More People Buying More Guns Thanks To Obama's War on the Constitution

[red states rule]

So with all these new guns being purchased will libs come out and talk about confiscation?
The United States appears to be experiencing a rec­ord run on military-style assault weapons, high-capacity magazines and some kinds of ammunition as buyers deluge stores in search of guns and bullets they fear will be banned by the Obama administration, according to firearms industry executives and market analysts.Even allowing for spikes in gun sales that follow every mass killing in the United States and attendant political debates about gun control, industry executives said the surge seems unprecedented.
And it has emptied shelves of the kind of semiautomatic rifle that was used to kill 20 children and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., last month, the deaths that sparked President Obama’s proposal (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-unveils-gun-control-proposals/2013/01/16/58cd70ce-5fed-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_story.html)for tougher gun laws.
In some areas, a buyer walking into a gun store now will have to wait up to a year to buy a military-style assault weapon. The prices of available semiautomatics have doubled as buyers bid up the dwindling supply, and stocks of Glock handguns are also low.
“I think there has been a pretty dramatic uptick in demand within one month,” said Nima Samadi, who follows the gun industry for IBISWorld, a market research firm. “Certain locations are even running out of certain guns, and suppliers can’t fulfill demand.”
Samadi noted that 2012 was already a banner year for the gun industry, with projected 8.2 percent growth over 2011 — just as 2008, another presidential election year, saw a significant increase in gun sales.
The health and financial muscle of the gun industry was dramatically evident at the massive SHOT (Shooting, Hunting, Outdoor Trade (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/at-worlds-largest-gun-show-few-worries-about-tighter-controls/2013/01/15/5a7396b0-5f25-11e2-b05a-605528f6b712_story.html)) show here, where an estimated 60,000 people gathered to see, handle and buy firearms and accessories displayed by more than 1,600 exhibitors over more than 12 miles of convention space. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/2013/01/17/011bb7e0-60de-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_story.html?wprss=rss_politics

[logroller]

Prospective gun legislation= gun sales. Perhaps its time we discuss a ban on job growth. :coffee:

[red states rule]

Prospective gun legislation= gun sales. Perhaps its time we discuss a ban on job growth. :coffee:

We had a chance to place that ban in effect last November, but more takers showed up at the polls then the producers. Now we are f'd. What "prospective" gun legislation? Obama did an end-run around Congress and just signed it into law LR. and the ones he didn't sign will never make it through Congress. People see Dems are on track to simply take the guns. Like Obamacare - it's for their own good

[logroller]

We had a chance to place that ban in effect last November, but more takers showed up at the polls then the producers. Now we are f'd. What "prospective" gun legislation? Obama did an end-run around Congress and just signed it into law LR. and the ones he didn't sign will never make it through Congress. People see Dems are on track to simply take the guns. Like Obamacare - it's for their own goodthese
prospective new laws:

Require criminal background checks for all gun sales. (a.k.a. closing the "gun show loophole.")


Reinstate and strengthen the assault weapons ban.


Restore the 10-round limit on ammunition magazines.


Protect police by finishing the job of getting rid of armor-piercing bullets.


Give law enforcement additional tools to prevent and prosecute gun crime.


End the freeze on gun violence research.


Make our schools safer with more school resource officers and school counselors, safer climates, and better emergency response plans.


Help ensure that young people get the mental health treatment they need.


Ensure health insurance plans cover mental health benefits.

Have these been signed into new law? His executive orders aren't new laws; they're instructions and clarification on existing laws. There is a difference. Not saying he wouldn't use eo to legislate, but his recent activity hasn't risen to that level.

[red states rule]

these
prospective new laws:

Require criminal background checks for all gun sales. (a.k.a. closing the "gun show loophole.")


Reinstate and strengthen the assault weapons ban.


Restore the 10-round limit on ammunition magazines.


Protect police by finishing the job of getting rid of armor-piercing bullets.


Give law enforcement additional tools to prevent and prosecute gun crime.


End the freeze on gun violence research.


Make our schools safer with more school resource officers and school counselors, safer climates, and better emergency response plans.


Help ensure that young people get the mental health treatment they need.


Ensure health insurance plans cover mental health benefits.

Have these been signed into new law? His executive orders aren't new laws; they're instructions and clarification on existing laws. There is a difference. Not saying he wouldn't use eo to legislate, but his recent activity hasn't risen to that level.

