« A trip to El Bulli | Main | Non-profit prediction markets »
Why are gun owners so happy?
Arthur Brooks reports:
Who are all these gun owners? Are they the uneducated poor, left behind? It turns out they have the same level of formal education as nongun owners, on average. Furthermore, they earn 32% more per year than nonowners. Americans with guns are neither a small nor downtrodden group.
Nor are they "bitter." In 2006, 36% of gun owners said they were "very happy," while 9% were "not too happy." Meanwhile, only 30% of people without guns were very happy, and 16% were not too happy.
In 1996, gun owners spent about 15% less of their time than nonowners feeling "outraged at something somebody had done." It's easy enough in certain precincts to caricature armed Americans as an angry and miserable fringe group. But it just isn't true. The data say that the people in the approximately 40 million American households with guns are generally happier than those people in households that don't have guns.
The gun-owning happiness gap exists on both sides of the political aisle. Gun-owning Republicans are more likely than nonowning Republicans to be very happy (46% to 37%). Democrats with guns are slightly likelier than Democrats without guns to be very happy as well (32% to 29%). Similarly, holding income constant, one still finds that gun owners are happiest.
By the way, if you are curious, I have never even touched a gun.
Addendum: Arthur has a new (and very good) book out, Gross National Happiness.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on April 19, 2008 at 06:48 AM in Data Source | Permalink
Comments
Happiness is a warm gun.
Posted by: Hei Lun Chan at Apr 19, 2008 7:08:20 AM
From the article:
"Why are gun owners so happy? One plausible reason is a sense of self-reliance, in terms of self-defense or even in terms of the ability to hunt their own dinner."
Or maybe... Guns are a hobby, people who are willing to spend money on their hobbies tend to be happier.
But general aggregation of happiness statistics, which are inherently relative, does not make sense when the distribution of gun owners is so skewed geographically. It's fully possible that the areas where gun ownership is a social norm, also has differing social norms regarding reporting happiness.
In general, whenever social research flies in the face of conventional wisdom, the research is usually wrong.
In this case, I'm sure that if we analyze happiness between Gun Owners and non-gun owners in the same neighborhoods, a clear pattern will emerge:
In rural areas, Gun ownership is a vehicle toward pursuing a hobby, and Gun Owners will be happier than the local norm.
But in Urban areas, where hunting is infeasible(and usually done with rented weapons) and shooting ranges are commonplace, gun ownership is mainly an indicator of paranoia and mistrust toward society(however well justified). People who are fearful of society tend to be less happy then the social norm.
Most people live in Urban areas, so the latter stereotype(Violent and distrustful gun-nuts) prevails in society.
Posted by: David Shor at Apr 19, 2008 7:51:59 AM
Could they just be measuring the difference in happiness between people who live in large metro areas and people who live in small towns and rural areas where life is less stressful and it cost less to live well.
Posted by: joan at Apr 19, 2008 7:56:11 AM
My bet: Conservatism makes one happy and buy guns. And maybe something of the factor above (rural areas).
Posted by: Conny at Apr 19, 2008 8:28:13 AM
Bumper sticker that I first noticed on the pickup truck of a small businessman:
ANNOY A LIBERAL: Work hard. Be happy.
Maybe the problem isn't that gun owners are happier than they should be but that others are more likely to be grumps.
Posted by: tdp at Apr 19, 2008 8:33:30 AM
If a gun owner who has an AK-47 at home meets a gun control advocate, who is most likely to be laughing?
Posted by: 8 at Apr 19, 2008 9:11:38 AM
8,
the person that's read your comment.
Posted by: LemmusLemmus at Apr 19, 2008 9:26:23 AM
By the way, if you are curious, I have never even touched a gun.
Are you bitter?
BTW I'm a bit skittish around guns myself. I think it dates back to when I was in high school and we were at this kid's house, and he started pointing his dad's gun at us like in a low-budget after-school special.
Posted by: Bob Murphy at Apr 19, 2008 9:46:43 AM
Research suggests that reported happiness in surveys is mainly a result of personality, which is stable and substantially genetic.
So it is not a matter of guns or conservatism making you happy - rather the causal arrow goes from a certain innate temperament which includes being happier, to a resulting tendency to be conservative and own guns.
Posted by: BGC at Apr 19, 2008 9:59:23 AM
"In general, whenever social research flies in the face of conventional wisdom, the research is usually wrong."
This statement strikes me as false.
