5,700 attend Richmond Gun Show

[underpants]

Source: Richmond Times-Dispatch

Some dealers, buyers attribute spike in sales in part to worries about an Obama administration

"Everybody's scared to death," said Coffman, a salesman for Georgia Arms in Villa Rica, Ga., adding that sales for the business have skyrocketed in the past two weeks. "I appreciate the Democrats completely, because they sell more guns and ammo than anyone else has for us."

Fears that President-elect Barack Obama and a Democratic-controlled Congress will tighten restrictions on firearms have prompted gun aficionados nationwide to rush out and buy firearms. That trend played out over the weekend during the gun show at the Richmond Raceway Complex in Henrico County, which saw higher-than-usual attendance.

But Alice Mountjoy, government-relations coordinator for the Virginia Center for Public Safety, a gun-control advocacy group, said people who are afraid of Obama's politics are being paranoid, noting that the president-elect has said he respects the Second Amendment.

Several gun dealers yesterday said they have seen a spike in sales over the past month that they attribute in part to worries about an Obama administration, and some customers echoed that sentiment. Promoters of the Richmond Gun Show, likewise, were thanking Obama and the Democrats for the more than 5,700 people who attended the two-day show that ended yesterday. About 4,000 people attended last November.

Read more: http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/news.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2008-11-17-0145.html

---

Annette Elliott, a promoter for the Richmond Gun Show, is placing newspaper advertisements for a gun show next week in Chantilly using the slogan "Get your guns while you still can."

[DS1]

1. Stupid people being fleeced.

It would be amusing if it didn't inherently put guns in the hands of these stupid fucks.

[underpants]

5. You, literally, can't buy this kind of advertising

It would interesting if we could see how the price of guns at these shows or at stores have increased at the same time.

[UnrepentantUnitarian]

8. Remember Mama Gump's sage words...

..."stupid is as stupid does"! But, there's probably another quote that speaks louder still: (Voltaire) "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

[jody]

17. Oft said is "Facts speak for themselves", see post #4. n/t

[Midlodemocrat]

2. Wow. I feel safe.

:eyes:

Idiots.

[underpants]

11. You should. This is clearly another sign of how the Obama presidency will be good for the economy

it's already paying dividends!!!

[BOSSHOG]

3. Serious question

Conservatives say Obama will take their guns (all of them!) So their solution is to buy more guns (which Obama will take??)

and as an added side note, lets heavily arm all college students FOR SAFETY'S SAKE.

[Dogtown]

10. And elementary school teachers!

our schools aren't safe enough!

[underpants]

12. I'll go along with that

but NO MATCHES..those college students burn couches n stuff (WVU especially) and we can't have THAT menace being placated. Way too dangerous.

[BOSSHOG]

56. And no scalding hot crab boil

A couple of frat boys at Tulane in New Orleans got their house closed down because they poured scalding crab boil on the genitalia of some guys who wanted to join their orgaization. Those wacky frat boys. But, yes lets give them guns. To protect their keg parties.

[underpants]

62. Jesus!

OW!

[Mojorabbit]

68. I believe people are assuming

they will be grandfathered in.

[BOSSHOG]

88. Would it not seem "they" are assuming alot?

Like the communist muslim will shut down all their churches after he takes all their guns?

[Xithras]

138. Actually, they would either need to grandfather them or pay out mega $$

When California banned assault weapons in the 1990's, owners of those firearms were given two choices. They could sell the firearms to someone out of state, or they coult turn them in to the police for a big fat check.

The problem with simply banning them is that the Fifth Amendment has been interpreted by the courts to mean that government has to offer just compensation to people who purchased legal items which were later prohibited. With over 200 million firearms in the United States, and assuming an average fair market value of $400 for each (remember "just compensation"...for every cheap $150 gun out there, someone has a $1000 sport rifle), you're talking $80,000,000,000 (that's 80 billion dollars) in compensation payouts. Most people assume, probably rightly, that the government isn't willing to cut $80 billion in compensation checks at the moment. Instead, the government would probably ban sales and transfers, and just grandfather the existing gun stocks.

[customerserviceguy]

99. I would expect that if laws banning gun ownership are even discussed

in Congress, then there would be a lot of "stolen" guns reported.

Let's not forget that there are worries about recession and even depression that would have driven gun sales even if McLame had been elected. When local governments have to cut budgets to the bone, you might not be able to get a sheriff's deputy out to your place in the sticks if something bad goes down.

[Mojorabbit]

105. I have several weapons

that would be covered if the ban is renewed but they are not on record anywhere. I have had them for years. I am a liberal second amendment Dem but not a single issue voter. I am hoping Obama does not pursue this avenue because then I am going to have to donate a lot of money to help whoever ends up fighting a ban in the courts.

[zelta gaisma]

122. oh i LIKE that one! LOL , no one said they were smart

[jody]

4. Now that Obama says he will renew the AWB and repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, 80+ million gun-owners

have reason to stock up.

See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=190897&mesg_id=190897

53 million voters with guns in their household voted in the last election, 19 million for Obama and 33 million for McCain.

I guess Obama believes renewing the AWB and repealing the Tiahrt Amendment are what 19 million voters wanted when they helped him win with almost 67 million votes against McCain's 58 million.

I'm not convinced that all gun-owners who supported Obama will accept that position. :shrug:

President Elect Obama hasn't even taken office and he's already managed to piss off nearly 30% of his supporters.

[underpants]

9. I have heard a lot about how AWB was watered down and ineffective

the language of the bill didn't really cover what it proposed to do-simple changes to the handle or other details is an end-around of the bill

that being said, There is no purpose for automatic weapons other than to kill human beings and anyone who thinks they are going to out gun any governmental organization is delusional.

[jody]

14. The AWB is not about automatic weapons, those have been restricted since 1934 under the

National Firearms Act.

The topic of renewing AWB has been covered in numerous threads in DU's Guns-Fortress.

