Chris Uggen, at our sibling Context blog Public Criminology, posted an interesting graph showing that background checks for gun sales during the period from November to April for each year from 1999-2000 to 2008-2009. We see that they’ve increased significantly this November-April compared to previous years:
Background checks should serve as a decent proxy for gun sales, keeping in mind that not everyone who requests a check will eventually purchase a gun, not everyone who gets a gun bothers to go through legal channels and get a background check, and people who get a background check might then buy multiple guns.
Anyway, it appears that the reason for the jump in sales may be the election of President Obama (although as Chris points out, it’s possible the recession or some other factor could be driving it). When I mentioned this to a couple of friends, they assumed it meant some crazy White people were preparing for a race war. I presume that is true for some people, and that some of them are my relatives. However, there’s another explanation, which is what most news stories I googled report and which, having talked to a number of very right-leaning individuals I happen to know, seems more likely to me: with a Democratic controlled Congress and a Democratic President, many people are convinced that gun control is right around the corner, and they are taking advantage of the period before guns can be outlawed to stock up, with the hopes that after guns are outlawed, they can either hide them or maybe people who bought theirs before the law was passed get to keep them.
I haven’t seen as much news coverage of it, but in addition to gun sales, apparently bullet sales have gone up. My friends and family members who have guns have been complaining about the increasing price of bullets, as well as their scarcity. I was recently with a friend who is a police officer and needed to buy some bullets for shooting practice, and when he asked at Wal-Mart, the price was much higher than usual (I don’t remember the specific price, just that he said it was high) and they only had one specialty kind in stock; the rest of the shelf was bare.
So anyway, it’s sort of an interesting social trend that appears likely to be related to Obama’s election and the fear of liberals taking away guns (something I find highly unlikely), though I’m open to other explanations.
And as for why I don’t object to my friends and relatives having guns and buying bullets, I have a friend who is a police officer, so he has to have a gun while at work, and I gave up long ago on my family members, who are mostly ranchers and hunters; I’ve settled for being happy that my grandma shoots a lot fewer things than she used to.
UPDATE: In response to my story about going to Wal-Mart with my friend and checking on the price of bullets, Jeremiah says,
I question the veracity of this anecdote. In all my years of firearm ownership, only the most n00b newbz buy retail ammo for ‘practice.’ Everyone else buys repacked rounds at a HUGE discount.
People call me dumb or question my interpretation frequently enough, but being called an outright liar is new. I did, indeed, go to Wal-Mart with my friend Clint, who is a cop, and he went to the gun section and asked about bullets. I just called him and asked what kind he was looking for; he said he asked about .22 bullets, and I asked what he needed them for. He said “just for practice.” I didn’t think to clarify if he meant official practice at the firing range, or informal practice as in “a group of my friends and I are going to drive to a field and shoot at stuff.”
Point being, I am many things: crazy, bossy, sometimes overdramatic, a bit cranky. I am not, however, a liar.
UPDATE TWO: Joshua provides more information on background checks:
In states like Georgia, without a mandatory waiting period (the majority of states), the background check occurs at the time of purchase. The dealer makes a phone call, gives your identifying information, and in most cases gets an instant answer. At that point, you purchase the gun and away you go. The idea that someone would “request a background check” and then not purchase a gun seems questionable to me, because it is the act of attempting to purchase a gun that triggers the background check.
…
There are many legal channels for buying a gun without a background check. Only gun dealers are required to perform background checks. In most states, non-dealers can sell or give away guns just like they can sell any other possession. No background check is required for so-called private-party sales. There are limits on the number of guns a person can sell before they become a de facto dealer. A few states amend the federal requirements by requiring all gun sales to go through a dealer, who typically charges a small fee for the service.
…
Also, in states who issue concealed-carry permits, and whose permit requirements meet federal minimum standards, people who have a permit can buy firearms without a background check. The thinking is that the federal minimum standards mean that a permit-holder has already been vetted to a much higher degree than the NICS check system does, and at that point, NICS is redundant. This serves as an incentive for states to meet the federal recommended standards for carry permits.
Comments 30
Trabb's Boy — June 3, 2009
Conservative media, radio in particular, has pushed this idea that Obama is going to institute lots of new gun controls partly because it is a reliable way to retain people in the Republican Party, and partly because of a failure to recognize that Democrats have largely given up on this issue as a political loser. Ammo sales have been through the roof as well, on rumours that ammo would be restricted instead.
