Gun sales Surge in Anticipation of a Democratic Presidency by AnthonyT

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Gun sales Surge in Anticipation of a Democratic Presidency

POSTED BY: ANTHONYT
UPDATED: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 16:39
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1509
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 4:12 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/11/11/obama.gun.sales/index.html

Hello,

I also have some concern over what the next 4-8 years might bring in terms of gun law changes. If I had more money, I'd probably purchase a couple of the firearms I've been putting off for years.

None of my current firearms are likely to be affected by any sort of firearms ban (unless one is enacted that bans all firearms.) My most advanced piece of firearms technology is 50 years old, and my favorite pieces have design specs from the 19th century. On the other hand, I've always wanted an AK-47, and that's the sort of gun that the Democrats are likely to want to ban.

Unlike some people, I'm not particularly concerned that he's going to jump into office and immediately start banning guns. However, if any of his major initiatives stall, he may fall back on the 'safe bet' initiatives like 'common sense gun control' in order to rack up some points in the 'win column.' Claiming that you are protecting people from gun crime can be a great PR move, just like claiming to protect people from terrorism. It's the sort of Easy Win he might fall back on if he can't get his way on the important stuff.

And I really don't want to see AK-47's become expensive again, or the 7.62 Russian ammo become unaffordable. In fact, the latter would be especially tragic, since my SKS would end up collecting dust instead of performing its sacred duty of putting holes in chilli cans at 100 paces.

And honestly, the deployable bayonet puts the right amount of fear into a tin of Bush's Beans.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 6:19 PM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
None of my current firearms are likely to be affected by any sort of firearms ban (unless one is enacted that bans all firearms.)

That will never happen. The second amendment will not be overturned. I know it's something people freak out over, but it will not happen.
I think so long as someone is properly trained, they should be allowed to own any gun they please. If they're not trained, the risk is too high for injury. I know we all heard what happened when an eight year old fired an uzi. Just like one needs a special license to drive, say, a massive hazardous material truck. I don't think that's so unreasonable, but I'm sure I will be violently disagreed with on even that.

For the record, I've been firing guns since I was twelve. I very much enjoy it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 6:26 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Ah, so Obama has already stimulated the economy!

Anthony - If you've got your eye on an AK variant, it would be prudent to buy soon. Not right now, because prices are stupid-high due to "election fever", but probably within the next 6 months would be a safe bet. Think of it as an investment if it helps justify the cost.

Honestly, though, your SKS is every bit as good as an AK, and possibly even more accurate. Never understood why the SKS doesn't get any love...

Some places are already gouging on ammo prices. I've seen prices go from under $200/1000 rounds of 7.62x39 ammo to over $300/1000 at some places, on the fears that Obama will, before he's even sworn into office, ban all guns and ammo outright.

In truth, I'd say be prepared for SOME form of the old Assault Weapons Ban. There's an expanded version of it that was introduced in June of '08 - introduced and sponsored by four REPUBLICAN Congressmen, no less! It seemed like it was doomed to die in committee, but it may rear its head again.

It would probably be a mistake for Democrats to go after gun control or banning certain types of firearms too quickly. It didn't work out well for them in 1994, leading to the "Republican Revolution" that handed control of both houses of Congress to the Republicans in that year's elections.

Mike

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 6:29 PM

KWICKO

PR, I'm pretty much right with ya.

People who fear the outright banning of all guns simply don't understand how government works. The Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear, and the ONLY way to outright overturn that is to pass a Constitutional amendment to do so. That's something that just isn't going to happen.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 6:42 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I don't think there's support for banning firearms altogether currently. I do think there may be support for 'well regulating' me away from some firearms I'd like to own.

I don't mind requiring people to show competence in firearm safety if we include firearm safety courses in the High School curriculum as an elective, free of charge. (With night courses available for adults who have already graduated.)

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 7:53 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Don't kid yourself. It's not the impending grab and take of all the citizens guns that's starting the run at the gun shops, it's the inevitable race war.

PirateNews should have us informed on the details, any day now.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 9:55 PM

OUT2THEBLACK

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Don't kid yourself. It's not the impending grab and take of all the citizens guns that's starting the run at the gun shops, it's the inevitable race war.

PirateNews should have us informed on the details, any day now.

Which brings to fore , the question , " Just where is Pirate News nowadays ? "

The silence is oddly prolonged...