In summary S.2237 and H.R. 1022 would ban many of the most popular semiautomatic firearms used by 80+ million gun-owners.

[RaleighNCDUer]

65. Automatic shaumomatic. The fact is, the first semi-autos were invented

as MILITARY weapons, because of the need to put as many rounds down range as possible in as short a time as possible.

Hell, in WW1 most rifles were still bolt-action rifles.

What's an assault weapon? It has nothing to do with the configuration of the stock or the size of the clip or flash suppressors. Technically, a 1911 .45 is an assault weapon - it was invented for the military to be carried by troops putting down the Philippine rebellion. Does it being semi-auto make it any less a military assault weapon? Its only purpose is to take out a man with a single shot at close range

The AWB fucked up by not delineating exactly what made an assault weapon what it was - that being the inherent military intent, being fully or semi-automatic, designed for killing other people in combat situations. But how do you take a semi-auto assault weapon and make it a non-military weapon? Limit its capacity - make it hard to conceal, limit the number of rounds in a clip. The gun lobby stretched and distorted the definition of 'assault weapon' to something unrecognizable, then boasted how the castrated remnant was ineffective - which it was by the time they got through with it.

The intent of the AWB was to keep military grade hardware out of the hands of civilians. That's all.

[slackmaster]

93. Military-grade hardware is kept out of civilian hands by the National Firearms Act

The line was drawn correctly in 1934. Firearms technology has not changed much since then. There is no legitimate reason to re-draw the line.

[JeanGrey]

115. ALL guns are made for killing people.

All of them. Of course they are designed "to take someone down quickly". I am missing your point.

[wartrace]

127. Some people need killing.

Those willing & able to protect themselves with a firearm should not be forced to live in your world of passive compliance to criminals. I reserve my right to use whatever force I deem necessary if my home is violated. I will not comply.

[ejbrush]

118. Actually, no.

The fact is that self-loading rifles have been around longer in civilian hands than military hands by a generation at least.

The first semi-automatic rifle adopted by any military for *general issue* was our M-1, in 1936. Limited issue of the French Fusil Automatique mle1917 occured in 1917 (stating the obvious). German aircrews used a handful of 7mm Montogon self-loaders before 1915.

Both are preceded by the introduction of Winchester's Model 05 Self-loading rifle (1905) and Remington's Model 8 (1908) for the sporting market. Fabrique National introduced the Auto-5 shotgun in 1905. They sold like hotcakes. All three were utilized for many years by both hunters and law enforcement. None of them were expressly designed for anything other than taking game, but extended magazines, flash hiders, barrel shrouds and other "assaulty" do-dads were available for years prior to Mr. Kalishkanov's debut.

Does the existence of these items render these relics post hoc assault weapons, even if they aren't on a particular rifle? Does the existence of a 30rd magazine for my self-loading, definately non-automatic AK clone make it more dangerous than those old relics considering the 5rd magazine I actually have installed (the only magazine I own for it, btw.)? Drawing firm lines would be nice. Nice, firm lines defined by something less nebulous than "military grade" would be nice, preferably by someone with enough knowledge of the issues at hand on both sides to make a rational, fact based, emotion free decision.

Oh, and as an aside - the 1911 was developed partly in *response* to the experiences of the Philippine Insurrection. For actually dealing with the Moros, the Army brought the old Colt Model 1873 .45's out of mothballs. Some rumors contend that second-line units actually received Rodger and Spencer .44 revolvers left-over from the Civil War, but that may be a bit far fetched. A bigger part of the development of the big-bore .45 was the fact that the Cavalry wanted a pistol that would reliably un-horse opposing cavalry, i.e., kill horses.

[happyslug]

144. Actually the first Semi-automatics were for Civilian use.

The Military kept rejecting them for being unreliable when compared to Bolt Action Rifles (And they still are, the Military just reduced its requirements for reliability on its way to adopting today's assault Rifles).

Here are some French WWI Semi-semiautomatic rifles that were later "converted" to pull action (i.e. the gas port was sealed off and the weapon had to be manually operated between shots). The whole lot was to be replaced by the Model 1936 Bolt action rifle, but WWII interfered with that plan:
http://world.guns.ru/rifle/rfl29-e.htm

The MAS-36, still in use in the French Army as a sniper rifle:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAS-36_rifle

The MAS-36 is a Mauser type action, but with the lock BEHIND the bolt as in the British SMLE rifle. This made distance the bolt had to travel shorter (i.e. the lock did NOT have to pass over the round to be chambered into the weapon for it was already BEHIND the round). This design made the MAS-36 as fast as the SMLE when it came to rounds per minute but with the inherit strength of the Mauser 1898 action.

As to the civilian market, In the early 1900s you had the Remington Model 8:
http://www.remington.com/library/history/firearm_models/centerfire/model_8.asp


Thus it was the Civilian Market that took p semi-automatic Rifles decades before the military (Remington Model 8 was introduced in 1906, the M1 Rifle, the first general issue successful semi-automatic Rifle was only adopted in 1936).

Furthermore ever since firearms were introduced, civilian models have followed military models. For example, the most popular rifle before WWI were lever action models, but with WWI and most young men having fired bolt actions for the military, wanted bolt actions rifle. A similar situation occurred after WWII but was controlled by the fact most states FORBADE (And still forbid) the use of Semi-automatic rifles for hunting.

With the adopted of the M-16 and Ak series of rifles and their use of a rotating bolt (Developing independently but the idea was the same) the use of such a bolt has expanded to Civilian Weapon (The last Winchester Pump Shotgun had such a AK/M16 rotating locking bolt for example).

My point is that while it sounds easy to separate Military from Civilian design, the designers of such weapons regularly "steal" for each other (For example the Trigger Mechanism of the AK series of rifles is stolen from the US M1 Rifle, the AK's gas operation system was taken from the earlier SKS rifles for example, through the AK action itself was designed by Kalashnikov himself).

[michreject]

55. Talk about delusional

You really should do some research on the subject beforehand.

