Densley and Jones: ‘Super-Owners’ are the Foundation of the NRA

gun control NRA super owners guns

Bigstock

The anti-gun crowd is getting a bit smarter about how to reach their gun control goals. That should worry us, but here I’m snickering over this idea of “super-owners.”

So if I own 17 guns, I’m a “super-owner”? What if I own…uh…way more than 17?

Half of all guns in private hands ― about 133 million of them ― are owned by a mere 3 percent of the U.S. adult population. These people, called “super-owners,” own 17 guns each on average. They represent a small and intense, mobilized and engaged minority, and they form the base of the National Rifle Association.

Super-owners are more often than not the prototypical “good guys with guns.” They’re antiques collectors. They’re firearms instructors, gunsmiths, cops and competitive shooters. They’re preppers and survivalists who anticipate the end of the end of the world [sic] as we know it, and they’re skeptical (and in many cases fearful) of Big Government. They’re more likely to be male and conservative, white and often own a gun for protection.

…it’s of course possible for super-owners to overestimate their own firearms competencies, lose count of the exact number of weapons in their possession, and even neglect to store their collection safely.

– James Densley and David Squier Jones for Huffington Post in Want Better Gun Control? Win Over the NRA’s Core Members.

comments

  1. avatar Casey says:

    It is of course possible for super-statists to overestimate their logic and reason abilities, accept or reject any statistic from any source based on it’s confirmation of their bias, and even neglect to consider people with whom they disagree are in fact still human beings with rights.

    1. avatar BC says:

      So nice of HuffPo to give that Der Spiegel guy a job so quick.

  2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Seems like an awful lot of baseless speculation in that statement.

    1. avatar Big Sky says:

      Counting your guns is like counting your beers at your first kegger. It’s meanless and when you brag about it you just sound stupid and immature. There is no pile of Hi Points tall enough to equal one Glock.

      “Beware the man with just one gun….”

  3. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    I’m suspecting some entity is trying to figure out who owns how many guns.

    No comment.

    1. avatar Draven says:

      guns? what guns? lost them all in a horrible boating accident.

      1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

        Yeah. It was horrible.
        I lost the handgun and the long gun in my accident.

        1. avatar M1Lou says:

          It was a sad day when my 8′ Kayak tipped over with the 1000lb safe full of guns. It was horrific! I think I will scarred for life.

  4. avatar Shire-man says:

    Why 17? I’m sure the antis collectively view anyone with more than 2 to be a dangerous psycho. They needed a tiny percentage to highlight what a fragile minority the gun owners are. I suppose the percentage who own 16 was too high to fit the agenda. Surely a died in the wool Brady bunches would balk at the idea of anyone owning 10 guns. Percentage too high? Can’t let ignorant people get the impression that gun owners are normal. You might work with one of these people. There could be an owner of 10 or more guns teaching your children, fixing ytou car, in your house right now pairing your new nursery. Gasp!

    1. avatar Elaine D. says:

      17 is the average. I believe super owner means owning 8 or more. So it’s anywhere from 8 on up with no top number. I have been told that 8 or more also puts you on a list.

      1. avatar RCC says:

        Elaine
        I have more than 8 in Australia. Some of my friends here have 50 plus guns. Friends in Texas their teenagers are super owners by that small number.

        Media used FOI laws to get numbers of guns per owner earlier this year. Lots of screaming when they found out some people had over 100 firearms in Australia. Another reason I hate our gun laws and registration.

        1. avatar Elaine D. says:

          @RCC

          Yep, true about here in Texas. But, we are a pretty gun friendly place.

          Personally I believe the registry here already exists, both from snippets of conversation with certain individuals and my own experiences, since I am a super-owner also. We like to pretend that it doesn’t, but I’m pretty sure it does and has been in place for quite some time.

          I actually wish I could own fewer. The problem is that if you aren’t regularly doing training courses you pretty much end up having to follow the “extra weapon” rule, because if your weapon craps out or breaks and you have no backup, there goes your hundreds of dollars for that day, you’re just out that training. I prefer to have the least amount of stuff possible and to use all of it regularly.

        2. avatar Elaine D. says:

          *are* regularly doing training courses.

        3. avatar Anonymous says:

          Personally I believe the registry here already exists

          Just because they know you have some guns doesn’t mean a registry exists. Please elaborate. Who has the registry? Who keeps it? Is it state or federal?

        4. avatar HuntingtonGuy says:

          Full disclosure: I am behind the wall here in New Yorkistan.
          You’ve all heard the stories about how eff’ed up the gun laws here. We are required to have a pistol license to own, possess or even touch a handgun. Can’t even go into a gun store and fondle a pistol without a license…a felony here.
          It gets better. Every handgun I own is required to be listed on my license. Make, model, caliber, A for semi auto or a R for revolvers and serial number. When one card gets filled, they issue another. On top of each card is our license number and the number of handguns owned.
          Ok, so being a CCW you’d expect us to be gtg on possessing, right? Not so fast. We may only be in possession of guns on our own license. As an example, if I wear a gun on my wife’s license (it can only be on one persons license) and get caught it is CPW or Criminal Possession of Weapon…go to jail, licenses revoked (hers for allowing unauthorized access or failure to safeguard).
          Since every handgun is itemized and listed I’d say it’s a safe bet we have a fully functioning registry here.

          Sounds like crazy talk to many of you, I know, I wish it was. I pray the rest of the country never slides down the same rabbit hole we live in. It’s not as far fetched as it sounds…lots of red states have gone purple, millenials are about as smart as a bag of hammers and don’t embrace patriotism the way many of us do.

