T O P

New research shows "belief in supernatural evil is a robust predictor of support for policies that expand gun rights."

New research shows "belief in supernatural evil is a robust predictor of support for policies that expand gun rights."

AutoModerator

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) still apply to other comments. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


latenightscrollin

(Actual research behind paywall)


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


JaeCryme

My guns aren’t going to stop supernatural evil… hopefully the human kind of evil though.


IndigoFenix

A ~~bipartisan~~ two-party society will do that. America has a huge problem with splitting its population up along the "right vs left" political spectrum, where logically the facets of human opinion SHOULD be a lot more nuanced than that. EDIT: I wasn't expecting this comment to get so much attention. I didn't even read the article, turned out they actually accounted for that. >Overall, the estimated net effects of belief in supernatural evil withstand statistical controls for a host of sociodemographic covariates, and, importantly, political ideology. Also notable is that they found that very few other aspects of religion were correlated with gun policy. It's ONLY the belief in supernatural evil that was relevant. EDIT2: Also I misused the word bipartisan. Shame on you all for upvoting such a sloppy comment.


BallisticChalice

Right? There is no reason pro-gun people can't be, for example, more pro-environment. A lot of gun owners actually are, in their own personal lives. But securing more gun rights in the USA requires you to ally with pro-drilling, pro-mining, anti-green energy interests, so I'm sure you'll find a strong correlation between guns and anti-green stances.


18Feeler

>Right? There is no reason pro-gun people can't be, for example, more pro-environment. Hell, just look at 'old teddy Roosevelt. That is the exact sort of person most people want in their representatives.


skb239

The problem is the facets of human opinion are irrelevant when you have a two party system. Because of one or two issues entire populations vote for people who generally don’t have their interests at heart. The nuanced opinions of individuals becomes irrelevant when they are forced to act through a two party system. Only way to solve this is to fundamentally change our voting system.


flirt77

Ranked choice voting isn't THE answer, but it's a significant step in the right direction. End first past the post voting!


GiveToOedipus

You don't have to have a perfect solution to have a better one.


coleosis1414

In other words: don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.


ThrowawayFargoND

I love that phrase so much. It's definitely one of the most common roadblocks I've faced in my professional encounters.


Remy385

I also heard it said: "perfect is the enemy of done". The more you try to achieve purity, the less gets done.


cleverpseudonym1234

I also like George Patton’s formulation: “A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week.” The adverb is a bit more martial than I would choose myself, but it makes sense considering the source. And I guess he thought that a good quote, said now, would be better than a perfect quote said a week later.


port53

I feel like we could come up with a better phrase and we should avoid using this one while we work on it.


Praill

Don't let perfection be the enemy of improvement? I think this is how I've heard it elsewhere


Infinityand1089

“A good paper gets a grade, a great paper gets published, but a perfect paper never gets either.”


zortlord

Remove private money from elections. Though conservative, I'm strongly against privately funded elections and lobbying. Corporate money is not free speech unless corporations, which are claimed to be legally people, can be incarcerated for illegal actions. Since the divestiture of individual risk makes incarceration impossible, corporations are not people with rights to free speech. Once private money can no longer be used for elections, there's no real need for candidates to align into 2 major parties.


BallisticChalice

I don't think that's a contradiction with being a conservative. Not that many people know that John McCain was strongly in favor of elections solely funded by the federal government.


dennismfrancisart

You are more than just a conservative, you are fully formed human with the ability to step outside of political marketing buckets to form your own opinions on topics. I thank you from the bottom of my bleeding libertarian lefty heart.


Greenblanket24

The problem isnt conservatism itself exactly, it’s when the failures of capitalism are used as the basis for reactionary policy while blaming “socialism” and the people who “don’t want to work” for slave wages!


AussieOsborne

I'm so sick of so many things being labeled socialism/ communism. The harm in communism is typically lack of motivation in the workforce and authoritarian policy enforcement. Giving schoolkids free lunch is not either of these, and it's disgusting that people will find reasons to not feed kids and feel smugly superior about not falling victim to the wiles of communism.


Greenblanket24

You are correct.


Rufus_Reddit

The US is more polarized now than it was 20 or 30 years ago, but the voting system hasn't changed much since then. So it seems like there's more to it than that.