I'd be curious to know how much this concern was fueled by the gun industry to make the sales.
Maggie — June 3, 2009
"When I mentioned this to a couple of friends, they assumed it meant some crazy White people were preparing for a race war."
wow, that is really frightening.
Jeremiah — June 3, 2009
"I was recently with a friend who is a police officer and needed to buy some bullets for shooting practice, and when he asked at Wal-Mart, the price was much higher than usual (I don’t remember the specific price, just that he said it was high) and they only had one specialty kind in stock; the rest of the shelf was bare."
I question the veracity of this anecdote. In all my years of firearm ownership, only the most n00b newbz buy retail ammo for 'practice.' Everyone else buys repacked rounds at a HUGE discount.
T B — June 3, 2009
There also are some 'survivalists' out there --
That is, people who think that the way to respond to ecological problems (like oil depletion) is to set up private Alamos (like in the movie The Night of the Living Dead); that's the only way to survive, they believe -- hence they claim the term 'survivalists' for themselves. They're in a frenzy -- gripped by fear about what they see as a coming post-apocalyptic scenario (like in Mad Max movies).
Here's an online exchange about issues like these -
http://transitionculture.org/2006/09/04/why-the-survivalists-have-got-it-wrong/
(I've barely looked at it, but it happens to be a noteworthy example of such discussion; I also expect that Mr. Hopkins' initial blog post would be a constructive approach)
Above all, I'm thinking about how some people approach world-wide peak oil scenarios (http://energybulletin.net/primer).
Without trying to, and without wanting to, I have had contact with a few 'survivalists' even here in a city of 300k-500k people. And I'm in Canada -- rather than an area like Texas. (Another guy persistently would insist that immigration has to be ended in Canada.) I've had that contact with those people because I'm part of a Post-Carbon group (http://postcarbonlondon.ca/).
People have told me that sales of food rations have gone up. I wouldn't know whether those claims are true.
T B — June 3, 2009
[ Those last two links - ]
...
Above all, I’m thinking about how some people approach world-wide peak oil scenarios ( http://energybulletin.net/primer ).
...
I’ve had that contact with those people because I’m part of a Post-Carbon group ( http://postcarbonlondon.ca/ ).
T B — June 3, 2009
An animated representation of 'survivalism' -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QovBLFZhQME
It's sad and scarey, but there are people like this out there.
Here's how the video is described by the person who posted it -
"Some folks think this guy is an idiot but he is preparing for life after the oil crash."
Trabb's Boy — June 3, 2009
I'm sure there are survivalists and "race war" types out there, but the number of people involved is so small that I doubt they could account for the dramatic increase. Much more likely to be fear of restrictions on purchases by Democrats. There are a lot more gun nuts out there than nuts. ;)
Duran — June 3, 2009
How exactly did a discussion of firearm and ammunition purchases turn into a discussion about survivalists?
How about regular ol people like me, who do target practice for the fun of it?
opminded — June 3, 2009
"When I mentioned this to a couple of friends, they assumed it meant some crazy White people were preparing for a race war. "
'Race war'? Tell your friends to get out of the 1970's!!
Also, you say "the fear of liberals taking away guns (something I find highly unlikely)" although that is what the liberals tried to do in Washington DC. An act Obama supported.
Joshua — June 3, 2009
@Jeremiah: I have purchased ammo three times in the last three years (I buy in bulk). All three times, Winchester "white box" 9mm in the 100-round value pack was the same price or cheaper than factory-reloaded ammo ordered off the Internet, shipping included. I ordered the factory reloads because they came with free dry-boxes. When I need ammo today, I buy it at Wal-Mart because it's hands-down the cheapest anywhere. At least, it used to be. I'm dreading my next purchase.
Joshua — June 3, 2009
Regarding background checks:
Background checks should serve as a decent proxy for gun sales,
Agree, in general, but here is some more info.
keeping in mind that not everyone who requests a check will eventually purchase a gun,
This is technically true, but I think it might be based on a misunderstanding about how the NICS background check system typically works. In states like Georgia, without a mandatory waiting period (the majority of states), the background check occurs at the time of purchase. The dealer makes a phone call, gives your identifying information, and in most cases gets an instant answer. At that point, you purchase the gun and away you go. The idea that someone would "request a background check" and then not purchase a gun seems questionable to me, because it is the act of attempting to purchase a gun that triggers the background check.
not everyone who gets a gun bothers to go through legal channels and get a background check,
There are many legal channels for buying a gun without a background check. Only gun dealers are required to perform background checks. In most states, non-dealers can sell or give away guns just like they can sell any other possession. No background check is required for so-called private-party sales. There are limits on the number of guns a person can sell before they become a de facto dealer.