Did he offend the wrong folk and get sidelined ?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 2:46 AM

KWICKO

SSSSHHHHHHHHH!!!

Dammit, you're going to jinx it!

Enjoy the silence.

Ooo - Race war... Is next Thursday good for you? I'll have to pencil that in on my dayplanner... how's 2:00 work? It's always best to show up 15 minutes early, just in case. Race wars TRY to be punctual, but it may take a little longer to get everyone in.

Oh, and we better figure out how we're choosing sides. Is it going to be whites against non-whites, or just white/black, or what? Shirts and skins? Where do the Hispanics fit in? Asians? American Indians?

There's just so much planning that goes into a race war!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 9:40 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by out2theblack:
Which brings to fore , the question , " Just where is Pirate News nowadays ? "

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=081112174804.5qqnwk3u&show_art
icle=1

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 10:14 AM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Quote:
Originally posted by out2theblack:
" Just where is Pirate News nowadays ? "

Did he offend the wrong folk and get sidelined ?

Maybe he felt like there was too much competition here for "paranoid, hysterical, racist nutjob with the very occasional point who posts way, way too many garbage threads."
Been a few people here giving him a run for his 'illegally seized Ron Paul silver dollars' so to speak.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 10:52 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

PN sometimes goes away for long periods of time to do whatever he does in the RW.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:28 AM

OUT2THEBLACK

Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:

Maybe he felt like there was too much competition here for "paranoid, hysterical, racist nutjob with the very occasional point who posts way, way too many garbage threads."
Been a few people here giving him a run for his 'illegally seized Ron Paul silver dollars' so to speak.

Now , that's just Crazy Talk !

Every reasonable person hereabouts knows there's no rational reason to feel that way...

Yanno , last thing I recall from him was , he said he wanted to get some Nooky-Lur Sunglasses so's he could enjoy our country's BRIGHT Future !

,

Small Additional Charge for Adirondack Chair...

http://www.pnwx.com/Accessories/LeadProducts/Eyewear/Goggles/

Turns out , you have to get clip-on shades fitted for these to get the maximum flash-shielding effect , but the important thing is , the high Lead content of the glass...Helps protect the tender eyeballs from the radiation...

Also , I think he wanted to have plenty of rounds for the scattergun...I figure he's gone on a gun-run , probably caused the spike in ammo sales , too...

Hey , P-R , since you like doing difficult research , see if you can track down the Loose Nukes so we can get a Tyranny Response Unit to secure 'em...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 12:38 PM

WHOZIT

http://piratenews.org The truth is out there...somewhere.

I'm going to microwave a bagel and have sex with it - Peter Griffin

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:18 PM

FREMDFIRMA

He's out rakin the muck, like IMHO, he should be.

I don't agree nor give credence to much of what he says, but were I you, I'd not discount it entire, either - in fact they did unlawfully seize assets from the folk who make Liberty Dollars, and many of the other things he goes on about, but he thinks it's all one great conspiracy - but as I have said before, just cause crabs march in lockstep doesn't make em a hive mind.

Nasty, greedy, immoral people with a narrow thought process always react the same to the same stimulus, it's not coordination, just cause and effect.

As for guns, nah, they won't outright ban, no - they'll just nibble away chip by chip until it has the same affect, or pound away with lawsuits and taxes like they do tobacco, prohibition via taxation or by slowly crushing the production under the weight of downright frivolous lawsuits.

And regardless of how folk have overblown it a bit, there IS cause for concern especially if one is observant of events in the UK, don't blind yourself to real possibilities just because they're too awful or ridiculous to contemplate, cause those two things have never stopped Government from DOIN em, have they ?

To pretend it cannot happen, is to allow and invite it - simply remain vigilant, and loudly oppositional, and keep one boot solidly in the ass of your representatives, pushing them out of the seat if needs be.

Because those that wish to take from us, that want us to sit down, shut up and OBEY - they don't have our best interests in mind, never did, never will, folks.

"Every advance in human life, every scrap of knowledge and wisdom and decency we have has been torn by one side from the teeth of the other. Every little increase in human freedom has been fought over ferociously between those who want us to know more and be wiser and stronger, and those who want us to obey and be humble and submit"
- Philip Pullman The Subtle Knife

I got no problem with the manufacturers of weapons requiring some proof of training as a condition of sale in exchange for immunity from the endless barrage of lawsuits, but I damn sure have a problem with Government making decisions like that - you can follow Jim March's work for just how viciously they've abused that from the moment they got their hooks into it.