SgtRockyWalrus

Due to social media and the current media landscape, in my opinion. Social media curates your content to what you will engage with the most... which is content you either strongly agree or disagree with. They choose to only watch media coverage that reaffirms their world views. It’s a major problem with no feasible solution. Edit - check out “the social dilemma” on Netflix, if social media’s impact on polarization/radicalization is of interest to you.


ChevroletSparkSS

Other than just removing yourself from social media (which is increasingly difficult these days), there needs to be a way to dial back all forms of social media to a point where it's minimized as much as possible.


p00pl00ps1

You can just log off dude.


Xperimentx90

I'm close, already got rid of Facebook and Twitter. However... life is still basically the same because everyone else I know is still attached to these things, consuming propaganda. Point being everyone needs to log off if we want it to change, which seems unlikely.


skb239

The country MORE polarized now doesn’t mean it wasn’t always polarized. No legit third party has ever had real influence and most of this countries history follows single issue problems. Comparing that to nations with many many parties we have always been polarized, it’s just being made worse with social media and technology


Morphized

The Whig Party won several presidencies.


mrtheshed

The Whig party was the major opposition party to the Democratic party at the time they existed. The United States has effectively only had two major political parties at any given time for most of it's life, even though the names and/or goals of the parties have changed over time.


noteverrelevant

>Overall, the estimated net effects of belief in supernatural evil withstand statistical controls for a host of sociodemographic covariates, and, importantly, political ideology. They seem to have controlled for that.


IndigoFenix

Good catch.


nandryshak

Like 50% of the comments in this sub are something like, "BUT WHAT ABOUT XYZ? SURELY THEY DIDN'T THINK OF THAT!" but actually, yes, the researchers *did* think about it *and* they controlled for it...


urnbabyurn

The correlation would exist for any level of “partisanism”.


TheBigBadDuke

It's a class war disguised as left vs right.


__crackers__

Is it not largely urban vs rural?


Barricudabudha

This is exactly right. Thankfully someone said it. Most division is about class, usually dressed up as something else so we don't focus on the actual issues. My take anyway.


Pimptastic_Brad

Rich people in the South did this for generations after slavery. They stoked racist ideologies because you can work a poor white man much harder if he can think " well, at least I'm not black." Basically, pitting the poor against the poor instead of class against class.


ThouReaper

I've literally been called "basically a nazi" for not picking one and saying I'm more central than anything.


veringer

(I think you mean a *partisan*; as *bipartisan* is when two parties work together)


gulag_search_engine

Gun rights are a non partisan issue.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


VajainaProudmoore

Now a chainsword...


_Weyland_

Make the Emperor proud while you're at it.


ChuckWillWidow

What about a belief in just evil?


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


tiddertag

I want to preface this by saying I am neither a theist or firearms enthusiast, but this strikes me as a very odd study. I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong about documenting the obvious, but in this case it seems politically motivated. The obvious here, which isn't quite what the study addresses directly, is that religious people (and in this case it's evident that they're talking about Christianity in particular) are more likely to be politically conservative, and politically conservative people are more likely to support policies that expand gun rights. Typically, people that believe in 'the Devil' and demons also believe in god and angels, so they could just as well have framed it in terms of people that believe in a supernatural good are more likely to support policies that expand gun rights. I have a hunch the researchers do *not* support policies that expand gun rights, and this seems like an attempt to suggest support for policies that expand gun rights are motivated by kranky beliefs. I don't believe in the supernatural, but if it did exist and was out to get you, a gun wouldn't do you any good anyway. It seems to me if they're relying on guns rather than guardian angels or a benevolent deity for protection, maybe they aren't actually as convinced of their beliefs as they think they are.


jrm20070

>I don't believe in the supernatural, but if it did exist and was out to get you, a gun wouldn't do you any good anyway. It seems to me if they're relying on guns rather than guardian angels or a benevolent deity for protection, maybe they aren't actually as convinced of their beliefs as they think they are. This is going to be entirely anecdotal but I think it relates to what you said in the rest of your comment... people who are politically conservative tend to live in rural areas. Rural living (with slow first responder rates) tend to have "take care of your family first" attitudes. I think they can be convinced of supernatural good/evil while still being grounded enough to know there are human threats in the world that they feel the need to have guns for. Which also applies to hunting for food/sport and their belief of an individual need to do so. I don't think those things necessarily mean their beliefs aren't as solid as they think. More that there are certain things they can't do anything about (supernatural) while still doing what they can to handle earthly things. From my experience, many of their beliefs are more along the lines of "God wants us to live in his image but gave us free will so we still have to take care of ourselves". I dunno. Just a thought. Totally agree with the rest of your comment though.


