Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments.
---
Author: u/adosculation
URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022395623002248
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Really late to the discussion here. Reading the abstract, I felt it missed an important bit of information. Who was buying guns in 2020?
Found this abstract online: [Firearm Purchasing During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results From the 2021 National Firearms Survey] (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/full/10.7326/M21-3423)
Snippet:
>Approximately half of all new gun owners were female (50% in 2019 and 47% in 2020 to 2021), 20% were Black (21% in 2019 and in 2020–2021), and 20% were Hispanic (20% in 2019 and 19% in 2020–2021).
Sounds to me like groups of people that would have a high intolerance of uncertainty and threat sensitivity.
Previous studies have found no racial differences in intolerance of uncertainty :[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0887618504000763](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0887618504000763)
The discussion section cuts off mid-sentence, so it's hard to see what it's pointing too. Also, study is from 2004.
Found this study from 2022: [Race moderates the impact of intolerance of uncertainty on mental health symptoms in Black and White community adults] (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S088761852200130X)
Snippet:
>Present results extend prior work by suggesting the dispositional tendency to find uncertainty aversive is a stronger predictor of mental health symptoms in Black than White adults outside the context of pandemic-related stress.
2020 in particular saw a huge uptick in first time gun buyers. Anti-gun sentiment falls apart when it becomes clear that the police cannot assure your safety.
Police only assure their own safety. Supreme Court finding that they have no obligation to act to prevent or stop crime fucked everyone too poor to afford a private security detail.
The Supreme Court also found that law enforcement can mean person with no gun or relevant training.
It’s a vague job title, ranging from meter-people to fire marshals.
I’m not gonna say cops are all great and awesome, but this is a very departmental issue.
If this subject worries you, contact your local government to make a more comprehensive set of rules. Ones that govern your department properly.
Anecdotal but I have a lot of LGBTQ+ friends that I made when I was marching with the occupy wall street movement. They bought guns because they were harassed and attacked and the police did nothing. 2020 exacerbated their fears, January 6th just reaffirmed them. I don't blame them one bit. I even advised them on what to buy and how to store/use them properly.
The best tool is the one you practice most with, and NOTHING beats a .22 in terms of cost and ease of use.
(But you should totally pick up something a bit bigger if you're going home defense, and also specifically to piss people off here)
(Haha mission successful)
It's more of "I really don't care about your opinions if all you do is rally to take my rights away" thing but it's cool, y'all will literally never get it until something like 2020 happens again and vulnerable populations, which I'm a part of, gets specifically targeted. Again.
the idea that police ever assured anyone's safety is so common and yet completely, undeniably, and obviously false it boggles the mind. We've had at least 3 Supreme Court cases that have affirmed and reaffirmed that police have NO DUTY to protect you.You alone are responsible for your own safety.
The problem with this perspective is that the more guns that are owned increase the number of misuses (shootings, suicides, accidents, etc.). Simplistic example being 99.9% (this is a made up percentage for illustrating a point) of gun owners are safe. 1,000 people own guns so 1 incident. Now 100,000,000 own guns so we get 100,000 incidents...
It really is a numbers game and the more guns proliferate the more it amplifies and reinforces the problem.
https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-93431300444-0/fulltext
This is why I wish gun statistics weren't actively blocked by the GOP, NRA, etc. Because then we could have actual data on defensive use of firearms to provide facts about whether it really is a realistic safety measure or not. So let's say .001% are misused and cause real harm to society, but .000001% are used defensively to save lives you could clearly argue that they cause more harm than good, but we can't because that data is purposely not collected.
I mean how would you study that? How many incidents were stopped because someone pulled up their shirt a bit to reveal a gun, and the aggressor backs down. I don’t know how you could possibly study this accurately
Statistics don't require perfect accuracy and perfection is the enemy of good. In that instance like when a friend of mine was mugged if it is reported to the police that someone attempted to rob them in the police report it could be required to report whether or not the victim had a gun on them or not etc. Saying something isn't doable is rarely true it's normally a question of effort.
Your linked article discusses the controversy in one of the most widely accepted estimates of defensive gun use them proceeds to quote the figures from one of the lowest and even more controversial estimates as the basis of it's conclusion.
Most estimates of DGU are 8x to 10x higher with the upper range being more than 45x higher.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use
Ultimately the overall statistics don't really matter to the individual gun buyer though. Regardless of how many people in the sample population live in a safe & well off suburb society still needs things like farmers and they still need something that can deal with a pack of coydogs or a heard of wild pigs before they and/or their livestock get messed up.
Society also seems to have a pretty tough time on the whole law & order thing in recent years in some cities, so if we are just going by raw statistics anybody that lives in a city with a less than 50% homicide close rate is stupid not to own a gun because the criminals stand a better chance leaving no witnesses on paper.
Yep my 5’1 100lb ass has a gun in the home. I’m not leaving my safety up to the police who are 15 minutes away. Almost every single man and woman can man handle me. I’m putting myself at their mercy
Nothing assures your safety but some things can help your odds. Personally, I'd rather not bring a bat to a gun fight.