As for the rest, been there, done that, stated my position often enough that it don't need repeatin, I hope, cause I get damn sick and tired of doing so, or watching folks lie about it.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:02 PM

PHOENIXROSE

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
in fact they did unlawfully seize assets from the folk who make Liberty Dollars

Because it's not legal for a party other than the federal government to make currency. If they hadn't claimed it was currency they would have been fine. This argument has been done to death, though, and you clearly have your stand on it and I can respect that.

Quote:
To pretend it cannot happen, is to allow and invite it - simply remain vigilant, and loudly oppositional

I'm not pretending anything. I do plan to remain oppositional to anything I see as unreasonable when it comes to guns, as does the vast majority of the country. I'm just using my sense here. Guns won't be banned because they won't be allowed to be banned. People like their guns. I am one of those people. They're not going anywhere.

Quote:
I got no problem with the manufacturers of weapons requiring some proof of training as a condition of sale in exchange for immunity from the endless barrage of lawsuits, but I damn sure have a problem with Government making decisions like that

Okay, just try to remember that I'm on your side here, but the government made the decision to require a license to drive, and it hasn't caused any problems for the auto industry. Anyone capable of operating a vehicle who wants to can do so, they just need to prove they have a reasonable handle on how it works and aren't too terribly likely to kill someone. If they do kill someone, there's consequence for that, as there should be. If they injure someone, there's consequence for that, too, and it can result in loss of their license to drive. I do not see this as unreasonable. Licensing for deadly things makes sense to me. A gun is just as deadly as a car. More, really, since guns are by their nature designed for killing. Both have a WAY lower accident rate when used by those who have been taught to use them properly. Widely available classes on gun safety would result in a lower accidental death count. Showing you could handle a gun safely, check if it was loaded, properly load and unload, basically prove you're not terribly likely to kill someone, and getting a license to own and operate firearms, would not really be the terrible thing some people seem to think.
I believe the fear is that it wouldn't be handled in a similar way to cars. I personally can't picture another way it could be handled, but many that I've talked to about it seem to have the idea that if they're required to get a license, it will make it easier for government to take their guns away. So long as you don't kill anyone, I see no reason to fear this, but it seems to be the fear.
But no one has tried to take away our cars. (and if they did we could run them over) Just something to think about.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 13, 2008 1:01 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Oh we're about 90% on the same page, PR, in spite of my much fouler disposition, we usually are, to be honest... and damn ye for stealin my thunder in the prop8 thread too!

But stuff like this, bothers me a bit...

Quote:
Guns won't be banned because they won't be allowed to be banned.

And seizing someones children and trying to strip custody permanently simply cause of their religious beliefs, however ridiculous, wasn't allowed either.

That did not stop them, people like me did.

I am just sayin that vigilance is a good idea when facing folks who's *admitted* intention is an outright ban, slowly chipping away at any piece they can get - that ain't right, and I will fight em for every chip, every step of the way.

I am not greatly oppositional to the IDEA of licensing or similar qualification in order to pack heat, hell it's only sensible that if you wish to possess and use a powerful, dangerous tool that you know how to use it properly, be it a circular saw or a pistol, it's all the same principle with me, you see...

It's that the Government has proven repeatedly that they cannot be trusted not to abuse or misuse that scheme (See Also: Jim March) to deny people a Constitutional Right, every time anything of that nature has reared it's head the result has been the same, so I have a hard time expecting that it would necessarily be different this time around.

What I would LIKE to see, is the manufacturers and distributors get their shit together, and make licensing or training with completion cert a condition of sale - no proof, no sale, right ?

Would work about the same way, and would invite folks to open up that market for accredation, competitive courses, pricing and skill levels.

AND it would end the flood of pointless lawsuits aimed at economic destruction of what amounts in the end, in my opinion, to a tool industry - might as well sue craftsman blind cause someone knocked off someone else with a hammer, it's ludicrous.

So, I am completely cool with the idea, I just don't want it in the hands of the alphabet goons who I wouldn't trust to make a sandwich unsupervised, and have historically displayed so much disrespect for the american people, their rights, and especially their privacy, no.

