Talk:Gun culture in the United States

Foreign Perspective Section
The foreign perspective section seems very dodgy to me. It uses four sources all from the same date (which I assume are negative reactions to a mass shooting, written by americans most likely). This seems to me to be incredibly poor research and sourcing, and does not give a broad perspective. I will look for other sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.194.179.228 (talk) 02:34, 5 July 2019 (UTC)


 * The fourth source is clearly by a British writer in a British journal. The others do appear to be by Americans, but depend on quotations from a lot of non-Americans, which is presumably the point of this section. Feel free to find other sources, but please discuss them here before adding them to the article. HiLo48 (talk) 03:07, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Foreign Perspective implies that the views are widely held by people outside the US. Simply citing opinions by individuals is not sufficient. Surveys should be used, if they exist, if not this section should be removed. JSory (talk) 03:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Same image appears twice in article
The image to the right appears twice in the article: It is once inserted in the the lead section and once in the section "Ownership levels". Is it intended? --2003:F6:2716:2C00:C422:EA0:236D:98C7 (talk) 15:33, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

How are guns measered. Cheesecakep (talk) 01:26, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SP23 - Sect 201 - Thu
— Assignment last updated by FULBERT (talk) 16:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Propose deletion of misnamed "public opinion" section
This article is about Gun Culture in the US, not about gun laws in the US. The "public opinion" section would rightly be expected to be a section about public opinion of gun culture. It is however just poll results regarding gun laws. This is a pretty standard switcheroo - claim to be about one thing, talk about another. Gun laws are not gun culture. That's patently evident, any argument to the contrary would have to contend with the problem of original research. I propose removing the section, since it tells the reader nothing about public opinion of gun culture. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 03:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Seems like a reasonable change to me. Springee (talk) 04:00, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * The section is fine. It's chock-a-block full of public opinion on guns. That clearly equates to gun culture. HiLo48 (talk) 04:14, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Nope. That's synthesis. guns are not the same as gun culture. Otherwise, the term 'gun culture' wouldn't exist. Do the sources refer to the poll results as pertaining to gun culture? cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 04:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * This is where we need definitions. The lead says "Gun culture in the United States encompasses the behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs about firearms and their use by private citizens." The section in question addresses everything but the use of guns. HiLo48 (talk) 05:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Do the sources say that the polls are on 'gun culture'? Or just on gun laws? cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 05:57, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Do ANY sources discuss whatever you think "gun culture" means? HiLo48 (talk) 06:04, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Does this: "Gun culture in the United States encompasses the behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs about firearms and their use by private citizens." mention gun laws? The polls are opinions on gun laws, not behaviors, attitudes, or beliefs. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 06:06, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * They absolutely ARE about attitudes and beliefs, and somewhat also about behaviors. HiLo48 (talk) 06:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Synthesis. The majority of the article actually discusses the topic of gun culture. It's gradually been larded in just the last few months with political content that's not directly relevant to gun culture - instead relevant to the article that exists for that subject, Gun politics in the United States.
 * I just noticed that the poll that is sourced to an arabic-language site is already mentioned a few paragraphs above, verbatim, with a proper cite. The article doesn't need polling data on suggested gun laws, and certainly not duplicate content. That, again, belongs in the gun politics article. All of this content should go in the more appropriate article. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 06:29, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I'd suggest that the figures from that source are among the best you're going to get. And precisely what's wrong with that Arabic site? HiLo48 (talk) 06:59, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * This is the english wikipedia. Neither editors nor readers are expected to be fluent in arabic in order to verify a citation. Particularly when there's an english language source a few lines above with exactly the same, duplicated content. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 07:04, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Your claim about foreign language sources is just wrong. Many sources are hard for most readers to see - books, those behind paywalls, etc. HiLo48 (talk) 07:34, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Simply saying it's 'just wrong' is meaningless. NONENG. "English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when they are available and of equal quality and relevance." Again, the material is sourced merely a few lines above, in english. And it's duplicated content. And none of it is relevant to Gun culture in the United States, but it is relevant to Gun politics in the United States. Where a more appropriate article is available, the content obviously belongs there. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 07:40, 16 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I've been mostly watching this discussion but having read the back and forth I think anastrophe is correct. The stand alone section of opinions public opinion on gun laws doesn't make sense here.  A section on the opinions of gun owners on various laws would make sense and in context some of this information may make sense in other parts of the article, just not as a stand alone section with a narrow overlap with "gun culture". Springee (talk) 22:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Absent any further comment, I'm going to go ahead and remove the section, and the repeated content immediately above the section. Polls on gun laws seek opinions on measures that people think may reduce criminal violence. Criminal violence isn't gun culture in the United States, it's criminality culture in the United States. The actual article content describes this very well; gun culture is associated with lawful ownership and use of firearms. The recently larded additions of contemporary political views on how to address criminal violence by restricting weapons don't add anything relevant to the subject of the article; they are however entirely appropriate for articles such as Gun politics in the United States and more. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 04:33, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

The term hoplophobia refers to an "irrational aversion to firearms".
why is this sentence on this wiki page? There is no reference to anyone irrationally adverse to firearms, so why mention it? 2A00:23C5:EBA6:1001:F927:C0:8C6D:FEE4 (talk) 09:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * It's sourced, contrasting with the term 'gun nut', and it's in the appropriate section. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 18:55, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Gun ownership as highest in the world
The source given shows the US is top in number of guns per capita. This isn't the same as the gun ownership rate, which is implied to be the highest in the world by the initial phrasing. For example, suppose in Society A, 49% of people own one gun each (and the rest none, implied in all going forward). In Society B, 1% own 50 guns each. In Society C, 1% own 10 guns each. By number of guns per 100 people, Society B is the highest with 50, followed by A with 49, followed by C with 10. But that's obviously silly, because A is clearly the highest (49% own guns), then B and C which are the same (1%). I wouldn't be surprised if the US topped this metric too -- it does on Percent of households with guns by country, but the source there no longer exists, and it only has 34 countries, excluding Yemen, Serbia, etc. Since I can't actually confirm the claim as true, I removed it. Miladragon3 (talk) 09:12, 15 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Does this image and its source deal with your concern? Source: — RCraig09 (talk) 17:13, 15 February 2024 (UTC)