Gun sales are on the rise

[bjl584]

At least one sector of the economy is doing well.

Top Stocks Blog - MSN Money

[Broken Arrow]

Hehe. Yeah, firearm-related sales have been going through the roof since... October maybe? Just because of fear from Obama's gun-control policies. Especially ammo. Supposedly, Wal-mart's entire national supply has already been sold out.

In fact, I was just talking to a gun enthusiast earlier this morning, and he talked about how he decided to "invest" in 6 ARs, which he believes he bought at a good price, and can sell later for a much higher price.

That said, I do think this industry is now inflated with a bubble of sorts. When you think about it, it's over-bought based on some kind of fear. It's just as well because, although I have "profited" in the past from it, this is one commodity trading I just don't care to dabble in.

[zakity]

Yeah, a portion of the "gun people" are concerned because of Obama. He likes gun control. Look what he did to Illinois and their gun laws.

I do not need that where I live. There is no real police protection here and it takes them like 15 minutes to respond. And, they advertised in the Oregonian (major newspaper) on the front page, that this county has no sheriffs on duty between 10 pm and 10 am. So, people who live in the county are pretty much on their own. If the gun laws go stricter, how do I protect my children?

And, you know, the police do not have to respond to your emergency (by law, there have been court cases where they said that they aren't required to). That totally does not make me feel safe. Having the ability to have a weapon makes me feel safe. I can defend myself if someone comes into my home uninvited. And, I don't have to call 911 and then wonder when or if someone will come to help me.

[sweeps]

Some things should be legislated at the national level; some things should be legislated at the local level. Gun laws should be dealt with at the local level (not even necessarily the state level). What is appropriate for Montana may not be appropriate for Rhode Island. What is appropriate for NYC may not be appropriate for upstate New York. What is appropriate for southern California may not be appropriate for northern California.

And the issue here is about concealed weapons, right? I don't think there should be any dispute that you should be allowed to own a (registered) gun for protection on your own property. Now carrying around a concealed weapon in public areas, however, is not appropriate in all areas.

zakity, if you're in a remote area and the police cannot respond to an emergency call in a reasonable amount of time I would consider that a good case for more relaxed local gun laws.

[GREENBACK]

This administration is very anti-gun and when they took over it was like yelling fire in a crowded theater to gun owners. There's too much on their plate to do a lot right now but eventually they'll focus on this.

People should assume responsibilty for their own safety just as they should for finances or anything else critical to survival. Calling the police or assuming you can beat a gun with a baseball bat is taking a chance that luck is really on your side.

[EEinNJ]

I bought a small amount of Smith & Wesson last year just to dabble. I'm enjoying the pop this week but it's still way down from where it was. It's a small-cap, volatile stock, and they haven't been doing very well. I love the old revolvers, but the modern versions don't have the quality reputation they used to.

The laws here in NJ are already stricter than the Fed AWB was. It's too bad people in this country are so afraid of each other and the government that they feel the need to stock up on weapons. You can only shoot one at a time, anyway, and if you really had to defend yourself, if you needed more than 1 magazine full of ammo you'd be in deep doo-doo.

[Broken Arrow]

The laws here in NJ are already stricter than the Fed AWB was. It's too bad people in this country are so afraid of each other and the government that they feel the need to stock up on weapons. You can only shoot one at a time, anyway, and if you really had to defend yourself, if you needed more than 1 magazine full of ammo you'd be in deep doo-doo.

Yeah, NJ is a whole 'nother world. I have a friend who was once active military (but Coast Guard) and could not qualify a firearm license there. Eventually became State Trooper, and only THEN was he finally allowed to own firearms, but only for work purposes. He says that being anything less is next to impossible.

As for the self-defense comment, I can't resist not commenting.... You see, some people such as myself simply enjoy shooting. Yes, even if it is an emphasis towards self-defense, it is mostly for the hobby of it, not necessarily out of paranoia against the government or that eccentric old neighbor, Herbert, down the road.

The problem with the regulation being described here is that it is a fine-- and a potentially heavy one at that-- against law-abiding, tax-paying firearm owners who follow the law and will almost never cause any troubles. All the while, the lawless will always have illegal avenues to purchase their firearms.

Personally, I do believe in some common sense regulation, such as making the completion of NRA's basic safety training course mandatory, before being permitted to purchase any firearms. But beyond a certain point, more regulation will not bring us closer to a more peaceful society.

[GREENBACK]

Personally, I do believe in some common sense regulation, such as making the completion of NRA's basic safety training course mandatory, before being permitted to purchase any firearms. But beyond a certain point, more regulation will not bring us closer to a more peaceful society.

Therein lies the problem. There are plenty of laws on the books that in theory should keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Criminals don't follow these laws(surprise!). Law abiding citizens do. Anti-gun politicians want more laws when the laws on the books aren't enforced. If outlawing guns worked I believe NYC, D.C., and Chicago would be the most safe places to live in America since they have the most stringent laws. What it amounts to in these areas is that it's only the criminals that are armed. Oh yeah, these same politicians that disarm the citizenry have armed personal protection in most cases.

What you descibe as common sense regulations won't happen because they want guns outlawed period and will only agree to things that lead to that end and they have the voting record to prove it.

[Broken Arrow]

Well, the particular regulations I am in favor of-- such as the one I've mentioned above-- deal more with improving firearm safety and the general skill level of law-abiding gun folks, not to keep it out of the hands of criminals per se.

The desire and even the necessity to improve safety and gun handling skills has never been a bad idea. I can't even begin to tell you how many yahoos I've come across shooting guns that I thought they were going to hurt themselves, or worse, me! Nevermind even hitting the target. And all that simply because there is no regulation in place for... the requirement of passing the NRA's own basic firearm safety course.

Right now, at best, gun ranges only make up their own rules about passing a written exam.... But that's only if you plan to shoot on their range. You don't need ANY training, even safety training, if you're only there to buy a gun. And that's the part that doesn't sit well with me.

Of course, I don't disagree with you that many law makers go well beyond that, marching towards the outright ban of firearms. That part isn't common sense to me, and it's ultimately an exercise in futility.

[zakity]

You can only shoot one at a time, anyway, and if you really had to defend yourself, if you needed more than 1 magazine full of ammo you'd be in deep doo-doo

That is why you have extra magazines full and at the ready. And, as for lots of weapons, you need to have a 22 for plinking, your IWB carry weapon, your OWB carry weapon, and you need a few larger ones just for "target practice" on a block of ice (ie, just for destructive purposes).


Someone said something about the people who don't go practice enough. I do agree that some people should not own weapons. I can think of a few guys who suffer from SPS (small, um..., male body part that starts with a "p" syndrome). I just want to tap them on the forehead and tell them that a larger weapon does not make it grow.

Most of the people I know who keep firearms around, go target practicing regularly. Actually, all the discussions about their groupings can be sort of funny. Most get then all in the little circle in the middle. I would not want to meet them in a dark alley if I had bad intentions in my head.