      2. avatar rosignol says:

        Why would it matter? Most people only have two hands, it’s not like anyone is going to be using their entire collection at once.

      3. avatar frank speak says:

        recently retired sheriff had a collection of 600 guns…does that make him a super-dooper gun owner?…just wonderin’….

    2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      The anitis view anyone with more the zero guns to be a dangerous psycho. But you’re right, they need to paint the bad people out to be a tiny minority – just like they’re always demonizing the NRA and not Joe-duck-hunter. Someone came up with this probably bogus anally extruded statistic about half the guns being in the hands of 3% of the population and since it fits their narrative they’re going to run with that.

      1. avatar Draven says:

        Their ‘estimates’ and ‘studies’ are also based on a far larger number of pre- NICS and Pre-GCA’68 guns being worn out or broken than is normal for firearms to suffer. I’m wondering if they are basing their rates off of the military and police rates for replacing firearms or something.

        1. avatar M1Lou says:

          I have serviceable firearms from 130-150 years ago. Some of them are breach loaders and while servery obsolete, could be pressed into limited use if needed. I have a bunch more serviceable weapons that are around 100 years old. The of course the more modern semi autos from around 70 years ago would still be somewhat effective. Most guns probably don’t get much of a workout and are nearly new internally. Guns last a long time if they are stored in an environment that doesn’t let them rust so you are probably right in your assessment.

        2. avatar Draven says:

          That was totally my point. I have a 1944 Mosin and a M24/47 Mauser… they probably think they are both ‘non-functional’

        3. avatar M1Lou says:

          Wow, wish I had the edit button so I could fix my mistakes in my posts for this thread.

    3. avatar David says:

      Shireman–to the hoplophobic gun grabber a civilian owning a single firearm is excessive ownership

  5. avatar GS650G says:

    Here comes the idea on restricting the number of guns you can own with the requisite confiscation of excess numbers and felony conviction for holding more than that.
    They are very clever in their fascist dreams.
    That’s how registration fits into the plan. They can just spin a spreadsheet up and highlight the owners with collections, publicly confiscate their hoard, and work on the PR imagery of it all.
    I’m well above 17 at this point so I can expect a place on their list.

    1. avatar Ralph Humphrey says:

      “Half of all guns in private hands ― about 133 million of them ― are owned by a mere 3 percent of the U.S. adult population.”
      I’m confused. 3% means ~9.6 million Americans own “alot” of guns.
      If there are ~270 million guns out there, that must mean that ~137 million (the rest of em out there, or the other half) are owned by 44% of the population if it is just one gun per person.. But that is from a total pool of the total estimated population of 320,000,000 people….. So… Since children can’t legally own firearms and there are multiple people per household…
      Doesn’t that mean that a hell of lot more than 44% of the population have a firearm???

  6. avatar CTstooge says:

    133 million? Guffaw.

  7. avatar Kman says:

    Funny how they object to legal gun owners regardless of how many.
    90% of gun crimes are committed by people who are prohibited from owning guns so technically they aren’t gun owners.
    Where’s the outrage?

  8. avatar Cooter E Lee says:

    “Want better gun control? Win over the NRAs core members.”

    Yet their suggestion is universal background checks. That’s not winning me over.

    I think (and my opinion is born out by factual evidence) that universal background checks are a waste of time in preventing murders and mass shootings.

    Still, if you want to win me over what are going to give me in return? Overturning unconstitutional bans by state and local jurisdictions on firearms and magazine capacities? Due process on red flag laws? Nationwide concealed carry? Suppressors and SBRs? Open machine gun registry?

    Oh, none of these things are on the table, just infringements on my rights? GTF home.

  9. avatar CTstooge says:

    Doesn’t this make us a minority? Where’s our free shit? I want a casino.

    1. avatar Elaine D. says:

      Gun owners ARE a minority. 1/4 to 1/3 of the overall US population from everything I’ve seen.

      1. avatar Draven says:

        nope, 1/2 is a more accurate figure.

        1. avatar Feral45 says:

          Much higher. How many liberal fascists own a gun but will never admit it.

      2. I think that’s drastically understated. It’s based on numbers derived from Gallup and Pew polls. And gun owners, by their very nature, tend to 1) not talk to strangers calling and asking about their guns or, 2) if they do answer them, lie about whether or not they have firearms in their homes.

        I’d be shocked if the true number is anything less than 50%.

        1. avatar Manse Jolly says:

          Agreed, and I’ll further add….’who the heck talks to pollsters or survey takers on the phone’ ..about anything….let alone firearms.

          True numbers are unknowable unless all the background checks are added up over the years since they started, multiply private sales by some arbitrary number, throw in another number for all weapons not in circulation outside of a family unit/stored in attic..ect ect

          Only guesstimates and not accurate at all.

        2. avatar Joe in San Antonio says:

          I have skewd the numbers myself. Who the hell actually answers that question. That’s like when people ask my religion or political party.

        3. avatar Elaine D. says:

          Ah yes. I always forget about that part of it. I suppose because I am always open about my gun ownership and participation in firearms training. I understand that this is a stance a lot of gun owners wouldn’t feel comfortable with. Thanks for reminding me.

