Heavily Armed Counties

[timac]

Do you live in one of these counties?

http://www.city-data.com/top2/co8.html

Read More

 

[coop44]

yep

 

[techiej]

me too

 

[etrain16]

Count me in. Number actually seems a little low to me though.

 

[bolus]

how do they get that data?

 

[WashCoDad]

Yep.

 

[Sgt Nambu]

Nope! Me too on the data. It all looks much too low.

 

[Straighthome]

Yup, lived in a couple on the list.

 

[CJ1089]

Data is probably collected via survey. They list the major city/cities of the county, so they may have just stopped people on the street and asked. That would get you some quality data, right??

 

[Morpheus]

Something a little off with that list. I noticed only 2 counties in Oregon on the list. Both of which are in the Portland Area. Three if you count Clark County in Washington.

Same thing in the Washington counties.

There seems to be something missing in how they are doing this 'list'

 

[bolus]

Im curious on how they get their data. If someone called asking if I had guns in the house for a survey Im most likely going to say goodbye politely. Im sure a lot of people dont just want to randomly give out that information. So curious if it is done with flawed surveys or some other source of information that I dont know about.

 

[MountainBear]

Pretty sure I won't be believing the data when it says that Washington and Clackamas Counties are armed at a higher rate than say, oh, Linn, Deschutes, Crook, Harney, etc...

That being said, the Northstar Borough makes sense to be on that list. Surprised the other Alaska Boroughs aren't on that list.

 

[BillM]

Interesting. The only two counties that made the list in Oregon are Clackamas and Multnomah?
Boolpuckey.

Go south or east--the percentage will be WAY higher that the Portland Metro area. But the folks
that live there probably wouldn't tell the government what they have. Good for them.

 

[chemist]

"Statistics are like bikinis, in that what they reveal is interesting, but what they conceal is vital."

The way the article headline is worded, it's not clear to me whether they're talking about the percent of residents that are armed or the percent of households that have a weapon in them. The former is a lot harder number to glean, since ownership may be shared, or the husband and wife might even disagree over whether they're "his" guns or "their" guns.

Household sizes have been falling for many years, and have only recently started to edge back up again since the Crash of 2008. A trend toward smaller households logically equates to a lower percentage that have firearms in them. For example, both my son and my daughter moved out on their own, and neither has a firearm in their house. Now one household has become three, and only 1/3 of those households has a firearm in it. This is the same result found in the University of Chicago General Social Survey, one of the most extensive longitudinal surveys in US history.

That didn't stop some of the more rabid posters on this site from roundly branding one of the best universities in the world as a "liberal hotbed" or whatever, and dismissing the results of a forty-plus-year survey because they didn't like or just didn't understand the results.

I'm not a member of this forum because I like to hear people who say things I agree with and who agree with me; I'm here to learn. How about we maintain a level of interest and involvement that's consistent with that goal, and leave the histrionics to the Brady Bunch?

http://www3.norc.org/gss website/

 

[Just Jim]

I would much rather know who has better guns.

 

[Just Jim]

"Statistics are like bikinis, in that what they reveal is interesting, but what they conceal is vital."

The way the article headline is worded, it's not clear to me whether they're talking about the percent of residents that are armed or the percent of households that have a weapon in them. The former is a lot harder number to glean, since ownership may be shared, or the husband and wife might even disagree over whether they're "his" guns or "their" guns.

Household sizes have been falling for many years, and have only recently started to edge back up again since the Crash of 2008. A trend toward smaller households logically equates to a lower percentage that have firearms in them. For example, both my son and my daughter moved out on their own, and neither has a firearm in their house. Now one household has become three, and only 1/3 of those households has a firearm in it. This is the same result found in the University of Chicago General Social Survey, one of the most extensive longitudinal surveys in US history.

That didn't stop some of the more rabid posters on this site from roundly branding one of the best universities in the world as a "liberal hotbed" or whatever, and dismissing the results of a forty-plus-year survey because they didn't like or just didn't understand the results.

I'm not a member of this forum because I like to hear people who say things I agree with and who agree with me; I'm here to learn. How about we maintain a level of interest and involvement that's consistent with that goal, and leave the histrionics to the Brady Bunch?

http://www3.norc.org/gss website/

Might have been good learning institutions in the distant past but today they are money grabbing places of indoctrination. If education was really working our country wouldn't be in such sad shape. Nope, in my opinion higher education has failed us and no way would I believe any study they put out.

 

[BillM]

Data is probably collected via survey. They list the major city/cities of the county, so they may have just stopped people on the street and asked. That would get you some quality data, right??

Yup. I'm sure that a stranger walking up to people on the street in Baker or Pendleton or Prineville and
asking if they had any guns in the house would get maybe not an honest answer, but it would probably
be an "educational" answer.

 

[natef]

I wonder this...last time I went to the doctor they asked me about guns in my house and if they were in a safe....I politly told him it was none of his GD buisness. I wonder if those questions went into somthing like this.

 

[Sstrand]

natef
The answer is no . . . BUT the DHS, the FBI, and the NSF will be notified. You can expect your next background check will be negative!?!?!?!?

Sheldon

 

[Certaindeaf]

Didn't click because it doesn't/wouldn't matter. I just do my regular thang and I live where I live.
Perhaps it's more about population density more than anything else? it doesn't matter.. just mind and take care of your own priorities wherever you might happen to be