Wall street journal article puts Hawaii's gun ownership rate at 45%

4. Hawaii
> Universal background check: Yes
> Gun ownership rate: 45.1% (10th highest)
> Annual firearm death rate: 2.8 per 100,000 (the lowest)
> Required safety training or exam?: Handguns only

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2016/07/24/hardest-states-to-buy-a-gun/2/

I find that 45% hard to believe or their using some sort of weird accounting.  If it's strictly per person, that would mean nearly every home would have a firearm in it, since each home probably averages 2 adults each.  The report used has a range of 5% ownership in the lowest states to 62% in the highest with a sample size of 4,000 nationally which is pretty low per state.  My guess would be 10 to 20% ownership for individuals.

I think we need someone to volunteer to work on a survey to find out how many gun owners we have and how active they are.  No one has this data and it could be useful for elections and the legislature.  Get someone at UH to do it as a paper, get the survey criteria vetted through HPD, HRA, and the legislature, and we get a bunch of volunteers to administer a couple thousand surveys.

Any volunteers to lead it?

I find that 45% hard to believe or their using some sort of weird accounting.  If it's strictly per person, that would mean nearly every home would have a firearm in it, since each home probably averages 2 adults each.  The report used has a range of 5% ownership in the lowest states to 62% in the highest with a sample size of 4,000 nationally which is pretty low per state.  My guess would be 10 to 20% ownership for individuals.

I think we need someone to volunteer to work on a survey to find out how many gun owners we have and how active they are.  No one has this data and it could be useful for elections and the legislature.  Get someone at UH to do it as a paper, get the survey criteria vetted through HPD, HRA, and the legislature, and we get a bunch of volunteers to administer a couple thousand surveys.

Any volunteers to lead it?

In the articel it gives the source, Looks like it was a telephone survey and its 45% of households not people.

In the articel it gives the source, Looks like it was a telephone survey and its 45% of households not people.

Sorry, but anybody that registers guns is a nut case.
If y ou think Hawaiians are that stupid, go Vote
for Democrats.  Always obey the law.  The cops will
kill you if you don't.

In the articel it gives the source, Looks like it was a telephone survey and its 45% of households not people.

45% of households does seem unusually high.  Where'd you see the source article?  I've been trying to find a copy and it's $37 to order one from the website.

45% of households does seem unusually high.  Where'd you see the source article?  I've been trying to find a copy and it's $37 to order one from the website.

easiest way to find an article behind a paywall
google the title, and you sometimes find a free version off the same website, or another paper that picked up the article and reprinted it

45% of households does seem unusually high.  Where'd you see the source article?  I've been trying to find a copy and it's $37 to order one from the website.

Not in my subdivision in Puna.  Here I would say 45% is low.  I would guess 85% of the homes in my area have a firearm.

45% of households does seem unusually high.  Where'd you see the source article?  I've been trying to find a copy and it's $37 to order one from the website.

Another look finds this page, Which shows that the ownership rates are based on BULLSHIT, in one link i found it said from phone surveys(as stated in the article they couldn't use these as they stopped in 2004)  but had no further source of who did the survreys ect.... So after i looke dup the name of the report and googled it with the addtion of .pdf i found the full report and it says

", we calculated household firearm ownership rates
per state using the firearm suicide/total suicide ratio, which is
the proportion of all suicides in a state caused by firearms.11
This ratio has been highly correlated with firearm ownership
rates in the United States and other developed nations.12-17 There
are no direct data from 2007 through 2010 on firearm ownerships
rates in the United States; the last large state-based survey
of firearm ownership was performed in 2004 by the CDC’s
Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System."

https://www.procon.org/files/gunslawsanddeaths.pdf

Here is some common sense.
Suppose you own a gun or guns, for whatever reason.
and....
Some stranger calls you and asks if you have a gun.
Some stranger knocks on your door and asks you if you have a gun.
Some stranger mails you a questionaire asking if you own a gun.

What you going to say?
----
That is exactly why somebody had to make up some BS method to estimate gun ownership numbers.
Basically, it's a wild-ass guess.

