Alaska: The cost Of Gun Control

While we have had regularly enforced gun laws since 1865, it was not until 1905 that those laws impacted an Americans right to purchase,own,or carry a gun. Most of the restrictive gun laws were “time and place laws, generally observed as a part of civilized behavior. Such laws are not considred in this discussion of the cost of gun control.

This post will look more closely at the effect and cost of gun control in our largest State, Alaska. The effects of gun controls – and permissive gun laws – \have been profound, and should be much better known and appreciated than is the case. In particular, the

Homicide rates give a much more limited picture, which we will discuss presently.For the moment, let’s look at Alabama’s violent crime rates.

The key dates are 1960,after a 27 year long decline n violent crime rates brought on by relaxed enforcement of restrictive gun laws after Prohibition:

1963, the year the entertainment industry began a nationwide gun ban campaign in response to peer reviewed scientific studies demonstrating a causal link between television violence and societal violence:

1964, the first full year of the first nationwide gun ban campaign:

1968; the fifth full year of a gun ban campaign, the year Hollywood got two very restrictive State gun laws and the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968:

1969, the first full year of dra State level gun restrictions the Greek tyrranos Draco would be proud of, and Federal gun controls:

1973, the fifth year of Federal gun controls; and..

1993,the final year of the “Assault Weapons Ban” campaign.

And the results of the gun control campaign and resultant violent crime wave are shown in the chart below. These numbers can be verified in the back issues of the FBI Uniform Crime Report, or in his convenient spreadsheet, maintaned by he Disaster Center.

You can easily see the effect of both gun ban campaigns and restrictive gun laws as well as economics, in the chart above. here is the hihgh homicide rate in the early 1960’s as drug wars over turf took lives. There is the reaction to the Gun Control Act of 1968, leading to a \first peak in 1976, followed by a decline as conditions improved somewhat and then a second peak in 1992,and a sharp decline as many of Alabama’s criminals decided the easy lifestyle was not worth the risk.

In the next 50 “Cost” posts you will see this pattern repeated. Not exactly – because the demographics and economics of each State are different, as well as the difference in how stringent the gun laws are and how vigorously they are enforced.

In 1960 American Law Enforcement agencies reported 288,288,460 violent crimes, murders, rapes,robberies, and aggravated assaults to the FBI.

In 1963, with a somewhat larger population, local LEA’s reported 316,970 such crimes.

In 1964,the first full year of a gun ban campaign, LEA’s reported 364,220 such crimes.

In 1968,the fifth year of Hollywood’s gun ban and the first two weeks of the Gun Control Act of 1968campaign American LEA’s reported 595,010 violent crimes to the FBI..

1969 was the first full year of Federal, and two State,gun control laws, and local LEA’s reported 61,870 violent crimes to the FBI.

1973 was the fifth full year of Federal gun controls, and local Law Enforcement Agencies reported 875.910 violent crimes to the FBI. 1993 was the peak of the campaign to ban so-called “assault weapons,” a rifle used far more ofte by police SWAT teams than by civilians with harm on their minds.

I993 marked a turning point, as relaxed gun laws and general realization that our masters in Washington intended to disarm Americans started a wave of gun purchases. In the next few months, more than 200 million new guns have been purchased, cutting violent crime from 758.1 violent crimes including 9.5 murders per 100,000 in 1993 to to 379.12 violent crimes and 4.5 homicides per 100,000 in 2013.

That is when the latest gun control campaign began doing what gun control ampaigns have invariably done,drive up the crime rate. If you refer to the upper,homicide,chart, the red columns at the right side of the chart shows the effect the effect relaxing gun laws have on the homicide rate. As usual, the numbers can be verified with back issues of the FBI Uniform Crime report or by the Disaster Center’s convenient spreadsheet:

The relatively small population and weather and economic factors produced the high extremely variable homicide rate that was prevalent before the late 199o.s The homicide rate has been much lower since Constitutional Carry, concealed carry without a permit, was allowed. After that, the violent crime and homicide rates stabilized until the arrival of large quantities of gun control activists. The results of that lot easily be seen on the right side of the homicide chart.

THE OVERVIEW

Since the entertainment industry began its 1963 gun control campaign, the total cost of gun control to Alaska has exceeded $750,000,000 seven hundred fifty million dollars,well over $17,000 for every living Alaskan.

