Guns, ammunition, rednecks, liberals, Gun Fabricators, and the Constitution

[Churchill]

Something near and dear to me has a lot of people doing some pretty crazy things now that Barack Obama is going to be the next President of the United States. Since November, prices on guns have in most cases, doubled. That is to say, if you can even find certain types of weapons at this point. Gun Shops (and those who also sell at gun shows) are reporting having a really hard time obtaining any more stock from most distributers, who are complaining that gun companies themselves just aren’t getting them any product. Now, this sounds odd when I read it because if I’m a gun company, I see the rednecks going crazy and I have my employees working 24/7 through Christmas because that’s going to make me a ton of money, and if all the rednecks fears come true, well I won’t have much of a business anyway. The guns most affected are your higher caliber handguns, high capacity 9mm, AK’s, AR-15’s, and combat shotgun type weapons. Basically, everything; the stuff that is still available is generally the brands that were more pricey even before this “run on guns”, ie Kimber, DPMR, etc.

In addition to all of that, ammunition is scarce. Go online and see for yourself – 9mm, .45cal, 5.56, 7.62x39/54 are out of stock at most sites, and if in stock it’s basically just range ammo. Anything that can be used to put a man down in one shot is gone. Gun shop owners that do Gun Shows are saying they’ll sell out of tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition in an hour. If you’ve never been to a gun show, they span over probably the same amount of area as 6? Football fields, full of tables with guns and ammunition, when I went as a kid I remember there being a lot of people. Since November, there have been so many people that it’s hard to even breathe.

Now, the reason for the ammunition scare is very easily attributed to (2) factors as I see it. Obama is not pro gun, his statements on the campaign trail scare Constitution loving, redneck, and liberal gun owning Americans very much. On top of this, there is a resurgence in an ’09 campaign beginning in March for the ammunition accountability state legislation – this would require that by a certain date you destroyed or turned in all of your ammunition, and that by a certain date you could only buy the new ammunition which is marked, and logged/recorded by caliber, date sold, and identifying information of the buyer. It would be illegal to transfer or store the old ammunition, and it would be illegal to transfer the new ammunition, even to a friend at the range.

Legislation

What I have a hard time understanding is the lack of guns being produced – is it a problem of just too many being sold for every gun shop to get merchandise, or is it something else? I am personal friends with a couple who own a gun shop, and even their good friends working for some of the manufacturers are unable to get them Uppers/Lowers for certain products. So I looked into it, and past all the rumors of legislation being passed to ban new weapons being produced, or all weapons being produced to only handle certain calibers or capacity magazines, there was some things that stuck out. There are two possibilities that came up last year as a result of some of the Brady organizations lobbying and one of the NRA opposing it. The first is legislation to protect gun manufacturers from being sued, the second is to heavily regulate the gun industry to produce results (less gun violence, etc) and be fined or rewarded accordingly.

How gun makers can help us - Los Angeles Times

Now many people have probably already heard about this, or at least read it and blew it off; during Katrina many private weapons were confiscated by police without being documented and then were stored. The NRA won a suit that ordered LA to release those weapons, though people trying to get them back, even when bringing the serial numbers to the police, are being told they need to have a receipt of purchase. I find (beyond the entire seizing in the first place) that ridiculous when considering these people’s homes were flooded, on top of not many people keeping a receipt for however long they’ve owned the weapon.

NRA: The Untold Story of Gun Confiscation After Katrina - RIVERSIDE COUNTY (CA), Part of the Red County Network

I read an article like this, and I really don’t know what to say.

Paul Helmke: A New Day For Gun Violence Prevention

I am completely fine with having a background check in place for purchasing a weapon, in fact I agree with these registries needing to be kept up to date. You shouldn’t be walking into a gun store and legally obtaining a weapon if you’ve got documented mental issues or just got out on parole after being involved in a violent crime or something. Laws that say you can’t have weapons in bars, government buildings, etc are fine as well – they make sense for obvious reasons.

I completely disagree with gun restrictions, I have no perfect solution for keeping weapons out of the hands of criminals or to stop someone from walking into mall with a fully automatic AK-47 and killing a hundred people, but I know it doesn’t include registering anyone that owns a weapon in a database or banning certain types of weapons or magazines altogether. Many people blow off the fact that this country was created by men using their own weapons, against tyrannical law from an Imperialist mother nation. The founding fathers knew the roots of the many issues forced upon them and sought to create a document that would protect this nation’s people from those same issues ever happening again. Barring further Constitutional rapeage discussion, basically, the Second Amendment was included so that in the future, if the American people felt that they needed another Boston Tea Party and wanted to freeze in Valley Forge, they could do so using the best weapons possible. Fighting government troops/police would be pretty ineffective if all you had was black market weapons (due to the cost), single shot hunting rifles and 5rd 9mm pistols.