Here is some common sense.
Suppose you own a gun or guns, for whatever reason.
and....
Some stranger calls you and asks if you have a gun.
Some stranger knocks on your door and asks you if you have a gun.
Some stranger mails you a questionaire asking if you own a gun.

What you going to say?

NO HABLO INGLES.   MAHALO NUI LOA.

Best way to do a firearm survey is to go out on the street and have them drop surveys in a box so it's completely anonymous.

This is going to be a huge undertaking since to do a good accurate job you'll have to crossreference multiple sources some of whom can't or won't share that kind of info. I would suggest getting in touch with the local clubs first and using that as a starting point.  From there you can figure out how you'll account for the curio and relic collectors and those that don't shoot with any of the clubs (SRG, Puuloa, etc.)

Just ask RapBack !   

.

Couldn't this information be used as additional support to reject any more restrictive gun laws?

LoL you think they pass gun laws for safety

I think anti gunners would use this report to show why guns should be confiscated before we have a bloodbath because someone didn't like their neighbor's dog barking or parking in front of their house.

Repeat after me:

THERE IS NO CORRELATION BETWEEN A STATE'S HOMICIDE RATE AND ITS GUN LAWS.

Again:

THERE IS NO CORRELATION BETWEEN A STATE'S HOMICIDE RATE AND ITS GUN LAWS.

Once more:

THERE IS NO CORRELATION BETWEEN A STATE'S HOMICIDE RATE AND ITS GUN LAWS.

Here's why, in case you missed it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/06/zero-correlation-between-state-homicide-rate-and-state-gun-laws/

Zero correlation between state homicide rate and state gun laws

There’s been much talk recently — including from President Obama — about there being a substantial correlation between state-level gun death rates and state gun laws. Now correlation obviously doesn’t equal causation; there may be lots of other factors that are the true causes of both of the things that are being measured. But if we do look for now at correlation, it seems to me that the key question should focus on state total homicide rates, or perhaps (for reasons I describe below) total intentional homicide plus accidental gun death rates. And it turns out that there is essentially zero correlation between these numbers and state gun laws.

To begin with, here’s why I focus on total homicide, rather than gun homicide or all gun deaths. First, few people care much about whether they are stabbed to death or shot to death. And even if gun restrictions do decrease gun homicides, that effect may well be offset (or more than offset) by an increase in other homicides:

    Some killers would kill with knives or other weapons instead of guns.
    To the extent that today some attempted killings are stopped by defenders who have guns, those attempts might succeed if the guns become harder enough for defenders to get.
    To the extent that today some potential killings (or attempted robberies, rapes, or burglaries that lead to killings) are deterred by attackers’ fear of running into a gun, it might be that fewer will be deterred if guns become harder enough for defenders to get.

:::

Second, suicides are quite different from homicides. Morally speaking, restraining people’s liberty, and in particular their ability to defend themselves, to prevent murder of unwilling victims deaths is quite different from restraining that liberty to prevent others from willingly killing themselves. It is no accident, I think, that the calls for gun restriction are usually specifically tied to murders — whether mass killings or the aggregate of individual killings — and not to suicides.

:::
The correlation between the homicide rate and Brady score in all 51 jurisdictions is +.032 (on a scale of -1 to +1), which means that states with more gun restrictions on average have very slightly higher homicide rates, though the tendency is so small as to be essentially zero. (If you omit the fatal gun accident rates, then the correlation would be +.065, which would make the more gun-restricting states look slightly worse; but again, the correlation would be small enough to be essentially zero, given all the other possible sources of variation.).

;;;
Now of course this doesn’t prove that gun laws have no effect on total homicide rates. Correlation, especially between just two variables, doesn’t show causation.

.

The data is unreliable to be used for anything.  We need more accurate data first.

I think anti gunners would use this report to show why guns should be confiscated before we have a bloodbath because someone didn't like their neighbor's dog barking or parking in front of their house.

During Obama's recent interview, he stated that crime rates are the lowest since the 80's.  His propaganda is that everything is fine and the world is a safer place since he took office.   I know he knows that gun sales and ownership have skyrocketed in relation to his so called plunging crime rate.  But yet it's the evil black machine assault guns dat's killin too much folk nowdays and causin dem nice muslim yute to go on mass killin.
This guy is pure evil for those who see.