stanglemeir

Another thing in rural areas is response times. If you live in a rural town a 30 minute response time for a Cop might be quick. Add in the issues that many small towns have with drugs/unemployment and there is a surprising amount of problems in some areas. Just went to a place in rural North Texas for work. I can honestly say I’ve never seen so many methheads in my life. If I lived in that town, I’d always be packing.


furluge

30 minutes was the the response time for a shooting right next to the police HQ in my city.


alinius

Rural life also requires more self sufficiency in general. I once stayed overnight with a family in another town. It had rained lightly recently, and the dirt road from the paved county road to the house was over a half mile of wet mud, and damn near impassible. I grew up in a rural area, but lived in town, so 4 wheeling was mostly something we did for fun. I was in absolute awe of how this well dress middle aged woman flipped the truck into 4 wheel drive, and handled that road like a damn pro. My take away was, "I guess when you live out here, you kinda have to learn to do that." Camping in the Big Bend area for a week. We got a 12 hour warning that the creek through the camping area was going to be impassible for 2 days, so make sure you have enough supplies. Middle of the night a wall of water rolls through the creek, and the creek went from a couple inches deep of gently moving water to 4 feet of very swiftly moving water. The warning wasn't necessary for supplies because pretty much everyone already had all their supplies in camp, but it was more a warning, "Do not try to cross the creek, period" Finally, I live in a suburb now, and it is pretty glaring the lack of basic first aid knowledge. When the nearest EMS could be 30+ minutes away, you have to know how to treat things enough so that you don't bleed out before they get there. I broke my right arm really badly when I was young. It wasn't a compound fracture, but it was bad enough the you didn't need x-ray's to know it was broken(Protip: Your arm does not normally have a 45 degree bend halfway between your elbow and wrist). My parents took me to the local hospital, and they flat out were told that the nearest doctor qualified to handle a break like that was 90 miles away. In Urban areas, you take for granted not just EMS response times, but the availability of specialists of all kinds.


Neat-Station9874

My mother had to preform CPR on a dead man for 45 minutes one time because she was legally obligated to do so until he was declared dead... And ems couldn't get there for 45 minutes. First responders in some rural areas are JUST volunteers, too.


Zaros262

Is there a contingency on that obligation? Like what if you have no way to get help, or if ems never came for some extreme reason?


Hickelodeon

some say she's still doing CPR today


furluge

> Rural living (with slow first responder rates) tend to have "take care of your family first" This is true, but I do have to ask, what cities are people living in where the police have a response time of under a minute? In Virginia Beach we had a shooter attack in a de-facto gun free zone in a building right next to the Police HQ and the Courthouse and it still took them 30 minutes to arrive. By the time they got in there all the victims had been killed 15 minutes ago.


jrm20070

Yeah that's fair for sure. I guess with rural areas it's a guaranteed 30 minutes though in that scenario. If the police are 20 miles away there's absolutely no chance they get there in 15 minutes. In a city there's the possibility there's a cop a block away who can get there if they aren't caught up in the something else. Point stands though, there can be slow response times everywhere. https://www.safety.com/comparing-the-average-911-response-times/ Some interesting info here for some major cities.


furluge

Yeah unfortunately none of those response times is good enough when you really think about it. I think we kind of need to establish that it's not necessarily how long it takes them to arrive but how long to actually render aid. In the instance I talked about the first officer arrived at the scene much earlier but no actually got inside to do anything until the 30 minute mark. It doesn't do you much good if you're fighting for your life inside your house and outside there's one patrolman outside waiting for backup to arrive and a perimeter to be established. And if we're talking about the kind of emergency you'd use a gun for that's going to be a factor.


THEamishTRACTOR

Yeah I think you are correct it's just much more obvious in more rural areas. Like distance requires more thought so you understand it more. Maybe I'm stupid though.


alinius

Urban areas give you the illusion that the police could be there to protect you. rural areas do not give that luxury. ​ Also, the Supreme Court has ruled on multiple occasions that the police have no duty to stop a crime in progress. A guy was knifed in the NY Subway 15 feet away from a cop sitting in a bulletproof glass both. The cop didn't have backup, and thought the attacker might have had a gun, so he chose to stay in the booth while the guy was stabbed several times, and nearly bled out.


