your chart depicts gun manufacturing, not gun sales.
That’s because I was illustrating a rise in firearms entering the marketplace after the expiration of the AWB...supply follows demand. As this concept is apparently is too complex, I have also attached a Gun Sales chart that lines up pretty much exactly.
“looking at the above chart, neither the Brady Bill nor the Assault Weapons Ban had any affect on sales or manufacturing.“
Clearly you didn’t actually look at either chart? Sales, your chart, plateaued, and manufacturing, my chart, dropped by almost half%?
According to the FBI less than 300 people are killed each year with ANY type of rifle, and its estimated that less than 100 are killed by the dreaded AR/AK “assault weapons”.
Straw argument. I made zero statements about types of weapons used in crimes, only that manufacturing of certain types of weapons increased after the expiration of the AWB of 1994.
The Brady Bill (1993 - 1998) was merely a waiting period and did not restrict anyone from purchasing a firearm
Actually it mandated background checks. It put in place a 5 day waiting period for the first 4 years until the background check system was ready.
So since people are seldom killed with an AR/AK, no guns were confiscated,
Straw argument. I never said guns were confiscated. Ironically, it’s anti-gun control people that claim laws like this remove guns from law abiding citizens.
and new gun sales didn’t slow when these laws were enacted,
The growth on gun sales slowed, as can be clearly seen in the chart.
how could they be responsible for the substantial drop in gun deaths?
Straw argument. I never actually said these two laws were responsible for the substantial drop in gun deaths. I merely pointed out that your chart, which implies more guns = less crime, was comparing two incompatible numbers. In fact, i clearly stated that the two measures were separate in my post: “Look it up. The percentage of Americans who own guns is dropping slowly but surely over time. As is homicide rates, suicide, all that other stuff.”
And, when the AWB ended, why didn’t gun sales and gun deaths skyrocket back to pre-ban levels?
Gun sales did, as evidenced by both charts. The reason gun deaths didn’t skyrocket is unrelated to firearms ownership. The Brady Bill didn’t end; that may or may not be a factor. I would say the biggest factor is probably improvements in technology, communications, mental health awareness, police training, etc.
Especially since the chart shows that more and more guns are being manufactured and sold, and as you say, all these new guns were being pushed to gun owners?
Straw argument. When did I say they were being pushed to gun owners? What I said was that gun owners tend to own multiple guns, to a degree that was absolutely not the case in the past, and that this accounts for the increase in the number of privately owned guns.
Instead, gun sales are booming, and gun homicides are drastically lower.
Gun sales are up. Your char lists homicides, not gun homicides. Gun related homicides are not drastically lower.
All with NO Brady Bill OR assault weapons ban
The Brady Bill is still in effect.
Concerning gun ownership; my question to you is, how do they determine gun ownership has dropped? Simple, they poll Americans and ask, right?. Do you believe, in this era of gun bashing and talk of gun control, everyone is going to be honest when asked?
The only way the results of polls could be artificially influenced in a way that makes gun ownership drop would be if people who owned guns wrote down that they didn’t own guns. Also honesty in polls goes both ways, you have to take into account people who didn’t own guns but wanted to own them in the future. Also, there is a reason polls include margin of error. The fact that ALL of them show a decrease is statistically significant. If there was somehow foul play involved, some would show and increase and some would show a decrease. All show a decrease, so it is statistical fact. Also, all of the statistics you’ve posted so far as also based on polls, as actual firearm sales figures are not known. Notice that your last chart has the word “ESTIMATE” in it? You can’t invalidate my chart on a ruling that your are somehow immune from.
You probably believed the polls when they told you Hillary had a 98% chance of winning the last election, amirite?
Straw argument but I’ll indulge. No. Those polls were based on actual ‘votes’, and not the geographic region and available electoral votes. She won the popular vote by roughly the same margin as the polls predicted she would win the election, so the polls themselves weren’t technically wrong - they just didn’t compensate for electoral votes per region.
I only mention this because people aren’t honest when they feel threatened.
I don’t know of a single gun owner (and I know a few) who woke up one day after a lifetime of gun ownership and decided to get rid of the only effective means of defense they have for themselves and their families.
Straw argument. I never said anything about anyone giving up their guns.
So who are these people giving up their guns? I would never tell you, a pollster, a neighbor, or a coworker if I owned firearms. Why would I? In fact, since you asked, I don’t own any. Oh, I used to, but not any more…
Humans are not immortal. Older generations, for example, are more likely to own a gun than a millennial. As boomers die off, the average ownership rate drops. That’s how math works.
Seriously, you may want to believe it, but you can’t be naive and think everyone is going to be honest about it. In fact, more and more people will start lying if things keep going the way they are… My guess is, only optimistic gun-grabbers will believe it.
prguitarman
theartofmadeline
janainaart
titsay
stormborns
germansingergirl
baratheonpilled
dededos
romaincrisis
yousharknotpass
izzy806