        4. avatar M1Lou says:

          I haven’t been called on the phone ever as an adult by a pollster. It’s been over 20 years since I’ve been an adult. I think the last time I talked to a pollster was in the early 90s? I wasn’t old enough to participate in the survey and I told them my parents weren’t home. They were of course in the house but I know, like a lot of us, they don’t want to be bothered after a long day at work. I’ve been over the

        5. avatar Michael Buley says:

          What gun owner in his or her right mind would disclose, to some ‘third party,’ how many guns they have? Not these days. Maybe 30 or 40 years ago when it was normal to have guns. If I were asked today by some pollster, or someone saying he’s a pollster, I obviously am very much against gun ownership and guns.

          Look. ‘Journalists’ are political tools any more. They advance an agenda. We have a couple recent cases of ‘award-winning’ (super good at lying) journalists, found to have completely fabricated their award-winning (you told the best lies the most convincingly) stories.

          They have ZERO compunction about making anything and everything up, to achieve their ends. We shouldn’t just ‘question’ these stories. We should assume they are packed with lies and made-up statistics.

          This is all getting very down and dirty. Communists have no morals. Truth means nothing to them. Only disarming us. We should assume the very worst about almost all ‘journalism.’

        6. avatar Broke_It says:

          I love messing with surveys. It’s a garbage idea even for rough eyeballing work. Especially all these online mandatory ones to read articles or dick around on you tube. Garbage in, garbage out. There’s no way I’m the only one intentionally skewing results for funsies.

        7. avatar skiff says:

          “Seventy to 80 percent of NRA members support a universal background check.” I have always been a skeptic of these polls.

        8. avatar Buff cousin Elroy says:

          I’m a residential electrician in the Seattle area. So I do a lot of work in peoples attics and basements/crawlspaces. Even in this super liberal shithole I see gun safes, rifle bags, ammo, “tactical” gear, just things that suggest they own a firearm, in about 50% of the houses I work in.

          its a shame lots of those same people likely are gun control supporters too lol

      3. avatar frank speak says:

        depends on whether you’re talking rural..[lots of guns]…or urban..[very few guns]…with the suburbanites falling somewhere in between…

  10. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

    Bwah hah hah!! “and even neglect to store their collection safely.”

    Does this mean they get the meaning of tragic boating accident?

    1. avatar Elaine D. says:

      Well, to be fair, I’ve seen that. I had a friend who had well over 300 guns that were scattered all over his house. None of them secured. They were in drawers, lying on shelves, in unlocked glass cabinets, what have you. I don’t think that’s a common thing, but then again owning that many guns isn’t that common either.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        Well, they sound like they are secured. They are in his house right? Does he lock the front door? They sound secured in his house. And a person’s house is their castle, and people rule over their castle.

        Same as in my case – all my guns are well secured – in my locked house.

        1. avatar Elaine D. says:

          @Anon

          In Texas, DPS guidelines for safe storage are that the firearm must be in a locked case and ammunition kept separately. It’s a recommendation, not a law at this point except as it applies to preventing minors access. But, Abbott was looking at stronger gun storage laws this spring along with something equivalent to ERPOs, though I have not gone back to see what’s happened with that.

        2. avatar Anonymous says:

          In Texas, DPS guidelines for safe storage are that the firearm must be in a locked case and ammunition kept separately.

          Bang! Rapist on PCP breaks down front door. Texas resident following DPS guidelines: “Hold on one second. I keep my ammo separate from my guns. Just need one more second here. Safety first.”

          It’s a recommendation, not a law at this point except as it applies to preventing minors access.

          When I was 12 I had access to everything. I could use them too, if need be. We lived out in the countryside, and dad often was out of town on business. And we had livestock and chickens to protect. Good thing I’m not in Texas and it’s not “the law.”

          But, Abbott was looking at stronger gun storage laws this spring along with something equivalent to ERPOs, though I have not gone back to see what’s happened with that.

          Hopefully nothing. Nothing says “protection” like de-fanging the prey living amongst the wolves. That and perhaps, the principles and traditions themselves, are more important than the life itself.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      how many gun safe dealers deliver?…ever try lugging one of these things home?

  11. avatar Anonymous says:

    Just more of the civilian disarmament complex at work. Still focusing on treating the symptoms of the problem and not the cause. No amount of gun control is going to remove the malice in the hearts of those with intent to harm. Gun control is a band aid, It’s not the underlying problem. The problem is cultural and is a moral, existential problem. And trying to make people defenseless is not going to solve that problem.

    Further, being defenseless is not virtuous. It just means you are prey. Being dangerous and formidable but voluntarily choosing not to act on that capability, unjustly, is virtuous.

    Lastly, the solution isn’t that the people can never rise to the challenge of being moral and responsible – so they need their freedom taken from them (firearms). The solution is that people must rise to the challenge of being moral and responsible so that they may burden the responsibility for their freedom. That’s right. Gun control proposes the opposite. It suggests that people can never rise to the challenge of doing right, living right, so their guns must be taken from them. It is an extreme pessimistic view on the outlook of society.

    And how do people inspire such morals? Parents, teachers, and friends inspire into themselves, their children, and others a meaningful and moral life rich with family values and the determination to seek out the best way to carry yourself in the world, individually.

    1. avatar Pg2 says:

      We need to stop pretending the disarmament agenda has anything to do with safety or saving lives.

      1. avatar Michael Buley says:

        Exactly.

    2. avatar ExPharmaGuy says:

      “Still focusing on treating the symptoms of the problem and not the cause.”

      They see the “problem” as common people being able to resist, by violence, their communist/fascist plans.