PrivetKalashnikov

I'm an atheist living in a rural area who owns a ton of guns. I think the urban vs rural thing is really overlooked in gun arguments. In my area we have wild hogs that can be aggressive towards humans and pets and coyotes that can be aggressive towards pets. Also like you said the sheriff's office takes 20-30 minutes to get out here, so regardless of your religious values owning guns is smart. My neighbors are all Christian and while they expect God to protect them from supernatural stuff, they think it's on them to protect themselves from physical threats.


BlitzballGroupie

It's also worth considering the particular character of supernatural evil in the christian context. Believing in demons or the devil doesn't necessarily mean some hellspawn is going claw it's way out of the ground and attack your house. The devil works through people just like God does, and a gun works plenty well on them.


Willingo

I never thought of a connection between response rates and family culture, interesting


mr_ji

Making tenuous connections between politics and lifestyle to make one group or another look evil or stupid is the specialty of this sub.


oldtrenzalore

>The obvious here, which isn't quite what the study addresses directly, is that religious people (and in this case it's evident that they're talking about Christianity in particular) are more likely to be politically conservative I don't have access to the full text, but the abstract indicates they controlled for poltical ideology (along with other sociodemographic covariates).


SynfulCreations

Not a theist but I hang out in a ton of gun subs and I can tell you that the theism has correlation but no real causation for gun ownership. Many gun owners are conservative and therefore religious. If you wanted to study WHY they own guns they can look at how fear motivated people are. People who own guns fear their property being stolen, breakins, the government coming after them, immigrants etc. Or look at affluence or hate. Maybe look at how common firearms are in their family as many gun owners grew up with guns and vis versa. I saw data recently about spikes in gun sales after riots, stock market crashes and the start of the pandemic. Those could potentially provide useful information. You're right that this article seems incredibly dumb, obvious and politically motivated.


alinius

Funny thing fear, it is a great motivator, but it can also be entirely rational as well. Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you. A woman who has a stalker is probably afraid, but she likely has good reasons to be afraid. This last year gave a lot of people reasons to be afraid some rational, some not. ​ As for the causation between theism and being pro-gun. Most every form of Christianity I have seen preaches that without God's influence, mans natural inclination is toward selfishness or evil. If you follow that towards its logical conclusion, you will end up at "Stay strapped or get clapped"


6a6566663437

They included controls for political ideology: >Overall, the estimated net effects of belief in supernatural evil withstand statistical controls for a host of sociodemographic covariates, and, importantly, political ideology. IMO, the reason for the correlation is not that you're going to shoot demons, it's that "supernatural evil" can make people irrationally and permanently bad. Which means they're coming for you, no mater how little sense that makes. And nothing can be done to prevent it, because they're permanently bad. So you need a gun.


Blork32

>supernatural evil" can make people irrationally and permanently bad This seems like a pretty good explanation. Another thing is that it could correlate with several different political ideologies. In the same way that (at least pre-COVID) you'd see "hippy" (for lack of a better word) types in Oregon be anti-vaxx as well as conservative home school types. It could be similar where you have politically conservative Christians who support gun rights as well as more liberally minded "spiritual" folks. Both of whom might share an anti-establishment attitude, but would by some measures transcend political ideology.


Ituzzip

There are a lot of people who believe in supernatural good but do not believe in supernatural “evil.” They would have religious/spiritual beliefs that fall along the lines of seeing bad actions as being more like illness or just not knowing any better, rather than succumbing to a temptor. Dualistic religions (Christianity, Islam), though highly evangelical, are a minority of world religions. And I would suggest that a large number of Muslims and Christians have a personal belief system that is non-dualistic as well. I grew up Catholic for example and my highly devout grandma told me she didn’t think hell was real. Because god is good.


