Tracking use of claim that 40% of gun sales take place without a background check (Updated)

The 40% claim seems to be absolutely everywhere.  People are now calling for "universal background checks," the new phrase for what used to be called the "gun show loophole."  It is strange that "universal background checks" are being called for when none of the attacks which are supposedly serving as the motivation for the new law would have been stopped if they had been in place.

NOTE: I have an op-ed that I have written explaining why this claim is wrong.  As soon as it is published, I will post it here.

President Barack Obama, from January 16, 2013:

But it’s hard to enforce that law when as many as 40 percent of all gun purchases are conducted without a background check.  That’s not safe.  That's not smart.  It’s not fair to responsible gun buyers or sellers. . . .

Vice President Biden, remarks to the U.S. Conference of Mayors, Jan. 17:

“That’s why we need, and I’ve recommended to the president, universal background checks. Studies show that up to 40 percent of the people -- and there’s no -- let me be honest with you again, which I’ll get to in a moment. Because of the lack of the ability of federal agencies to be able to even keep records, we can’t say with absolute certainty what I’m about to say is correct. But the consensus is about 40 percent of the people who buy guns today do so outside the NICS [National Instant Criminal Background Check] system, outside the background check system.”

New York Times, from January 17, 2013:

New York Times, from January 16, 2013:

Mr. Obama’s plan would require criminal background checks for all gun sales, closing the longstanding loophole that allows buyers to avoid screening by purchasing weapons from unlicensed sellers at gun shows or in private sales. Nearly 40 percent of all gun sales are exempt from the system. . . .

New York Times, from January 15, 2013:

All federally licensed firearms dealers are required to run background checks through the computerized databases that comprise the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. But the requirement does not cover guns that are sold by unlicensed sellers at gun shows and in other private sales, which account for about 40 percent of gun purchases in the country. . . .

New York Times, Editorial, from January 14, 2013:

The need for background checks on every gun buyer has never been greater, now that the Internet has made it easy for private individuals to buy and sell guns without screening. The reason that both the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and Mayors Against Illegal Guns have made universal background checks their top priority is that 40 percent of gun sales now take place privately, including most guns that are later used in crimes. . . .

Steve Chapman, columnist, Real Clear Politics, from January 17, 2013:

In the category of "possibly helpful" is a new rule requiring private gun sales to include a federal background check -- as purchases from licensed dealers already do. That change, which would cover some 40 percent of all gun transactions, holds the potential of preventing convicted felons from getting guns by stopping them at the point of sale. . . .

Slate, from January 17, 2013:

The [New York] Times reports that "nearly 40 percent of all gun sales are exempt from the system" under the loophole. The paper doesn't cite where that figure comes from, but it appears to be a reference to a 1997 study by the National Institute of Justice on who owns guns and how they use them, the last major relevant study on the topic. . . .

Wall Street Journal from January 16th, 2013:

Mr. Obama also endorsed universal background checks, including for the 40% of gun sales between private parties. . . .

Associated Press, "Schumer pushes background checks for gun sales," from January 14th:

Because enforcing background checks on all gun purchases doesn't change the rules on who can own guns, Schumer says he sees it as "a way to come to the middle and get something real done." Right now, advocates say some 40 percent of gun sales occur without background checks, such as those at gun shows.  Schumer spoke to reporters at the Capitol Monday. . . .

Associated Press, "Del. Gov. Markell calls for background checks for private gun sales in school shooting's wake," from January 14th:

[Gov. Jack] Markell noted that about 40 percent of gun sales in Delaware are private sales not involving federally licensed dealers and therefore not requiring a mandatory background check of the buyer. . . .

Politico, from January 14th:

Gun control groups say 40 percent of guns are sold on the secondary market. . . .

CNN, from January 14th:

Advocates say 40% of gun sales are private transactions, including gun shows. . . .

Politico, from January 13th:

"I think the nation is ready for more thorough background checks so that we cover the 40 percent that now are not covered," Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said. 

The discussion came after the liberal Center for American Progress issued a recommendation"to require criminal background checks for all gun sales, closing loopholes that currently enable an estimated 40 percent of sales to occur without any questions asked." The gun-control debate was renewed after the Dec. 14 Connecticut school shooting that left 20 children and six school employees dead. . . .

Fox News Sunday, January 13th:

Chris Wallace: So, let’s talk about universal background checks, because, I was surprised to find out…[that] in 40% of the sales there is no such screen on the person buying the gun. What is wrong with universal background checks? . . . 