  12. avatar former water walker says:

    Well I aspire to 17 guns…sadly stuck on less. I’ll do my best to be a super duper owner. But I got that NRA membership-for now. Merry CHRISTMAS!

  13. avatar BLAMMO says:

    Right about one thing. Not that there are too many guns owned by too few people. There are too few people who own guns.

    The gun industry, and the gun culture as a whole; manufacturers, distributors, gun shops, ranges and particularly gun owners do a lousy job of inviting new entrants into shooting. People who have never been exposed to the gun culture are intimidated. The barrier to entry is not money, it’s fear. We’re our own worst enemies.

    If we couldn’t make more progress during 8 years of Obama, we never will.

    1. avatar possum says:

      Not everyone, the people whom come out here to shoot are encouraged to bring new shooters, no critique on not knowing how to shoot,decent instructions, and good atmosphere. About everyone in this area are like that. We like gunfire and the more the better….. It does get a little annoying, 17 people sharing one single shot bolt action 22 , … that damned flood

  14. avatar Patrick says:

    So folks who are more involved, invested, and persuaded of a cause are the most likely to support it?!

    As far as actual data, they could try to provide a number such as the percentage of NRA members who own more than 17 guns. Would it be above or below 50%?
    Obviously, they would believe that it strengthens their argument if it was higher than 50%; it would support the idea that the NRA is a “special interest” funded by a few rich people.

    For you statistics guys: If there are an estimated number of guns in the population, and the NRA has a given number of members (realizing that some are life members who are no longer interested?), could you even attempt to estimate the number of guns per NRA member? We would need to know how even the spread is: are there a lot of 10-25 gun owners, or more 1-2 gun and a few 100 gun owners? I would imagine a high number of 1 gun owners (“Fudds” on one political side of the NRA) and 100 gun owners (on the other side, with NRA compromise controversy) would have a lower percentage of membership, where as the 3-10 gun owners (or the above referenced >=17) would have a higher percentage.
    I don’t really know what I’m saying now. Does anyone have any insightful numbers?

    1. avatar GunnyGene says:

      Numbers, whether they are accurate or not, are irrelevant in this except to manufacturers and individual owners. Using numbers/stats to push an agenda should be summarily dismissed.

      1. avatar Patrick says:

        I agree. This shouldn’t be an issue.

        However, numbers are relevant here because party A wants more regulation, party B doesn’t want more regulation, and therefore party A wants party B to seem like an extremist minority so that people side with party A.

        Do the resulting numbers make gun ownership or its regulation by the state more or less rational? No, but it’s less frustrating to win the relevant and irrelevant arguments rather than only the relevant.

        Hence my request… for those who wish to indulge.

        1. avatar MyName says:

          From a purely statistical standpoint it its probably accurate that a minority of gun owners own the majority of the guns. I would assert this because it is a very common statistical observation across a wide swath of human behavior and demographics. A minority of the population owns a majority of many things or engages in the majority of a given behavior. Beyond that, there is not much left but speculation.

          If I were to hazard a guess (or some guesses), and that is what it is because of very incomplete data, I would start my guessing at around 20% of gun owners own around 80% of the guns. Why this estimate? Because guns are material goods and that 80/20, 20/80 breakdown is roughly the wealth distribution in the U.S. – about 20% of the households control about 80% of the wealth. If we were to take widely used numbers of gun owners of 100-120 million and guns of 300-400 million that would mean the 20-25 million owners would own 240-320 million guns and the other 80-95 million owners own 60-80 million guns. Well, that would indicate that my initial guess of 80/20 is off since there would not be enough guns to go around for the non-20% pool. That would seem to indicate that guns must be more evenly distributed among the population than wealth. Well, then where would we go from there? We could look at the distribution of ownership of other durable goods as an indication. What are those distributions? Hard to say.

          If we were to estimate that 30% of the gun owners own 70% of the guns then 30-36 million own 210-280 million guns and the other 70-84 million own between 90 and 120 million. This is at least theoretically possible 30-36 million owning an average of 7 or 8 guns and the rest of the owners having an average of about 1.2-1.4 guns each. At first blush I would say that this is probably still more skewed than actual ownership. We could keep pursuing this thought experiment ad infinitum but, at best, we would probably come up with some very loose bounds of around 25% owning 75% to an equal distribution of every gun owner having somewhere between 2 and 4 guns. Both of these boundaries are probably incorrect but the truth is probably somewhere in between those (very broad) limits.

          What does all this say about NRA members? Well, not much. We know that the NRA has around 5 million members and, presumably, virtually all of them are gun owners. 5 million, however, is only 4 or 5% of the total estimate of gun owners so it is very difficult to extrapolate any general truths about gun owners from the sample that are NRA members. Really, about all we can say is that an NRA member is probably a gun owner and they have $25 or more of surplus disposable income each year.