As you can ee, Alaska a has paid a terrible price in lives,property,and treasure for State and Federal gun controls. From 1963 to 2015,that cost is estimated at more than $17,000 for every living Alaskan, a far greater cost than any state,

That is a terrible load, even for America’s \third most prosperous State. And it is a load that is increasing as gun control propagandists to drive Alaska’s murder and robbery rates sky high.

Stranger

Stranger

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Alabama, The Cost Of Gun Control

While we have had regularly enforced gun laws since 1865, it was not until 1905 that those laws impacted an Americans right to purchase,own,or carry a gun. Most of the restrictive gun laws were “time and place laws, generally observed as a part of civilized behavior. Such laws are not considred in this discussion of the cost of gun control.

Labor problems were the proximate cause of the restrictive laws imposed in the 1905-06 period, as workers demands for bettre wages and working ocnditions clashed with the determined opp;osition of mine,mill,and factory owners not to give an inch. The resutlt were many armed clashes between striking workers and the company’s hired “strikebreakers,called scabs.

The immediate result was a near vertical increase in murder and violent crime rates, particularly assault. It was not unusual for workers walking a picket line to be jeered by scabs patrolling the fence, and violence often resulted.

A very similar pattern appeared in the crime rates during the 1960’s, particularly in the violent crime rates that give a snapshot of the overall victimization rate in a nation, state, or community.

Homicide rates give a much more limited picture, which we will discuss presently.For the moment, let’s look at Alabama’s violent crime rates.

The key dates are 1960,after a 27 year long decline n violent crime rates brought on by relaxed enforcement of restrictive gun laws after Prohibition:

1963, the year the entertainment industry began a nationwide gun ban campaign in response to peer reviewed scientific studies demonstrating a causal link between television violence and societal violence:

1964, the first full year of the first nationwide gun ban campaign:

1968; the fifth full year of a gun ban campaign, the year Hollywood got two very restrictive State gun laws and the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968:

1969, the first full year of dra State level gun restrictions the Greek tyrranos Draco would be proud of, and fFederal gun controls:

1973, the fifth year of Federal gun controls; and..

1993,the final year of the “Assault Weapons Ban” campaign.

And the results of the gun control campaign and resultant violent crime wave are shown in the chart below. These numbers can be verified in the back issues of the FBI Uniform Crime Report, or in his convenient spreadsheet, maintaned by he Disaster Center.

Largely rural, bogged in poverty,and subject to the outrageous risks of farming,Alabama was slow to respond to Hollywood’s gun ban campaign, and to the Federal gun controls that followed.

In 1960 Alab ama Law Enforcement Agencies reported 6,097 violent crimes to the FBI, out of a population of 2,267,000.

In 1963, Alabama LEA’s reported 6,115 duch crimes to the FBI.

In 1964, authorities reorted 7,260 violent crimes to the FBI.

1968, the year that saw the entertainment industry’s gun ban camp;aign pay off, Alabama’s LEA’s rep;orted 8,288 violent crimes to the FBI.

in 1969, the first full yer of Federal gun controls, Alabama authorities reported 12,390 murders,rapes,robberies and aggravated assaults to the FBI.

The peak year for violent crime was 1992, when Alabama LEA’s reported 3232676 violent crimes to the FBI. That reflects Alabamians early awareness that they could lose their gun rights, and a shift from purchases of sporting arms, rifles and shotguns, to defensive weapons.

So it is time for a a chart of Alabama’s violent crimes

You can easily see the effect of both gun ban campaigns and restrictive gun laws as well as economics, in the chart above. here is the hihgh homicide rate in the early 1960’s as drug wars over turf took lives. There is the reaction to the Gun Control Act of 1968, leading to a \first peak in 1976, followed by a decline as conditions improved somewhat and then a second peak in 1992,and a sharp decline as many of Alabama’s criminals decided the easy lifestyle was not worth the risk.

In the next 50 “Cost” posts you will see this pattern repeated. Not exactly – because the demographics and economics of each State are different, as well as the difference in how stringent the gun laws are and how vigorously they are enforced.

But for the moment, since this series is alphabetical,it will be “North to Alaska.”

Stranger

In 1960 American Law Enforcement agencies reported 288,288,460 violent crimes, murders, rapes,robberies, and aggravated assaults to the FBI.

In 1963, with a somewhat larger population, local LEA’s reported 316,970 such crimes.

In 1964,the first full year of a gun ban campaign, LEA’s reported 364,220 such crimes.