Posted by: keith at Apr 19, 2008 10:32:08 AM
I think when Obama said "cling to guns and religion" he meant that they vote based on cultural issues rather than in their own economic interests, so the variable of interest is not gun ownership but political attitudes.
I'd be surprised if this relationship held when controlling for some geographic variables. Also, it is less likely that conservatism makes you happier than it is that people are happier when their preferred party is in power. See:
Rafael Di Tella, Robert MacCulloch (2005) Partisan Social Happiness
Review of Economic Studies 72 (2)
Posted by: Keith at Apr 19, 2008 10:44:11 AM
I think when Obama said "cling to guns and religion" he meant that they vote based on cultural issues rather than in their own economic interests, so the variable of interest is not gun ownership but political attitudes.
Yes, but he's wrong on this issue. See Prof. Larry Bartels discussing his research in the New York Times. It seems that the wealthier (and more urban) people get, the more likely that they are to vote on cultural issues. The difference in the Republican (or Bush) vote among poor atheists, rare churchgoers, or frequent churchgoers is tiny; it's dramatic among the wealthy (and the effect increases among the urban). The same goes for attitudes about guns, abortion, etc. I don't think that's surprising, really; the idea that economic security frees one from voting on that issue is something I would expect.
Also, it is less likely that conservatism makes you happier than it is that people are happier when their preferred party is in power.
It's certainly true that people are happier when their preferred party is in power, but if you read the books of Arthur Brooks and others, you'll see that even after controlling for that factor, conservatives and libertarians are happier. Again, an unsurprising result for me regardless of your personal politics; broadly speaking, it does not seem too strange that people who are more likely to want the government to do something and demand change would be more likely to be unhappy than people who are satisfied or whose first instinct is that problems will solve themselves either through the market or through voluntary action. That doesn't mean that unhappiness or dissatisfaction with the current situation has no value.
Posted by: John Thacker at Apr 19, 2008 11:17:51 AM
I think people are missing one possible cause for this result: Selection bias. Unhappy, miserable gun owners are less likely to be around any more to respond to surveys asking how happy they are.
(I'm a gun owner, BTW).
Posted by: Bruce at Apr 19, 2008 11:37:22 AM
I read something a few years ago suggesting that people are likely to have a surge of testosterone when holding a gun. Related, mayhaps?
Also, hello to CN
Posted by: Robert Olson at Apr 19, 2008 11:46:27 AM
I'm a former gun owner. I found that once a year I'd go to the range, shoot a few rounds, clean and oil the rifle, and then lock it up for another year. This seemed pointless so I sold it and let my licence expire. But now Britain is awash with unlicensed guns in the hands of criminals, while it is made ever more irksome to own a gun legally. So I reckon my decision was pretty foolish. But perhaps not; if ever it seems wiseto get a gun for self-defence, it would probably be wiser to get an illegal one.
Posted by: dearieme at Apr 19, 2008 11:54:46 AM
I don't think that Obama was making a claim about gun owners in general (just as he wasn't making a claim about religious people in general). Rather, he was talking about people in small towns who base their politics on issues like guns, and vote based on issues like guns. Since these are only a fraction of gun owners, Brooks's data on gun owners doesn't really speak to Obama's claim.
Posted by: anon at Apr 19, 2008 11:59:11 AM
One thing that's turned me off gun owners, at least on the internet, is the overall feeling of emasculation, whinyness, deep bitterness, and propensity to fantasize about end of the world zombie scenarios. And on top of that, the usual noise associated with internet dialog. One popular forum even banned zombie talk, it was getting so thick.
Perhaps none of this negates the happiness factor. Or perhaps in the internet they're a particularly grumpy group. I don't know. I do know that I am a gun owner, I generally find myself happy with my life, and I can find little worthwhile discussion with other internet gun nuts.
Posted by: shecky at Apr 19, 2008 12:25:41 PM
Forgive me my cynicism, but the article by Prof. Larry Bartel was nothing more than the cobbling together of some numbers without reference to their source combined with the most rudimentary of all logical fallacies, the appeal to authority: "He's a professor of gobbly-gook at such-and-such university."
Anyway ... the moral of the story is, politicians always take a huge risk when they attempt to characterized a constituency.
Posted by: fancythebard at Apr 19, 2008 12:34:36 PM
Banned Zombie Talk? What ever else would they talk about?
Posted by: Don Meaker at Apr 19, 2008 1:07:24 PM
When Obama said "cling to guns and religion" he meant only that he wanted the votes of those in attendance who apparently agreed with his speech. He's a politician, and an immature one at that. He has no concerns over culture or economics except those specifics which might help him get elected.