They have a slim chance of passing Congress and please LR tell me how if any of these laws are passed why you think criminals will obey them and how any them will prevent future murders. Like most liberal ideas, you will end up harming the law abiding citizens you claim to want to help and protect

[logroller]

They have a slim chance of passing Congress and please LR tell me how if any of these laws are passed why you think criminals will obey them and how any them will prevent future murders. Like most liberal ideas, you will end up harming the law abiding citizens you claim to want to help and protect
Just for the same of argument? Because I don't believe it will have an appreciable effect. It may be have some effect, but only draconian laws will have the intended effect. I'm not a liberal, nor are they my ideas--I'm merely explaining things as I understand them. I understand both sides' arguments; and I favor no new gun laws. Please don't make your arguments with false attributions; its counterproductive.

[PostmodernProphet]

had a conversation at the supper table last night about guns......except for the 410 shotgun I inherited when my dad passed I have never had a gun or considered getting one......lately I have begun to think that I ought to get one simply because someday I might be prevented from having one.......my wife was shocked and wanted to know why......I told her I wanted it so she could shoot me if I ever went senile.....

[red states rule]

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/gmc10651820130117040100.jpg

[PostmodernProphet]

so I stopped today at a gun shop and shooting range in Grand Rapids, Michigan because a buddy told me they carried a lot of used handguns........there had to have been between 100 and 150 people there.......there was an hour and a half wait to use the shooting range.....I asked a person who was waiting to shoot if this was typical and he said that two months ago you could come on a Saturday and there would be five people there....

anyway, it was not a good day to ask clerks questions so I will raise it here......been looking at guns for home defense on the internet and I saw something that looked interesting......its a Smith and Wesson Governor revolver that can fire either 45 caliber or .410 shotgun shells.....the thought struck me that one could load the first two chambers with 410 bird shot and the other four with 45s......if the first two shots weren't enough to discourage a home invader, your next shots would solve the problem......granted most of you have more experience with guns than I do....am I being foolish?.......

by the way, this is one of the reasons I have started considering owning a gun.....
http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2013/01/kentwood_couple_killed_in_thei.html

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

so I stopped today at a gun shop and shooting range in Grand Rapids, Michigan because a buddy told me they carried a lot of used handguns........there had to have been between 100 and 150 people there.......there was an hour and a half wait to use the shooting range.....I asked a person who was waiting to shoot if this was typical and he said that two months ago you could come on a Saturday and there would be five people there....

anyway, it was not a good day to ask clerks questions so I will raise it here......been looking at guns for home defense on the internet and I saw something that looked interesting......its a Smith and Wesson Governor revolver that can fire either 45 caliber or .410 shotgun shells.....the thought struck me that one could load the first two chambers with 410 bird shot and the other four with 45s......if the first two shots weren't enough to discourage a home invader, your next shots would solve the problem......granted most of you have more experience with guns than I do....am I being foolish?.......

by the way, this is one of the reasons I have started considering owning a gun.....
http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2013/01/kentwood_couple_killed_in_thei.html

My home, I want the first shots to be lethal. You may only get those so why chance it? Also why wound a criminal that can then come back to sue you. Dead they tend not to sue so much. ;). Something to consider..
Man in my home uninvited I will assume he is there to do murder.

[PostmodernProphet]

killing someone isn't on my bucket list, but I do want to keep someone from killing my family.....

[red states rule]

and the liberal media expresses its dismay over the right to bear arms
Appearing in his role as regular panel member on Friday's Inside Washington on PBS, Politico's Evan Thomas -- formerly of Newsweek -- made known his view that the Second Amendment was meant to be "limited to muskets," but went on to undermine the talk of more gun laws as a "side show" as he asserted that "it's a diversion from what we really need to do, which is deal with bigger issues like debt and climate and things that politicians don't want to deal with."

At one point during the discussion of gun control, liberal columnist Mark Shields suggested taxing bullets to make them more expensive like the governnent did with cigarettes:
It wasn't just simply the culture and the glamour. They put a cost on it. We ought to put a cost on ammunition. We ought to put a tax on that. Cop-killer bullets ought to be prohibitively expensive.
Host Gordon Peterson read the text of the Second Amendment and queried:
Does that speak to the right of security of the nation through a well-regulated defense establishment? Or is it a green light for some guy in Upstate New York to outfit his garage like an armory?
Thomas responded:
I think it was limited to muskets myself, but the Supreme Court differs on this. They have basically upheld the Second Amendment. It does offer real protection to gun owners. And it makes this somewhat of a moot issue. I think this is mostly for show right now.

And I think it's a diversion -- I'm all for gun control, but I don't think it's going to happen -- it's a diversion from what we really need to do, which is deal with bigger issues like debt and climate and things that politicians don't want to deal with. It's a side show.


Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2013/01/20/politicos-thomas-views-2nd-amendment-limited-muskets-views-debate-sid#ixzz2IexcvTfY