[underpants]

78. Oooh LOOK! I did..and I was right

Compliance and avoidance

AWB advocates and opponents alike stated that the AWB allowed firearms manufacturers to make minor changes to make their affected firearms legal, and they both described the features affected by the ban as "cosmetic".<2><3>

Some manufactures complied with the law by removing certain banned features. For example, the AB-10 was a legal version of the TEC-9, with barrel threading, and barrel shroud removed; the XM-15 was a legal AR-15 without barrel threading, or a bayonet mounting lug; post-ban semi-automatic AK-47s were also sold without folding stocks, bayonet lugs, and with standard or "thumbhole" stocks instead of pistol-grips. As the production of large-capacity magazines for civilians had also been prohibited, manufacturers sold their post-ban firearms either with newly-manufactured magazines with capacities of ten rounds or less, or with pre-ban manufactured high-capacity magazines, to meet changing legal requirements.

The BATF technology branch determined in 1994 that muzzle brakes were not impacted by the AWB, and that muzzle brakes on threaded barrels were not an assault weapon feature, so long as they were welded or soldered in place.

The law prohibited detachable magazines with a capacity to hold more than ten rounds manufactured after enactment of the law from sale, transfer, or importation. One effect was the increased importation of large quantities of magazines manufactured before the ban from other countries. Former Warsaw Pact countries had large quantities of AK-47 magazines of various capacities that could fit a variety of both pre-ban and post-ban AK-47 variants. Existing stocks of pre-ban American-made magazines were likewise exempt from the ban; this resulted in a brief surge in domestic manufacture of high-capacity magazines before the law took effect.

With the ten-round limit on magazine capacity in effect, and some form of concealed carry of firearms legal in over 38 states, manufacturers had an added incentive to design smaller frames at or below the ten-round capacity, thus replacing the previously popular 9mm and .45 ACP "high capacity" pistols. Since they could no longer manufacture the popular 15- and 17-round magazines to consumers, continuing to market the large frames designed for such made less sense. Glock introduced their 10-round capacity 9mm semi-automatic pistol, the Glock 26, in August 1994, in apparent anticipation of the legislation. In 1995, the Kahr Arms company was founded; they debuted their ultra-compact 9mm pistol, the K-9. In the years that followed, all manufacturers of semiautomatic pistols followed suit, developing a large array of concealable ten-round pistols in various calibers, including 9mm, 10mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP.

In March 2004, Kristen Rand, the legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, criticized the soon-to-expire ban by stating "The 1994 law in theory banned AK-47s, MAC-10s, UZIs, AR-15s and other assault weapons. Yet the gun industry easily found ways around the law and most of these weapons are now sold in post-ban models virtually identical to the guns Congress sought to ban in 1994."<4>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_Weapons_Ban
Sources listed at the link for this section include <2>the NRA

Hey LOOK! more research, for you
http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/faqs/?page=awb

[jody]

83. Citing Brady literature make as much sense as asking the Devil what to do to get into Heaven. n/t

[michreject]

104. You use the Brady bunch as a reference

LOL. They tell more lies that the Gun Guys and his group of loony bins.

[underpants]

109. But first I used the NRA

forgive me. I believe that if you go to their site they DO have a way to give them more money to continue their tireless and unrelenting effort*

Citing the Brady bunch is something you should step out of your box and consider.



*if you don't get the joke there look into the NRA's history of buckling on their "core beliefs" (like serial numbers and background checks) when public opinion and law enforcement offered even the slightest resistance. They probably just needed more money.

[smoogatz]

18. OMG!!!11!! Obama wants to take R Gunz!!11!!

From change.gov: "Obama and Biden would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent."

He's a radical commie gun-taker!11!! He wants to help law-enforcement solve gun crimes? He's just like Hitler!!111! No wonder gun owners are up in arms! Next he'll be after our flamethrowers!

http://www.change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy_agenda

[jody]

20. ROFLMAO about your obvious lack of knowledge on the issue. n/t

[smoogatz]

24. Enlighten me.

Because from where I sit it looks like a bunch of paranoid rednecks having their usual "Red Dawn" wet dream. Wolverines!!!11!

[jody]

26. Please visit DU's Guns-Fortress and read views from both sides of the RKBA issue. One specific

concern among 80+ million gun-owners is Obama's promise to renew the assault weapons ban and that includes H.R. 1022.

H.R. 1022 is sponsored by 68 Democrats and includes a clause that gives the attorney general unilateral authority to ban any semiautomatic firearm that is similar to ones used by the military.

That would include bans on the popular Remington model 1100 shotgun, over 4 million produced, and a favorite of 80+ million gun-owners.

[smoogatz]

45. They use a lot of Remington 1100s in the military, do they?

Yeesh.

[jody]

46. It doesn't have to be "a lot" and yes DoD does use them. n/t

[slackmaster]

47. I have seen Remington 1100 shotguns among the armaments on US Navy ships

They are quite common. I've even fired one while on a Tiger Cruise from Pearl Harbor to San Diego.

[bertman]

92. I don't know about "a lot" of Remington 1100's being used in the military nowadays, but

I carried a Remington 12 ga. semi-auto pump (don't know if it was an 1100 ) for one day in Vietnam. I'm pretty sure it had an eight-shell capacity, but it was too long ago to say for sure. I do remember that it gave me a good feeling of having some serious firepower while we were working some very high, thick grass where visibility was one foot in front of you.

From what I remember, that weapon was pretty popular with the grunts walking point.

Disclaimer: this post does not mean that I consider a Remington 1100 to be an assault-type weapon. Just that it could be used for that purpose. Of course, it's mostly used for hunting or shooting skeets by normal red-blooded Americans like moi.

[boilinmad]

32. Personally...

....I dont really want to have any knowledge about the issue, because, GUNS FUCKING SUCK.

[jody]

35. Many people share your distaste but presidents find out quickly that 80+ million gun-owners do care

and they vote in large numbers.

If you support President Elect Obama you might want to do as he asked,

"I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face," he said.

