Wal-Mart Says to Stop Selling AR-15, Other Rifles
Source: Reuters
(Reuters) - Wal-Mart Stores says it will stop selling the AR-15 and other modern sports rifles at its stores due to sluggish demand.
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2015/08/26/business/26reuters-wal-mart-stores-rifles.html?src=busln&_r=0
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,314 posts)... the sales of shotguns.
aikoaiko
(34,153 posts)
former9thward
(31,913 posts)Walmart is always accused of destroying small stores in the area. This will help small gun store sales.
aikoaiko
(34,153 posts)
former9thward
(31,913 posts)I have never been good at puns.
JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,314 posts)
sarisataka
(18,465 posts)
ellisonz
(27,711 posts)...that it just got a little harder for them to slaughter people.
ileus
(15,396 posts)beevul
(12,194 posts)Just get an anti-gun politician to mention an assault weapon ban, that will fix the sluggish demand.
ellisonz
(27,711 posts)Sadly there are millions of yahoos with these murder machines.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)
Roy Rolling
(6,905 posts)Gotta run out an pick me up a few freedom fighters before those commies at Wal-Mart are forced by Obama to stop selling guns. Because, you know. America. Freedom, and stuff. 
ileus
(15,396 posts)They sliced the prices on loads of their AR accessories and misc other related equipment, word spread on gun forums and facebook like wildfire. Everything was sold in a matter of days.
Our 3 local WMs have a few scattered optics and stocks rails and other junk no one has a use for, but all the actually useful accessories are gone.
OldRedneck
(1,397 posts)A family member was convicted of a felony a couple of months ago. Before his trial, I convinced him to give me his guns because, if he had access to guns after his conviction, he would be in BIG trouble. He pissed and moaned about it but his wife told him to give me "the goddam guns." He was convicted and his wife told me to sell the guns.
He had an AR-15 with several accessories for which he had paid around $1,500. I tried to sell the gun at four local gun shops -- two were not interested, one offered very low price, the other one gave me $600 for it.
All four told me the bottom dropped out of the AR-15 market months ago. They all told me they have 2-3 people a week coming in, trying to sell back AR-15'S.
I'm thinking about all those fools like my relative who dropped $1,000 - $1,500 on a piece of shit they don't use, can't use, don't hunt, no use for it . . . and they are stuck with it.
WhiteHat
(129 posts)For a supposed reason that doesn't add up.
"Sluggish demand" is nonsense. Gun sales have never been better.
How sad that Walmart can't simply announce that it's the wrong thing to do, bad for society as a whole.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)As late as the 1960s, only 10% of all firearms sold were pistols, it is now 40% of the market (and that is NOT due to any drop in sales of Rifles and Shotguns, pistols have been the area of growth in the firearms industry).
Since the 1990s the firearm industry went crazy over AR-15 actions. Surprisingly not to many were sold, conventional rifles and shotguns out sold the AR-15 actions by a HUGE amount, but you could sell an AR-15 clone for $1000 to $1500 dollars, while a SKS were being sold for under $100 and AKs were being sold for $200 to $300 dollars (in between times when AKs were being banned from being imported). AKs today, are being sold for $600 to $1000 dollars, mostly due to importation of them were banned by Obama in 2014 over the fighting in the Ukraine.
Now, a barrel of a rifle last about 20,000 to 25,000 rounds before it has to be replaced. That sounds like a lot, and in the days of the Bolt Action Rifle it was. The Model 1903 Springfield could fire 14 rounds per minute. That is 140 rounds in a ten minute fire fight. In both Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, the US could get air cover within 15 minutes. Infantry units form WWII onward had artillery spotters with them so they could have Artillery fire support within 2 minutes of any combat (if the infantry was in range, and infantry were trained to stay within range of their fire support). Thus the typical infantryman carried with him only enough ammunition to operate in a fire fight of about 15 minutes (through I have heard of some infantrymen in Vietnam carrying up to 1000 rounds of ammunition on them for use in combat).