          All of this has little to do with the point of the HuffPo article though because it is coming from the assumption that gun control is something that is only opposed by gun owners and is most opposed by so-called super-owners and it also supposes that they are likely NRA members. All of this is a stretch. There are non-owners who oppose gun control and owners and NRA members who support it. There are “super-owners” who are not NRA members and there are (presumably) NRA members who own no guns. Sure, those groups don’t all overlap along exactly the same lines as the general population but, there is still some sort of convoluted and unknown venn diagram. The big reach, however is, that if one could convince some unknown number of “super-owners” that gun control is a good and necessary thing then that would sway the general conversation in the political arena. There is no meaningful, statistically sound way to make this assumption. For one, there is an implicit assumption that gun-control (however that term is supposed to be defined) actually accomplishes some degree of progress toward some, generally unstated, goal. Well, what is that goal? The common ones stated are things like crime reduction, enhanced public safety and so on. Well, if these are the actual goals then linking the critical measures to achieve them to gun owners and NRA members and even to so-called gun control is not very meaningful since the overwhelming majority (and by overwhelming I mean in excess of 99.8%) of gun owners and NRA members are not involved in crime or threats to public safety. Further, no conclusive relationship between an increase in gun control (i.e universal background checks) and crime reduction can be shown from available data. The simple truth is that people being victimized by crimes involving guns are rare in the U.S. There are 160,000 or so ‘gun-crimes’ in the U.S. each year and this includes everything from the much discussed mass-shootings to possession and paperwork type crimes. Even if every one of those crimes was committed by an NRA member, which we know they are not, we would be talking about 3.2% of the membership. Across the whole population of gun owners we are talking about 0.13% to 0.16%. Across the whole of the country, 0.05%. Essentially, too few people and too few guns are involved in gun crime for gun control measures that affect the vast majority to be expected to constrain or impact the tiny minority. Another way to look at this is to recognize that there are 400 million guns but we only “need” 160,000 a year to commit all the gun crime. At that level, even if there is never another new gun, we have enough guns to support the current crime rate for 2500 years. Sure, there might need to be some saturation level below which there are not enough available guns to support the crime rate but, even if that saturation level was an order of magnitude (10 guns in the wild per crime gun) we would still have enough guns to support the current crime rate for 250 years. Just not that many guns are used in crime.

          TL;DR

          Way too many guns, owners and variables to draw meaningful conclusions. Gun control addresses guns, not crime. To address gun related crime by limiting guns, you have to get rid of not just some but, all the guns.

  15. avatar Gladius et Scutum says:

    I think they are vastly underestimating the number of guns in this country.

    1. avatar Herb Allen says:

      The “three percent own eighty percent” meme is intended to encourage gungrabbers in Congress thusly: “C’mon, gun owners are a tiny insignificant minority of the electorate! You can go after them hammer & tongs and suffer no political consequences whatsoever, so start banning!!”

  16. More Totalitarian fantasies proposed by the bias left-wing media platforms…Why am NOT surprised….

  17. avatar Johnny Go Lightly says:

    Hahaha…..let these leftists keep thinking only 270 million guns in the wild…..lol

    http://weaponsman.com/?p=33875

  18. avatar m. says:

    densley & jones, go back to the occupation in which you have the most experience, sucking d***s.

  19. avatar MouseGun says:

    Funny how HuffPoo doesn’t have a comments section anymore. Me thinks they were tired of people who didn’t share their opinions voicing their thoughts, maybe?

    1. avatar Pg2 says:

      Same as NPR, they were we’re getting called out as propaganda pushers in the comment sections, they pulled the comment sections.

  20. avatar W says:

    Likely a flawed point but interesting. Attack the super owners.

    Okay, how about when the cat gets out of the bag about the gun banners wanting to attack non-super owners? Imagine when the single mom who owns only one Glock 19 finds out that Chuck and Nancy really want to ban and confiscate that one firearm from her?

    Reality says that the super owner ploy is interesting, but it’s based upon leftist stereotypes and a misleading understanding of the mainstream Democrat gun agenda. As a first step, mainstream Democrat thought is to ban the possession of greater than ten round capacity semiautomatics, i.e.: the most popular firearms owned in this country and ones that have nothing to do with “super owners.”

    Always remember: Democrats lie about reality and they lie about their intentions.

  21. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    And if all those 17 guns are collectible Colts that makes somebody some kind of threat?Dumbasses.

  22. avatar Bob999 says:

    I wonder how many “super-owner’s” still exist in Venezuela? Obviously, not enough.

  23. avatar Coffee Addict says:

    My father isn’t a super – owner, neither am I. My son may own exactly one rifle. However, when my father passes away, I could become a super owner, when I pass away, my son could potentially become a super – duper owner. Guns accumulate over generations. I may own one firearm passed onto me by my grandfather. Unless there’s a tragic boating accident, which given the frequency, seems almost assured, my son could, in theory, one day, own firearms dating back to his great-grandfather.

    His future son would probably be considered a freaking Armory.

    .. treacherous boats notwithstanding.

  24. avatar Imayeti says:

    Do they cite a reference for this crap?

    1. avatar Michael Buley says:

      They’re very adept and practiced at making up stuff, and propagating it as fact.

      The Gov accurately referred to these as AES: anally extracted statistics. It is an acronym we should use ‘liberally,’ as it were, when ‘referring’ to such information.

  25. avatar Imayeti says:

    I’m never going to get to 17 if they don’t stop falling overboard.

  26. avatar tdiinva says:

    I bet a lot of these “superowners” are over 50. Guns are expensive and they deteriorate. Over a life cycle youngsters with a few guns become oldsters with more guns. And someone with one gun can be more dedicated to the Second Amendment then someone with 50 guns. I bet a majority of these “superowners” are Fudds.

    1. avatar CZ Rider says:

      Not necessarily. I had a solid collection by 25, figured that I should get all the cool stuff I wanted before I did the whole married with children thing so the eventual missus wouldn’t be able to complain.