"And if they tell you that, 'Well, we're not sure where he stands on guns.' I want you to say, 'He believes in the Second Amendment.'

[123infinity]

147. Deliberately ignorant and proud of it?

Whatever...

[RaleighNCDUer]

67. Frankly, I think any talk about "making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent"

is just to put something on the table as a give-away -- close the gun show loophole and in return they won't try to follow up on reviving the expired, failed AWB.

Basic to all negotiations - ask for more than you know they will accept, and negotiate away those things you don't really want in the first place.

[smoogatz]

75. Good point.

You may be onto something there.

[azurnoir]

27. Wow you know as a fact that every gun owner that voted

for Obama is pissed? Is that all gun owner want automatic and untraceable guns, wow you're certainly knowledgeable on the subject.

Think I detect a whiff of cat spray.

[jody]

29. For a fact those buying firearms are upset about Obama's promise to renew the AWB.

Anything you smell is coming from the gun-control community.

[azurnoir]

36. So it's the gun control community

which of course includes all gun owners OK if you say so, except I do know better as a fact.

[jody]

40. "know better as a fact". Please provide credible sources for those facts. n/t

[azurnoir]

58. I am the source and a gun owner who

supports Obama's policies.

[jody]

61. So your personal experience, a sample of size 1, supports your inference about a population of

several tens of millions!

I do believe you and I have exhausted this exchange.

Have a wonderful day. :hi:

[azurnoir]

63. I doubt I am alone n/t

[brentspeak]

80. I'm waiting for you to back up your assertion that "19 million gun-owning Obama voters..."

will be pi$$ed if Obama renews the AWB and Tiahrt Amendment.

Data? Statistics? Proof??!

[jody]

82. Are you reading challenged? You twist my statement so do you want to ban all guns? n/t

[brentspeak]

85. Owning a firearm requires a sound mind and solid reasoning power

Your bizarre posts and faulty arguments makes me worry about your ability to responsibly own a gun.

[jody]

86. Goodbye. n/t

[NickB79]

90. It would piss off this Obama supporter. NT

[JeanGrey]

116. Me too.

[Mojorabbit]

106. I know a boatload of them

and luckily they are not single issue voters.

[desktop]

34. I hope there comes a day when people like you just die off

You gun nuts are everything that is wrong with America. I would rather have a democratic party that loses, than a democratic party that wins with people like you in it.

[jody]

39. I've already been dead once and brought back to life so your opinions are of no concern to me.

I am concerned about the future but know to get there we must survive the present.

For the present, SCOTUS says government is not obligated to protect an individual so self-defense is a personal problem.

SCOTUS also said the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.

I will exercise my right to keep and bear arms for self defense until we live in a society where violent criminals no longer exist.

I will also respect your distaste for guns and refuse to use my arms to defend you if you are assaulted.

[RaleighNCDUer]

69. You bolster your argument by citing the Bush supreme court?

:eyes:

[Thothmes]

101. The Supreme Court is the Supreme Court

Their decision is the law of the land until the Constitution is amended or a later court overturns the decision. Looks like the courts ruling the the 2nd amendment will stand for several years to come.

[smoogatz]

60. Now now.

Gun ownership is protected in the Constitution: we don't get to pick and choose which rights we like and which we don't. What I hope is that we can loosen the grip of the gun-manufacturer's lobby on American politics, and relegate this debate to where it belongs: the letters-to-the-editor pages of gun-porn magazines.

[RaleighNCDUer]

70. Seems to me the Constitution also mentions

"insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, and promote the general welfare."

That seems to argue against letting militias and gangs that are better armed than the police terrorize us within our own borders.

[Thothmes]

103. Those words come from the Preamble to the Constitution

They have no legal meaning as far a the law is concerned.

[123infinity]

146. Just a guess here, you never heard of Dale Carnegie, right?

:grr:

[onehandle]

6. Cue banjo music.

Run, Ned Beatty, Run!

[derby378]

7. Once again, folks...

If you're a politician, and you want to discourage panic buying like this, you cannot talk out of both sides of your mouth. Saying you support the Second Amendment one minute while saying you support a ban on self-loading rifles the next - that's classic Third Way bullshit, and it helped sink Kerry in 2004 and left Gore vulnerable to the Florida heist in 2000.

[Dogtown]

13. Yes we definitely lost in 2000 *and* 2004

based on our deceptions to the carry-crowd.

In the vernacular; that dog will not hunt, sir.

[YOY]

15. I'm pretty sure the blame is on the Right Wing media.

AM radio and FOX News and the idiots who believe them. I wish they will realize they have egg on their faces a few years from now...but gullible once is gullible forever.

Chances are already are firearm owners but are buying more. Chances are they only have 2 hands and 2 trigger fingers.

[jody]

16. See post #4 above. n/t

[smoogatz]

19. They're stocking up on assault weapons.

Nice, huh?

[jody]

21. What do you think an "assault weapon" is? n/t

[smoogatz]

25. Oooh! A semantics game!

What do you think I think it is? Then maybe we can play "I'm thinking of a number between one and one twenty," followed by a brisk round of three card monte.

[jody]

28. Until you give me your definition, then I will assume you don't know. Don't be upset because many

DUers are equally ignorant.

[smoogatz]

44. Okey dokey, smokey.

And I'll assume the same thing until you give me yours.

[jody]

48. Good bye. n/t

[smoogatz]

50. See ya.

[michreject]

73. Not only ignorant

But the poster is clueless. Well.......maybe ignorant is a better description.

[derby378]

37. Maybe you should read this, instead

A little old, but the question is still valid:

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=161038273&blogID=443469947&Mytoken=34E95DA2-48CA-4CC7-B91588BDFC23EE9B282787115

And, for a little more detail:

http://a2dems.net/terms.htm

[brentspeak]

81. I've played that tired old game with NRA types, too

I know exactly how you feel. It's just one of the many circular arguments they employ.