That's like asking the sleaziest sheriff of the most corrupt wild west town to watch your horse while you go drinking - only a fool would expect it to be there when they get back.

Oh, and FYI, in order to "pass" the road test up here, given by a Govt sponsored testing company, I had to pay a bribe - they set it up so it was unpassable if they wanted it to be, more or less a rigged test, and only some long green changing hands will get a passing score.

So you can imagine after that experience, when I had to get an in-state license after moving here... the idea of putting weapon licensing in the same folks hands... just.. no.

But I am all for the IDEA, mind you.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 13, 2008 8:58 AM

ELVISCHRIST

Okay, I'm late to this thread, and haven't had a chance to catch up yet, but I wanted to respond to this:

Quote:

I believe the fear is that it wouldn't be handled in a similar way to cars. I personally can't picture another way it could be handled, but many that I've talked to about it seem to have the idea that if they're required to get a license, it will make it easier for government to take their guns away. So long as you don't kill anyone, I see no reason to fear this, but it seems to be the fear.

PhoenixRose, we're largely on the same page, and I'm definitely not trying to start a war with anyone over this topic, but if you don't get what "the fear" is over this approach, you need to do some deep digging into concealed-carry laws, NFA Class III permits, and the differences inherent between "shall issue" and "may issue" wording in the various states' laws governing such things.

We're talking about people who have met every single requirement to be allowed to have a concealed-carry (or eve open-carry in some areas) permit, yet who still can't get that permit, because their local CLEO (Chief Law Enforcement Officer, usually the county sheriff) won't sign off on it and issue the permit.

And THAT is what the fear is all about - that you'll do everything legally required, and your government will then say, "Thanks, but we've decided not to issue you a permit. And we're not required to explain why or allow you to appeal that decision."

And these people only fear that happening, because it is in fact happening.

Sad but true.

If the prefix "pro-" means "for" or "in favor of", and "con" is its opposite, and if "progress" means "pushing forward" or "improving"... then what the hell does "Congress" mean?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 13, 2008 9:15 AM

ERIC

Hey Anthony, you might want to check out a Romanian WASR-10 imported by Century Arms. It's made essentially out of spare AK parts, then modded to take a double stack mag and have the required minimum amount of US-made components (trigger group, pistol grip, bayonet lug, etc). Only thing is its semi-auto only, but with the price of ammo, thats not necessarily a bad thing. Saw one for $350 at a show last June, though the stock needed polishing.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:07 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by Eric:
Hey Anthony, you might want to check out a Romanian WASR-10 imported by Century Arms. It's made essentially out of spare AK parts, then modded to take a double stack mag and have the required minimum amount of US-made components (trigger group, pistol grip, bayonet lug, etc). Only thing is its semi-auto only, but with the price of ammo, thats not necessarily a bad thing. Saw one for $350 at a show last June, though the stock needed polishing.

A few points.

1) They're ALL semi-auto - at least the ones you can legally buy and own without a Class III permit.

2) Good luck finding a WASR (I'm told the acronym stands for "What A Shitty Rifle" - but I've not found them to be bad) for anywhere close to $350 these days. Most places seem to be pulling closer to $550 for them right now (because of fear and gouging). Some of the older Century Arms stuff had a bad rap, but they seem to have gotten much better, and the WASR isn't nearly the cheap piece-o-crap they used to be viewed as.

3) The wood stocks on WASRs always look like that - unpolished, unfinished, and very un-pretty. I refer to them as "Fisher-Price 'My First Rifle Stocks'" because they look so cheaply made. But they work fine, and they can be polished and finished to look great.

If you're dead set on an AK variant, you could do a lot worse than a Saiga 7.62x39mm. Typical prices when you can find them in stock range from $299 for a bone-stock "sporter" version with a Monte Carlo (traditional hunting rifle) stock, up to $650 or so for a fully-converted AK-74 semi-auto clone. Lots and lots of people are doing conversions themselves, but I haven't worked up the nerve yet.

Also, a Norinco (Chinese-built) MAK-90 (Modernized AK - 1990 version) is a very well-built version to have. I walked out of a pawn shop with a very lightly-used example a couple months ago for $400. If anything, it's more accurate and well-built than my Saiga.