Now, in the days of the Bolt Action Rifle, the soldiers trained on them weekly, so that they would be good shots. Thus 20 rounds a week for 52 weeks is 1040 a year. Thus after 20 years a bolt action rifle needs a new barrel for it had fired over 20,000 rounds by then (if fired weekly). When the M1 Rifle was adopted it increased the fire power to 30 rounds a minutes or 1560 rounds a week, thus it needed a new barrel in about 15 years of peace time training. The M16 in the semiautomatic mode, fires 40 rounds a minutes or 2080 rounds a year and thus needs a new barrel after 10 years of such use.
Please note, the above is assuming peace time shooting. In actual combat, these rates are exceeded. A M1903 soldier carried on him 50 rounds of ammunition. Once an infantryman used his 50 rounds of ammuntion he went back to his supply system and obtained more ammunition (Soldiers were also resupplied on line and ONLY went back themselves if the unit went back as a whole to get resupplied). 50 rounds a day for 30 days means 1500 rounds per month, thus after about a year of daily combat the M1903 needed a new barrel.
The M1 rifleman carried 80 rounds in 9 pouches and one in the M1. in 30 days of fighting with one fire fight a day, that comes to 2400 Rounds of ammunition per month, thus in less then 9 months of daily combat the M1 needed a new barrel (While the US had troops in North African and Italy in 1942 and 1943, the US main effort occurred after the invasion of Normandy, it appears that by the time the Germans surrendered in 1945, almost all of the M1 rifles in Europe had exceeded their barrel life, mostly because toward the end of the war the Soldiers demanded and fired Armor piecing ammunition, which wears out barrels faster then normal ammunition).
The AR-15 round, the 5.56x45 also wears out barrels, but it fires from a 30 round magazine and a typical soldier is suppose to have 260 rounds of ammunition in 13 magazines, 12 in pockets on the soldier the 13th in the rifle. Thus in combat, again assuming only one fire fight per day, you are looking at 7800 rounds a month, thus in two months of such combat the AR-15 needs a new barrel (this high rate of fire and the need replace barrels is one of the reasons many countries kept bolt action rifles in use till the 1960s, the other reason was that bolt actions rifles are more reliable then semi-automatic and automatic weapons).
US units have NOT seen 30 or more days of constant combat since Vietnam (and I am using the term combat to mean actual shooting occurring daily not fear of being in a combat zone). Thus we have NOT seen soldiers having to used rifles that need to be replaced (through a shortage was reported, forcing some units to use captured AKs).
Side note: When the M16 was adopted in 1964 to replace the M14, the US also closed down Springfield armory, where the M14 was produced. Thus when it was found that the M16 in actual combat was failing in the 1965-1966 period, the US had a problem, it had no weapons and no facility to make weapons to replace the non functioning M16s. The only weapon in stock was the WWII era M1, the M14s had been all assigned to the US Army in Europe OR already in Vietnam. Thus those early M16s had to be used till replacements could be made by Colt. Only when Colt had produced enough new M16 to replace those early M16s were those early M16s withdrawn and the problem with them fixed. (The US Army said the problem with the early M16s was a change in Ammunition, but that appears to be a cover story. The real reason appear to be that the early M16 had been purchased WITHOUT Parkerized chambers. Parkerization had been used in US weapons since the M1 and the Russian AKs and SKS always had Parkerized chambers, for such chambers help prevent rounds from jamming in the chamber. The main "Fix" was to give the M16 the same parkerized chambers, but that required them being returned to the US, something the US Army could not do in the 1965-1967 period until replacements had been made. This need to replace early M16s with newly made M16s was the reason the Ohio National Guard still had M1 rifles at Kent State).
My point is writing this is that these weapons do wear out with use. The AK was designed to be fired for 20,000 rounds and then junked (the AK could be rebuilt, but it is cheaper to build new). The AR series were designed to be rebuilt after firing 20,000 rounds, but the rebuild often means a completely new upper receiver.
In the AR series of weapons, it is made up of two parts, known as the upper and lower receiver. The lower receiver contains the trigger, the magazine well, the pistol grip and the stock. These rarely need to be repaired (The sole exception would be the Buffer in the stock, the buffer works with the bolt). The Upper Receiver contains the barrel, the bolt and the gas mechanism. These are what wear out in firearms and are also the most expensive parts of a firearm.