ABC News, January 13th:

And, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said some 40 percent of gun sales happen with no background checks, often at gun shows or through private sellers over the Internet or in classified ads. . . .

Los Angeles Times, January 12th:

Vice President Joe Biden, who could make recommendations to the president as soon as Tuesday, said he believed there was support for expansion to cover private gun sales, which make up much as 40% of all purchases but do not require background checks.

Washington Post from January 11th:

“Our top policy priority is closing the massive hole in the background check system that enables 40% of all gun sales to take place without background checks, not only at gun shows, but also with the added anonymity of the Internet,” the Brady Campaign report said. 

Another Washington Post piece from January 12th:

CAP’s top recommendation is to require criminal background checks for all gun sales, closing loopholes that currently enable an estimated 40 percent of sales to occur without any questions asked. . . .

New York Times, January 11th:

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, one of the nation’s leading gun control groups, said its top priority was to close the loopholes that currently allow 40 percent of gun sales to be made without background checks. . . .

New York Times, January 10th:

But background checks are still not required for individual, private sales of firearms — estimated by some lawmakers to make up 40 percent of gun sales in the state. . . . 

Time Magazine, January 11th:

Gun-control advocates say up to 40% of gun buyers in the U.S. sail through the loophole.

New York Daily News, January 10th:

Also, Cuomo would demand universal background checks — so anyone attempting to buy a gun could be screened for a criminal record or mental health history. Now, fully 40% of gun purchases nationwide happen at gun shows and through private deals where no check is required. . . .

The Sun-Sentinel in Florida, January 12th:

"The problem is not gun shows. The problem is you have the ability in place for people to sell a bunch of firearms without background checks," said Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition To Stop Gun Violence. 

He said 40 percent of gun sales nationwide go without background checks, including those made at gun shows by unlicensed sellers and other private sales elsewhere. In some states, gun shows allow private citizens to sell their firearms without running the background checks licensed dealers are required to conduct, he said. . . . 

E.J. Dionne Jr., January 10th:

It's also encouraging that Vice President Joe Biden, charged by President Obama with responsibility for proposing a comprehensive approach to the problem, is reportedly going big. He is ready to start with the necessary minimum — a renewal of a more effective assault weapons ban, a ban on high-capacity magazines and extending background checks on private gun sales.The last really matters, since the group Mayors Against Illegal Guns estimates that perhaps 40% of all gun sales are made by unlicensed private dealers. . . .

CNN, January 10th:

What about background checks? 40% of all gun sales in America, gun trades are not covered by background checks. . . . (at 8:15 into this video)  Thanks to Bill Vargas.

Hartford Courant, January 8th:

The bill wouldn't cover the many ammunition purchases made at gun shows, where background checks also don't have to be performed for gun sales between private parties. [Senator] Blumenthal said it's estimated that 40 percent of all gun purchases happen at gun shows, adding that this "gun show loophole" needs to be closed via additional federal legislation. 

Julie Roginsky, Fox News, January 4th:

What’s worse, only licensed gun dealers have to run their customers’ names through a background check. 40% of the guns in this country are not purchased through those licensed dealers – and their buyers are not subject to a background check of any kind.

Dean Obeidallah, Huffington Post

Our current federal law only requires background checks to determine if the purported gun buyer has a criminal record or history of mental illness if the gun is so sold by a licensed firearm dealer. But that only accounts for 60% of the guns legally sold. Meaning, 40% of the guns legally sold are to people who have had no background check at all.

James Rainey, Los Angeles Times

An estimated 40% of all gun sales in America occur without criminal background checks on the buyer, Gross said. Many of the unscreened buyers get their weapons at gun shows, via the Internet or in person-to-person transactions. . . .

ABC News in Baltimore

"Over 40% of guns are not sold through dealers.  They're private transactions, sold at gun shows and internet sales and classified ads.  You could check Craig's List today," said Chief Johnson. . . .

Detroit Free Press:

One of the most significant changes would be requiring universal background checks for all gun sales, not just by sanctioned gun dealers, he said. Around 40% of all gun sales are made by private dealers, he said. . . .

UPDATED: I haven't tried to keep track of these quotes as often recent, but they continue at quite the rapid clip.

USA Today, from January 14, 2013:

the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said some 40 percent of gun sales happen with no background checks, often at gun shows or through private sellers over the Internet or in classified ads. . . .

There are a whole range of other pieces from the Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Media Matters, Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and the Children's Defense Fund.  Thanks to Merle Harton for providing some of the links.