If you're considering getting something like these, I'd look into doing it in the next 6 months or so, but NOT the next week, because prices are artificially inflated right now because of all the hysteria - and the more news stories you see, the more people want to rush out and buy up whatever they can find. Let the furor die down a bit, and many of those people will likely be selling cheap. ;)

Mike

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, November 13, 2008 2:36 PM

KWICKO

Oh, and Eric? Don't take any of that the wrong way. I'm not bagging on the WASR, just throwing out a couple things to think about.

Personally, I'd love to have a WASR, because I like my AKs, and there's really no such thing as "too many guns", right?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 14, 2008 1:37 AM

FREMDFIRMA

You know, Mikey... life is funny sometimes, and here I thought I'd have no use for the gunsafe that guy was trying to pawn off on me...
(get me to haul away for free, more like!)

I dunno so much about too many guns....

But I do know about ENOUGH gun.

And THIS...
*strokes Fourquet lovingly*

Got her back late last night, she was nice before, but now she's like my every gun fantasy all rolled into one - a veritable mutant Ak-47/SPAS-12/Thompson M1928 all rolled into a single handy package.

Yes virginia, there IS "enough gun"...
And I'm holding it.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 14, 2008 4:58 PM

KWICKO

Hehehehehh...

Y'know, I figured you'd like the S12. It just SEEMS so much like you - blunt, to the point, no fucking around, and hella dangerous when screwed with! In other words, the one weapon you'd definitely want on your side, and the last thing you'd want the other guy to have.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, November 14, 2008 10:32 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Well, I think the inscription laser engraved down the right side of the barrel in Corsiva script is a nice touch too.

"Je mangerai vos yeux"

Gave the RO a case of the twitches, that did.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 15, 2008 5:27 AM

KWICKO

I think I'd have gone with "It eats you, starting with your bottom."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 15, 2008 9:59 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Oh hell no, first shot goes right to the top of the seven-ring.

Overlay a standard open choke single-O blast pattern on that aimpoint and you'll see why.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 15, 2008 10:18 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"Je mangerai vos yeux"

I'm going to eat your eyes ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, November 15, 2008 1:21 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Yes - it's the battlecry of Arya Stark, and appropriate in a way that's almost eerie once you think on it and realize a certain commonality of cause and intentions.

And once he gets back from overseas in January, imma have him do "ego mos trado hic" on the other side, Latin: "I shall commit heresy."

Normally I don't bother with such decoration, as they are just tools, but this particular beast is such a horror that I feel a pointed reminder is necessarity to everyone who views it, including me, that it's purpose entails something awful and should be reserved only for when there is no other option.

To do otherwise, would be irresponsible.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, November 16, 2008 10:58 PM

SHINYGOODGUY

I wonder who's instilling FEAR in the hearts of men....could it be OBAMA?

Yes, he's going to take your guns away and here's how he'll do it.

The United States Constitution is unusually difficult to amend. As spelled out in Article V, the Constitution can be amended in one of two ways. First, amendment can take place by a vote of two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and the Senate followed by a ratification of three-fourths of the various state legislatures (ratification by thirty-eight states would be required to ratify an amendment today).

Hey, wait a minute, the above says that Obama, even if he is the Prez, or any one man cannot change (or amend) the Constitution. That's FUNNY....Ms. Palin, Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. O'Reilly and others said he would change that law all by his lonesome. Why would they tell a lie that wasn't true?

There's a reason for all the hype of FEAR that's going around. Don't just take their word for it. Question and investigate!

Race War? Please give me a break. Don't believe the hype! They're doing the magician's trick, you know sleight of hand. They get you watching one hand, while they do the trick in the other.

"Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 17, 2008 12:22 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Nah, they'll just ban each piece individually, so that no one can make one, or tax them into prohibitive expense, or ban critical components, or tax ammunition makers out of business...

Any number of ways to subvert the Constitution....

IF we let em.

I simply do not intend to - as stated above, I am all for licensing/training with proof as condition of sale, that's fine...

But trusting the Government with such a thing given their past behavior regarding it would be damned foolish, they are the poorest known caretaker of such things, as History shows.

A piece of that history is Jim Crow laws, for example - our Gov has a history of not respecting it's own Constitution until forced to with threat of violence in hand.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws

Mere protest, ha! get back in your free speech zone, or we'll taser you, and you might get real lucky and catch "Excited Delerium" since the taser is too "safe" to kill you, even when we zap you eighteen times in the chest cavity...