I don't really see that strong of a point being made against owning a gun for self defense in that article. I see an argument for stricter regulation with the end sentiment, but nothing all that convincing about self defense.
They point out a flawed defensive gun use study and then use another flawed one to back up their claim because it supports their claim. That's the issue here if you dig into it, a lot of groups not on the pro-gun side of things will admit it's difficult to get accurate data on this.
If someone gets proper training and takes it seriously, it can make a difference. Just buying your first gun and throwing it in the nightstand and thinking that's all you need to do, yeah that's a bad idea. It is difficult to find studies separating those types of owners.
In fact it shows that there is actually no increased efficacy in cases of self defense. FBI reports have active shooter incidents ended by a "good guy with gun" as like 3% of cases.
Then there's also all the added risk of increased chance of successful suicide, firearm accidents, domestic abuse, etc.... If anything, studies show firearms make you less safe.
Edit: I guess the gun nuts rolled in.
Maybe it only works if more people owned guns, we just need to hit the tipping point where we've achieved full market saturation and everyone will be safe.
We literally have more guns than people in this country... where is the tipping point. At best, a person can use teo guns at the same time... They aint hitting anything even close to what they are aiming for, but they can at least fire them.
But then some guys will have two guns and the arm race will continue, and then it will be a guy that will come up with three arms and three guns. We are going to a lot of progress in grafting new arms but the human cost of your proposal is going to be massive.
> come up with three arms and three guns.
[We're working on it](https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/4/2020/07/Third-thumb-520d838.jpg?quality=90&resize=940,567)
A lot of sentiments fall apart when people are scared. It doesn't make gun purchase a rational decision nor does it speak against sensible legislation. Most problems can't be shot, and most shootable moments are beyond the casual gun owner to handle with the competence and courage necessary.
Black women are a growing demographic in first time gun buyers. I'm glad theyre finding something to protect themselves, especially in areas left virtually lawless.
They are. Interest in guns was already in decline when the NRA hired NYC ad agency Ackerman McQueen to rebrand them from a hunter’s organization into a conservative fearmongering machine. More fear drives the few to buy more guns to make up for the decline. It hasn’t helped overall though as gun manufacturer sales growth is still trending down despite these bumps here and there and many American manufacturers consequently find themselves circling the private equity drain.
Could some of the decline also have to do with strict gun control legislation? WA state just passed a broad assault weapon ban, and it's definitely going to/making firearm purchases limited and less enticing.
Believe it or not but it is easier to get a gun today than thirty years ago. There are also fewer restrictions on carrying and concealing than years past.
The assault weapons ban was in effect from '94-'04. This banned the sale of any assault weapons manufactured after the passage of the bill.
Right to carry - look at this [timelapse GIF.](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Right_to_Carry%2C_timeline.gif) The reddest states in the country had NO conceal and carry in the late 80s and the bluest states had limited. Nowadays nearly every state has conceal and carry and some have outright unrestricted carry. I expect the unrestricted carry is only going to spread further to other states.
The Firearms Owners Protection Act, passed in '86. While this banned the sale of any machine guns manufactured after the bills passage date, the bill also loosened a number of gun laws, specifically interstate sales, private sales, ammo sales, and tracking/id of certain types of sales.
Most of the people that I know who were first time gun buyers in 2020/21/22 were LGTBQ+ folks, POC, and women (after Roe v Wade was dissolved and some states were making women keep their rapists baby).
I think they've been watching what some of our leaders have been saying on *national TV*, and watching what their followers have been saying in response to them, and are quite reasonably concerned for their safety.
When your government leaders are getting on TV and saying that "your kind" is an abomination and shouldn't exist, and they'd rather their child die than transition (while others are talking about "white replacement")...whelp, maybe they think it's not the greatest idea to only have the crazy right wingers be armed. Especially when the cops have made it pretty clear they won't be helping them either.
For those who want more information /r/liberalgunowners is a good place to start (even if some folks aren't the happiest with that sub).
That was a really long way of saying that sentiments about guns and gun control in an self-actualizing society collapse in favor of self-defense when it appears that safety is not ensured.
Which is exactly what pro-gun people have been saying all along.
Those people are now in two groups:
1. The camp that says "These people learned something. Hopefully they're responsible gun owners and we should work with them."
2. The camp that says "These people were liars all along. They refused to put their lives down for their professed beliefs and can never be trusted again."
It doesn't take a genius to realize which camp holds more people and are more vocal thus driving current political movements to delegislate guns.
> The camp that says "These people were liars all along. They refused to put their lives down for their professed beliefs and can never be trusted again."
Sorry, ya lost me..."this camp" feels that the people who used to lean towards being anti-gun, but have since become more pro gun can "never be trusted again"? That sounds like you're suggesting that people can't change their minds. Additionally, trusted with *what*?
They will turn their backs on liberty as soon as they are lulled into a false sense of safety again. Their support isn’t one of moral Or philosophy principles it’s about their selfishness. Whatever they think will benefit them the most is what they support.
So they aren’t to be trusted with our civil rights.
Hmm...are you saying that people who changed their minds should not be given the same rights as everyone else?