BarkBeetleJuice

>Typically, people that believe in 'the Devil' and demons also believe ingod and angels, so they could just as well have framed it in terms ofpeople that believe in a supernatural good are more likely to supportpolicies that expand gun rights. I looked up the study through my school's library and was able to access it. Turns out the other factors of religion aren't linked. That means people who are religious but do not believe in demons and "the devil" are outside of the correlation. Per the abstract: \>Very few other aspects of religion are associated with any of these gun policy attitudes. Implications and study limitations are discussed, and promising directions for future research on religion and guns are identified. It goes on to explain: >What factors might account for the connection between religious conservatism and gun ownership? Prior theory and research suggest several potential explanations for this pattern, although few studies have actually explored these factors directly (for a partial exception, see Yamane 2016). For example, Protestants—and especially fundamentalists, evangelicals, and charismatics—may be more likely to own guns because they: (a) tend to hold more punitive attitudes toward criminals (Grasmick and McGill 1994); (b) areless trusting of others (Hempel et al. 2012); (c) are more politically conservative on a host of issues and tend to align with right-wing candidates and the GOP (Schwadel 2017); (d) are less trusting of supra-local government, due in part to a deeply rooted anti-institutionalist ethos (Jiobu and Curry 2001; Bivins 2008); (e) tend to hold individualistic attitudes that stress—among other things—personal responsibility for family well-being and protection (Young 1989; Celinska 2007); and (f) may be prone to embrace“rugged masculinity,” a gender ideology that links masculinity with an imperative of defending one’s self, their loved ones, and others from outside threats (Eldredge 2001; Gallagher and Wood 2005). Although some or all of these factors may help to explain the higher rates of gun-owning and -carrying among religious conservatives, the evidence remains inconclusive at this time. It isn't restricted only to Christianity either, nor does a person have to be religious. The phenomenon appears to be related strictly to belief in a supernatural evil: >To be clear, dualist world views are not unique to the U.S. Christian context and are prevalent across religious and philosophical traditions throughout the world. The notion of supernatural evil is found within most world religions and believed by the majority of U.S. adults (Martinez 2013; Norenzayan and Shariff 2008). Belief in supernatural evil is present in the Hebrew Bible, the Qur’an,Hinduism (Brinkgreve 1997), and Buddhism (Anderson 2012). Despite the ubiquitous nature of dualist views about good versus evil,we have opted to center our discussion on Christian perceptions of supernatural evil, given that the majority of religious U.S. adults are affiliated with a Christian religious institution. Methods for isolating supernatural beliefs as a dependent variable: >In order to test our hypotheses regarding the estimated net effects of supernatural evil beliefs, it is desirable to control for other dimensions of religion that have been linked with gun ownership or policy attitudes (e.g., Yamane 2016; Merino 2018). First, we measure denominational affiliation using a variant of the well-established RELTRAD coding scheme (Steensland et al., 2000), including dummy variables for the following categories (a) conservative (i.e., fundamentalist, evangelical, and charismatic): Protestant; (b) mainline Protestant; (c) black Protestant; (d) Catholic; and (e) other religion (including Judaism, Islam, other non-Christian world religions, and various smaller minority faiths). These various categories are compared to persons with no religious affiliation, who comprise the reference group in our analyses. Unweighted descriptive statistics (see Appendix A) indicate that the religious composition of the BRS sample is as follows: 28.4% of respondents are conservative Protestant, followed by Catholic (24.9%), mainline Protestant (16.9%), unaffiliated (14.4%), other religion (8.2%), and black Protestant (7.2%). It also appears that the correlation occurs across political lines, so it doesn't seem like this is a study targeted at conservatives: >each one-unit increment in the strength of one’s belief in supernatural evil is associated with a 27% decline in support for banning semi-automatic weapons (OR = 0.73, p < 0.001). The magnitude of this pattern is diminished only slightly with controls for political ideology (OR = 0.81, p < 0.05), which partially mediates this relationship (b = 0.83, p < 0.001). This suggests that gun policy position scores would change by the value of the slope (b) if beliefs in supernatural evil were stably low, but political ideology scores were changed from the level they would take for those who identify as extremely conservative to the level they would take for those who are extremely liberal. When we divided the natural indirect effect of banning semi-automatic weapons (0.83) by the total effect (2.16), we observed a proportion mediated of 38.4%. This means that over one-third of the association between supernatural evil and supporting policies to ban semi-automatic weapons, after controlling for all covariates, is mediated by political ideology. Appendix B contains the results of these mediation analyses for all gun policies.


coheedcollapse

I'm not an expert and haven't read the entire study, but doesn't this part of the abstract address what you said about believing in supernatural good as well as supernatural evil? > Overall, the estimated net effects of belief in supernatural evil withstand statistical controls for a host of sociodemographic covariates, and, importantly, political ideology. Very few other aspects of religion are associated with any of these gun policy attitudes. It kind of hits on all of your complaints. The desire to relax gun laws doesn't correlate as strongly with any other religious belief, religion, or political motivation, it correlates specifically with "belief in supernatural evil", which seems to go far further than basic religious belief. Not arguing for or against the validity of the study, but it seems they took what you said into mind when drawing their conclusions.


