dagblog - Comments for "Views of Gun Control -- A Detailed Demographic Breakdown"

Gee, I thought the prevalence

jollyroger — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 21:37:49 +0000

In reply to No Shift Toward Gun Control

Gee, I thought the prevalence of troubled individuals was a broad societal problem....How high must the troubled fraction get, do you suppose, before it's not merely idiosyncratic nuttiness but a general climate of mass insanity?

No Shift Toward Gun Control

artappraiser — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 17:53:49 +0000

In reply to Views of Gun Control -- A Detailed Demographic Breakdown

No Shift Toward Gun Control After Tucson Shootings
Most Point to Troubled Individuals, Not Broader Societal Problems

January 19, 2011
Pew Center Survey Report

http://people-press.org/report/695/

Very true on the nothing much

seashell — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 22:05:46 +0000

In reply to Thanks, seashell. Thanks for

Very true on the nothing much and the research, aa. What is odd, I think, is that I can find no peer-reviewed type of research on the relationship between evangelicals and guns that shows up so clearly in Pew's polls. This JSTOR article surfaces to the top every time in searches and what's underneath doesn't address the issue.

Thanks, seashell. Thanks for

artappraiser — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:48:12 +0000

In reply to You two are such frauds.

Thanks, seashell. Thanks for the offer on full access but from what you added I'll go with your interpretation, looks very "unsatisfying" as you say. Look like he's got nothing much--I recognize the syndrome as I've done it myself--he started out the research thinking he had something, but then...

You two are such frauds.

seashell — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 13:05:40 +0000

In reply to The swarthy ones are

You two are such frauds. :-)

However, I was interested in the JSTOR article, also, and having immediate access, present the following (unsatisfying) excerpts:

The literature thus suggests two distinct explanations for the disproportionate tendency of Protestants to own guns. The first is that fundamentalists, most of whom are Protestants, are imbued with an individualistic orientation leading them to feel responsible for their own protection (McDowall & Loftin, 1983; Young et al., 1987). Since the time of the American frontier, the firearm has been a symbol of this kind of individualism. As a result, firearms have practical and (for those less concerned with protection) symbolic characteristics that make them especially attractive to fundamentalists. The second explanation has nothing to do with religion. It is that Protestants are more likely to own guns because they tend to grow up and/or live in areas characterized by a tradition of gun ownership that is cultural in nature. The following analysis is designed to assess the relative merits of these two explanations.

[...]

CONCLUSIONS
This research provides one explanation for the often-cited correlation between Protestantism and gun ownership. Part of the answer is that Protestants are more likely to hunt. Although Protestant and non-Protestant hunters are equally likely to own guns, overall membership is higher among Protestants because of their affinity for hunting. The involvement of Protestants in hunting is in turn a function of the fact that they tend to grow up in the rural South, an area where hunting is a cultural tradition. Among non-hunters, Protestants are more likely to own firearms largely because of their ethnic and cultural (including rural) heritage and because they tend to grow up in rural areas where guns are common artifacts of everyday life. Protestantism ceases to be a significant predictor of gun ownership when we take into account the mutually reinforcing effects of frontier ethnic heritage and religious fundamentalism. The individualistic orientation that emanated from the American frontier was strongly reinforced and perpetuated by religious fundamentalism long after the frontier period. On the basis of this research, it appears that the correlation between religious faith and gun ownership is an indirect manifestation of that heritage.

Should anyone wish to read the entire pdf, email me through the 'contact' feature and I'll gladly wing it to ya.

I am very fond of German

jollyroger — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 05:27:04 +0000

In reply to Maybe what you're missing is

I am very fond of German girls....I can sense blond dna in the dark at 400 meters.

Maybe what you're missing is

artappraiser — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 05:19:27 +0000

In reply to I'm pretty damn sure I don't

Maybe what you're missing is what became the biggest ethnic group of this country. Mostly they stayed away from the urban areas, they were farmers and wanted to farm. On the frontier. Where there might be hostile natives, or gasp, in the earlier times, maybe even Franzozen.