It's always, always been the inherent threat of violence behind a protest, that has ever made the protest work, it's a civilised attempt to say "Please listen to us, so it doesn't have to get rough" - even european royalty feared the wrath of the serfs for that very reason.

A protest without it is just a laughable comedy and means to show those peons their place, like in Florida, aka The Miami Model (google it).
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1125-13.htm

Oddly enough, it's that very force behind it that ensures things REMAIN civilized, because as soon as you remove it, they get ugly - either it winds up a farce as the protestors get crushed, or things become so desperate it ALL comes apart and you get something like South Africa.

So I'd be damned careful in protecting that element, mind you.

It's still useless without the will of the people behind it though, cause the weapon itself is just an inanimate tool incapable of any action of it's own.

But if the tool is gone, without the means, the will soon follows.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 17, 2008 3:13 AM

KWICKO

Frem:

Just waking up, so I haven't really thought this through at all, but something just hit me...

What about a "tiered" system of licensing and instruction, where the more instruction and certification you pass, the higher the class of weapons you're allowed to own?

Pass a "Class One", for example, and you're cleared for a revolver and/or bolt-action rifle. "Class Two" gets you cleared for a semi-auto up to, say, a .50 caliber. "Class Three" certification would allow you to own fully automatic weapons such as REAL Uzis, AK-47s, and the like.

Just an idea, and it would HAVE to be very carefully worded. No "may issue" phrasing, no subjective tests and certifications - if you pass the tests and pass the background check, you WILL be allowed to buy and own the weapons you're qualified for.

Anyway, just something to ponder...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 2:12 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Works for me, a lot of methods do, BUT!

Not in the Governments hands - they cannot be trusted, they've PROVEN they cannot be trusted with it, so many times over and over that anyone proposing the idea of doing so is going to get from me the same reaction as proposing an outright ban.

Do you let the town drunk drive your car ?
The local pervert babysit your children ?

I mean, come ON Mikey, after so many times they've betrayed that trust, the mere suggestion that we hand it to em again is actually pretty damned offensive, innit ?

I am all-ok with it, but ONLY AS A CONDITION OF SALE IMPOSED BY THE MANUFACTURER, period.

In fact, that is completely legal, logically sensible, some immunity to lawsuit, and not an "infringement" cause it's a business to person transaction not involving the FedGov beyond paying them their cut.

The purpose of gun laws has nothing whatever to do with crime or safety, never did - that's about control, and THAT rests in the same idiotic and ludicrous mental territory as the thought that a "gun free zone" will stop a perp bent on a killing spree followed by suicide.

See how well that "magic wall" works in practice ?

Well, for all the claims that Gov would behave, and not do exactly the same fuckin thing they have every single time before - those claims are made by the same folk who believe the "magic wall" will stop a perp cold, you understand me ?

I don't trust the Gov, and I don't trust nutters who believe that laws are a supernatural force impossible to disobey neither.

Not that I am hugely fond of manufacturers, but they DO wanna sell you a piece, and they DO want some insulation from being sued for it - thus making the concept I expressed an optimal, although imperfect, solution.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 1:44 PM

KWICKO

Quote:

The purpose of gun laws has nothing whatever to do with crime or safety, never did - that's about control, and THAT rests in the same idiotic and ludicrous mental territory as the thought that a "gun free zone" will stop a perp bent on a killing spree followed by suicide.

See how well that "magic wall" works in practice ?

Yup, a "gun free zone" only guarantees that if you have a gun, you'll be the only armed sumbitch in the area, so you're free to do as you please...

I'm okay with manufacturers doing licensing and instruction, IF it can be enforced that they actually DO the damn job, and not just write down a "pass" on the form so they can hurry up and take your money.

The problem area I see there is akin to putting driver's licensing in the hands of the automakers. They have a vested interest in making sure you pass so they can sell you what you want, whereas the problem with government doing it is, they have a vested interest in making sure you DON'T pass for some reason or other, so they can keep you from buying what you want.

Somewhere is a middle ground and a compromise, but where?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 4:39 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Easy one, that...

Never said to let the manufacturers OR the Gov do the testing - there's plenty of classes out there independant of either, and we already have a minimum criteria in basic CCW requirements.

Just get the manufacturers to require a cert from one of em as condition of sale, problem solved.

And since they're already in place, and state-specific since each state has slightly variant lethal force laws, nothing new needs be constructed, we already have an existing framework already in place if we only use it.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE