Why do People Want Guns so Much?

Gun Watch ^ | 14 July, 2016 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Those who demand a disarmed population claim that it is the easy availability of guns that causes people to do bad things with guns.

The core assumption is that guns have no useful function.  The people who wish to disarm the population constantly say that guns are only made and used for one thing - to kill people.  It is implied is that no person actually wants to kill people, and they would not, if there were no guns.

From that follows the idea that people do not really want guns.  If only some barriers were put in place to make it a little harder for them to get guns, people will give them up, and the number of killings would go down.

That is a naive and simplistic view of reality.

It is easy to see how people who have no experience with guns, and no experience with violence, could believe these naive notions.  They have never used a gun in defense of themselves or others; their narrow view of the world is constrained to believing that everyone else is just like them.  We hear the echo of this in a popular song:

 "People are the same all over the world"

Fortunately or not, the song flies in the face of reality and experience.  Everyone is not the same all over the world.  In fact, everyone is not the same across even most cities in the United States.  Many people have pivotal experiences in their lives that make the demand for guns strong, determined, and inflexible.

People who have experienced violence up close and personal have strong desires for firearms.

People who have had military or police training understand that personal power and safety grows out of the barrel of a gun.

People who live in rural areas have many cultural experiences that reinforce the utility of firearms. 

All of these people have something in common.  They are outside of the cultural set of President Obama and those who desire a disarmed population.

Their desires are not soft and squishy desires easily met by a DVD or a new pair of shoes.  Most people in the United States equate firearms with personal safety.  Making firearms a little harder to acquire with more regulations will not deter people who equate them with safety.  It will make them suspicious of the motives of people who wish to disarm them.

A recent study in Chicago reinforced that fact.  It is very difficult for people to obtain firearms in Chicago.  There are no gun stores.  Buying a gun in Chicago carries a risk of arrest and imprisonment. That does not stop people from illegally acquiring firearms. Phillip Cook has studied the availability of guns in Chicago.  He found that firearms were difficult to obtain. From the study JCrimLC 2015 Guns in Chicago.pdf:

In our 2007 article Underground Gun Markets, we found evidence that guns are surprisingly difficult to obtain in the underground gun market in Chicago.20 This evidence includes substantial price markups for guns on the street relative to the purchase price in legal transactions, substantial legal or physical risk and delays for criminals in their attempts to get a gun, and the existence of a system of retail brokers who charge a fee to facilitate exchanges between gun buyers and sellers.21 Yet despite the difficulty for most people in getting guns on the streets, roughly four in five homicides in Chicago are committed with guns.22

President Obama is exactly wrong when he says:

"We flood communities with so many guns that it is easier for a teenager to buy a Glock than to get his hands on a computer"

Second Amendment supporters have been correct when they say that Chicago has high levels of homicide with guns in spite of stringent infringements on Second Amendment rights.
Phillip Cook doesn't draw the obvious conclusion that people who strongly desire guns will go to considerable lengths to obtain them.  He thinks strict gun controls on places outside of Chicago (where the crime rate is much lower) could reduce the number of guns that get to Chicago.  It seems unlikely.

Chicago is a text book case of inflexible demand.  Brazil is another.  In spite of extremely strict gun controls and no Second Amendment,  the murder rate, including with guns, is one of the highest in the world.  One of the favorite guns in the Brazilian underworld is the homemade submachine gun.  The demand for guns is so strong that when factory made guns are unavailable, a supply is generated by individuals and small shops. 

People who desire a disarmed population point to Europe.  They fail to note that homicide levels did not drop when strong gun controls were imposed.  They stayed the same.  Guns do not cause crime.  Guns do not cause death. Guns are used to commit crimes or to kill.  They are also used to prevent crimes and to save lives.  People who see their utility will not give them up.  Historicaly, it has not happened.

In the much touted case of Australia, with an incredibly law abiding population, only 20% of banned guns were turned in.  Now, 20 years later, the number of legal guns and gun owners is as high as it was before the ban was put in place. Now, there is a significant black market in illegal guns and homemade guns.