Here on a German-American themed website is a description that would stir any NRA member's heart (not to mention Tea Partiers):

,,,,Among the most enthusiastic patriots were the Germans. Everywhere the young men responded to the call of Congress for volunteers. The spirit of that response may be judged by the example given by Pennsylvania. On June 14, 1775, Congress ordered that province to furnish six companies of sharpshooters. Instead, Pennsylvania provided nine, four of which were entirely German and were commanded by German officers. Several divisions of these, commanded by Colonel Nagel and Colonel Daudel, immediately marched to Boston to join Washington's army. The first to arrive were sharpshooters of Berks County, splendid fellows, every one of whom would have been welcomed by King Frederick the Great into his famous body-guard of giants. These sun-burnt backwoodsmen, dressed in deer skin or homespun hunting suits, and wearing fur caps, armed with rifles, tomahawks and hunting knives, created a great sensation everywhere. On the breast of each, written in large letters, appeared their watchword: "Liberty or Death!"
Similar squads of German sharpshooters made the long march from Virginia to Massachusetts with Daniel Morgan. When Washington espied them from a distance, he galloped up to them, and when they reported: "Sharp shooters from the right bank of the Potomac!" he jumped from his horse to greet them. Tears of joy streamed over his face upon beholding these splendid men, who had tramped six hundred miles to come to his assistance.....

I got to that last page through google. Upon further inspection of the entire website turns out its a purveyor of "get to know your German heritage" goods.

But there's more. I was surprised at how multi-culti has invaded this kind of thing, with nice Polish girl Martha Stewart's face smiling at me near the top. Then I recalled hearing more than one old German lady from Milwaukee tell me the Poles make excellent housekeepers....

I'm pretty damn sure I don't

jollyroger — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 03:38:45 +0000

In reply to Apparently that's a question

I'm pretty damn sure I don't want to be anywhere near an armed holy roller when the spirit comes into him.

Also, you'd think if anyone would have a jones for weapons it would be the catholic fenians, who were tired of fucking around with pikes and shearing hooks, and not the scots-irish who were the "overseers" for the Anglo Irish and probly had uptodate implements of death.

I must be missing something...

The swarthy ones are

quinn esq — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 02:03:26 +0000

In reply to CatholicsYou mean the

The swarthy ones are particularly worrisome.

Interesting JStor, in that it seems he's effectively throwing the explanation back in time, to when people developed a strong hunting culture in the South, which I guess he's saying was then carried on.

I find this problematic though, with Pew finding a 20% difference between Protestants and Catholics, and - I believe - only 10%-20% of North Americans being "rural-dwellers."

Maybe he's saying that it developed historically, and has continued on culturally in rural areas (which I could see), losing its denominational basis. But I find it hard to see that this would explain the massive numbers of additional Protestant urbanites who must have guns today, if Pew is correct.

Anyway, you and I are fighting. So stop conversing sensibly, and get back to being elitist, willya?

Thanking you in advance.

CatholicsYou mean the

artappraiser — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 00:58:37 +0000

In reply to Well, Protestantism is

Catholics

You mean the invading horde of Papist breeders. The ones coming to take over a still nascent republic by sheer volume of their ruddy or swarthy progeny. Once the misssion was accomplished, they would shred the Constitution and take their instructions from their authoritarian leader, and start with the anti-enlightenment hocus pocus. One could let them have New York, but no further---certainly second amendment type stuff..

More seriously, if you check out that JStor abstract I linked to (which I only found vai a quick google,) it was interesting that in the second paragraph, he is setting up the indiividualistic Protestant ethic explanation as one that has already been easily dismissed in the past, as if no one accepts it anymore. I don't have access to the rest until at a library, but I do wonder what his explanation is, and of others that have challenged it.