[derby378]

108. This isn't a game...

...the fate of Democratic control of Congress hangs in the balance. Wouldn't you like the Dems to be in charge for more than two years with Obama in the White House?

[LatteLibertine]

23. Not all gun owners are paranoid morons

I'm a liberal that also supports second amendment rights.

My father was a Navy SEAL and I grew up around firearms. I learned to respect them and how to properly handle them.

I own a shotgun and two handguns. I don't have any weapons that would be considered exotic, unless you count my katana. :)

[smoogatz]

41. If the're stocking up on AR 15s because they're afraid Obama's

a Marxist, or something, they're paranoid morons. I own a nice over-under shotgun for shooting clays, and my father served in the Pacific in more-or-less continual combat between 1942 and VJ day in 1945. They killed a lot of people who were trying to kill them. My father came back from the war hating war, violence and guns. He had zero respect for civilian gun nuts and thought they were idiots, one and all. This was a guy who hunted Japanese soldiers in the jungles of Borneo and killed them, up close and personal. So, does that give me cred as a gun owner and son of a vet, or does your experience trump mine?

[slackmaster]

53. The difference in demeanor is striking

You're the one who is being rude.

[smoogatz]

59. Oh noez!11!1

Rudeness, how dreadful! Somebody get me my smelling salts!

Okay, got that out of the way.

[LatteLibertine]

54. Not sure where you are going with this

I am not defending people "stocking up on AR 15s".

I am saying all gun owners aren't like these folks. I recognize there are some "gun nuts" in the United States.

My father served in the end of WW II, in the Korean War and in Vietnam. These experiences did not make him hate guns. He certainly doesn't love war however felt it was his duty to serve in wars the United States was involved in when they were being fought.

As for trumping your experience, I am not sure where you are going with that. I am relating personal experience and opinion not "truth". There is nothing to prove or debunk here.

I was socialized to respect guns and view them as a tool. I do not fear or hate guns, and "gun nuts" do concern me to a degree. I do think our involvement in WW II was just. I do not agree with the Vietnam War or the Iraq War.

[smoogatz]

57. My point was that you assumed a couple of things about me

in your previous post: first that I was not a gun owner (I am), and second that your father's experience lent you some "ethos" or authority on the issue that I lacked (it doesn't). In fact I think you seem like a reasonable person, and I have no real argument with you. Peace, and good day to you.

[LatteLibertine]

66. I think this is a simple misunderstanding

My other post was not meant to assert such things and certainly wasn't aimed at you. It was purely a general commentary from personal experience and opinion I was tossing in the thread. I hold no object truth or authority on the issue. I was concerned that often some folks that are liberal like I am view all gun owners like the folks who are "stocking up on AR 15s". That's not fair or accurate.

People snapping up guns because Senator Obama was elected President are both irrational and misguided.

Apparently, we are both "sport" owners. I plink away at the firing range with my weapons.

A good day to you as well.

[JonQ]

96. So because your dad used guns in the military

and now doesn't like them, that makes you an expert on gun laws?

What about the folks who served in the military and came back with a respect for guns, and proper gun usage, and continue to collect and shoot guns to this day? Are we now going to solve all our debates by stacking up vets on either side of the issue until one side is shown to have more support? Seems like an odd way to run a government.

[smoogatz]

97. Apparently you neglected to read the post I was responding to. n/t

[JonQ]

98. I did

and it didn't seem like he was claiming any sort of "cred" for having a veteran father. Merely refuting the assertion that anyone who likes guns is a gun-nut.

[smoogatz]

100. Then why would he bring it up?

What does his father's vet-or-not status have to do with it?

[JonQ]

111. Perhaps indicating

that his father has plenty of experience with guns, was taught how to use them properly and actually had to use them as a tool for his job. So he isn't some crazy militia type, living the backwoods and loving to play soldier that gun-grabbers like to stereotype all gun owners as.

[LatteLibertine]

120. I

only mentioned my father because he taught me to handle firearms correctly and to respect them. He's the one that taught me to view them as tools that are no more wicked than their user. I was basically explaining how I was raised around them and socialized not to fear them. I was explaining some of the reasons I am not biased against them and why I am the way I am. Obviously, my father contributed to that.

I commented in the thread because I'm a liberal who does appreciate firearms and am not a "gun nut" that feels I need to stockpile AR 15s because Obama was elected. As I said, that's irrational and misguided. I voted for the man.

I didn't intend to call anyone out or to pontificate. I was offering my perspective. I believe I've cleared up any misunderstanding.

[smoogatz]

126. You have.

But people keep bringing it up. Sorry to drag you back into this. I believe I'll retire for the evening. One thing that's been interesting, though, is being reminded of my father's utter contempt for the whole business of civilian gun ownership. I can't overstate how strongly he felt about it--and he was one tough old dude. He had a different take on guns than your old man's--probably because he'd been shot at more or less continuously for three years.

[smoogatz]

123. Okay, then.

My father had plenty of experience at both ends of numerous guns, was taught how to use them properly and actually had to use them in brutal, close-quarters combat for three years as a "tool" for "his job," which was killing or maiming as many of the enemy as possible before they killed or maimed him. Does that fact make my views on the subject more legit, in your estimation, than they would be otherwise? If not, why is a father's military experience only relevant to the debate if he's pro gun? What about the guy who got shot at, again and again, and actually killed actual people with actual guns, and came back from the war believing fervently that any non-combatant with a hard-on for guns was a pathetic loser who needed a gun to make himself feel tough?

[JonQ]

124. I think he explained his reasoning

right below my last post, quite well. And it wasn't some sort of "my dad is better than your dad" competition.

Anyway, you are perfectly entitled to your beliefs. Just like people may believe abortion is murder and thus refuse to get one, or that mass protests are silly and refuse to participate in one. But that doesn't give you or them the right to make that choice for everyone else. Don't like guns? Fine, don't get one. But don't lash out at everyone else for doing something that is perfectly legal.