Logical_Area_5552

The average person who owns guns and is against gun control does so because they believe that home invasions, hunting, animals that attack livestock, and violence are real. I am agnostic, and own a gun because home invasions and violence in my zip code are far too common. If somebody also happens to be religious or superstitious it is probably lower on the list of reasons to own a gun than the others I listed above.


mark_lee

Plus, guns are really fun.


Bacontoad

Garand-Thumb bites are not fun.


UnbearableEgg

Fortunately there's thousands of other guns that don't bite


teachthequan

Scope bite, the mistake you make once.


semvhu

I scoped my forehead once and tore a small chunk of flesh. Didn't scope myself again.


unthused

Seems like it would be just as simple as people who tend to be conservative and religious are also more likely to live in a rural area and own guns. Add to that the recent increasing political divide and fear-mongering over gun control. Calling it 'supernatural evil' makes it sound like these people are trying to protect themselves from demons or something.


SimpleWayfarer

Moon’s haunted. *pumps shotgun*


jimke

They said it was still a strong predictor across multiple covariants, including political ideology.


M116Fullbore

Wowee, rural people tend to be more religious and also rural people tend to own more guns. Big revelation here. Perhaps belief in the supernatural is also a robust predictor of someone's likelihood to own a tractor.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


joehoul

"Very few other aspects of religion are associated with any of these gun policy attitudes." is in the abstract. This is about support for policies not gun ownership itself, the Baylor Religion Survey polls adults in all fifty states. Belief in supernatural evil also has a strong positive correlation with religious commitment (2007 Baylor Religion Survey) so it's not just being religious but being devoutly religious that appears to be an indicator. The ruralness of these findings is words you've put in their mouths.


GhostOfJohnCena

Yeah like it’s right there first paragraph. The whole point is that a specific type of religious person is much more interested in expanded gun rights.


Westcoast_Dreams51

Whoa buddy, you're supposed to only read the title and make a stupidly casual observation based on the title alone, reading the actual link is frowned upon here. I mean sure, the article specifically mentions they are only focusing on one aspect of religious belief, but it's so much easier to make a generalized comment that tells us nothing when I pretend they're talking about religion as a whole.


Rafaeliki

>Overall, the estimated net effects of belief in supernatural evil withstand statistical controls for a host of sociodemographic covariates, and, importantly, political ideology.


Vladamir_Putin_007

Still, correlation doesn't mean causation. I don't think they are buying guns because they believe in a supernatural evil.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


Don_Julio_Acolyte

Yep. I remember a time when 22's were like 5 cents, 9mm were 10 cents, 223/556 were 20 cents. That wasn't long ago. I'm not some old fart. I've seen people pick up 556 at $1/round. $20 for a box of 20ct. Like...idk how much "it's just supply and demand" talk I can take until price gouging comes into the mix. It's ridiculous. Been holding my current ammo for nearly a year as I just sit and wait and HOPE it comes back down (which it is, but 556 is still sitting at around 50-60 cents a round, which is still double its typical price). Insane.


resumethrowaway222

Why has manufacturing not kept up with demand? Ammo is easy to make, and at current prices, extremely profitable, so you would expect supply to follow demand and limit prices, but it's not.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


the_tater_salad

by the grain*


Diazepampoovey

Don't forget rock salt


Opening-Resolution-4

Need to go to the store and pick up 10 lbs of guns.


no-eye_contact

Dont waste your money on silver. All you need is a 10mm. That's God's caliber.


[deleted]

[удалено]


WeepingSomnabulist

also be sure to sage-smudge your gun and your whole house. with sage from WalMart.


FalconX88

The paper doesn't say that. It says it's a predictor.


VoDoka

Yes, which is why it only says that believes in supernatural evil is a strong predictor for attitudes towards gun laws.


HardPawns

This is Reddit, the ability to discuss science beyond "correlation doesn't mean causation" *is* a bit limited around here.


BigHeadSlunk

That sentence is typically employed by unscientific people who want a quick excuse to ignore any findings that run contrary to their beliefs. It's rarely used the way it should be.


zapitron

Yes, but does the sentence cause people to ignore findings, or does ignoring findings cause them to say the sentence?


BridgetheDivide

Every single post on /r/Science that discusses mental health and politics is littered with this


pegothejerk

So are discussions in any sub discussing increasing funding for mental health services.


0xD153A53

I don't think the study ever makes that claim.