In 1968,the fifth year of Hollywood’s gun ban and the first two weeks of the Gun Control Act of 1968campaign American LEA’s reported 595,010 violent crimes to the FBI..

1969 was the first full year of Federal, and two State,gun control laws, and local LEA’s reported 61,870 violent crimes to the FBI.

1973 was the fifth full year of Federal gun controls, and local Law Enforcement Agencies reported 875.910 violent crimes to the FBI. 1993 was the peak of the campaign to ban so-called “assault weapons,” a rifle used far more ofte by police SWAT teams than by civilians with harm on their minds.

I993 marked a turning point, as relaxed gun laws and general realization that our masters in Washington intended to disarm Americans started a wave of gun purchases. In the next few months, more than 200 million new guns have been purchased, cutting violent crime from 758.1 violent crimes including 9.5 murders per 100,000 in 1993 to to 379.12 violent crimes and 4.5 homicides per 100,000 in 2013.

That is when the latest gun control campaign began doing what gun control ampaigns have invariably done,drive up the crime rate. If you refer to the upper,homicide,chart, the red columns at the right side of the chart shows the effect the latest gun control drives have had on the murder rate/

Since the entertainment industry began its 1963 gun control campaign in 1963, the total cost of gun control has exceeded $4,200,000,000.00,$4.2 trillion,equivalent to $16,000 for every living American and more than$37,000 for every current American
household.

As you can ee, Alabama has paid a terrible price in lives,property,and treasure for Federal gun controls. From 1963 to 2015,that cost is estimated at $7,000,000,000,seven billion, dollars.Costs include lives lost,medical treatment,permanent disability,loss of companionship,loss of a parent,property lost,destroyed,or damaged; as well as the extra costs of security, law enforcement, and incarceration.

That is a terrible load for a poor State to be forced to carry.It is time for Congress to behave like adults and preempt all State gun laws, bringing them back to no more than the restriction level America had before gun controls.

Watch for the 50 posts showing in detail what gun cotnrl did to your State, and to every State.

Stranger

Posted in CRIME AND GUN CONTROL, THE COST OF GUN CONTROL | Leave a comment

The Cost Of American Gun Contro

Whie we have had regularly enforced gun laws since 1865, it was not until 1905 that those laws impacted an Americans right to purchase,own,or carry a gun. Most of the restrictive gun laws were “time and place laws, generally observed as a part of civilized behavior.

Labor problems were the proximate cause of the restrictive laws imposed in the 1905-06 period, as workers demands for bettre wages and working ocnditions clashed with the determined opp;osition of mine,mill,and factory owners not to give an inch. The resutlt were many armed clashes between striking workers and the company’s hired “strikebreakers,called scabs.

The immediate result was a near vertical increase in murder and violent crime rates, particularly assault. It was not unusual for workers walking a picket line to be jeered by scabs patrolling the fence, and violence often resulted.

Then Prohibition came to America, driving violent crime and murder rates to more than ten times the pre gun control levles. The chart below shows the homicide rate, excerpted from Justice Department,Census,and local records:

If you look closely you can see the sharp initial rise in murder rates, followed by a brief decline as labor tension eased in 1909, followed by the sharp rise in crime from New York’s Sullivan Law in 1911, the temporary halt to the climbing homicide rate during WWI, the spike at the 1919 imposition of Prohibition, the climbing murder rates as criminal gangs killed off their rivals, and then the sharp decline in the murder rate after the end of prohibition in 1933.

After prohibition \ enforcement of many restrictive gun laws eased, both beaues of the lack of money during the Depression, and because many LLaw Enforcement Officers realized such laws were counterproductive.

That began a 30 year decline in the homicide rates that ended in 1963.That year, two peer reviewd and meticulously done studies demonstrate link between juvenile violence and exposure to small screen violence.

hat was also the year President John F. Kennedy was murdered. The panicked entertainment industry took advantage of President Kennedy’s murder to launch a campaign to ban “the real reason for violence in America, mail order guns.”

Since official data is readily available and linkable, the balance of this discussion will concern the modern gun control movements, with an overview of violent crime and homicide.

Key dates used throughout the 51 postes in this series will be 1964, the first full year of Hollywood’s gun ban campaign:

1968, the fifth full yer of Hollywood’s gun ban campaign, nd the year that industry got draconian gun control laws in Illinois and New Jersey, a number of less restrictive State laws,and the Federal Gun control Act of 1968 (TCA^*():

And 1993, the year Hillary Clinton ramrodded the Assault WEapons Ban through Congress. That was generally the peak year for violent crimes, although lawsuits delayed the peak a year in some venues.