      1. avatar tdiinva says:

        You are generalizing from your own experience. I transititioned from a “good” gun owner with a 1911 and a couple of bolt guns to the super owner almost overnight when my son finished college. Most 25 year olds don’t have the disposable income to buy and feed a large number of guns and most people don’t feel they have to binge buy to catch up. Speaking from my own experience binge buying is not very efficient. I have a number of guns that are safe queens that I didn’t need to buy. And I still don’t have an AR or a Glock.

    2. avatar John in AK says:

      Guns deteriorate?

      Where do you store yours, at the bottom of the proverbial lake after the catastrophic boating accident?

      I have guns that have exceeded the 150-year mark that are in near-new condition; If properly stored, cleaned, and maintained, a firearm will last virtually forever.

      If cared for, I expect that even a modern polymer/steel pistol will last several lifetimes–unless exposed to extreme heat, very strong solvents, or the dreaded PolyesTermites, wicked little bugs that dine on plastic.

      1. avatar Draven says:

        Most of the dem’s ‘these are how many guns there are in America, its far less than anyone says, gun owners are a minority’ numbers are essentially predicated on guns deteriorating at a rate comparable to.. I dunno, cars or something. They think they wear out and fall apart just like other machines… which, technically, they do, if under constant use. The average M4 assigned to use by an Army basic training unit wears out pretty fast, which is where my earlier remark about the dems ‘assuming military wear rates’ comes from.

      2. avatar tdiinva says:

        That is the result of the demise of the comment editor. Should read don’t deteriorate.

  27. avatar Enuf says:

    Well now, by their math I am somewhere’s above the average “Super Owner”. Always thought I was a good person, never dreamed I’d be “Super”. So at first glance, sounds like quite an honor. Wondering if when my trophy will arrive? Or is it a medal? Maybe a nice certificate to frame and put on my wall? Dare I dream of a testimonial steak dinner for 300 of my closest friends and relations?

    Sadly, going down the list of qualifications, I maybe do not rate this honor.

    1. “good guys with guns.”
    Yes, got me there. I’m a good guy, I have guns. I carry one or two every day.

    2. “They’re antiques collectors”
    No. Used to be, I sold off my antiques around a decade back and modernized. Kept a few items from by boyhood, like my first gun, that sort of thing.

    3. “They’re firearms instructors”
    No, not professionally by any stretch. I certainly taught a youngster or two to be safe around and with guns. But that’s in the family, not out there teaching the public.

    4. “gunsmiths”
    No. Routine stuff done to my own guns does not make me a gunsmith.

    5. “cops”.
    No, never worked in law enforcement. Known many, but from the EMS/Fire/Rescue side of things. Doesn’t count.

    6. “competitive shooters”.
    No, never competed like that, just not the competitive type. Been a hunter and a plinker and carry for personal defense, that’s abotu it.

    7. “They’re preppers and survivalists who anticipate the end of the world”.
    No way in hell. Though I can be something of a hoarder if I don’t watch myself on it. But hey, that’s genetic, from what I’m told.

    8. “they’re skeptical (and in many cases fearful) of Big Government”.
    Mixed bag here. Plenty I dislike, still I know the necessity of government.

    9. “They’re more likely to be male and conservative, white and often own a gun for protection.”
    In order then: Yes, conservative on Constitutional Rights but otherwise rather moderate really, and yes one of the reasons I own guns is for protection. Used them that way a couple of times too, so I think I got it right on that point.

    10. “it’s of course possible for super-owners to overestimate their own firearms competencies, lose count of the exact number of weapons in their possession, and even neglect to store their collection safely.”
    No on all counts. I know what I am good at, and not good at. I know exactly what I own in quantity and detailed description. When not out for my use or on my person the guns I own are stored in three gun safes inside a locked room inside a locked house with me keeping it all that way.

    So, there it is, the sad and awful truth. I am not a “Super Owner” of guns. While I exceed the minimum quantity by a healthy margin, too few in the “Yes” column, too many in the “No”. Guess the honorable thing to do is when the “Super Owner” trophy arrives, I’ll just have to send it back.

    Darn, I just never win nuth’n in these sort of games.

    Already missing that testimonial steak dinner too ……

  28. avatar possum says:

    Theys a whole bunch of guns and a whole bunch of people off the radar. Cash payments only, private sales, no permission slips, never been to a pay to play range. The gun grabbers would sht.

  29. avatar neiowa says:

    Half of all demtard votes ― are by a mere 3 percent of the U.S. adult population (alive or dead).

  30. avatar Wally1 says:

    This is what millennials come up with when taking statistic classes in college. Great for making charts and graphs but not so much in reality. So as gun owners, are we now classified as a minority and have special status? This must explain the hate speech and irrational hoplophobic anger against us. Next time use this when having a talk or debate with an anti-gunner. Their true colors come out when you point out their bigotry and racism. Then make the comparison to the Gestapo who disarmed the Jews and it’s aftermath, after this discussion they usually resort to name calling, you just won the discussion!

  31. avatar Ranger Rick says:

    Bad news for HuffPo, you’re not going to “win me over”.

  32. avatar HT says:

    So Huffpoo,

    What would it mean if a guy, theoretically speaking of course, had more than 17, despised the worthless commie NRA and had only daughters to leave his collection after his demise??

    Hmmm… ANOMALY!

  33. avatar Yarbles says:

    There are some 100 million gun owners in America.

    This is why the Globalists are considering the Nuclear Option. Remember Neutron Bombs?

    No kidding.

  34. avatar Anonymous says:

    Well, they sound like they are secured. They are in his house right? Does he lock the front door? They sound secured in his house. And a person’s house is their castle, and people rule over their castle.