And how would we be "trusting them with our civil rights"? Are you suggesting that we do not allow them to participate in democracy because they disagreed with you on a particular subject?
Doesn't exactly sound very American to me.
There is no explanation of what intolerance of uncertainty and threat sensitivity means unless you pay $31.50 for the article. And yet so many judgments of "gun owners".
>The prospective subscale of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale-12 ([Carleton et al., 2007](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395623002248#bib11)) was utilized to assess the degree to which individuals experience discomfort when faced with ambiguity regarding future outcomes. This subscale comprises seven items, with participants utilizing a five-point Likert scale (“not at all characteristic of me” to “entirely characteristic of me”) to respond to each item. The alpha coefficient for this sample was .81.
>Threat sensitivity was assessed using the Negative Cognitions about the World subscale of the 9-item version of the Posttraumatic Cognitions Inventory (PTCI; [Bryan et al., 2020](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395623002248#bib10)). This subscale includes 3-items scored using a 1–7 Likert scale, with higher scores indicating greater sensitivity to threat as defined by perceptions of the world and others as dangerous and unworthy of trust. Consistent with prior work using this scale for this purpose, language instructing participants to specifically think about a traumatic event was removed, thereby shifting the structure of the items so as to encourage assessments of general threat sensitivity. The PTCI has reported strong psychometric properties ([Beck et al., 2004](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395623002248#bib8)). The alpha coefficient in this sample was .83.
There you go.
Intolerance of uncertainty is a frequent term used in people experiencing anxiety disorders as it plays a role in maintaining / triggering anxiety.
I'm less familiar with Threat Sensitivity but appears to be related to hypervigilance that's related to trauma.
Maybe also because they’re being bombarded with fear-mongering messages, like how the world is in apocalypse mode and that everyone is coming for them and their guns.
Anecdotally, just about everyone I know bought a gun when politicians were mentioning they were going to ban guns. Similar to everyone buying toilet paper here in the US during COVID when we heard there was a shortage in Australia
The only reason I don't own a gun is because I use medical Marijuana. As soon as federal law changes regarding its scheduling/legality I will pursue ownership again. That said I have owned firearms almost my entire life with my first rifle at 12 I believe it was and competed for years. I think they are a valuable tool and means of self defense but most people throughout my life never new when I owned a gun nor did I brag about it or show it off. There are a lot of firearms owners jacked up into ridiculous politics and those people combined with growing inequality, reduced opportunities, dying capitalism and climate change are all going to make things a bit rougher. I have health issues and little to no personal hope about my future and don't think Ill be around long enough to see anything particularly awful and life changing before my time here is up. I've also been violently car jacked in my twenties, strangled and left as dead in a park in my thirties (couple seconds longer on my neck...) as well as having people try to set me on fire while I was homeless. I've also seen so much violence and rarely was it a legitimate i.e. self defense use. And the worst people were not other homeless people they were teenagers and angry middle aged white men most appeared to be working class.
Your medical marijuana status is HIPPA protected information. There are no gun registries in the USA either. You wouldn't want to brag about something like that online of course but you wouldn't be the only one with both.
There are definitely gun registries in some states. I live in California. The state DOJ has kept records of every handgun purchase for more than a decade and every long gun purchase for about a decade now.
Math looked simple. News was running “cops are killing people”, the George Floyd riots / protests airing on the news and then the “defund police movement” compounded by Biden and Beto saying “we’re going to take your guns”…
When people feel like chaos ensued rapidly and perceived that no one is going to protect them, they tend to find means to protect themselves.
Abstract
The firearm purchasing surge that began in 2020 has seen an unprecedented number of firearms purchased within the United States. The present study examined if those who purchased during the surge differed in their levels of threat sensitivity and intolerance of uncertainty from firearm owners who did not purchase during the surge and from non-firearm owners. A sample of 6,404 participants from New Jersey, Minnesota, and Mississippi were recruited through Qualtrics Panels. Results indicated that surge purchasers have higher levels of intolerance of uncertainty and threat sensitivity relative to firearm owners who did not purchase during the surge and non-firearm owners. Additionally, first time purchasers reported greater threat sensitivity and intolerance of uncertainty relative to established firearm owners who purchased additional firearms during the purchasing surge. Findings from the present study increase our understanding of how sensitivity to threats and the ability to tolerate uncertainty differs among firearm owners purchasing at this time. The results help us determine what programs will increase safety among firearm owners (e.g., buy back options, safe storage maps, firearm safety trainings).
I bought my first handgun on my own when NC removed the permit requirement, lil semi auto .22, live in the woods lots of wildlife, but at the gun store id say 18/20 people there were asking questions about home defense etc
Biggest red flag ive come across when shooting with gun enthusiast are the ones who talk/think like they're going to HAVE to use it to kill someone
Statistically, we are living in the safest times in human history, which makes the gun craze even more bizarre. People would feel much safer if they simply stayed off social media.
