Guns and alcohol: Gun owners drink more and take more risks, study says

[tom sawyer]

You're twice as likely as people who do not have a gun at home to down five or more drinks in a single sitting.

Guns and alcohol: Gun owners drink more and take more risks, study says - latimes.com

What a load of CRAP!!

Let me see, what was their premise for this study?

What do you think of this?

Read More

 

[aslinged]

Trace it back and the money originating this study will lead to insurance companies. Bet ya 10 bucks. The real question would be of course who are those companies working with in congress.

 

[22many]

Of coarse. Lemme guess, we are also 10 times more likely to do drugs, beat out wives, and molest children also right?

 

[del_and_bones]

Coauthor on the paper "Professor D W Webster, Center for Gun Policy and Research, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health".... no agenda there.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

People are looking at this from the wrong angle. This has been an excepted fact for many years. Psychology students study this as far back as when I was in school. The problem is people are reversing cause and effect. They are confusing periphery attributes of a situation for core/causal attributes. They are ignoring the fact that it is NOT gun ownership that causes such behavior. It just happens that people who engage in such behavior have personality traits that also tend to make them gravitate towards firearms. People who own trucks instead of sedans are also more likely to drink and take chances.

You can't try and decry the facts...it just makes a person look misinformed and close minded. You just have to understand how the facts are misrepresented and how it means absolutely nothing when it comes to the solitary action of gun ownership. A person who is a drinker and a risk taker is more likely to also want a gun. A person who buys a gun is not more likely to become a drinker or a risk taker.

Just think of it like this. Hiring a prostitute will not make you more likely to become a politician...but being a politician means you are much more likely to regularly hire prostitutes. In this case prostitutes have as much effect on whether someone becomes a politician as guns do on making someone drink or take risks.

 

[All2kool]

People are looking at this from the wrong angle. This has been an excepted fact for many years. Psychology students study this as far back as when I was in school. The problem is people are reversing cause and effect. They are confusing periphery attributes of a situation for core/causal attributes. They are ignoring the fact that it is NOT gun ownership that causes such behavior. It just happens that people who engage in such behavior have personality traits that also tend to make them gravitate towards firearms. People who own trucks instead of sedans are also more likely to drink and take chances.

You can't try and decry the facts...it just makes a person look misinformed and close minded. You just have to understand how the facts are misrepresented and how it means absolutely nothing when it comes to the solitary action of gun ownership. A person who is a drinker and a risk taker is more likely to also want a gun. A person who buys a gun is not more likely to become a drinker or a risk taker.

Just think of it like this. Hiring a prostitute will not make you more likely to become a politician...but being a politician means you are much more likely to regularly hire prostitutes. In this case prostitutes have as much effect on whether someone becomes a politician as guns do on making someone drink or take risks.

Great analogy. Reminds me that not all Germans were Nazis; however, all Nazi's were Germans.

 

[capdek]

Added this to the comments section for this article:

Deadly Doctors - Physicians more likely to be incompetent, study says

A study by the American Association of Medical Malpractice Attorneys has found that physicians have a higher incidence of incompetence than other professionals. Based on the data collected, the AAMMA has found convincing statistical evidence that people are much more likely to be injured or killed by doctors than other professionals...

So when a medical journal that likely gets the bulk of its data from hospitals that only deal with shooting victims - mostly gang members and violent criminals - we are supposed to assume that this is somehow representative of all gun owners? What a crock. Millions of decent law-abiding gun owners use their firearms in a safe and responsible way every day in this country, but you never hear about these people. Why doesn't the BMJ go to the thousands of gun clubs and shooting ranges across the country and interview the people they find there - trap shooters, skeet shooters, hunters, target shooters, etc.

Any chance this BMJ study could be slightly biased? Any chance the L.A. Times chose to highlight this so-called 'study' because they might have an anti-gun agenda? No, of course not!

I thought that comment was pretty good!