    Same as in my case – all my guns are well secured – in my locked house.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      alarm system isn’t a bad idea either….as well as cameras…how’d that pam anderson porn tape get out?…heard it was locked in a safe….

  35. avatar Mort says:

    For the Record: Once I went on this fantastic camping trip… I was gonna be on the road for a long time, so I figured that all my arms were safer with me– how I managed to fit them all on my motorcycle is a little proprietary trick of physics I like to call “magic,” but anyhoo… I ended up camping by an amazingly beautiful lake, somewhere in Wyoming. Or… maybe it was Idaho… or Colorado? It was a long time ago.

    As I looked across the lake, I thought, “The view from the otherside just looks so much sweeter. Hmm.” Someone had left their canoe turned over on the bank where I had pitched camp, so I thought, “I could move camp to the other side, and then I’d really have the time of my life. Hmm.” Mildly ecstatic with my brilliant ideas, and preoccupied with my enthusiasm for the moment, embracing the wild of nature… I failed to take note of the epic storm approaching overhead.

    So, I haphazardly threw all my gear– including all my precious fully semiautomatic barrel-shrouded assault weapons; who remembers how many, but at least sixteen and a BB gun– into the canoe, and I embarked for the other side of the lake. About half way across, the waters started getting choppy. Now, being an able seaman, I stood up in a serious squat and accentuated my gristled able seaman face… it was me against the hard sea. All of a sudden, lightning started to pound the canoe… I could see the Nessie-type sea serpents circling the canoe, testing its seaworthiness by wacking it with their tall tales… the wind steadily whipped up its fury, and the waves slapped the side of the canoe, violently pitching me about, probably five feet, or perhaps twenty-five feet up and down. As the rain poured down and the waves relentlessly assaulted the canoe, the water poured in and I was standing knee-deep in a pool, struggling to save my beloved ship….

    I knew that I was running out of time, but then– a miracle! Through the thunderous lightning, explosive downpour and waves, and ravenous sea serpents, a small window appeared. I could see the other side of the bank, and I knew if I jumped out, I could swim to the other bank and survive. Survive! But, I only had one chance, mere seconds to decide…. I knew if I pushed off the canoe as I leapt, my faithful ship would capsize. To get a headstart on the sea serpents, I would have to push off and flip the canoe… the moment of truth, I had no choice. But being a bloodthirsty, child-hating gun nut, this would mean sacrificing my most prized possessions. I didn’t know if I had the courage, to be perfectly honest. But, it was either my life, or my assault weapons… I imagined my family– all Democrats– a tear squeezed out of my eye, emotion overwhelmed me, but I knew what I had to do. I had to survive… my family would be downright celebratory. Fate, the weather, and sea serpents could manage what years of bitching and moaning against the Second Amendment could never accomplish.

    Anyway, I jumped. The canoe capsized… all my guns sank to impenetrable depths of the lake. I did make it to the other size. I had nearly drowned, passing out within mere feet of the bank. But, I woke up in tattered clothes thrown atop a rock. It was sunny and calm outside, a perfect summer day. My camping gear had washed up onto the sand, miraculously. God was watching out for me that day… whether he approves of “superowners,” well, that is up for debate, I suppose. I picked up my waterlogged gear, walked a hundred yards or so around the lake back to my motorcycle, took stock of my harrowing ordeal, and rode off to find more adventures.

    I don’t remember where exactly this all occurred… I was pretty traumatized by the loss of some old iron friends. But life goes on. This is America, after all, and we can rebuild. Better, faster. We have the technology.

    I just thought I’d share. I mean, we are all gun nuts here. But I don’t think “they” realize the hard truth of the matter… there are not nearly as many “superowners” as they believe. I suspect that the oceans, lakes, ponds and puddles of America have really taken their toll on the realistic, accessible supply of assault weapons in this country. People need to know… Democrats need to know… the sea yields for no man, no matter how gristled, no matter the Fisherman’s Friend lozenges. “Superowners” are an endangered class of American that is rapidly surrending its numbers to a wild, ornery nature. Perhaps it’s global warming… could be.

    Thank you for letting me share my story. Merry Christmas. Be safe.

    1. avatar Michael Buley says:

      Mort, I hope you write professionally, because that’s a damned good story. And harrowing, brilliantly described. We were right there with you. That was a terrible tragedy. And very glad you survived to share it with us, no matter the iron lost. Your life, my friend, was worth every lost shrouded barrel.

      1. avatar Mort says:

        Why, thank you, Michael. I appreciate your kind words… indeed, it was a grueling trial, as I apparently suffered mild brain damage from nearly drowning; that lack of oxygen has made me susceptible to typos from time to time (e.g., with words like, “surrendering”). Alas, that is what editors are for– certainly, no work is beneath a man, regardless how crusty and nitpicky. Ask Mike Rowe, after all.

        I am pleased with the solidarity we share. It took me over 25 years to become a “superowner,” but mere moments to be cast back unto a childsafe, morally decent, societally acceptable state of naked disarmament. And so, I think the most crucial, obvious thing we’ve all learned is:

        When any vital task presents itself, the most important question is always, “How many tools do you have in your toolbox?” Never mind what sort, or why they might be needed, or even why different types of tools exist…. for one can always assess the situation by simply knowing the bean count. How many? Is it enough, or, is it too many? Or something. A little Christmas wisdom for you and your family– it’s really helpful with that whole gifts & presents thing. Cheers.