Read More

So what can the US learn from other developed countries regarding guns and crime

Charles Blow recently claimed in the New York Times: “America has the highest gun homicide rate, the highest number of guns per capita . . . .”  On Sunday, the New York Times quotes researcher David Hemenway as claiming: “Generally, if you live in a civilized society, more guns mean more death.”  CNN’s Piers Morgan believes: “America has the worst incidents of gun murders of any of what they call the civilized world.”

If you look at just the countries used in the Small Arms Survey, you get this.

Data available here.

Note that it is somewhat misleading to speak of a US homicide rate as 3 percent of the counties in the US account for over 70 percent of the murders (they have about 23 percent of the population).

Much is made of comparing some rather arbitrarily defined "civilized" nations, but what can Americans learn from these nations?   If the non-US developed nations show anything, even with the extremely questionable data that Charles Blow at the New York Times apparently trusts regarding gun ownership rates, it shows that higher gun ownership means lower homicide or no change in gun homicide rates.  He just hadn’t even bothered to graph out the numbers.

There is a real problem in using cross-sectional data.  Below is part of a long discussion in The Bias Against Guns, Chp. 5 (More Guns, Less Crime also has a long discussion in Chp. 2).  Take a simple example.  Suppose for the sake of argument that high-crime countries are the ones that most frequently adopt the most stringent gun control laws. What if gun control actually lowered crime, but not by enough to reduce rates to the same low levels prevailing in the majority of countries that did not adopt the laws. Looking across countries, it would then falsely appear that stricter gun control resulted in higher crime. Economists refer to this as an “endogeniety” problem. The adoption of the policy is a reaction to other events (that is, “endogenous”), in this case crime. To resolve this, one must examine how the high-crime areas that chose to adopt the controls changed over time —not only relative to their own past levels but also relative to areas that did not institute such controls. 

Unfortunately, many contemporary discussions rely on misinterpretations of cross-sectional data. The New York Times recently conducted a cross-sectional study of murder rates in states with and without the death penalty, and found that “Indeed, 10 of the 12 states without capital punishment have homicide rates below the national average, Federal Bureau of Investigation data shows, while half the states with the death penalty have homicide rates above the national average” (Raymond Bonner and Ford Fessenden, “States With No Death Penalty Share Lower Homicide Rates,” New York Times, September 22, 2000, p. A1.).  However, they erroneously concluded that the death penalty did not deter murder. The problem is that the states without the death penalty (Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Rhode Island, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Vermont) have long enjoyed relatively low murder rates, something that might well have more to do with other factors than the death penalty. Instead one must compare, over time, how murder rates change in the two groups – those adopting the death penalty and those that did not.

Of course, I have other problems with the New York Times discussion.  For example, the rates of gun ownership for Switzerland and Israel are ridiculously low.  This survey excludes all the military weapons kept in Swiss homes in 2007 because they were technically owned by the government.  Israeli guns are also excluded for the same reason.  But if people have possession of guns in their homes for decades, the issue should be that public possession, not who technically owned the guns.  My point above was that even if those numbers are taken as given, you still find the opposite relationship from what the New York Times was claiming.  Of course, if you fix them, you will get a negative relationship across all developed countries even with the US observation included.  The reason that the Small Arms Survey messes up those two entries is that Israel and Switzerland are very low murder rate countries and giving them their true values would pull down the regression line a lot.  Putting the US all by itself out there at 88 firearms per 100 people drives the supposed positive relationship claimed for developed countries (see below).

The graph showing all non-US countries is shown here.

So what if we asked a different question?  Including the US in the data shows the absurdity of the Small Arms Survey measure of gun ownership in 2007.  They define it in such a way to exclude the military weapons in Swiss homes and to exclude most Israeli guns because the government technically owns them.  The Small Arms Survey claims that there are only 7 guns per 100 people in Israel, when up to 15 percent of the adult Jewish Israeli population has been able to openly carry handguns.  Virtually all guns in Israel are technically owned by the government, but Israelis may have possession of a gun for decades.  It seems that possession of the gun and not technical ownership is what is the real question here.  Switching either or both of these countries so that they had a higher gun ownership rate than the US would offset their bias for the US rate. In any case, despite my objections to both cross-sectional data and the obviously bogus Small Arms Survey measure of gun ownership, here are the results with the US included.  Doing this leaves the result for the world essentially unchanged and makes the relationship for OECD countries equal zero.

Read More