Now, I don’t really fear having my guns taken away - the issue is the desensitization of gun laws to the American public, and future ones being put into place. We already know what can happen to the Constitution if government goes unchecked (Patriot Act 1&2, guns seizure at Katrina, Posse Comitatus) and I highly doubt continued and harsher legislation would be any different – until the point that America is like England.

(Ignore the extraneous redneck propaganda) http://www.morebans.org/defendyourself.html

"My first priority will be to reinstate the assault weapons ban as soon as I take office. Within 90 days, we will go back after kitchen table dealers, and work to end the gun show and internet sales loopholes. In the first year, I intend to work with Congress on a national no carry law, 1 gun a month purchase limits, and bans on all semi-automatic guns."

– Barack Obama

Language like this is often used to garner support, and I know in other instances Obama has said other things that are less harsh, however the language is scary – especially to be coming from a person that has the power to enact such policies. Obama’s cabinet, including Clinton and Napolitano are also very keen on getting rid of weapons. Like a previous article indicated, the NRA has lost a lot of power and sway over people’s thoughts on gun control, and the House is headed by Nancy Pelosi – a person who is intimately familiar with much of the gun legislation coming out of Congress.

Like many other laws put into place to protect people, most serve the lobbying interests of a minority, often who suffered a trauma or are scorned by some issue, and these laws often do not uphold the Constitution or serve to really benefit the majority. This is how people act when a system of government supports their efforts, however often in these cases the legislation is supported by more than just the “best interests” of the American people and rather serves the best interests of a private party(s). Gun control is most often associated with the black market (criminals getting weapons) or the gun violence in America. I don’t think gun violence is a relevant issue, and again I don’t have a perfect solution, but it doesn’t involved taking guns away from American citizens.

(Violence in the UK) BBC NEWS | Scotland | Scotland worst for violence - UN

In the end, I guess I’d say that gun control itself has nothing to do with stopping crime, and is more about the wealthy and people in power protecting that power. This has happened before, most notably with the illegalization of marijuana as supported by Dow and other businesses/politicians in the 1930’s.

I don’t have the solutions that many people seek in regard to this issue, but I fear the
America that has a government that doesn’t fear its people.

(inb4 conspiracy theory, also I don't think McCain would be any different)

[Blarg]

Okay, let's do it. Let's admonish guns not seven times, but seventy times seven. Without going into all the gory details, let's just say that on the issue of propagandism, guns is wrong again. Sure, if we let it glorify rabid, suppressive, murderous governments as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities, civilization itself will fall. But that's just one side of the coin. The other side is that guns's primary goal is to lay the foundation for some serious mischief. All of its other objectives are secondary to this one supreme purpose. That's why you must always remember that guns should stop calling me a paltry control freak. Although I've been called worse things by better organizations, knowledge is the key that unlocks the shackles of bondage. That's why it's important for you to know that guns is not only immoral, but amoral.

Guns has written more than its fair share of lengthy, over-worded, pseudo-intellectual tripe. In all such instances it conveniently overlooks the fact that it has a vested interest in maintaining the myths that keep its junta loyal to it. Guns's principal myth is that the health effects of secondhand smoke are negligible. The truth is that guns keeps insisting that it is a refined organization with the soundest ethics and morals you can imagine. To me, there is something fundamentally wrong with that story. Maybe it's that I can't make heads or tails of guns's conclusions. I mean, does it want to funnel significant amounts of money to lousy showboaters or doesn't it? To end on a more positive note: Guns frequently takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle.

[Rhinox]

Just out of curiosity whats the percentage of Minorities in the NRA?

[Churchill]

I would assume it's mostly made up of white people, from the South. I will say though, that when I go to the range there are maybe 50 people there, with similar ratios to minority populations of the area to white people. Here in AZ, there's always 15 or so mexican dudes there, 5/5 asian/black dudes as well.

So NRA representing people is probably not a good platform, though they do try to fight pretty much anything gun related. Gun ownership though is definitely not a white male, southern, type thing.

[Rhinox]

Well Thats the range. Wonder if there have been studies done either internally or otherwise. While gun ownership is not exclusively a white only thing hardcore lobbying is.

[Olo401]

Screw the NRA - they're nothing but a shill group for the gun industry execs. Go with the AHSA

[Gregorio]

I can't wait to fight an actual oppressive government with sticks and stones in 50 years when it becomes REALLY oppressive. That is, if I still have sticks and rocks remaining after the real criminals have taken away my pointy sticks and good flyin' rocks for their own purposes.

[Khamsin]

Why do people even still need ammo? Assuming these are all just humble folks with guns to protect their families, I assume most have had the same ammo for years, only needing to replace it when they discharge their firearms in defense of their family. For practice, range ammo is fine. For hunting, you use a different kind of ammo, and weaponry, anyways.