The underlying FBI sourced data for this part of the discussion can be had with a click at this convenient spreadsheet, and many police headquarters have the paper copies on file.

So it is time for a a chart of America’s violent crimes

In 1960 American Law Enforcement agencies reported 288,288,460 violent crimes, murders, rapes,robberies, and aggravated assaults to the FBI.

In 1963, with a somewhat larger population, local LEA’s reported 316,970 such crimes.

In 1964,the first full year of a gun ban campaign, LEA’s reported 364,220 such crimes.

In 1968,the fifth year of Hollywood’s gun ban and the first two weeks of the Gun Control Act of 1968campaign American LEA’s reported 595,010 violent crimes to the FBI..

1969 was the first full year of Federal, and two State,gun control laws, and local LEA’s reported 61,870 violent crimes to the FBI.

1973 was the fifth full year of Federal gun controls, and local Law Enforcement Agencies reported 875.910 violent crimes to the FBI. 1993 was the peak of the campaign to ban so-called “assault weapons,” a rifle used far more ofte by police SWAT teams than by civilians with harm on their minds.

I993 marked a turning point, as relaxed gun laws and general realization that our masters in Washington intended to disarm Americans started a wave of gun purchases. In the next few months, more than 200 million new guns have been purchased, cutting violent crime from 758.1 violent crimes including 9.5 murders per 100,000 in 1993 to to 379.12 violent crimes and 4.5 homicides per 100,000 in 2013.

That is when the latest gun control campaign began doing what gun control ampaigns have invariably done,drive up the crime rate. If you refer to the upper,homicide,chart, the red columns at the right side of the chart shows the effect the latest gun control drives have had on the murder rate/

Since the entertainment industry began its 1963 gun control campaign in 1963, the total cost of gun control has exceeded $4,200,000,000.00,$4.2 trillion,equivalent to $16,000 for every living American and more than$37,000 for every current American
household.

Watch for the 51 posts showing in detail what gun cotnrl did to your State, and to every State.

Stranger

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Answers To Questions – And A Bit More

Thanks for the questions, so let me give some answers.

First, this site is under construction, with more than 1,000 posts close to deletion and almost as many ready to be posted. The site is intended to provide up to the minute data on guns and crime for those fighting the Statists. Outdated information is being deleted, and fresh data added,. Which brings up the next question:

What about RSS? Yes, when the site is fully updated.

Social media? That too, although perfectly factual information on the effects of gun control keep getting knocked off Facebook.

For reports not directly concerned with gun control, and the rushes of reports for Polite Society are at Extranos Alley.

Stranger

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How Much Muzzle Energy For Self Defense?

One of the most common searches at Extranos Alley is “how much energy for self defense?”

It is hard to say “you need exactly 324 foot pounds of muzzle energy because…” to such a question.

More people are killed with the ubiquitous .22 than any other caliber firearms, simply because they are inexpensive and common. The caliber is not well adapted to self defense, because it rarely kills instantly and often gives the person shot three to five minutes to do whatever he intends to do, but the .22 will kill. In fact, enough .22’s delivered in a short period of time can, and has, killed grizzly bears.

On the other hand, it is not uncommon to run afoul of someone sky high on a devils mixture of drugs and alcohol, when even the 500 foot pounds from a magnum caliber handgun is barely enough.

So we come back to a “circumstances alter cases” situation, where .22 in the hands of a careful shot may drop an assailant in his tracks, while a .45 bullet that left the muzzle with 500 foo pounds of energy may take a while to stop a lung shot perp.

Personally, being neither recoil or report shy, I prefer a .40 or larger caliber with 400 or more foot pounds of muzzle energy. But that’s my personal preference.

My advice is the largest caliber that you are comfortable with, in a gun that feels comfortable to you.

If you are buying a gun and a .44 magnum beats you up drop back to a .45, a .40, a .357, or even to a 9mm. They will all get the job done – but the less powerful the gun the more important the operators proficiency becomes.

If you have a .22, use it until you can trade up for something more powerful.

It’s your money, your life, and your choice. So you should make the decision.

Good health, Sir or Madame, as the case may be.

Stranger

Posted in GUN TALK | Leave a comment

Should Some Americans Be Denied Gun Rights?

The gun control advocates have made it clear. They believe anyone with as much as an overtime parking ticket should e denied the right to possess or carry a gun. They seem to believe that a parking ticket is the equivalent of murder when it comes to access to a firearm.

