Skip to main content

Table 3 Logistic regressions predicting cable lock use in Minnesota, Mississippi, and New Jersey

From: Interactions at the point of firearm purchase and subsequent use of locking devices

Ā 

Minnesota

Mississippi

New Jersey

OR

Wald

95% CI

OR

Wald

95% CI

OR

Wald

95% CI

Number of Firearms

.98

.75

.94, 1.03

.95

6.45

.91, .99

1.00

.03

.96, 1.04

For a few of my firearm purchases

.88

.07

.327, 2.35

2.69

4.00

1.02, 7.06

1.49

.46

.48, 4.64

For some of my firearm purchases

2.33

3.80

.99, 5.47

1.97

2.31

.82, 4.69

2.17

2.50

.83, 5.68

For many of my firearm purchases

1.84

1.87

.77, 4.43

3.06

6.19

1.27, 7.38

1.57

.81

.59, 4.18

For almost all of my firearm purchases

2.99

5.35

1.18, 7.56

3.66

7.07

1.41, 9.51

2.15

1.88

.72, 6.42

For all of my firearm purchases

2.06

3.46

.96, 4.40

4.04

11.28

1.79, 9.13

2.59

3.97

1.02, 6.60

Ā 

Ļ‡2

df

p

Ļ‡2

df

p

Ļ‡2

df

p

Omnibus test

11.82

6

.07

24.66

6

ā€‰<ā€‰.01

6.66

6

.35

  1. For all three states the reference group for frequency of retailers noting cable locks at the point of purchase is ā€œFor none of my firearmsā€