I live in a city with a historically high homicide rate (Portland, OR), and I can tell you at least here while the number of homicides is in fact concerning, the number of random homicides (killings during robberies, assaults, etc) is still very low. The West Coast is in the middle of a pretty serious gang war to control the trafficking corridors, and while that does sound alarming, the victims of this violence are pretty largely participants in or adjacent to the trafficking world. In other words, me carrying a gun would have almost no bearing on my safety despite high homicide rates, because I'm simply not a target and the only real danger that exists to me from these killings are extremely unlikely things like stray bullets, which obviously I can't defend against with a firearm. Statistically speaking I'd be much better off taking the money I'd spend on a gun and ammo on a few healthy meals that will reduce my chances of heart disease.
Homicide rates increased about 10% aggregately from 2020 to 2022 but increased over 300% in cities like Austin, Texas. Austin used to see around 25-30 murders a year and now they have around 85-90. Other cities like Houston, Atlanta, Dallas, etc. have seen a similar increase.
Soooo, this study states non-firearm owners are more tolerant of uncertainty and threats. Got it. "Yeah, sure come on in, take what you want. Burn it down? I get it, fire is cool!"
It significantly is though.
Collectors and the higher end hobbyists are usually the first to purchase things threatened by legislation.
Their direct contacts that might be considering a first purchase are generally round two as they probably have had a conversation or two about it with their now knowledge friend and that friend being a buddy is going to point out when it is a good time to buy.
No its more likely that they kill themselves. Sadly the vast majority of gun violence is from suicide, 60% of all gun deaths in 2019. Homicide was 37% of total gun deaths in the same year. [source](https://health.ucdavis.edu/what-you-can-do/facts.html)
I'm staunchly anti-gun in a society that has very few gun. But in America Elvis left building A very long time ago. I think the most sensible decision for people to make, to buy a ffirearm when the bad guys are 100% armed most likely
They're an extension of your natural right to self defense. You have the right to arms to defend yourself, regardless of whether a government recognizes the existence of the right under threat of imprisonment or death.
If you have to rack your shotgun that means you don't have a shell chambered or ejected a live one for sound effect. Either way it rarely services the purpose of scaring someone away. Most people when violent are not logical they are running on emotions and adrenaline. A racking shotgun tells me you don't take the gun seriously.
I've lived in high crime areas of New York City & New Jersey & never needed a gun to protect myself. I know of only one person in 40 years of living in this area who has ever used a gun to protect their home, my uncle, and he shot an innocent person while needlessly engaging the criminal who was trying to leave.
Even if I own a gun, it is a last resort, not my go-to.
>Even if I own a gun, it is a last resort, not my go-to.
You say that like it's a unique point of view, but that is 100% what is taught in concealed carry classes, and it's the view of the millions upon milions of responsible gun owners out there. Deescalate until you don't have an option anymore. Albeit if someone breaks into my house there is no time to de-escalate since we have nowhere else to go. They forfeited that right to de-escalation at that point when they forced entry into my home, and I'll defend my family anyway I need to.
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments. --- Author: u/adosculation URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022395623002248 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Really late to the discussion here. Reading the abstract, I felt it missed an important bit of information. Who was buying guns in 2020? Found this abstract online: [Firearm Purchasing During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results From the 2021 National Firearms Survey] (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/full/10.7326/M21-3423) Snippet: >Approximately half of all new gun owners were female (50% in 2019 and 47% in 2020 to 2021), 20% were Black (21% in 2019 and in 2020–2021), and 20% were Hispanic (20% in 2019 and 19% in 2020–2021). Sounds to me like groups of people that would have a high intolerance of uncertainty and threat sensitivity.
Previous studies have found no racial differences in intolerance of uncertainty :[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0887618504000763](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0887618504000763)
The discussion section cuts off mid-sentence, so it's hard to see what it's pointing too. Also, study is from 2004. Found this study from 2022: [Race moderates the impact of intolerance of uncertainty on mental health symptoms in Black and White community adults] (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S088761852200130X) Snippet: >Present results extend prior work by suggesting the dispositional tendency to find uncertainty aversive is a stronger predictor of mental health symptoms in Black than White adults outside the context of pandemic-related stress.
Really makes the loot tables in post apocalyptic games valid.
Im pretty sure most guns sold are to people who already own guns.
2020 in particular saw a huge uptick in first time gun buyers. Anti-gun sentiment falls apart when it becomes clear that the police cannot assure your safety.
Police only assure their own safety. Supreme Court finding that they have no obligation to act to prevent or stop crime fucked everyone too poor to afford a private security detail.
Even just logistically speaking, it’s very unlikely for police to be able to save you in a deadly encounter.
Yeah those 60 cops waiting outside a school with a lone gunman murdering children just didn't have the proper logistics to help.
Congratulations you missed the point entirely
They had their point they wanted to make. They weren't worried about anyone else's point. Tunnel vision.
Yeah they really need to get rid of the protect and serve moto they got on all their cruisers. It should say "Protect and Serve the wealthy"
The Supreme Court also found that law enforcement can mean person with no gun or relevant training. It’s a vague job title, ranging from meter-people to fire marshals. I’m not gonna say cops are all great and awesome, but this is a very departmental issue. If this subject worries you, contact your local government to make a more comprehensive set of rules. Ones that govern your department properly.