[smoogatz]

125. When did I do that?

As I said above, I own a nice 12-gauge over-under. And legality has nothing to do with it: it's perfectly legal to crap in your pants in public, but most people would probably (rightly) consider you addled if you did it repeatedly.

[LatteLibertine]

128. My father

was used in my comments solely to explain how he helped shape my views on firearms. He doesn't legitimize my views or make them "right". He merely helped shape them. I do not feel the views I've expressed on firearms are over the top or irrational.

I would guess your father contributed some to your world view as well. I am not critical of people that have served in the military that have developed some measure of anti-gun sentiments. They have every right to their opinion.

I did not intend to devalue or judge differing opinions. I was explaining mine. Period.

The primary reason I commented in thread was simply to say some liberals are pro-gun and not all pro-gun people are irrational or misguided like the fellows stockpiling AR 15s because Obama was elected.

There's no debate to be had. People will value what they wish and follow their conscience provided they are not sociopaths. Even then they will do what they will. I don't believe there is one right answer to the issue.

Again, I was merely explaining where I was coming from, and partly how I got there. I can't be any clearer than I have been in my last post and this one. I have nothing more to add beyond this point.

[Bonhomme Richard]

22. The crazy thing is................

that a majority of the loons buying guns now, I would bet, have at least a half dozen guns at home already.
Suckers.

[d_r]

30. what they are afraid of.

It isn't just gun control that SOME of these people are "afraid" of. They have to have more guns to be ready for the riots/black uprising/race war/socialist takeover/one world government/mark of the beast.

[slackmaster]

52. No, the riots would have happened by now

They're worried about a re-enactment of the federal "assault weapons" ban.

Some people who have had their eye on an AR-15 rifle or a semiautomatic AK or a Remington 1100 shotgun or a Ruger Mini-14 rifle are buying them now, in order to get in before any such ban comes to be.

These purchases are being made at the expense of other discretionary spending like vacations, eating out, buying a new car, donating to charity, etc.

[RaleighNCDUer]

72. IOW, they are morons.

There will NOT be a new AWB.

[slackmaster]

87. I very strongly hope you are right about that

Thanks for the reply.

[michreject]

119. I only have one of each

1 Bushmaster M4A3
1 Springfield SAR 4800 FN-FAL
1 Mak-90 AK
1 IMI UZI
1 DPMS LR-308
1 Springfield M1A1 National Match


I do have 15 1911's though and an equal number of S&W revolvers, including a S&W 500 mag.:)

[Bonhomme Richard]

137. LOL, I figure I have enough.

1851 Navy Colt Revolver
Fabrique Nationale M1900 (Browning No. 1) semi-automatic pistol
Savage Model 1914 pump .22 rifle
Old Winchester single action .22 rifle
Half dozen Bows
A shitload of knives.

[bertman]

31. Recommend. This really pisses me off. I was planning to buy a pistol and now the prices

are skyrocketing faster than Sarah Palin's clothing budget. Guess I'll have to wait until the rhetoric calms down and the ignoramuses all get their gun cabinets loaded up.

Jody's comments about the AWB (Assault Weapons Ban) and the Tiahrt Amendment may be correct, but neither amendment will have a noticeable effect on the public's ability to buy personal protection weapons such as pistols, or to buy hunting rifles and shotguns. The only hunters or gun enthusiasts who will be impacted by the AWB are those who are hunting PEOPLE. Hopefully they are a miniscule percentage of the 53 million voters Jody cites.

Neither of these Congressional acts would impact the average American's ability to purchase guns other than the ones that are specifically designed for military use. Read up on the Assault Weapons Ban and you will see that the banned weapons are the ones that are being purchased by these so-called militias groups and urban gangs because they can easily be retrofitted as automatic weapons. This does not seem like an infringement of the Second Amendment to me.

I was not familiar with the Tiahrt Amendment until today, but after reading about it this amendment seems to be a piece of bad legislation. The gist of it is that police departments will not be allowed to trace the origin of weapons that are confiscated in the commission of crimes. What is the reasoning behind this? I want the police to be able to find out where these illegal weapons and weapons that are confiscated in criminal activities have come from. Many of them are obtained illegally so why would Congress want to limit the police's ability to stop this kind of activity?

You have to give it to the weapons industry, they are really good at marketing. Anybody know what Smith & Wesson's stock is selling for?

[underpants]

38. I commented on gun prices up in this thread

I know supply and demand and all that but I just knew that prices would get jacked up-people in a frenzy will pay anything.

[RaleighNCDUer]

76. Actually, the amendment makes it so only police can use what

should be public information to trace guns. And, as I understand it, if police in one jurisdiction refuse to cooperate with police in another jurisdiction, that can stop the trace in its tracks. So if a weapon used in a crime in NYC has been traced to VA, the VA police (who may have re-sold a confiscated illegal weapon thru a gun dealer there) can prevent the NYPD from tracing it back to them. Lots of police agencies re-sell confiscated weapons, rather than destroy them. But it's bad PR for the police to be directly in the line of ownership of a crime weapon, isn't it.

[bertman]

91. Yeah, that would be some seriously bad PR. I hope there is a better reason than the one

you stated here, NCevilDUer. It seems to me that the police would like to get the traceback on these weapons considering many of them are involved in the shootings of law enforcement types.

[underpants]

113. Speaking of Va-guns-and NYC

NYC Defends Running Stings Of Va. Gun Sales
Friday, May 11, 2007; Page B01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/10/AR2007051001377.html

Convinced that illegal gun sales in Virginia contribute to violent crime in New York, Bloomberg has been arming private investigators with hidden cameras and sending them into Virginia gun stores to try to make illegal buys. The process involves "straw purchases," in which one person legally fills out a form and buys a gun for someone else.

New York has filed suit against 27 gun dealers over such practices, including six in Virginia. During the past decade, New York has traced 800 guns bought from the 27 dealers to numerous crimes, including homicide.