Can someone explain where this ammo demand is coming from, or are people just stockpiling sheds full of ammo just out of paranoia?

[Chen]

just ban guns alltogether, right thing to do.

[Boyiee]

Why do people even still need ammo? Assuming these are all just humble folks with guns to protect their families, I assume most have had the same ammo for years, only needing to replace it when they discharge their firearms in defense of their family. For practice, range ammo is fine. For hunting, you use a different kind of ammo, and weaponry, anyways.

Can someone explain where this ammo demand is coming from, or are people just stockpiling sheds full of ammo just out of paranoia?

Every single range around here doesnt give you "range ammo". There is no such thing as "range ammo". You can rent a gun, but you cannot rent ammo. If you want to shoot the gun you rented, you must purchase the rounds. The full box is entirely yours to keep, bring back and use whenever you want.

Friend has about 1900rounds of 9mm ammo, those will run out pretty damn fast if you go to a shooting range.


edit: ban guns altogether? Like drugs are banned? Cause noone has possesion of drugs anywhere anymore right? So guns get banned, everyone who wants a gun wont be able to get one, and all the gangsters will still have them and we'll have no protection. Where I live, a gun is not a necessity, but 1 town over, where my brother lives, it is. And it's kept armed in a fireproof safe/case next to his bed with a fingerprint reader on it for instant opening.

[Not Kuno]

Why the fuck does anyone need a semi-automatic assault rifle?

[Chen]

well, its a start to getting rid of them alltogether, in the UK they working on getting rid of knifes. also anyone caught with a gun over here (out of the house) clearly up to no good, so they can't lie to police and get away to go shoot someone.

keeping them at home is ok, because no-one who you want to shoot should ever been in your home.

[Takedown3]

gun crazy americans

why is this bad? people don't need more then 1 or 2 guns at most and even then you dont really need them anyway

paranoid idiots

[Odesseiron]

At my place we have a gun safe full of about 20 different guns, all registered. Pistols, assault rifles, shotguns, etc. We also have tens of thousands of rounds of ammo. We're not some trigger happy momo's, we just like to shoot at the range. Anybody who does go to a range often (weekly or so) can tell you how quickly you can blow through all this ammo. It's nice to have a wide variety of guns, just like any other collector would like to have a variety of whatever it is they collect.

People act like everyone who owns a gun legally or is a member of the NRA are all in some kind of conspiracy that we're going to overthrow the country. That's just ignorance, plain and simple.
Yeah, we're stocking up, because it's no secret that things are gonna go back to how they were when Clinton was in office. Hard to obtain a lot of shit, lots of stuff gets banned again, etc.
Our friend has 3 gun safes worth of shit, makes ours look like nothing. He probably has over 200k rounds of ammo.

Also, when there is finally another revolution in this country and yes, I believe there will be someday, we will be fully prepared. We have the MRE's, guns and ammo waiting

Until then, just leave us be. We're not bothering anyone.

[mayori]

When the revolution comes, I'm going to Odess' house, he'll save me!

[Odesseiron]

Mayori, my man... I will welcome you with open arms!

[mayori]

Mayori, my man... I will welcome you with loaded arms!

Fixed.

[Dareus]

On top of this, there is a resurgence in an ’09 campaign beginning in March for the ammunition accountability state legislation – this would require that by a certain date you destroyed or turned in all of your ammunition, and that by a certain date you could only buy the new ammunition which is marked, and logged/recorded by caliber, date sold, and identifying information of the buyer. It would be illegal to transfer or store the old ammunition, and it would be illegal to transfer the new ammunition, even to a friend at the range.

I actually think this is a great idea. I'm personally against guns so I don't know how owners of this feel, but if you are only using them to shoot for fun or defend yourself this seems alright. I have no doubt the government would mark up the prices to hell though.

I also wonder how many gun owners will actually take part in the "Revolution part 2" cause I don't see it happening ever in our lifetimes.

[Churchill]

The markup is designed to make it so people don't go and shoot guns, essentially, why ban guns when you don't have anything to shoot out of them?

The problem is that government has no business knowing how many rounds of ammunition I own, just like it has no business knowing whether I bought Asian Trannies 6 or use a certain medication or go to 4chan.

[Khamsin]

By "range ammo", I was referring to the person who said it was hard to find ammo that can put a man down in one shot, and that range ammo wouldn't cut it.

Why is there a demand for powerful ammo? Personally, I don't care what somebody chooses to protect themselves with. You want to defend your family with a submachine gun, be my guest. Want some exploding tip hollow point armor piercing super mega rounds? Sure thing. But you should only need new exploding tip hollow point armor piercing super mega ammo when the old ones are discharged, presumably when someone breaks into your house.

I can understand demand for regular ammo, but why the demand for ammo that can make a man's head explode a'la Fallout 3?