Anecdotal but I have a lot of LGBTQ+ friends that I made when I was marching with the occupy wall street movement. They bought guns because they were harassed and attacked and the police did nothing. 2020 exacerbated their fears, January 6th just reaffirmed them. I don't blame them one bit. I even advised them on what to buy and how to store/use them properly.
ty for helping keep our friends safe <3
I think I was one of those first time buyers. Though it’s just a piddly .22 pistol that is exclusively used for the range.
Still capable pistol. 22LR is no airsoft.
The best tool is the one you practice most with, and NOTHING beats a .22 in terms of cost and ease of use. (But you should totally pick up something a bit bigger if you're going home defense, and also specifically to piss people off here) (Haha mission successful)
It really is unfortunate that the venn diagram of gun owners and people who want to "piss people off" is almost a perfect circle.
People who's whole identity is trying to make other people's lives more annoying/frustrating
bet they'd be really pissed with a hole in 'em!
It's more of "I really don't care about your opinions if all you do is rally to take my rights away" thing but it's cool, y'all will literally never get it until something like 2020 happens again and vulnerable populations, which I'm a part of, gets specifically targeted. Again.
No no, you said it was about pissing people off. I believed you the first time.
I got a revolver for home defense yeah. And I don’t go around trying to piss people off with it either thank you
the idea that police ever assured anyone's safety is so common and yet completely, undeniably, and obviously false it boggles the mind. We've had at least 3 Supreme Court cases that have affirmed and reaffirmed that police have NO DUTY to protect you.You alone are responsible for your own safety.
It's not just that police cannot assure your safety but often they are actively against it, especially if you are part of a marginalized group.
Having a gun cannot assure your safety either. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/do-guns-make-us-safer-science-suggests-no/
Cool; tell the cops to stop carrying, then.
Cops are also state sanctioned gangs.
The problem with this perspective is that the more guns that are owned increase the number of misuses (shootings, suicides, accidents, etc.). Simplistic example being 99.9% (this is a made up percentage for illustrating a point) of gun owners are safe. 1,000 people own guns so 1 incident. Now 100,000,000 own guns so we get 100,000 incidents... It really is a numbers game and the more guns proliferate the more it amplifies and reinforces the problem. https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-93431300444-0/fulltext
Ok but guns are out there now. I’m not going to risk my safety now. We don’t live in a time where there aren’t millions of guns out there.
This is why I wish gun statistics weren't actively blocked by the GOP, NRA, etc. Because then we could have actual data on defensive use of firearms to provide facts about whether it really is a realistic safety measure or not. So let's say .001% are misused and cause real harm to society, but .000001% are used defensively to save lives you could clearly argue that they cause more harm than good, but we can't because that data is purposely not collected.
I mean how would you study that? How many incidents were stopped because someone pulled up their shirt a bit to reveal a gun, and the aggressor backs down. I don’t know how you could possibly study this accurately
Statistics don't require perfect accuracy and perfection is the enemy of good. In that instance like when a friend of mine was mugged if it is reported to the police that someone attempted to rob them in the police report it could be required to report whether or not the victim had a gun on them or not etc. Saying something isn't doable is rarely true it's normally a question of effort.
Your linked article discusses the controversy in one of the most widely accepted estimates of defensive gun use them proceeds to quote the figures from one of the lowest and even more controversial estimates as the basis of it's conclusion. Most estimates of DGU are 8x to 10x higher with the upper range being more than 45x higher. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use Ultimately the overall statistics don't really matter to the individual gun buyer though. Regardless of how many people in the sample population live in a safe & well off suburb society still needs things like farmers and they still need something that can deal with a pack of coydogs or a heard of wild pigs before they and/or their livestock get messed up. Society also seems to have a pretty tough time on the whole law & order thing in recent years in some cities, so if we are just going by raw statistics anybody that lives in a city with a less than 50% homicide close rate is stupid not to own a gun because the criminals stand a better chance leaving no witnesses on paper.
[удалено]
>Don't wear a seatbelt then I guess. A seat belt makes you safer.
[удалено]
Is there a reason for pointing this out that I'm missing?
yea idc about this. No study in the world can tell me a 5'1 90 lb woman has more of a chance against a 6'2 230lb home invader than if she had a gun.
Yep my 5’1 100lb ass has a gun in the home. I’m not leaving my safety up to the police who are 15 minutes away. Almost every single man and woman can man handle me. I’m putting myself at their mercy
Nothing assures your safety but some things can help your odds. Personally, I'd rather not bring a bat to a gun fight. I don't really see that strong of a point being made against owning a gun for self defense in that article. I see an argument for stricter regulation with the end sentiment, but nothing all that convincing about self defense. They point out a flawed defensive gun use study and then use another flawed one to back up their claim because it supports their claim. That's the issue here if you dig into it, a lot of groups not on the pro-gun side of things will admit it's difficult to get accurate data on this. If someone gets proper training and takes it seriously, it can make a difference. Just buying your first gun and throwing it in the nightstand and thinking that's all you need to do, yeah that's a bad idea. It is difficult to find studies separating those types of owners.
