On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 20:31:27 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 1/17/2014 8:09 PM, wrote:
On Friday, January 17, 2014 8:00:09 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:

50 years ago when I was about that age if I ever got caught with some
friends entering a vacant building, I'd probably be hauled down to the
police station along with my friends and all of the parents, read the
riot act by the cop on duty and then sent home to face the real
punishment at the hands of my old man.

The difference is, 50 years ago the chance of you and your friends packing heat is very low. As we've all seen, the chance of it now, with the numbing of our young by Hollywood's glamorization of violence along with video games, etc., has increased that chance many times. I'm, unfortunately, on the side of the homeowner. It's a consequence of the loss of morals by society in general.



I guess I agree although there is statistical data that would suggest
the opposite is true in terms of having access to firearms.

I found some data that covers 1973 to 2012 (39 years).

The percentage of households with one or more firearms has decreased
over that period from 49.1 percent in 1973 to 34.4 percent in 2012.
The percentage peaked in 1974 at 54 percent and the lowest was 2010 at
32.3 percent.

So, again, I put the blame solely on the lack of parenting.


I wonder where they got that data. I've never been asked how many firearms I own on any census or
survey I can remember. I'll bet there are a whole hell of a lot of unregistered, illegal handguns
floating around our big problem cities that aren't included in those households.

On 1/17/2014 9:27 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 20:31:27 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 1/17/2014 8:09 PM, wrote:
On Friday, January 17, 2014 8:00:09 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:

50 years ago when I was about that age if I ever got caught with some
friends entering a vacant building, I'd probably be hauled down to the
police station along with my friends and all of the parents, read the
riot act by the cop on duty and then sent home to face the real
punishment at the hands of my old man.

The difference is, 50 years ago the chance of you and your friends packing heat is very low. As we've all seen, the chance of it now, with the numbing of our young by Hollywood's glamorization of violence along with video games, etc., has increased that chance many times. I'm, unfortunately, on the side of the homeowner. It's a consequence of the loss of morals by society in general.



I guess I agree although there is statistical data that would suggest
the opposite is true in terms of having access to firearms.

I found some data that covers 1973 to 2012 (39 years).

The percentage of households with one or more firearms has decreased
over that period from 49.1 percent in 1973 to 34.4 percent in 2012.
The percentage peaked in 1974 at 54 percent and the lowest was 2010 at
32.3 percent.

So, again, I put the blame solely on the lack of parenting.


I wonder where they got that data. I've never been asked how many firearms I own on any census or
survey I can remember. I'll bet there are a whole hell of a lot of unregistered, illegal handguns
floating around our big problem cities that aren't included in those households.



I found the data I posted at:

http://www.gunpolicy.org/

I don't know where they get their data from but I suspect it's from
random surveys.

"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 1/17/2014 9:27 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 20:31:27 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 1/17/2014 8:09 PM, wrote:
On Friday, January 17, 2014 8:00:09 PM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:

50 years ago when I was about that age if I ever got caught with some
friends entering a vacant building, I'd probably be hauled down to the
police station along with my friends and all of the parents, read the
riot act by the cop on duty and then sent home to face the real
punishment at the hands of my old man.

The difference is, 50 years ago the chance of you and your friends
packing heat is very low. As we've all seen, the chance of it now,
with the numbing of our young by Hollywood's glamorization of violence
along with video games, etc., has increased that chance many times.
I'm, unfortunately, on the side of the homeowner. It's a consequence
of the loss of morals by society in general.



I guess I agree although there is statistical data that would suggest
the opposite is true in terms of having access to firearms.

I found some data that covers 1973 to 2012 (39 years).

The percentage of households with one or more firearms has decreased
over that period from 49.1 percent in 1973 to 34.4 percent in 2012.
The percentage peaked in 1974 at 54 percent and the lowest was 2010 at
32.3 percent.

So, again, I put the blame solely on the lack of parenting.


I wonder where they got that data. I've never been asked how many
firearms I own on any census or
survey I can remember. I'll bet there are a whole hell of a lot of
unregistered, illegal handguns
floating around our big problem cities that aren't included in those households.



I found the data I posted at:

http://www.gunpolicy.org/

I don't know where they get their data from but I suspect it's from random surveys.

Most people would not answer the question. There are very few illegal
unregistered weapons in California. Only those "assault weapons" on the
banned list, that people had before the ban, and did not register.
Otherwise, no permit or license is required to own a firearm in this state.
federal and state laws now require a transaction to go though an FFL
holder, but that has only been for some years. When I bought my Rem. 1100,
I bought it at the firearms dealer on 2nd street in downtown San Francisco.
No waiting period for long guns. They wrapped in paper and handed it to
me, and
I walked out the door. The records are not supposed to go to the state!

On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 21:41:55 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 1/17/2014 9:27 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 20:31:27 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:


I found some data that covers 1973 to 2012 (39 years).

The percentage of households with one or more firearms has decreased
over that period from 49.1 percent in 1973 to 34.4 percent in 2012.
The percentage peaked in 1974 at 54 percent and the lowest was 2010 at
32.3 percent.

So, again, I put the blame solely on the lack of parenting.


I wonder where they got that data. I've never been asked how many firearms I own on any census or
survey I can remember. I'll bet there are a whole hell of a lot of unregistered, illegal handguns
floating around our big problem cities that aren't included in those households.



I found the data I posted at:

http://www.gunpolicy.org/

I don't know where they get their data from but I suspect it's from
random surveys.

I wonder...could that be due to the population increase over the past 40 years coupled with the
source of the increase? The number of small arms either manufactured or imported during the past 25
years has gone from about 3.7 million to 8.7 million. I suppose DHS accounts for a bunch, but it has
only about 230,000 employees. Even giving each of them a couple guns doesn't account for the growth.