However, most of the crimes “That may be punished by one year or more in prison” that disqualify an American from owning a gun are non-violent crimes, and for the most part do not indicate there is any risk that the individual will graduate to violent crimes.

The cohort of people who will, at some time during their lifetime, commit a violent crime is very much smaller than the ten million who have lost their gun rights. While the number is not known with exactitude the most common number I hear is one in twenty, or five percent – 500,000 – of ten million who have lost their gun rights..

So we have a pool of 500,000 individuals who may commit another violent crime during their lifetimes – and 322 million of us who are very unlikely to collect anything more serious than a traffic ticket.

Limiting anyone’s God given right of self defense is an extremely serious matter. To take a person’s rights to defend themselves because they have committed a non-violent crime is clearly an injustice.

Crime and homicide numbers dating back 25 years before there were regularly enforced gun control in the United States show just how little risk there was in letting anyone with the money buy, possess, and carry a gun:

1880-2014UShomicide

Clearly, the homicide rate when anyone with money could buy and carry a gun was far lower than today’s rate.

The presence of armed members of the “victim class” severely inhibits violent crime. so limiting firearms access is far less successful than one might think, even with numbers at hand.

So the question should be whether or not to relax gun laws. Given the very much lower homicide and violent crime rates when such laws are relaxed or repealed, the answer to that becomes obvious.

More guns mean less crime, and we need less crime.

Stranger

Posted in CRIME AND GUN CONTROL, CRIME AS A LIFESTYLE CHOICE | Leave a comment

Was Concealed Carry Or More Guns Responsible For The Decline In Crime?

Someone came by searching for “more guns, more ccw, make crime rate go down.”

I assume the question was for something like “Were more guns or more concealed carry responsible for the decline in crime after 1991?”

If so, there was certainly a major decline in the number of crimes reported to the police after 1993. You can see that decline in the graphic at the link, or in the violent crime graphic, below:

19502014USVIOLENTCRIMEGun sales from 1969 to approximately 2000 were severely depressed due to several factors. One was the incessant and well funded gun control/ban drives, many of which were funded to the tune of $70 million 2016 dollars a year for years on end. Another reason was the “three day waiting period,” which was supposed to keep criminals from getting guns. As you can see from the chart below, taken from ATF Firearms in Commerce data:

gunsales Except for a brief bump resulting from Hillary Clinton’s Assault Weapons Ban, gun sales stayed just below five million guns produced, and prsumably sold per year while violent crime rates were dropping like a rock.

And that leaves Concealed Carry. The graphic below shows the rate of increase in actual carry, year on year for the period of interest:

CONCEALEDCRRYRATE As you can see, when concealed carry was a novelty, and increasing at a relatively fast rate, crime and murder rates plummeted. when the year on year increase fell off, due to anti-gun activity impeding passage of new Concealed Carry laws, the rate of decline of crime fell off.

Obviously, the rate at which citizens carry; and therefore a criminals risk of getting shot while engaged in his or her trade increased, the lower the violent crime rates became.

In one respect, we have enough guns to provide a carry weapon to every American. In another respect, we do not have nearlyi enough Americans carrrying to fully inhibit criminal activity.

While criminals are much like the poor, we shall always have both the poor and the criminal with us, we should strive to make the risk of crime as high as possible, so so our people will be as crime free as possible.

Stranger

Posted in GUN OWNER VS CRIMINAL | Leave a comment

On Gun Safety – And Gun Control Lies

New York’s former mayor, Michael Bloomberg, backed with fifty million dollars of his own money and a reported two hundred million from from his billionaire friends, has hired a staff of propagandists to sell his gun ban program as “gun safety.”

In the abstract, Bloomberg’s push to use “gun safety” as an excuse to ban guns is hilarious. The National Safety Council’s annual report for 1968 estimated the number of firearms fatalities at 6,800, in a population of 199,400,000 for a rate of 3.4 fatal firearms accidents per 100,000 Americans.

For 2014 the efforts of the NRA CDC estimates – well, here is the chart from the CDC’s WISQARS website:

2014gunaccs

That is correct. 583 accidental gun deaths in 2014, a rate of only 0.183 accidental gun deaths per 100,000 population. The shooting community and our hobby groups did that, on our own time, and with our own money. While all Bloomberg, the New York Times, and the rest of that lot did nothing but get in the way.