Yes, people will say there fire more then the above number of rounds in their weapons every week, and my response is that just wears them out faster. Given how people are shooting these weapons, I hope they are enjoying themselves, for there are also wearing out that weapon. With the SKS selling for under $100 dollars and the AK selling for $600 even with Obama's ban on importation, why buy an AR-15? All three will wear out about the same time, but the SKS and AK are a lot cheaper and the AR series of weapons is not two to five times the worth of the AK or SKS rifles. Thus I never figure out the AR craze, if I wanted to shoot, the AK or SKS will shoot almost as much with almost the same accuracy, thus why by the AR15? It is like buying a sports car to drive on a crowded highway as you go to and from work. Some people wants that Sportscar, but I ride a bicycle. It is more how one sees oneself NOT what people really need.
jmowreader
(50,520 posts)The ammunition was a huge contributor to the M-16's original problems. Specifically, it was the powder.
Eugene Stoner designed the AR-15 action around Improved Military Rifle powder. The Army had a shitload of Ball powder - a totally different powder technology. The Army's stockpile was originally made for howitzers. When they used it in the M-14 rifle it worked great...but the M-14 is the honey badger of rifles, it doesn't give a shit what you load it with. An M-14 has a piston that shoves against an operating rod, which pushes the bolt back to cycle the piece. (Remember the scene in Full Metal Jacket where Private Joker caught Private Pyle talking to his rifle? One of the pieces he was talking to was this rod.) Because the piston is so large, you can put any kind of powder you want in the cartridges and the rifle will work fine. The M-16 uses a "direct impingement" gas system; powder gases feed down a narrow tube and directly force the bolt carrier back.
Here's where it gets entertaining: Direct impingement is HIGHLY critical of the distance between the gas port and the muzzle - if there's not enough time for gas pressure to get high enough to force the bolt back reliably, your rifle will jam all the time. The first M-16s didn't have enough barrel past the gas port to ensure reliable cycling. Add three other fun features - the powder the Army had was clogging the gas tube because there were non-combustible stabilizers in it, the extractors on the bolts kept breaking, and the design of the M-16 keeps its operators from cleaning the inside of the gas tube - and you're looking at a recipe for battlefield disaster.
Here's the best part: Colt sold this piece of shit to the Army as a Self-Cleaning Rifle! Yup, that's right: some nice man from Colt's Patent Firearms Division actually told the Army with a perfectly straight face a soldier in the field would never have to clean his rifle if he was armed with an M-16. Anyone who's ever been in the Army longer than a month knows the M-16 is NOT a self-cleaning rifle, but it was an impressive-enough claim to get the Army to buy these atrocious pieces of shit without cleaning gear...and since the M-14 has a larger bore than an M-16 you couldn't use your old equipment on your new rifle because it wouldn't fit.
So...what did they change on the M16A1? The barrel was made a little longer to enable the gas system to work better. The gas tube is slightly larger in diameter to allow gas to flow more easily. They chromed the inside of the barrels to make them more reliable and to allow spent cartridges to slide out of the chamber more easily. The sights were improved - some of them were issued with a tritium insert in the front sight post to allow shooting North Vietnamese Regulars at night, when they were awake. (This will show you the Army's infinite wisdom: the front sight post is adjusted by screwing it in and out - screw it in and the impact point goes up, screw it out and the impact point goes down. Once you've adjusted it to your desired setting you don't want it moving around, so there are little notches around it that a spring-loaded pin drops into. The standard post has five notches. The tritium post has four - which forces we weapons-instructing sergeants to have to train soldiers slightly differently and use different targets, depending on the sight post they had. What would have made more sense is to make the standard posts have four notches.) Not only did every soldier receive a cleaning kit, complete with cute little bottles of gun oil and bore cleaner, there was even a storage well for the cleaning kit in the buttstock and the gun oil bottle - or, now, a bottle of Break-Free which replaces both LSA oil and RBC cleaner) would fit in the pistol grip.
IronLionZion
(45,380 posts)First he issues mandatory gay marriage for everyone, now this. What's next on the slippery slope? Serving up bald eagles in school lunches? This is socialism!
jmowreader
(50,520 posts)Benjamin Franklin wanted to make the turkey America's national bird.
Not this turkey...
but this one
My thesis was, if the turkey was our national bird we'd have to worship turkeys and serve eagles for Thanksgiving.
