🧵 Lot of interest in gun raffles these days. I was interviewed yday by @wsoctv in CLT about one for a youth baseball team in Bessemer City, NC. It was a very brief story so here are some addtl thoughts.
(1) Raffles are legal. Guns are legal. Combing the two is legal. All legitimate gun raffles, including the one in NC, require winners to pass a background check in order to take possession of the gun.
(2) Charities raffle things that people value to incentivize donations. E.g., despite the harm it causes in society many groups use alcohol raffles to raise money for charity.
(3) Guns are a commodity some people value. Why, then, is a gun raffle scandalizing? It is scandalizing because some people largely associate guns with crime and deviance and/or find guns distasteful.
(4) Insofar as people's people's intuitions and cultural perceptions shape their opinions in general, we see systematic differences in people's views on guns that map onto whether a gun raffle is scandalizing.
Here the earlier @NPR story on gun raffles captures some of my more significant observations:
"We really live in some distinctly different worlds with respect to guns," Yamane says.
It continues: "You know that some people live in a world in which they only think of guns in connection with ... inner city violence or random mass shootings, whereas other people live in situations where guns are a very perfectly normal part of their everyday life," Yamane says.
In NPR, I compare Manhattan, Kansas to Manhattan, New York. In this case, it's Bessemer City (pop 5,500) and its 168x bigger city neighbor 25 miles to the east Charlotte (pop 873,570).
(5) As I note in the WSOC-TV story, some of the highest-profile mass shootings have involved AR-15 style rifles. Not included is the fact that the (to be published) Harvard/Northeastern 2021 National Firearms Survey est that over 11M own nearly 25M AR-15 styles rifles.
(6) I'm sure it doesn't make those scandalized by gun raffles feel any better, but in the 19th century, the San Francisco Chronicle used to incentivize subscriptions by giving away revolvers.
(7) The WSOC reporter asked me if there could be a meeting in the middle on this. As much as I favor the via media, I said I didn't think those who were holding the raffle were doing anything wrong and so there didn't need to be movement on that side.
Those who are scandalized by the youth baseball rally should take a ride to Bessemer City and chat with people like the two African-American men interviewed who didn't see anything wrong with the raffle as long as the guns were transferred legally.
End 🧵
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: "One of the strange things about the reaction to the invasion of the Capitol was how few of those dismayed by it speculated that they might one day long for just such an assault to succeed. . ."
"Might a different mob storm into Congress to save democracy, rather than attack it? If an autocrat who has stolen an election is about to have his trashing of American democracy hallowed by Congress, all other recourse having failed, shouldn’t Democrats . . ."
"–or democrats, at least–take direct action? . . . [I]t’s one thing to imagine ... the gradual spread of white supremacist, anti-government terrorism across America against a democratic framework, until one day the progressive left, and the people of colour [Walter] suggests..."
Was asked to review this but have been putting it off. I am more worried about what it will say about me as a person and scholar than what I have to say about it. But I need a break this morning so here I go.
Enjoying this biography of Bellah by Matteo Bortolini of the U of Padua. It's very well written for a sociologist, much less one who I assume is not a native English speaker. It is a full biography not just an intellectual biography.
TIL: Bellah's father abandoned his family and committed suicide, leading him to be renamed Robert Neeley. He was a competitive individualist in HS. And he served a year in the Army after he arrived at Harvard.
🧵Attempting again to harvest sources on gun violence for my contribution to this special issue of The ANNALS. Unlike the other contributors, I am a scholar of guns, not gun violence, so I don't immediately know the state of the art on adverse outcomes. 1/n
My contribution focuses on the rise of Gun Culture 2.0, the self-defense core of American gun culture today. But I also want to engage what I call "The Standard Model of Explaining the Irrationality of Defensive Gun Ownership." 2/n
A very pure example of The Standard Model can be found in "Protective Gun Ownership as a Coping Mechanism" by @NickButtrick. It has the following structure . . . 3/n
Excited that results from the 2021 National Firearms Survey are now being published so we can know more about the dimensions of firearms purchasing in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic.
I'm not a survey methodologist but I like the opt-in panel design as the response rates seem much better than random digit dialing or mail-back surveys I have seen recently, whose response rates seem to be tanking.
I note the estimated rate of personal & household gun ownership in the 2021 National Firearms Survey is higher than in the General Social Survey, perhaps because it overcomes some of the reasons for underestimation I have noted before.
Mak begins with a claim he has made before, no better documented here than elsewhere, that the NRA is "America's most powerful advocacy group." A well-reported book doesn't need this kind of unsubstantiated hyperbole. Just say the NRA is powerful. This is undisputed #nra#misfire
Ch. 1: Wayne. Unflattering portrait of a leader as a "clumsy, meek, spastic man with a weak handshake." I do object to Mak's characterization of WLP as having a "professorial demeanor."