    2. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      Could you work a little harder on trying to remember the name/location of the lake that is possibly in Wyoming?

      1. avatar Flying Fish says:

        I’ll be there with my dive gear to “document” an epic sinking.

      2. avatar MyName says:

        From the description, I’m pretty sure it is the one on the other side of that one big hill with the creek running out of it. You know, the one where that old cabin used to be. I could be wrong though.

        1. avatar Michael Buley says:

          That’s the one. Now EVERYBODY knows … lol …..

    3. avatar Troubled Soul says:

      Wait.
      Is that why you never returned all my rifles you borrowed?
      Gone, all of them?

  36. avatar Specialist38 says:

    I seem to remember talk of an “arsenal” restriction on guns and ammunition back in the 80s. Seems like that’s where this is headed.

    A friend of my from Britain asked me how much ammo I had for my guns. When I told him, he literally looked ill. His brainwashing engaged and he thought immediately that this was somehow immoral and certainly illegal in some way.

    I noticed in these posts people referring to hunters with only one gun (Fudd). I am sure there are some, but I know many people who only hunt and have no dedicated self defense weapon – hunting only. I would guess on average they own 7 guns each. Deer rifle long range, short range, hog gun, duck gun upland gun, etc). Just like other shooters, they like a variety of tools for different applications.

    I imagine the number of functioning firearms in the US is at least double the current estimate. Hell…many of the guns I bought new are now antiques and they are fully functional.

    Now, lets talk about reloading components and how much proto ammunition is out there.

  37. avatar Michael says:

    When the crunch comes, ‘most everyone manages to come up with something,…”oh, this old thing…I’ve had it forever”…-30-

  38. avatar Broke_It says:

    The whole “argument” these types appear to be making is “here’s what WE’LL let you have. Agree or be crushed.” Yet they wonder why it’s so hard to reason with people and find middle ground. Sounds like strong arm tactics to me or am I missing something?

  39. avatar GS650G says:

    I know someone with a basement gun room that’s concrete block and steel. 5 safes inside with countless guns. He works at a gun shop the past 15 years so he’s collected a lot.
    And he’s definitely on a list.

  40. avatar Johnny D says:

    I bet a lot of honest gun owners owns at least one gun that nobody knows about,and good for then. I would love to own one myself. To hell with the no good gun grabbing bastards

    1. avatar MyName says:

      I’ve known a couple of gun owners that owned guns even they themselves didn’t know about (well, had forgotten about).

  41. avatar Chip says:

    Sadly my love of boating and the tragic accidents that can happen on the water have prevented me from becoming one of these “Super-owners.”

  42. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    Win over people by marginalizing them?

    I know a sermon reaffirming the faithful when I see one. The problem is “those people.”

  43. avatar StLPro2A says:

    “….lose count of their guns….” I always operate under the concept that …..If you HAVE ANY IDEA of how many guns you have, you don’t have nearly enough!!!! Signed: Gunaholic on the Road to Recovery. Bullshit. I’m on the road to the gun shop to buy another gun….or two….or three. Happy man with NO ADULT SUPERVISION IN HIS LIFE.

    1. avatar Michael Buley says:

      lol … best comment of the thread!!

      Just the kind of logical persuasion I need to go get the next couple of guns I’ve been thinking about!

      1. avatar jwtaylor says:

        This is me mashing the like button.

  44. avatar jwtaylor says:

    I’m not an NRA member. No one has ever surveyed me. Since they haven’t I counted. 89 in the house (WAY down from last year). Many are NFA items, including silencers, SBRs, SBSs, and a few full autos. That does count the black powder guns (my favorites), but that doesn’t count what’s in the truck (usually 5) the barns (22s), the ones on me, or the dozen or so I have on loan to friends. I gave away 4 guns for Christmas, and got 2 more as gifts. I have 4 on order (his and hers Wilson EDXs, a Marlin and a Colt SAA, both in 45Lc.) I have 2 1911s currently being smithed and I’m looking for another Hi-power for a project.
    So if anybody’s counting, add me to the list. I ain’t hidin shit.

    1. avatar Michael Buley says:

      I like your style.

      I was up to about 35 some guns earlier this year. Nothing super expensive. I started the year with about 5 guns I had purchased years ago; I hadn’t bought a thing in many years. Many of the ones I picked up this year were pocket pistols. Found a temporary addiction to them that I’ve since broken. I’ve sold most of them, put it into Glocks and ammo. I have 5 Glocks, a Sub2000, an AR15, shotgun, a 10/22, a .22, .357 revolver, and .380 which I’ll give to my daughter.

      Many thousands of rounds of ammo. And getting more. I don’t know what people consider to be a lot, but I suspect my siblings think it’s around 0 to 50. We all grew up with a lot of guns in the house. Dad had all kinds of military rifles, pistols — he loved guns. A lot were stolen when the house was broken into one time. I’m the only one who owns guns out of 6 brothers and sisters.

      I figure we’re all known, whether we think we are or not. Whatever surveillance abilities we think the state has, it’s 30 or 40 years ahead of that. For some reason, I’ve always had this sense that being right out in the open about who you are is a strength, not a weakness. Many can tell stories that suggest I’m wrong. If I’m wrong, I’ll try to get word out from prison if I’m ever given access to a lawyer and the outside world.

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        ATF even has trouble keeping track of the class III stuff…let alone anything else…your state cops may know more about you than they do…especially if you have handgun registration…but standard long guns? forget it…even they would consider it more trouble than it’s worth….

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email