A few states amend the federal requirements by requiring all gun sales to go through a dealer, who typically charges a small fee for the service.
and people who get a background check might then buy multiple guns.
Also, in states who issue concealed-carry permits, and whose permit requirements meet federal minimum standards, people who have a permit can buy firearms without a background check. The thinking is that the federal minimum standards mean that a permit-holder has already been vetted to a much higher degree than the NICS check system does, and at that point, NICS is redundant. This serves as an incentive for states to meet the federal recommended standards for carry permits.
Joshua — June 3, 2009
fear of liberals taking away guns (something I find highly unlikely)
The issue, I think, is not "liberals taking away guns" in general, but liberals taking away certain specific very popular guns, like the good old AR-15. In 1994, the mis-named "assault weapons ban" made lots of guns illegal. Thankfully, it sunsetted in 2004, but the people who pushed the ban in the first place are still hard at work, and if there's one lesson gun-rights advocates have learned, it's that complacency will be rewarded with reduced rights.
Timm! — June 4, 2009
Somehow I ended up on some super-conservative mailing list, and every since Obama got elected, my spambox has been filled with emails like "Obama's Gun Control Obsession," "Obama OPPOSES Gun Rights!" "Obama's Supreme Court Nominee OPPOSES Gun Rights!" so I would have to say that, at least in certain conservative/right circles there is a great fear of some liberal agenda to "take away our guns."
styleygeek — June 4, 2009
Another possible explanation is the recession. In a recession, crime and poverty rise, and people get scared and respond by buying weapons.
Woz — June 4, 2009
This reminds me of an article from the StarTrib a few months back (sorry, I couldn't find the link) about large numbers of people buying land up north to bury their guns and ammo so they're there when the government comes for us, or some sort of rationalization like that. So clearly there's something to the "gov'ment gonna take away my kill sticks" crowd driving up background checks.
On the other hand, the constitution clearly grants me the right to have cyanide-tipped armor-piercing bullets to defend my mountain blockade from ATF agents, so we have to give weight to that perspective as well...
Tony — June 4, 2009
One possible explanation is that some states have been trying to beef up existing gun laws, by requiring background checks at gun shows, and for private party sales (which can account for a very large portion of gun sales). I don't know enough about each of the states laws to comment, but it may be worth looking into gun laws in the more populous states to see if anything has changed.
Another point I would like to make, is that, looking at the graph, since the 2003/04 period, background checks have been increasing exponentially. 2007/08 is the one time period that seems out of place with growth smaller than would be predicted by the trend of the years before this. It would be just as interesting, in my mind, to find out why check were so low that year.
Avi — June 4, 2009
No one seems to count the black market guns when it comes to the issue of gun control...
Avi — June 4, 2009
Oh wait-nvm. The poster and a commenter just mentioned it.
Maria — June 17, 2009
Just to counter Jeramiah, as a liberal gun owner in CA (hey I'm a Democrat), in urban areas many gun owners buy their rounds. Many of us either cannot make our own rounds due to space availability (many people live in small apartments) or time (many of us work 50-60 [or longer] hour weeks).
In CA, there was a run on ammunition after the election, which triggered a feedback loop in which all of us tried to get as much ammunition as possible due to its scarcity. I can tell you from personal experience that where I live a store is out of ammunition on the day that they receive their shipment and this has been going on for some time.
The run on ammunition has been exacerbated in CA by a proposed 50 bullet purchase limit (per month I believe) and AB 962, which is a current proposal to require fingerprinting upon ammunition purchase (recording ammunition purchases has been tried by the federal gov, and by the city of Pasadena and been shown not to work as a law enforcement tool in both settings).
Just to give you a hint at why someone like myself would need to participate in the "hoarding," when we go to the range, my shooting partner and I usually shoot, at minimum, 200 rounds. This may seem like a lot, but keep in mind that we are two people practicing target shooting (accuracy) and with a magazine of about 10 bullets (the maximum magazine capacity in CA), we have the practice of shooting two magazines so that's 5 actual practice rounds of shooting for each of us.