To understand this inflexibility of demand, anti-gunners would have to step outside their comfort zone.  A few do, every day.  The number of people who actively support the Second Amendment has been growing for decades.

That is why Second Amendment rights are slowly being restored, and why pushes for more infringements are defeated again and again.


©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

[marktwain]

Current "progressives" live in a bubble, and have a limited view of reality. They are very smug about themselves.

[kearnyirish2]

Smartphones are computers, and most blacks I see have more expensive ones than my own; I can’t help that they use it for different purposes.

People want guns because they no longer assume anyone else will protect them, and some suspect those paid to protect them have become the enemy.

[Don Corleone]

If “Guns kill people” and guns are so dangerous how does anyone survive going to a gun show?

[Joe Bfstplk]

The predicted bloodbath did not occur when Texas authorized open carry. I have yet to see an instance, though I do not get out much.

[Gen.Blather]

“Current “progressives” live in a bubble, and have a limited view of reality. They are very smug about themselves. “

The Left signals its virtue by spouting what is held by the Left as a virtuous position. They bask in the praise from people they want to impress and ignore the response from people they don’t care about. Their position is fashionable and sets them above the common folk. They are the Dixie Chicks of our culture, seeking praise and attention. Unfortunately they vote.

[Ken H]

Repeating a post I made on another thread =>

Northern Europeans are better armed than most think. According to a 2007 survey cited by wiki, gun ownership in Germany, France, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden is just over 30 guns per 100 residents. That compares to 45 guns/100 residents in Switzerland and 112/100 for the US.

A word about the survey. It looks like the source is one of the usual suspects, so the figures are probably way low. However, it seems reasonable that comparing ratios would be more accurate. Looked at that way, the northern Europeans have 2/3 of the guns that the Swiss have.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country

[Flintlock]

..........read/listen to the news much, a$$#ole??

[usconservative]

Why do People Want Guns so Much?

Wrong question. The question should be:

Why does the Government want to take them away?

[Bottom_Gun]

have to agree with you, since Constitutional carry was started here is Maine, I've failed to see the blood in the streets that the liberal rags here said would happen.

[Ken H]

Graphic for my previous post.

[Gaffer]

The USSC basically ruled that police are not solely obligated to ‘protect’. Their function is to “enforce the law”.....

Our USSC has so hampered police with respect to pre-emptive measures (e.g., profiling and ‘rights’) that it basically had to admit the “protect” part is not the primary function.

I forget which decision but a few minutes on a web search would find it.

[Gaffer]

.....easier for a teenager to by a gun than......

What's the take away from this? It is Obama himself sending it and can't understand the difference between "by" and "buy". Or, he just has some other flunky racist think up this crap and tweet out.....take your pick.

[Cobra64]

True. I have zero compassion for these jerks if and when they are raped, mugged, stabbed, or shot. I say, “tough-titty, you deserve what you got because you’re a moron.”

[wastoute]

The best reason ever was given to Senator Feinstein. “Because you don’t want me to...”

[Ken H]

Both open and concealed carry without a permit is legal in Vermont. It has one of the lowest murder rates of all the states.

[kearnyirish2]

I understand that, but they certainly throw that out there when looking for taxpayers to foot their six-figure salaries.

Part of enforcing the law involved protecting property rights; that is what the Dallas police were doing (not protecting the mob, as the news indicated) where they were attacked.

[Texas resident]

When Texas proposed the CHL, the media drones predicted a bloodbath. When Texas proposed open carry, again a bloodbath was predicted. Didn’t happen. In fact, after Hurricane Ike, the drones asked Governor Perry about looting in Galveston county. The head of the DPS spoke up to let them know that there was no looting in that county.
At the time, Galveston County had the highest per capita of CHL licensees. Go figure.

Also, when seconds count, law enforcement is only minutes away.

[LizardQueen]

Add in “students of history” to the list of people who want guns.

One of my lingering Walter Mitty fantasies is to go back in time and arm the european Jews in 1938.

[Texas resident]

Question for Obama. He says “we” flood communities with guns. Who is we?

[Lazamataz]

This is excellent writing, Dean.