But New York's tactics infuriated Virginia gun groups and the General Assembly, which this year approved the law outlawing the practice starting July 1.
---
Virginia Gun Dealers Hold Contest to Protest New York Mayor Bloomberg's Gun Policy

Monday, March 19, 2007
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,259726,00.html

Nine dealers, including two in Virginia, have settled with the city, agreeing to be monitored by a court-appointed special master. The owners of two Virginia stores being sued said they were forced to close because of crushing legal fees.

But in January, two other store owners began fighting back with the gun giveaway.

Through March 31, customers who spend $100 at either of Bob Moates' stores or at Old Dominion Guns and Tackle in Danville are eligible to win a handgun or a rifle, courtesy of the Defense League. The drawing will be held April 19.

---

The giveaway was held IN a government facility

The event drew an overflow crowd at a Fairfax County government building, with the fire marshal aggressively enforcing an occupancy limit of 150 for the meeting hall. Others stood outside and peered in through open windows.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/18/national/main2824415.shtml

[pipoman]

133. Wrong,

Read up on the Assault Weapons Ban and you will see that the banned weapons are the ones that are being purchased by these so-called militias groups and urban gangs because they can easily be retrofitted as automatic weapons. This does not seem like an infringement of the Second Amendment to me.

Urban legend right there. The AR15 is the most popular competition firearm and has been for almost 2 decades. Millions sold, damned few involved in crime. In fact on any given weekend there are likely several competitive shooting events within 100 miles of where you are sitting with thousands of law abiding competitors. You have been fed a complete lie about "they can easily be retrofitted as automatic weapons". It is just as easy and requires the same equipment to build an auto weapon starting with scrap metal. If these are so easily converted where are the stories of massive seizures of illegal automatic weapons? Where are the stories about these easily converted weapons being used in the commission of crimes? In fact I don't believe there has been a single homicide committed in the last 10 years with an illegal automatic weapon. Anyone converting, possessing illegal automatic weapons or the parts needed to make them is eligible for 10 years in federal prison for each gun or part. Don't believe me? How about the armorer from the San Jose PD, a detective of LAPD, and the director of the BATFE?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTjBxW6Df_A

Los Angeles Detective Jimmy Trahin testifying before the California State Assembly,"in my 12 years within the unit, considering the enormous amount of firearms we have taken into custody, and that's over 50,000 I would say, and these include ones from the hardcore gangs and the drug dealers, our unit has never, ever had one ak47 converted, one Ruger Mini 14 converted, an H&K 8193...never converted, an AR180 never converted, so this media blitz of these military style assault weapons being converted to fully automatic is not true."

Then there is this:

I was not familiar with the Tiahrt Amendment until today, but after reading about it this amendment seems to be a piece of bad legislation. The gist of it is that police departments will not be allowed to trace the origin of weapons that are confiscated in the commission of crimes. What is the reasoning behind this? I want the police to be able to find out where these illegal weapons and weapons that are confiscated in criminal activities have come from. Many of them are obtained illegally so why would Congress want to limit the police's ability to stop this kind of activity?

You obviously didn't read (or didn't comprehend) the Tiahrt Amendment (I am from Kansas and am not a Tiahrt supporter).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=190897#190929


"no funds appropriated under this or any other Act with respect to any fiscal year may be used
to disclose part or all of the contents of the Firearms Trace System database maintained by the
National Trace Center of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives or any
information required to be kept by licensees pursuant to section 923(g) of title 18, United States
Code, or required to be reported pursuant to paragraphs (3) and (7) of such section 923(g), to
anyone other than a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency or a prosecutor solely in
connection with and for use in a bona fide criminal investigation or prosecution and then only such
information as pertains to the geographic jurisdiction of the law enforcement agency requesting the
disclosure and not for use in any civil action or proceeding other than an action or proceeding
commenced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or a review of such an
action or proceeding, to enforce the provisions of chapter 44 of such title, and all such data shall be
immune from legal process and shall not be subject to subpoena or other discovery, shall be
inadmissible in evidence, and shall not be used, relied on, or disclosed in any manner, nor shall
testimony or other evidence be permitted based upon such data, in any civil action pending on or
filed after the effective date of this Act in any State (including the District of Columbia) or Federal
court or in any administrative proceeding other than a proceeding commenced by the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to enforce the provisions of that chapter, or a review of
such an action or proceeding"

The ONLY people this amendment keeps personal information away from are nosy curiosity seekers. Can you please show me where your contention that this amendment contains language which "police departments will not be allowed to trace the origin of weapons that are confiscated in the commission of crimes" is located? This statement is in fact completely contrary to the amendment and a blatant lie told by which ever anti freedom site you perused to come to this conclusion.

Anybody know what Smith & Wesson's stock is selling for?

$2.47 close of market 11-17-2008..wow

Another fact, if the gross reciepts of ALL US gun manufacturers were added together it would not make the Fortune 500.

[MrsBrady]

33. well, these are the same people that voted for bush

so we already know they are not too smart

[jody]

42. 53 million voters with guns in their household voted in the last election, 19 million for Obama and

33 million for McCain.

[underpants]

49. I have a gun. I voted for Obama. Guns wasn't within the top 20 reaons why I did

[jody]

51. So what? Your experience and mine does not alter the fact that 80+ million gun-owners might not all

agree with you and I.

[YOY]

71. Well I own one and I voted in my own interests.

Unless my right to own a .22 long-short is in danger...it's not.

[RaleighNCDUer]

43. Headline might also read

"Stupid People Flock to Buy Guns".

Because Obama is not going to change a fucking thing.

ON EDIT:
And THAT makes ME nervous. Anybody so stupid as to be stampeded like this is too stupid to own a gun.

[Bake]

64. Gun show in Jackson, MS ... same report

The place was PACKED and business was brisk. Further report is that gun shops can't keep guns and ammunition in stock fast enough.

See? Obama's election has already had a positive effect on the economy. I'm glad those folks have money to spend on hardware.

I guess, however, they missed the recent SCOTUS decision on the 2nd Amendment being an individual right.

