assault weapons | PROBABLE CAUSE

One of the ongoing myths in the gun debate is that more and more households in the U.S. are rushing out to purchase firearms, fearing that President Obama and Congress are planning to “take away our guns” in the near future. But the latest General Social Survey, a public opinion survey conducted every two years since in 1973, shows just the opposite is happening.

The household gun ownership rate has actually fallen from an average of 50% in the 1970s to 34% in 2012, continuing a downward trend that began in the 1980s.

So what about all the headlines and data claiming that gun sales are skyrocketing?

Researchers believe that increased gun sales have been limited primarily to current gun owners.

The downward trend in household gun ownership coincides with the decline of hunting and a significant drop in violent crime. According to the 2012 survey, only 25% of men said they hunted, compared to 40% of men in 1977. Urbanization also has contributed to the decline. Only 17% of the population now lives in rural areas, which traditionally have the highest gun ownership, compared to 27% in the 1970s.

The rate has dropped in cities and the suburbs as well, and in households with and without children, households that attend church and those who don’t, and for those who say they are happy and for those who say they are not. In other words, the decline in gun ownership is broad based.

The survey might help explain recent polling data that show the majority of households support closing the gun show loophole by requiring universal mandatory background checks, banning the sale of semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines, and prohibiting high-risk individuals from having guns, including those with mental illnesses, those convicted of a serious crime as a juvenile, and those who violate a domestic-violence restraining order.

Whether Congress is willing to listen to the will of the people or to the gun lobby remains to be seen. But the significant decline in gun ownership should coincide with a significant decline in the power and influence of the NRA.

As politicians from both sides of the aisle mourn the loss of lives in the latest mass shooting, we hear little about the need for a policy change. Neither President Obama nor candidate Mitt Romney dared to mention the words “gun control” as they expressed sorrow for the victims––such is their fear of upsetting the NRA, the most powerful lobby in Washington.

It’s a familiar scenario. After every incident, politicians wring their hands and offer condolences to the victims and their families. Then, after the funerals, life returns to “normal” as we wait for the next mass shooting. Let’s face it; no matter how many die due to gun violence, the citizens of this country have apparently accepted these rampages and the deaths of hundreds of innocent people as the price we have to pay for having the loosest gun laws in the industrialized world.

The shooter, James Holmes, easily acquired a military-style semi-automatic assault rifle, a shotgun, and two Glocks at local gun stores within two months. He was able to purchase 6,000 rounds of ammunition over the Internet. Yes, you heard that right, 6,000 rounds. He also bought an urban assault vest, two magazine holders, and a knife from an online supplier of tactical gear for police and military personnel. The owner was reported as saying that his company processes thousands of orders each day, and there was nothing unusual in the one that Holmes placed.

Gallup polls over the last two decades show the percentage of Americans who favor making gun control laws “more strict” fell from 78 percent in 1990 to 44 percent in 2010. Revenue to the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence has declined while the NRA’s donations have increased.

According to a recent Reuter’s poll, while only 32 percent of households owned a gun in 2010, the majority of Americans support the right to use deadly force to protect themselves, and two of every three respondents had a favorable view of the NRA.

Congress hasn’t approved any major new gun laws since 1994, and a ban on certain semiautomatic rifles expired in 2004. Some states have loosened gun laws to allow gun owners to carry concealed weapons or adopted “Stand Your Ground” self-defense laws.

So while the NRA and its supporters may have won the debate, the country as a whole has lost. And no matter how many condolences and excuses are offered to the victims and their families, the NRA has blood on its hands, as does anyone who votes for politicians who support the organization and this country’s lax gun policies.