Posted by: Rich at Apr 19, 2008 1:08:24 PM
In the movie The President's Analyst, the title character realizes that the reason a CIA agent is so relaxed is that he can just release his stress by killing someone, and be perfectly legal while doing so. Perhaps this is the core of their happiness -- grumpy? You have the ability to KILL something!
Posted by: bill at Apr 19, 2008 1:22:44 PM
Mr. Shor wrote:
"But in Urban areas, where hunting is infeasible(and usually done with rented weapons) and shooting ranges are commonplace, gun ownership is mainly an indicator of paranoia and mistrust toward society(however well justified). People who are fearful of society tend to be less happy then the social norm."
I call BS.
Wrong on two counts. First, if hunting is infeasible, then how is it done with rented weapons? Rental of weapons to people for hunting purposes is so rare as to be virtually non-existent. Mr. Assertion, please meet Mr. Fact.
Second, gun ownership as an indicator of paranoia? Perhaps it's an indicator of one's experience with the use of law enforcement for protection. I like policemen as much as the next guy, but dialing 911 is a poor second choice when you're getting carjacked. You can't criticize a rational person's actions just because you don't like the world in which the actions are taken.
I own guns. Lots of them. I hunt very infrequently, but compete fairly often in competition shooting. And, I live in a suburban area. Does that make me or my fellows any more squirrelly than average? Don't know. We seem happy enough on the whole.
Mr. Obama made the same mistake lots of people do when they talk about issues they don't understand. He got called on it.
There would be a similar outcome if I talked about literary deconstruction or whatever the hell it is.
Simple as that.
Have a nice day.
:)
Posted by: JS at Apr 19, 2008 1:27:52 PM
"In general, whenever social research flies in the face of conventional wisdom, the research is usually wrong."
Yes, and 72.381% of statistics are made up on the spot. Conventional wisdom is just about the dumbest 'wisdom' available. It comes from, and/or is repeated by, folks like Rosie ("Fire has never melted steel") O'Donnell and her moronic ilk.
I can't answer for research I haven't seen, but at least getting actual numbers is a step in the right direction.
There are quite a few intervening variables I can conceive of on the happiness, but absent data to the contrary, most of the speculation above about what's 'wrong' with the conclusions are just rampant moonglow.
And I find it easier to discuss zombies with gun owners than anything with anti-Second Amendment moonbats.
Posted by: JorgXMcKie at Apr 19, 2008 1:28:01 PM
What's with all this "gun owners are macho and paranoid" crap? I'm seeing a lot of ad-hominem and straw-man attacks here.
Sometimes gun ownership is a hobby, but what those who have no experiences with them often fail to understand is that for many people, it is not a hobby of any sort.
I have a couple of weapons, and I have no intention of ever hunting with them (I live in/near a major city in a very nice area). I am not wealthy, but I am managing to pursue an advanced degree in a field I truly enjoy. I am a happy, hard-working person who has every reason to defend his own life and lifestyle, and the training (through prior careers) to do so. I am not bitter, religious, or clinging to anything, nor am I any sort of firearm "hobbyist".
Many of my friends are like myself; well educated professionals. While there are bitter kooks out there, those who think *all* gun owners are bitter, bible-thumping nutters obviously don't know many gun owners, nor do they know there are many different types of them; there is a big divide between hunters and those like myself.
I own a gun for the same reason I own a hammer or screwdriver; as a tool to do a job. I find that generally, the real disagreement isn't over *guns*, it's about the lawful use of force, regardless of what you're using.
Posted by: Tim at Apr 19, 2008 1:28:06 PM
"In general, whenever social research flies in the face of conventional wisdom, the research is usually wrong."
Yes, and 72.381% of statistics are made up on the spot. Conventional wisdom is just about the dumbest 'wisdom' available. It comes from, and/or is repeated by, folks like Rosie ("Fire has never melted steel") O'Donnell and her moronic ilk.
I can't answer for research I haven't seen, but at least getting actual numbers is a step in the right direction.
There are quite a few intervening variables I can conceive of on the happiness, but absent data to the contrary, most of the speculation above about what's 'wrong' with the conclusions are just rampant moonglow.
And I find it easier to discuss zombies with gun owners than anything with anti-Second Amendment moonbats.
Posted by: JorgXMcKie at Apr 19, 2008 1:29:34 PM