The handgun chart is really weird, showing 5% gains and drops in household possession in two year
periods.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/co..._with_handguns

In article ,
says...


I wonder...could that be due to the population increase over the past 40 years coupled with the
source of the increase? The number of small arms either manufactured or imported during the past 25
years has gone from about 3.7 million to 8.7 million. I suppose DHS accounts for a bunch, but it has
only about 230,000 employees. Even giving each of them a couple guns doesn't account for the growth.

The handgun chart is really weird, showing 5% gains and drops in household possession in two year
periods.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/co..._with_handguns

You can't get accurate stats on guns. Violates the 2nd.

On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 10:20:37 -0600, Boating All Out wrote:

In article ,
says...


I wonder...could that be due to the population increase over the past 40 years coupled with the
source of the increase? The number of small arms either manufactured or imported during the past 25
years has gone from about 3.7 million to 8.7 million. I suppose DHS accounts for a bunch, but it has
only about 230,000 employees. Even giving each of them a couple guns doesn't account for the growth.

The handgun chart is really weird, showing 5% gains and drops in household possession in two year
periods.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/co..._with_handguns

You can't get accurate stats on guns. Violates the 2nd.

In what way?

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 10:20:37 -0600, Boating All Out wrote:

In article ,
says...


I wonder...could that be due to the population increase over the past 40 years coupled with the
source of the increase? The number of small arms either manufactured or imported during the past 25
years has gone from about 3.7 million to 8.7 million. I suppose DHS accounts for a bunch, but it has
only about 230,000 employees. Even giving each of them a couple guns doesn't account for the growth.

The handgun chart is really weird, showing 5% gains and drops in household possession in two year
periods.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/co..._with_handguns

You can't get accurate stats on guns. Violates the 2nd.

In what way?

Unless guns are universally registered, it's just guessing.
Do you think universal registration violates the 2nd?
I have no opinion on that. You might have an opinion.
But the reason for lack of registration is the 2nd.
In any case, statistics on ownership are garbage.

On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 15:38:19 -0600, Boating All Out wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 10:20:37 -0600, Boating All Out wrote:

In article ,
says...


I wonder...could that be due to the population increase over the past 40 years coupled with the
source of the increase? The number of small arms either manufactured or imported during the past 25
years has gone from about 3.7 million to 8.7 million. I suppose DHS accounts for a bunch, but it has
only about 230,000 employees. Even giving each of them a couple guns doesn't account for the growth.

The handgun chart is really weird, showing 5% gains and drops in household possession in two year
periods.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/co..._with_handguns

You can't get accurate stats on guns. Violates the 2nd.

In what way?

Unless guns are universally registered, it's just guessing.
Do you think universal registration violates the 2nd?
I have no opinion on that. You might have an opinion.
But the reason for lack of registration is the 2nd.
In any case, statistics on ownership are garbage.

I don't think universal registration, in and of itself, violates the 2nd. I do think that universal
registration makes universal confiscation much more feasible. I also think that a President, if so
inclined, may try to conduct such a confiscation through another 'executive order'. Luckily, their
are still enough Democrat gun owners to keep a lid on what Congress does. I think they are also
influential in keep a lid on what the President does.

I agree that the statistics are probably garbage.

On 1/18/2014 4:38 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sat, 18 Jan 2014 10:20:37 -0600, Boating All Out wrote:

In article ,
says...


I wonder...could that be due to the population increase over the past 40 years coupled with the
source of the increase? The number of small arms either manufactured or imported during the past 25
years has gone from about 3.7 million to 8.7 million. I suppose DHS accounts for a bunch, but it has
only about 230,000 employees. Even giving each of them a couple guns doesn't account for the growth.

The handgun chart is really weird, showing 5% gains and drops in household possession in two year
periods.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/co..._with_handguns

You can't get accurate stats on guns. Violates the 2nd.

In what way?

Unless guns are universally registered, it's just guessing.
Do you think universal registration violates the 2nd?
I have no opinion on that. You might have an opinion.
But the reason for lack of registration is the 2nd.
In any case, statistics on ownership are garbage.


Unless you interpret the "shall not be infringed" part as meaning
registration is unlawful, I don't see anything in the 2nd that would
otherwise prohibit registration. My opinion is they *should* be
registered.

On 1/18/2014 9:40 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 21:41:55 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 1/17/2014 9:27 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2014 20:31:27 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:


I found some data that covers 1973 to 2012 (39 years).

The percentage of households with one or more firearms has decreased
over that period from 49.1 percent in 1973 to 34.4 percent in 2012.
The percentage peaked in 1974 at 54 percent and the lowest was 2010 at
32.3 percent.

So, again, I put the blame solely on the lack of parenting.


I wonder where they got that data. I've never been asked how many firearms I own on any census or
survey I can remember. I'll bet there are a whole hell of a lot of unregistered, illegal handguns
floating around our big problem cities that aren't included in those households.



I found the data I posted at:

http://www.gunpolicy.org/

I don't know where they get their data from but I suspect it's from
random surveys.

I wonder...could that be due to the population increase over the past 40 years coupled with the
source of the increase? The number of small arms either manufactured or imported during the past 25
years has gone from about 3.7 million to 8.7 million. I suppose DHS accounts for a bunch, but it has
only about 230,000 employees. Even giving each of them a couple guns doesn't account for the growth.

The handgun chart is really weird, showing 5% gains and drops in household possession in two year
periods.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/co..._with_handguns


That's why I think the data is based on random surveys. Also, that
particular statistic is for percentage of households with one *or more*
firearms. I think it represents a shrinking ownership but those who
have guns will typically have several.