Oregon voters narrowly passed Measure 114 in November 2022, approving new restrictions on gun purchases that have yet to take effect.
But a new study co-authored by Oregon State University economist Katie Bollman found the prospect of those restrictions prompted a sharp increase in firearm demand.
Researchers estimate Oregon recorded about 63,000 more firearm-related background checks than expected in the 18 months after the election. The study found the increase wasn’t simply driven by people moving up purchases they already planned to make.
“What we find is that it’s largely driven by new purchases that folks who weren’t planning to purchase a firearm in the near future ended up buying one because of the Measure 114 referendum,” Bollman said. …
The findings could have implications beyond Oregon. The researchers describe the phenomenon as a “Steel Paradox”: The prospect of tighter gun restrictions can prompt people to buy firearms before those restrictions take effect.
— Mike Green and Natalie Golay in Oregon passed tighter gun restrictions. Gun demand surged instead
Well, duh…
Liberalism ALWAYS generates the exact opposite of its stated intent. – Rush Limbaugh
“Liberalism ALWAYS generates the exact opposite of its stated intent. – Rush Limbaugh”
R.I.P., Rush Hudson Limbaugh…
“…Human Behavior Still Somehow Baffles Academics Who Study Effects of Gun Control” because they are academics and its from an academics viewpoint they approach subject matter. Academics don’t actually include or study actual human behavior even though they might observe it or note it. Academics view point for human behavior study is to try to quantify actions of human behavior using ‘models’ based upon ‘causality = correlation’ believing the ‘models’ can predict human behavior which is actually not predictable and when an action of human behavior doesn’t meet the expectations of their ‘model’ the academics are baffled.
The Clinton AWB and its aftermath is the definitive case study here.
Prior to the AWB, AR’s were a niche product, as they had been since the 1960’s. Colt and Armalite were the major US vendors (the former largely because of its defense and LE contracts), but AR’s were expensive enough that most gun people didn’t bother with them (especially given that they were useless for the largest market for centerfire rifles — deer hunting). They just were not a thing for the vast majority of gun owners.
Then came the AWB. Suddenly, perhaps remembering what happened to the price of MG’s after the Hughes Amendment, *everyone* wanted some of the forbidden fruit. Prices and demand for grandfathered “pre-ban” weapons skyrocketed, as did sales of AR variants that could get around the AWB.
When the AWB sunsetted in 2004, lots of people got into the market to take advantage of these high prices, resulting in a large increase in supply and resulting price drops. When it became apparent in the summer of 2008 that Obama was going to be elected and would certainly try to reimpose the AWB, the panic-buying cycle repeated, as did the resulting increases in supplies to meet the demand. (That’s was when I bought my first AR.)
Then came Sandy Hook. Faced with what seemed to be certain, imminent, adverse action by the federal government, demand for AR’s went truly insane (and so did the prices). I still recall being in line at GT Distributors (Austin-area cop shop) for hours to buy a striped lower receiver (“1 per customer”) for five times what it had sold for a few weeks earlier later sell for, and whatever AR mags and any ammo I could get my hands on. This heightened demand — created purely by the prospect of future government bans — also cause existing manufacturers to go into overdrive, and lot of new ones to enter the market. The resulting oversupply caused a price crash once it became clear that the Senate would never pass Obama’s gun bills. The glut of cheap AR’s led even more people to but more of them.
So now after several such cycles, AR’s are now something that every self-respecting gun guy has, and many of us have many different versions.
Had the gun grabbers not gotten greedy in 1994, AR’s would likely have remained an overpriced niche product like it was in the 1960’s through early 1990’s. Instead, the AR is now ubiquitous, and is “America’s Rifle”! Indeed, the huge increase of the numbers of them in circulation will likely be part of the SCOTUS reasoning for finding the AWB’s violate the 2A, because they are now “in common use” — which they were not prior to the AWB.
“They just were not a thing for the vast majority of gun owners.”
Preach it, it was during the 90s-era AWB I bought my first center fire rifle, a Ruger Mini-14. It did most everything that an AR did, in the key areas that were important, like a detachable magazine
Tell people drugs are banned, the more people want it. Attempts at gun control are the very best gun salesmen out there…
Question, LKB, if you could be so kind –
Can the 5th circuit judge change or modify his ruling for clarity?
Is there a procedure for that?
NFA GUIDANCE WATCH: ATF Field Offices Told NOT to Answer?!
“The NFA Guidance Watch continues—and we’re getting a clearer picture of what’s happening inside ATF.
New reporting indicates ATF headquarters has instructed local field offices not to independently interpret the NFA injunction, while DOJ and ATF have allowed the plaintiffs’ requested August 21 deadline for implementation answers to pass without a public response.
Meanwhile, attorneys for the plaintiffs and the federal government are reportedly communicating behind the scenes.
In this update, we break down what changed, why ATF field offices may be staying quiet, what it means for covered suppressor transactions and FFLs, the remaining SBR/SBS issues, and exactly what we’re watching for next.”
ht* tps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PA7jNY6SeI4