That is a 94 percent reduction in the fatal firearms accident rate. And the shooting community did it all, while the New York Times claims we did nothing but impede their killer program.

And then there is the small matter of more than 800,000 excess murders since the New York Times decided to back gun control in 1963. Excess deaths that resulted from gun controls that Pravda West supported in every way possible. From the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report for the years between 1950 and 2014, here are the homicide rates:

2014homrate

Obviously, we have only lately gotten the homicide rate back to where it was in the early 1960’s. It has taken tens of thousands of hours of hard work relaxing gun laws to get our nation’s homicide and murder rates back to where they were, and Pravda West would wipe those gains out in a heartbeat if they could; regardless of the cost in lives.

Remember, The United States population grew by 129 million between 1960 and 2014, making the actual effects of the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the other gun control laws the New York Times supported appear less than they actually were. But 800,000 excess homicide victims since 1963 should weigh as heavily as a tombstone on Pravda West’s owners, editors, and supposed reporters.

People whose general attitude seems to be “Don’t bore me with facts, our policies are not set here.” An attitude that is commendable in slaves, whose masters word is law, but unacceptable for reportage among a free people.

Since the New York Times hates guns and loves loves totalitarinism so much, they should emigrate to a country more to their liking.

Gun free venezuela would fit their wants.

Stranger

Posted in GUN CONTROL ACTIVISTS, GUN CONTROL PROPAGANDA | Leave a comment

The State Of Policing The U.K.

The Daily Mail has a telling report on the sad state of the underfunded and desperately shorthanded British police.

Briefly quoting the Daily Mail report linked above:

A businessman who dialled 999 as masked raiders ransacked his shop was astonished when a lone police community support officer on a bicycle turned up ten minutes later.

The gang, believed to be armed, were still at the children’s clothing boutique when Sam Islam rang.

The U.K’s financial problems only exacerbate the problem. At best, one Officer on duty for every 700 people will only cut the crime rates by a fifth, while England and Wales has six times the U.S. rate.

The U.K.’s real problem is their insistence that self defense with a gun or a knife is a cause of crime. The result of that fallacy can be seen in the chart below, which plots the increase in the U.K.’s violent crime rates after the almost complete gun ban following the Dunblane School Massacre:

UK2VICRIME

Not enough officers and not enough cells make matters that much worse. But the real problem is that violent British criminals have no fear of the public and even less far of the police.

Stranger

Posted in BRITISH CRIME REPORTING | Leave a comment

Why Do Americans Buy Multiple Guns?

The short answer to that is “because they want them, tut that is not generally the case.

For one thing, guns make good investments, with far greater price stability than commodities such as gold. A Colt Government model purchased for $87.00 fifty years ago, and kept in its original box, is worth close to $800 today. And you can do much better than that if you are careful about which make and model you choose to invest in.

Someone stopped by searching for “why buy more than one gun a month.”

I presume the search was related to Kali’s “One gun a month” law the anti-gun, and therefore pro-crime, legislature is working on.

While there are many reasons, including purchase of a collection the principal reason is for gifts. Guns have always been highly desirable gifts, and purchasing a gun for wife, a gun for son, a gun for daughter and a gun for self is quite common.

And on Christmas morn, Pop can smile broadly and say “Now we won’t have to share a gun when we go to the range.”

And of curse, collectors frequently buy matched pairs, consecutive serial numbers, “left and rights” or some part of a collection that particularly interests them.

But investment comprises only a small part of the market for guns. Collector purchases are much more common.

Speaking personally, my last “multiple purchase” was a consecutive serial numbered pair of pre-1968 PPK’s, NIB, and evidently unfired. As they remain after more than 40 years.

Far more multiple purchases are made for gifts. A friend’s triplet daughters received identical Browning handguns on their 15th birthday. As did his wife a few days later.

So there are a few of the reason’s people make multiple gun purchases.

And, despite much propaganda, very few with crime on their minds buy a gun from a dealer, leaving a paper trail from the gun maker to their front door.

Study after study finds the same thing. Criminals obtain guns from “friends and relatives” who are also working criminals. They are cheap, they can be disposed of without a qualm, and the paper trail ends with the legitimate purchaser.

So those are just two of many reasons to buy more than one gun at a time. But lawful purchasers, who pay retail prices, are not the problem.

Considering “one crime per criminal victimization, legitimate gun purchasers for fr less than six percent of firearm facilitated criminal victimizations.

Stranger

Posted in GUN TALK | Leave a comment