CannedCoachie

The study only points to a correlation though? I dont’t understand where in the study you got to this conclusion


EndorsedBryce

Doesn't seem to make a claim about anything other that you can reliably assume that if one of thee conditions is true about a given Invidual so is the other.


[deleted]

what about the word 'predictor' has you confused? The statement doesn't imply causation.


NicklesBe

I don't think they are arguing that there is causation are they? I mean if you say "Our research shows an affinity for red Maga hats is a robust predictor of support for Donald Trump" They aren't saying red maga hats causes people to support donald trump. Simply that it's an indicator that they do. Same with this study.


pennypacker2021

You don't need causation for reliable predictions.


Daughterofsithis

Not a correlation, a predictor. As in one variable predicts the other. You are inferring a third, unrelated variable.


[deleted]

They never proposed causation and your assertion that correlation doesn’t equal causation, while true, is meaningless because the conclusion of the research doesn’t rest or rely on that. The research only concludes there is a correlation and speculates on why. I’m betting you didn’t purchase the pdf or log into your research account to read about their speculation though, and you are just spouting this thing you heard in high school statistics for Reddit points.


redlion1904

I assume there are 0 people who literally believe in werewolves who do not support the right to their silver bullets.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


statesucks

Hmm, wonder what the motivation for examining this correlation is.


BatmanAffleck

Not hard to find if you run a search on the authors of this paper.... They are extremely biased.


logicordie

We sure get a lot of fringe political garbage in this sub.


Xandrya

I always want to state the same thing every time I see a similar post but I'm hesitant the hive mind will jump down my throat lol.


thedeal82

The hive mind of Reddit needs to be reminded 95% of us are sick of them and they do not represent the majority in real life.


fastredb

Or the possibility that you might upset one of the 1557 moderators.


MrsRainey

As a social scientist, I agree. Social science papers are so frequently misinterpreted for political gain it makes me livid.


[deleted]

[удалено]


wiking11b

Hmm, will M833 steel core pentrator rounds put a stop to a rampaging demon? Or do I need to sell my wife's car to get something chambered in .338 Lapua? Should I dip these rounds in Holy water? Would a store bought Supersoaker filled with Holy water work? I have so many questions....


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


PaulPierceOldestSon

People like to pretend like the world hasn’t seen multiple genocides within the last century. Carried out by evil people in high places of government


ukulisti

Or low places of government. Or outside government.


[deleted]

[удалено]


bitchalot

Why bother with "supernatural"? It's more of a view of how people see people. People who believe there is evil in the world want to protect themselves. Some people support guns rights, others create gangs to attack. It still a belief in evil.


PhillipBrandon

I was disappointed at the lack of discussion of werewolves and the regulation of silver-based ammunition.


[deleted]

Because evil is always banal and stupid. You can't shoot that with a gun.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


Xenon009

Smidge of a slant on there, don't you think? I'd say a better argument for gun ownership is the fact that it is (As far as I know) the only thing that Rand, Marx, Orwell and The founding fathers agreed on. ​ "That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell "Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempts to disarm the people must be stopped, by force if necessary" - Karl Marx “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” - 2nd amendment And... Rand is rand... Her whole thing was being the queen of ancapistan. ​ If those four, from radically different corners of the political compass are in agreement, then it might not be an awful idea.


TacosArePeopleToo

And the founder of the NAACP. "A Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home, and it should be used for that protection which the law refuses to give."-Ida B. Wells-Barnett


BatmanAffleck

It's almost like many of us just want to be able to protect ourselves and loved ones, no matter what our personal or political beliefs are.... Weird.


Gaben2012

Yes, maybe believe in self-reliance is the strongest predictor of them all in regards to being "pro-gun". But no, it's actually fear of demons, from DOOM.


sowhiteithurts

Doom is demon propaganda to make you believe your puny shotshells can stop us, I mean them.


ShallowFreakingValue

Did you know that an ice cream sales is a robust predictor of crime?


dmidge

Well, I guess that believing in something out of your controls that scares you, can lead to buy more guns. In case you can fight it. And I would say that I am not that surprised, knowing the very religious or superstitious people. Some of them would buy much more shiny stones though....


GrandMasterReddit

What an idiotic post with an idiotic title… Are we sure this is r/science ? This doesn’t conflict or align with any of my views at all, it’s just an absurd thing to post on whats supposed to be a science subreddit. I wouldn’t even be surprised if my comment got deleted…


[deleted]

[удалено]