 

[Jamie6.5]

Great analogy. Reminds me that not all Germans were Nazis; however, all Nazi's were Germans.

That's a huge fail there 2kool.
There have been plenty of nazis that aren't/weren't Germans.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Hmmm, no mention of NASCAR? LOL!

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Hmmm, no mention of NASCAR? LOL!

I am sure a study could be done that says if you like NASCAR you are more likely to be obese and have below the average number of teeth.

 

[CEF1959]

Both the NASCAR idea and the OP's actual study seem intuitively likely to be correct to me.

Jamie: Not a NASCAR fan by chance, are you? I believe we've met, so it makes me wonder.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Both the NASCAR idea and the OP's actual study seem intuitively likely to be correct to me.

Jamie: Not a NASCAR fan by chance, are you? I believe we've met, so it makes me wonder.

The big difference between the study in the OP and the NASCAR study is no one wants to make NASCAR people angry. There are a whole group of people wanting to make gun owners look bad. The bad thing is gun owners cannot fight back too much or we end up look as bad as the people attacking us are trying to make us look.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Not a chance Charles.

I was rather heavily involved with IndyCar and the NHRA at one time though.
One was part of a family oriented hobby, and the other was job related.
Care to guess which was which?

 

[trainsktg]

That's a huge fail there 2kool.
There have been plenty of nazis that aren't/weren't Germans.

True enough. There were plenty of ready,willing and eager Nazis (and SS) who came from over Europe including, believe it or not, France.

A better analogy would be not all liars are politicians, but all politicians are liars .

Keith

 

[Beefcake]

Much of the "logic" of the article missed the mark completely. For instance, the article points out that many homocide victims have alcohol in their system; what does this have to do with gun ownership? By that logic, I should probably carry a firearm when drinking so that I can defend myself...

 

[All2kool]

That's a huge fail there 2kool.
There have been plenty of nazis that aren't/weren't Germans.

I guess I should have been more clear in referencing Nazi's as those during the days of Hitler.

 

[jordanvraptor]

I like that line from Lord of War where Nicolas Cage is being arrested by an ATF agent and he says "I take it this is not about the alcohol or the tobacco..."

 

[Mark W.]

Great analogy. Reminds me that not all Germans were Nazis; however, all Nazi's were Germans.

NO THEY WEREN'T There were and are Nazi's of all nationalities.

 

[Mark W.]

I guess I should have been more clear in referencing Nazi's as those during the days of Hitler.

There were American, English, Dainish, Norwegian, Austrian, etc. Nazi's before and during WWII

 

[dolooper]

People are looking at this from the wrong angle. This has been an excepted fact for many years. Psychology students study this as far back as when I was in school. The problem is people are reversing cause and effect. They are confusing periphery attributes of a situation for core/causal attributes. They are ignoring the fact that it is NOT gun ownership that causes such behavior. It just happens that people who engage in such behavior have personality traits that also tend to make them gravitate towards firearms. People who own trucks instead of sedans are also more likely to drink and take chances.

You can't try and decry the facts...it just makes a person look misinformed and close minded. You just have to understand how the facts are misrepresented and how it means absolutely nothing when it comes to the solitary action of gun ownership. A person who is a drinker and a risk taker is more likely to also want a gun. A person who buys a gun is not more likely to become a drinker or a risk taker.

Just think of it like this. Hiring a prostitute will not make you more likely to become a politician...but being a politician means you are much more likely to regularly hire prostitutes. In this case prostitutes have as much effect on whether someone becomes a politician as guns do on making someone drink or take risks.

Good point. There is inherently some risk involved in owning guns. All the study really shows is a difference in the way some people calculate risk/reward and that is nothing new. I'd be willing to bet that the same study focusing on occupation would find the same difference, with gun owners more likely to be employed in risky jobs like commercial fishing, construction, farming, or oil work. I bet hedge fund managers have a higher rate of gun ownership than the average population.

And, from my willingness to take the risk to lay down bets on this, odds are pretty good that maybe I own a gun or two.