Bake

[bdamomma]

74. these people are out of control. and dangerous too.

[jody]

77. "out of control. and dangerous"! What laws have they broken and how are they dangerous. You do know

of course that anyone who purchases a firearm from a vendor at a gun-show must comply with federal laws including approval after a National Instant Criminal Background Check?

[bdamomma]

95. oh, I did not know about background checks, are these

background checks pretty accurate to let people obtain guns. I am not a gun owner so I am just asking.

[cabluedem]

131. No they are not accurate. They rely on asking questions which about 18 % lie about on the applicaion

many of these people have mental health and addictive drug/alcohol problems, which are often not in the database. Too lots of these people purchase guns and sell them to people who can't legally buy guns. Its called a "strawman" sale and it's a very common problem crime committed by gun purchasers.

[Name removed]

134. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jody]

140. NICS is effective in preventing people who are not qualified to legally purchase a firearm. See

reports below.

National Instant Criminal Background Check System Fact Sheet

FBI NATIONAL INSTANT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM (NICS) SECTION

[Mojorabbit]

107. What are you talking about?

My husband and I go to gun shows frequently. He is a physician and I am a retired nurse. We certainly are not dangerous not out of control.

[JonQ]

112. No, it's true

you both are unstable psychopaths who have allowed yourselves to fall under the influence of demonic guns. At some point in the near future these evil guns will force you to go on an unstoppable killing spree. I'm sorry, but the numbers clearly show that everyone who owns a gun at some point will kill at least 6 people, most likely friends and family members.



:sarcasm:

[JeanGrey]

117. Hey I'm even worse! I had my first lesson with how to shoot a

rifle at 8 (and stand back, I'm a GIRL). Was taken on evil, evil hunting trips to Canada with my Uncles!! Had a grandmother that kept (GASP) a loaded shotgun in the kitchen at all times.

My life was also saved because I had a (dare I say it) gun?

I am counting the steps to the tower right now.......................

[liberal1973]

79. Ignorant NRA folks.

Same kind of people who think that aliens from outer space will come down and take over Earth.

[jody]

84. Ignorance is not limited to NRA folks or pro-RKBA Dems. Posts to this thread by gun-control types

suggest they are completely ignorant about RKBA issues such as AWB.

[doc03]

130. Jody you can't argue with anti-gun nuts any

more than you can argue pro-gun nuts neither one will listen to reason. They are right and you are wrong and their minds won't change. The gun grabbers don't understand shooting or hunting. The anti-gun people think everyone is running around with fully automatic weapons even though they were outlawed decades ago. They think we use some kind super ammo that can't be used for anything but killing people. Then you have the other side that think you should have a nuke in your basement. I asked on here a few days ago for someone to define what an assault weapon is and nobody could give a definition other than they look scary.

[jody]

141. You might enjoy browsing the thread below in DU's Guns-Fortress where DEMS defend the 2nd.

Assault weapons versus automatic firearms

[Blue_Tires]

89. speculative fearmongering

2-3 years from now when people realize the laws haven't changed, there will be a glut of cheap used guns on the market (maybe I'll get a few of these suckers cheap)...the NRA and gunmakers are literally laughing to the bank given the relative ease of manipulating the puppet strings...

somewhere out there a bible salesman is trying to get his "Obama wants to ban the bible" -meme off the ground...

[LanternWaste]

94. And people still wonder why I do my best...

And people still wonder why I do my best to avoid gun-owners.... :eyes:

[EnviroBat]

102. I love the assertion that gun owners are "nuts".

Yet, when I go to the shooting range, I feel safer than when I'm driving my car on the freeway. Some of the safest, aware, and cautious people I've ever experienced are at the gun range every weekend.

[truthisfreedom]

110. Look at it this way... maybe they'll shoot each other.

Something has to reign in their explosive population growth.

[superconnected]

114. All that buck teeth and lack of edukation in one spot. Oww the menality.

Glad I missed it.

[zelta gaisma]

121. ok how much of it is "be afriad of the dems" and how much is "be afriad of the black man in power"?

[Chovexani]

136. Thank you.

All I can think of is the Bowling for Columbine animated segment "A Brief History of the United States" and another time when there was a huge run on guns.

[doc03]

129. A Democratic Administration is the greatest

recruiting tool the NRA has. I will be getting letters to join every few days for the next (eight) years. I used to belong to the NRA and every few days I got a letter wanting money to fight off the gun grabbers the evil Ted Kennedy and Clintons. After the Oklahoma City bombing the Government said they could put taggets in explosives so they could be traced to their origin, the NRA stopped it that's when I quit. George H.W. Bush was a life member of the NRA and he quit when Wayne LaPierre called the FBI jackbooted thugs.

[liberal1973]

132. The NRA is just a un-American far right group

NRA members are far right extremist, who really are nothing more than just POSs.

Send them to Alaska.

B-)

[Chovexani]

135. It was in Richmond

More than a few of those folks have white sheets in the closet.

This bullshit has nothing to do with the Second Amendment, though it's sort of comical that everyone seems to think it is. Yes, some of the gun nuts are paranoid the librulz will take their precious phallic symbols, but that's not where a lot of the fears are coming from.

[derby378]

139. Sexism has no place in this discussion

Referring to guns as "phallic symbols" is so 20th-century. We're looking forward now, not backward.

[Chovexani]

142. lol

I love these threads because they bring out all the CHUD from the Gungeon.

Might want to run back before daylight though.

[derby378]

143. Oh, please...

Gun owners have a stake in the future of this party, too, no matter what Joe Biden or Rahm Emanuel says. We're here to stay, so get comfortable with the idea.

[margotb822]

145. Let's see: Iraq, Afghanistan, the Economy, the Environment

Nope, don't see guns in our major priority lineup. This is a stupid scare tactic. And, I will be pissed at Obama and the Dems if they waste their poltiical capital on guns right now. If we're going to go with any social issue, I see GLBT rights as more pressing than gun rights.