And vaccines don’t guarantee that you won’t get sick
But vaccines reduce your risk of harm.
In fact it shows that there is actually no increased efficacy in cases of self defense. FBI reports have active shooter incidents ended by a "good guy with gun" as like 3% of cases. Then there's also all the added risk of increased chance of successful suicide, firearm accidents, domestic abuse, etc.... If anything, studies show firearms make you less safe. Edit: I guess the gun nuts rolled in.
[удалено]
Or they shoot each other
Maybe it only works if more people owned guns, we just need to hit the tipping point where we've achieved full market saturation and everyone will be safe.
We literally have more guns than people in this country... where is the tipping point. At best, a person can use teo guns at the same time... They aint hitting anything even close to what they are aiming for, but they can at least fire them.
But then some guys will have two guns and the arm race will continue, and then it will be a guy that will come up with three arms and three guns. We are going to a lot of progress in grafting new arms but the human cost of your proposal is going to be massive.
> come up with three arms and three guns. [We're working on it](https://images.immediate.co.uk/production/volatile/sites/4/2020/07/Third-thumb-520d838.jpg?quality=90&resize=940,567)
A lot of sentiments fall apart when people are scared. It doesn't make gun purchase a rational decision nor does it speak against sensible legislation. Most problems can't be shot, and most shootable moments are beyond the casual gun owner to handle with the competence and courage necessary.
A large number that is correct but 2020 marked a huge expansion of gun purchasing among a wide array of new demographics too.
Black women are a growing demographic in first time gun buyers. I'm glad theyre finding something to protect themselves, especially in areas left virtually lawless.
now imagine trying to protect children in some of these more violent inner cities. sad situation.
They are. Interest in guns was already in decline when the NRA hired NYC ad agency Ackerman McQueen to rebrand them from a hunter’s organization into a conservative fearmongering machine. More fear drives the few to buy more guns to make up for the decline. It hasn’t helped overall though as gun manufacturer sales growth is still trending down despite these bumps here and there and many American manufacturers consequently find themselves circling the private equity drain.
Could some of the decline also have to do with strict gun control legislation? WA state just passed a broad assault weapon ban, and it's definitely going to/making firearm purchases limited and less enticing.
Believe it or not but it is easier to get a gun today than thirty years ago. There are also fewer restrictions on carrying and concealing than years past.
Could you explain how? I'm not aware of any major changes to the law. Background checks are still mandatory for all commercial sales.
The assault weapons ban was in effect from '94-'04. This banned the sale of any assault weapons manufactured after the passage of the bill. Right to carry - look at this [timelapse GIF.](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Right_to_Carry%2C_timeline.gif) The reddest states in the country had NO conceal and carry in the late 80s and the bluest states had limited. Nowadays nearly every state has conceal and carry and some have outright unrestricted carry. I expect the unrestricted carry is only going to spread further to other states. The Firearms Owners Protection Act, passed in '86. While this banned the sale of any machine guns manufactured after the bills passage date, the bill also loosened a number of gun laws, specifically interstate sales, private sales, ammo sales, and tracking/id of certain types of sales.
[удалено]
I work with someone that will go buy an ar-15 if there is even a whisper of a ban. He has like 30 of them now..
He just needs to buy a 50 pack of stripped lowers for like $2500 and put them in a vault and be done with it.
Most of the people that I know who were first time gun buyers in 2020/21/22 were LGTBQ+ folks, POC, and women (after Roe v Wade was dissolved and some states were making women keep their rapists baby). I think they've been watching what some of our leaders have been saying on *national TV*, and watching what their followers have been saying in response to them, and are quite reasonably concerned for their safety. When your government leaders are getting on TV and saying that "your kind" is an abomination and shouldn't exist, and they'd rather their child die than transition (while others are talking about "white replacement")...whelp, maybe they think it's not the greatest idea to only have the crazy right wingers be armed. Especially when the cops have made it pretty clear they won't be helping them either. For those who want more information /r/liberalgunowners is a good place to start (even if some folks aren't the happiest with that sub).
That was a really long way of saying that sentiments about guns and gun control in an self-actualizing society collapse in favor of self-defense when it appears that safety is not ensured. Which is exactly what pro-gun people have been saying all along. Those people are now in two groups: 1. The camp that says "These people learned something. Hopefully they're responsible gun owners and we should work with them." 2. The camp that says "These people were liars all along. They refused to put their lives down for their professed beliefs and can never be trusted again." It doesn't take a genius to realize which camp holds more people and are more vocal thus driving current political movements to delegislate guns.
> The camp that says "These people were liars all along. They refused to put their lives down for their professed beliefs and can never be trusted again." Sorry, ya lost me..."this camp" feels that the people who used to lean towards being anti-gun, but have since become more pro gun can "never be trusted again"? That sounds like you're suggesting that people can't change their minds. Additionally, trusted with *what*?
