3 ms·
A house hold often includes more than one person. Those other individuals are not gun owners. Gun owners are a fairly small group with a very powerful lobby tha
by paulie_a 8y ago
A house hold often includes more than one person. Those other individuals are not gun owners. Gun owners are a fairly small group with a very powerful lobby that needs to be ignored.
- e12e 8y agoThis (and the sibling) strikes me as an odd interpretation - there are more guns than people in the US - most households with any guns, have more than one gun. And as I see it living in a household with guns, generally means access to guns? So I readily read one in three households, as strictly more than one in three persons - have access to guns?
- dragonwriter 8y ago> So I readily read one in three households, as strictly more than one in three persons That's a bad reading. Even if everyone in a household with a gun owner have access to guns, that would mean 33% of households implies exactly 33% of people if gun ownership is distributed among households with no bias by household size. It doesn't imply more than 33% of people unless gun owning households are larger than non-gun-owning households.
- imtringued 8y agoWhy even care about this meaningless distinction? Households can give other households guns. What's important is if there are enough guns and ammunition for every person, not how they are distributed unless it's extremely skewed to a very specific part of the population.
- ntsplnkv2 8y agoJust because you don't personally own a gun doesn't mean you're also against owning guns.
- paulie_a 8y agoAnd that is not relevant, either you own a gun or you don't. Americans by and large don't own one.
- ntsplnkv2 8y agoOnly if we're talking about gun ownership, which you did not do. You brought up the gun lobby. It's relevant because you equate gun owners only to the gun lobby. There are many non-gun owners that are without a doubt for owning guns.