Then try not to make smarmy remarks and you might not get them back.
I wouldn't bet if I were you. You'll look real foolish. Remember, not agreeing with something doesn't mean it's wrong. Good thing to note.
I found the information in two sources. First, a survey done by researchers at Harvard (the researchers having tracked gun ownership over the past 25 years), who sampled homes in the US for gun ownership demographics. 2770 homes were surveyed. Of those homes, 726 (26%) owned firearms; the breakdown of these numbers are as follows: 16% of gun owners were registered to <25 year olds; 26% to those between 25-44; 30% to those between 44-64; and 27% to those >or=65.
The second source comes from The National Gun Policy Survey from the University of Chicago. It's age breakdown is a little larger: 13.3% < 30 own a gun; 20.6% 30-39; 28.8% 40-49; 29.4% 50-65; 29.2 > 65.
Clearly no matter how you look at it, as folks get older, the are more likely to own a gun.
Links to the sources:
How Many Guns Are There and Who Owns Them? - Characteristics Of Gun Owners
The US gun stock: results from the 2004 national firearms survey -- Hepburn et al. 13 (1): 15 -- Injury Prevention
The US gun stock: results from the 2004 national firearms survey -- -- Injury Prevention
Cap, I looked at the top link and didn't see raw data or how the survey was conducted, or whether the sample was nationwide, etc. I'd have to have a few doubts.
On the second link, there was some more data: national distribution, etc. But their numbers were odd: 42 million US households with guns? The latest figures I've heard were 80 to 90 million households.
Also, at least one seems to be focused on registered guns...and most Southern states (and many midWest states) do not require guns to be registered. Not to mention, as the Turtle said, a lot of gun owners would be reluctant to tell some survey-taker what they had... I know I wouldn't answer such a survey. You never know for sure who you're talking to or what their agenda is, you see.
On the whole I think this puts those studies in a somewhat dubious light, as to the accuracy of their stats.
I've read the recent reports that certain aspects of brain development, specifically those relating to self-restraint and impulse control, tend not to reach full development until around 22-25yo. I won't dispute that; it makes sense to me. Yet I'm not sure that it is the whole story: we have plenty of evidence that 18-21 yo's are capable of handling enormous responsibility under many circumstances. The example of 18-21yo's serving in the military being one such example. Another would be, as some older posters have noted, that back in the 50's and early 60's many teens had ready access to guns and even brought hunting rifles to school, yet Columbine-type incidents were effectively unheard-of.
As I said, I will not dispute that the
average 25yo has better impulse control and ability to judge outcomes than the
average 18-21yo; I'm sure that is generally true. I think the more relevant question is whether the average 21yo is perfectly
capable of exercising
functionally adequate impulse control and good judgement in regards to CCW.
It would appear that at least 40 states have decided the answer to that question is "yes", because 21 is when CCW is allowed.
Now if you want to argue that the average 21-22yo
college student is less responsible than the average 21-22yo
working-man or
military enlistee... you
might have a better case. :mrgreen:
But whose fault is that? Is it our society's fault for letting college be an extension of irresponsible adolescence, letting those young adults (they are not "kids") continue to act like 17yo party-animals, when some of their same-age generational compatriots are non-comms leading infantry squads in Tikrit, and some of their other same-age compatriots have a full-time job, bills, a spouse and children to take care of? Hmmmm.... food for thought perhaps.
G.