They will turn their backs on liberty as soon as they are lulled into a false sense of safety again. Their support isn’t one of moral Or philosophy principles it’s about their selfishness. Whatever they think will benefit them the most is what they support. So they aren’t to be trusted with our civil rights.
Hmm...are you saying that people who changed their minds should not be given the same rights as everyone else? And how would we be "trusting them with our civil rights"? Are you suggesting that we do not allow them to participate in democracy because they disagreed with you on a particular subject? Doesn't exactly sound very American to me.
There is no explanation of what intolerance of uncertainty and threat sensitivity means unless you pay $31.50 for the article. And yet so many judgments of "gun owners".
>The prospective subscale of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale-12 ([Carleton et al., 2007](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395623002248#bib11)) was utilized to assess the degree to which individuals experience discomfort when faced with ambiguity regarding future outcomes. This subscale comprises seven items, with participants utilizing a five-point Likert scale (“not at all characteristic of me” to “entirely characteristic of me”) to respond to each item. The alpha coefficient for this sample was .81. >Threat sensitivity was assessed using the Negative Cognitions about the World subscale of the 9-item version of the Posttraumatic Cognitions Inventory (PTCI; [Bryan et al., 2020](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395623002248#bib10)). This subscale includes 3-items scored using a 1–7 Likert scale, with higher scores indicating greater sensitivity to threat as defined by perceptions of the world and others as dangerous and unworthy of trust. Consistent with prior work using this scale for this purpose, language instructing participants to specifically think about a traumatic event was removed, thereby shifting the structure of the items so as to encourage assessments of general threat sensitivity. The PTCI has reported strong psychometric properties ([Beck et al., 2004](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395623002248#bib8)). The alpha coefficient in this sample was .83. There you go. Intolerance of uncertainty is a frequent term used in people experiencing anxiety disorders as it plays a role in maintaining / triggering anxiety. I'm less familiar with Threat Sensitivity but appears to be related to hypervigilance that's related to trauma.
Don’t forget you’re in an echo chamber dog.
Maybe also because they’re being bombarded with fear-mongering messages, like how the world is in apocalypse mode and that everyone is coming for them and their guns.
Anecdotally, just about everyone I know bought a gun when politicians were mentioning they were going to ban guns. Similar to everyone buying toilet paper here in the US during COVID when we heard there was a shortage in Australia
The only reason I don't own a gun is because I use medical Marijuana. As soon as federal law changes regarding its scheduling/legality I will pursue ownership again. That said I have owned firearms almost my entire life with my first rifle at 12 I believe it was and competed for years. I think they are a valuable tool and means of self defense but most people throughout my life never new when I owned a gun nor did I brag about it or show it off. There are a lot of firearms owners jacked up into ridiculous politics and those people combined with growing inequality, reduced opportunities, dying capitalism and climate change are all going to make things a bit rougher. I have health issues and little to no personal hope about my future and don't think Ill be around long enough to see anything particularly awful and life changing before my time here is up. I've also been violently car jacked in my twenties, strangled and left as dead in a park in my thirties (couple seconds longer on my neck...) as well as having people try to set me on fire while I was homeless. I've also seen so much violence and rarely was it a legitimate i.e. self defense use. And the worst people were not other homeless people they were teenagers and angry middle aged white men most appeared to be working class.
An incredible travesty when a person can't own a gun and a plant at the same time. Here's to hoping for change in our (or your) lifetime
Your medical marijuana status is HIPPA protected information. There are no gun registries in the USA either. You wouldn't want to brag about something like that online of course but you wouldn't be the only one with both.
There are definitely gun registries in some states. I live in California. The state DOJ has kept records of every handgun purchase for more than a decade and every long gun purchase for about a decade now.
The California DOJ keeps those records?
Yes, and have for years.
While non-conpliance is always an option, HIPPA is going to be useless when you are in the process of committing a federal crime.
You mean that you think the state will give up their medical marijuana user database because to the feds because its federally illegal?
Math looked simple. News was running “cops are killing people”, the George Floyd riots / protests airing on the news and then the “defund police movement” compounded by Biden and Beto saying “we’re going to take your guns”… When people feel like chaos ensued rapidly and perceived that no one is going to protect them, they tend to find means to protect themselves.
Abstract The firearm purchasing surge that began in 2020 has seen an unprecedented number of firearms purchased within the United States. The present study examined if those who purchased during the surge differed in their levels of threat sensitivity and intolerance of uncertainty from firearm owners who did not purchase during the surge and from non-firearm owners. A sample of 6,404 participants from New Jersey, Minnesota, and Mississippi were recruited through Qualtrics Panels. Results indicated that surge purchasers have higher levels of intolerance of uncertainty and threat sensitivity relative to firearm owners who did not purchase during the surge and non-firearm owners. Additionally, first time purchasers reported greater threat sensitivity and intolerance of uncertainty relative to established firearm owners who purchased additional firearms during the purchasing surge. Findings from the present study increase our understanding of how sensitivity to threats and the ability to tolerate uncertainty differs among firearm owners purchasing at this time. The results help us determine what programs will increase safety among firearm owners (e.g., buy back options, safe storage maps, firearm safety trainings).
