Harvard and Northeastern Assess America’s Gun Owners with New Study

On Tuesday, The Guardian and The Trace both announced that they had obtained exclusive access to the findings of a recent gun ownership survey from researchers at Harvard and Northeastern University. The unpublished study seeks to craft a more detailed image of gun owners in America, and it is purported to be the most comprehensive look at the topic in decades. Most notably, the survey concluded that only 3% of Americans own nearly 50% of the nation’s privately-held firearms. Unsurprisingly, numerous media outlets have latched on to this number, but there are several other findings that are worth a look.

Among the most surprising statistics from the survey is the low count of overall guns in circulation. The study estimates that Americans own approximately 265 million firearms, which is far fewer than almost every other survey published to date. One 2000 estimate from the Congressional Research Service placed the gun population at 259 million. The number was revisited in 2009 and, at that time, revised to 310 million. Assuming linear growth, these figures would indicate there are as many as 350 million privately-held firearms in the United States.

Charles C. W. Cooke from the National Review recently weighed in on overall firearm numbers. Using data from the FBI and Duke researcher, Philip Cook, Cooke has estimated that there may be as many as 400 million guns in Americans’ hands. His figures use past estimates along with background check statistics and estimated attrition rates.

But this raises a question. Even if the study’s numbers are legitimate, so what? They still leave over 100 million firearms in private hands that don’t belong to so-called “super owners” (those who own more than eight firearms). That means that far more than 3% of the population owns guns. It’s important to realize that the study doesn’t try to make the claim that gun owners make up only 3% of America’s population, but media coverage of the study has implied that only a very small percentage of the population bears arms. That simply isn’t true.

According to a recent Pew Research Center survey, 44% of Americans live in homes with firearms. The Harvard/Northeastern study states that just 22% of Americans own guns. These statistics aren’t ideal for comparison, as one measures households with guns while the other counts gun owners. However, unless every gun owner is married and has a spouse that considers himself/herself not to be a gun owner, the numbers don’t jive. If you look at Pew’s past surveys, evidence points to increasing gun ownership over the last few years.

Moreover, states have been issuing concealed carry licenses in record numbers over the past few years. Concealed carry is, at this point, an established practice throughout much of the United States. The most recent state to institute carry rights was Illinois, back in 2012. As of 2015, there were an estimated 12.8 million concealed carriers and rising in the United States, up from 4.6 in 2007. These numbers don’t include states where citizens may carry without a license, and in some states, like California, New York, and New Jersey, obtaining a license to carry is nearly impossible.

So why do the numbers vary so drastically? For years, gun owners (including yours truly) have insisted that responses to these types of surveys under-represent firearm ownership. For personal security’s sake, few gun owners are willing to share the fact that they do own firearms with anyone but those they trust. And why would they? It’s a perfectly reasonable stance when you consider that guns are common targets for theft. The study itself states that there are as many as 400,000 firearm thefts each year. In the Harvard study’s case, data collection would be even more challenging because the survey asked not only if respondents owned guns, but also how many and of what type. That’s a remarkably intrusive set of questions.

Unfortunately, but perhaps predictably, the full study won’t be available until after the election. For now, The Guardian and Michael Bloomberg’s The Trace have exclusive rights to publish summaries of the results. It’s not only fishy that the full data hasn’t been made available for review, but it is also bizarre that a media outlet that was formed specifically to push gun control policy would have the first swing at the survey. Such a move makes it difficult to actually review the survey, and it gives The Trace full freedom to editorialize the findings to fit their narrative. This isn’t to say that the study is all bad or a total hack job, without the full study in hand, I’m in no position to make those claims, but Bloomberg-sponsored researchers at Johns Hopkins pulled the same sort of stunt with their PTP (permit to purchase) “studies.” By releasing the data too limited media sources, the narrative and headlines are crafted before anyone else can counter or review the work.

The Harvard School of Public Health isn’t exactly free from bias either. On the school’s website, the Joyce Foundation is listed as one of the institution’s major financial contributors. Earlier this year, the Joyce Foundation blamed inner-city violence on “easy access” to firearms. One of the solutions proposed by the foundation includes expanding the list of people prohibited from firearm ownership. Gun control advocates wouldn’t trust a study funded by the NRA or NSSF, so why should this be treated differently?

When the study is released to the general public later this year, I hope to sit down again and give it a look. For now, I’ll wear my newly earned “super owner” label proudly.