It's not white supremacist groups preparing for a race war, in the Bay Area, many of us in CA are racial minorities (the shooting range where I go seems to be staffed mostly by Filipinos) we're "hoarding," but for very CA specific reasons.
Maria — June 18, 2009
To bolster Tony's response -
Again, in a state like CA (very populous) - there are several proposed gun regulations in the assembly and a ballistic fingerprinting law going into effect now, and this has definitely influenced the number of guns and ammunition purchased in this state.
CA is an interesting study in gun ownership because we have some of the strictest laws in the country including long wait periods and very strict regulations regarding the types of guns and ammo that can be purchased (which, as a gun owner I fully support). In many gun blogs and literature, CA is referred to as Cantafornia because of our restrictions.
The restrictions do make legal gun ownership very expensive, thus the increase in gun purchases this year before the ballistic fingerprinting law increases the cost even more.
I'm not going to argue the effectiveness of ballistic fingerprinting here, but I do think, as a sociologist, that the effects of shows such as CSI on public policy are very interesting when you look how state (such as Maryland, New York, and now CA) are attempting to implement technologies on TV without fully understanding the time, cost, impact, and effectiveness of those technologies. Also, I've heard anecdotally, about how these shows have raised the expectations regarding the ability of the police and forensic labs, to the dismay of prosecutors who now have to address how science doesn't work as fast in real life as it does on TV.
American gun culture | Toban Black — July 1, 2009
[...] on the Sociological Images blog - “Increase in Gun Sales” [...]
srs — August 12, 2009
it figures that a web site is funded by liberals will be anti gun. right now I am waiting due to the background check on a .22 caliber rifle. Listen if a person is shot with a 22 all it does is piss them off unless it is held to the head at point blank range. I know I was shot in a robery in the 70's with a 22 and still have the bullet in my leg did not even knock me down just pissed me off. the Govt is actively seeking to stop 99% of the gun sales in the country and have already stopped the import unless by jumping thru hoops and spending millions of dollars foreign rifles. I do not own a hand gun nor will I. I do own a couple of rifles for hunting and just the relaxation of shooting, like fishing tere is a excitement when at the range and you make a good score on hitting the target or catching a 7 lb bass, calif has already outlawed 2 cycle engines so tell me the govt is not taking away rights and imposing their way on the population? health care, higher taxes, allowing illegals to stay and taking care of them for votes. come on open your eyes, if I see it and I was a died in the wool anti war hippy in the 60-70's and up untill a few years back a liberal , get a job work and see how the govt just takes and takes from hard workers and gives to jackasses who wont work or are illegal
Background Checks — September 3, 2009
The only means that will effectively reduce crime is to reduce the number of criminals. A person who is willing to kill you just for sport is not going to fill out any paperwork or do a NICS background check to buy a stolen gun from another criminal.
If 23,000 gun control laws have failed to turn criminals into law abiding citizens, enacting one or one thousand more gun control laws will not change criminal behavior either. Anyone who believes otherwise is in serious denial and probably should be kept away from sharp objects.
The good news is that a study of police reports show that an armed victim can successfully stop their attacker from killing them. Several well placed shots to his head or heart (good gun control) will not only stop the immediate threat, but may permanently end the criminal’s career also.
So as the criminal population shrinks because of lead consumption, the number of violent attacks these criminals can attempt upon citizens will also be reduced.
Unless you have been in a coma for six months, you should know that it is lawful in Wisconsin to openly carry a gun for self defense (some restrictions apply). Criminals do not like that because when victims shoot them, it makes their job more difficult.
People who are truly against violence, carry guns.
asds — October 13, 2009
vak you mum
Maximilian Hohenzollern — February 1, 2023
If you think that you can increase the company's sales with the help of various software, apps, and so on, then I think that this is not the right way. In my opinion, the most effective way is to invest in training and education of employees. If you doubt this, then I advise you to count ROI. This ratio will just show how profitable these investments are.
dario hill — March 26, 2023
To start playing Drift Hunters. This simple URL will open up a world of browser games that could entertain you for hours on end.
matthew clair — May 21, 2024
This introduction explores the complex realm of traffic violations in Goochland and emphasizes the value of getting expert help. An expert in handling a variety of traffic matters and well-versed in local legislation, a Goochland traffic lawyer can offer priceless assistance.