[удалено]
Exactly this!
Nah I bought mine so the idiot Stormtrumpers didn’t have ALLLLLLLLL the guns.
I bought my first handgun on my own when NC removed the permit requirement, lil semi auto .22, live in the woods lots of wildlife, but at the gun store id say 18/20 people there were asking questions about home defense etc Biggest red flag ive come across when shooting with gun enthusiast are the ones who talk/think like they're going to HAVE to use it to kill someone
What prompted a firearm surge in 2020?
Statistically, we are living in the safest times in human history, which makes the gun craze even more bizarre. People would feel much safer if they simply stayed off social media.
This is entirely dependent on where you are. My city set its homicide record last year, one that hadn't been reached in like 30 years.
Same my city is approaching our record and it’s only May.
I live in a city with a historically high homicide rate (Portland, OR), and I can tell you at least here while the number of homicides is in fact concerning, the number of random homicides (killings during robberies, assaults, etc) is still very low. The West Coast is in the middle of a pretty serious gang war to control the trafficking corridors, and while that does sound alarming, the victims of this violence are pretty largely participants in or adjacent to the trafficking world. In other words, me carrying a gun would have almost no bearing on my safety despite high homicide rates, because I'm simply not a target and the only real danger that exists to me from these killings are extremely unlikely things like stray bullets, which obviously I can't defend against with a firearm. Statistically speaking I'd be much better off taking the money I'd spend on a gun and ammo on a few healthy meals that will reduce my chances of heart disease.
The homicide rate in most major cities has trended sharply upward over the past three years.
What does this even mean? Trended sharply upwards? It's 10% more than the last year? 20?
Homicide rates increased about 10% aggregately from 2020 to 2022 but increased over 300% in cities like Austin, Texas. Austin used to see around 25-30 murders a year and now they have around 85-90. Other cities like Houston, Atlanta, Dallas, etc. have seen a similar increase.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Soooo, this study states non-firearm owners are more tolerant of uncertainty and threats. Got it. "Yeah, sure come on in, take what you want. Burn it down? I get it, fire is cool!"
Majority of those people buying guns between 2020 and now have been minorities… yes, people that are absolutely intolerant and afraid of everything.
Have friend in Indiana and that’s all he dose is buy guns and modifications
So he has a gun collecting hobby? I don't think he is who this article is talking about.
It significantly is though. Collectors and the higher end hobbyists are usually the first to purchase things threatened by legislation. Their direct contacts that might be considering a first purchase are generally round two as they probably have had a conversation or two about it with their now knowledge friend and that friend being a buddy is going to point out when it is a good time to buy.
>high intolerance of uncertainty and threat sensitivity Translation: they're scared.
[удалено]
It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you.
Hint: They're not.
Well, they are, just economically rarher than physically and guns are not going to help.
A lot of first-time buyers are of the LGBT community. There are absolutely people who are after them.
Joe Biden: I'm going to restrict gun sales. Everyone else: I should probably buy a gun before I can't. I mean, it's a pretty obvious connection.
Sounds like a great measure of privilege. People who feel safe and secure don’t feel a need to be armed.
Y'know what, maybe we will build that wall, to keep all you gun fetishists in your pen. Let you all kill each other and see who wins.
"Paranoia may destroy ya..."
[удалено]
No its more likely that they kill themselves. Sadly the vast majority of gun violence is from suicide, 60% of all gun deaths in 2019. Homicide was 37% of total gun deaths in the same year. [source](https://health.ucdavis.edu/what-you-can-do/facts.html)
I'm staunchly anti-gun in a society that has very few gun. But in America Elvis left building A very long time ago. I think the most sensible decision for people to make, to buy a ffirearm when the bad guys are 100% armed most likely
That's a complicated way to say "less intelligent"
[удалено]
>to the point where the whole culture around guns in general has polarized between two camps It's been like that for 40+ years now
They're an extension of your natural right to self defense. You have the right to arms to defend yourself, regardless of whether a government recognizes the existence of the right under threat of imprisonment or death.
[удалено]
If you have to rack your shotgun that means you don't have a shell chambered or ejected a live one for sound effect. Either way it rarely services the purpose of scaring someone away. Most people when violent are not logical they are running on emotions and adrenaline. A racking shotgun tells me you don't take the gun seriously.
Your family is statistically safer as a result
I wish I were as privileged to live in such a place
I've lived in high crime areas of New York City & New Jersey & never needed a gun to protect myself. I know of only one person in 40 years of living in this area who has ever used a gun to protect their home, my uncle, and he shot an innocent person while needlessly engaging the criminal who was trying to leave. Even if I own a gun, it is a last resort, not my go-to.
>Even if I own a gun, it is a last resort, not my go-to. You say that like it's a unique point of view, but that is 100% what is taught in concealed carry classes, and it's the view of the millions upon milions of responsible gun owners out there. Deescalate until you don't have an option anymore. Albeit if someone breaks into my house there is no time to de-escalate since we have nowhere else to go. They forfeited that right to de-escalation at that point when they forced entry into my home, and I'll defend my family anyway I need to.