|
Post by raphael on May 23, 2009 19:28:06 GMT -5
I've still got to get me some!!!! Anybody bought any guns or ammo lately? What is the status? In just 3 months Americans bought enough guns to outfit the entire Chinese and Indian army's combined.
'You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.' - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto WWII
You also bought 1,529,635,000 rounds of ammunition in just the month of December 2008. Yeah that is right, that is Billion with a 'B'. This number takes no accounting of reloading or reloaded ammunition.
.....read more at AmmoLand.com if you dare.
And how is Smith &Wesson doing? Pretty good I'd say. It looks like SWHC outperformed the general market's 30% gain since the lows. Spaceshot!!!moneytalks.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1233:red-hot-investment&catid=40:market-opinion&Itemid=66
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on May 24, 2009 11:40:25 GMT -5
I haven't been buying any more than normal. When I spend a box of ammo, I go buy one. I do believe that Obama and Co. would severely restrict firearm ownership if they could, but they just don't have the ability and would rather spend their energy on something that they might actually have some hope of accomplishing.
All theses hoarders are doing is driving up the prices and making themselves look foolish. Seriously, what is anyone going to do with 10k rounds of ammo? Even in a Mad Max kind of world a few hundred rounds is all that would be practical to store and/or transport.
|
|
|
Post by CoffeeShooter on May 24, 2009 20:29:34 GMT -5
It reminds me of the Beanie Baby craze of 10 years ago. Raph, ammo is readily available at gun shows but of questionable quality. Fredo is right, the prices are over the top.
|
|
|
Post by bret on May 24, 2009 21:06:01 GMT -5
I do believe that Obama and Co. would severely restrict firearm ownership if they could... Just curious, what do you base that Wingnut rhetoric on? The reason I ask is that it is so opposite what is really true. Obama is a Constitutional scholar. He worships the Constitution. He has openly admitted that the Second Amendment gives you the right to bear arms. So unless you have some info that he is planning to repeal that Amendment (which I kinda doubt) I just wonder why you would say such a thing? Did you hear that at a Palin rally along with the "OBAMA IS A MUSLIM" BS?
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on May 26, 2009 8:48:30 GMT -5
I do believe that Obama and Co. would severely restrict firearm ownership if they could... Just curious, what do you base that Wingnut rhetoric on? The reason I ask is that it is so opposite what is really true. Obama is a Constitutional scholar. He worships the Constitution. He has openly admitted that the Second Amendment gives you the right to bear arms. So unless you have some info that he is planning to repeal that Amendment (which I kinda doubt) I just wonder why you would say such a thing? Did you hear that at a Palin rally along with the "OBAMA IS A MUSLIM" BS? If you'd take a moment to remove your head from the Messiah's rectum, you might notice that this dipshit consistently votes in favor of more firearm restriction and against the rights of gun owners. His only votes in favor of gun owners were blatant CYA. His campaign website is completely silent on the subject. That doesn't sound like a person who supports my rights. linkAlso, here's a nice little list of how he's bobbed and weaved on the subject. He says he's in agreement with the second amendment, but votes for greater restrictions every time. If there were any legal opportunity for the Obama machine to put a total ban on new firearm purchases, I believe he would do just that. Why? Because that's what he always does. www.ontheissues.org/domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm"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, VPC Fund Raiser, 2007 "I believe the DC gun ban is Constitutional, and will not be overturned." --Barack Obama, Constitutional Scholar, 2/2/2008
"I agree with the Supreme Court decision that guns are an individual right." --Barack Obama, Political Pragmatist, 6/30/2008That should be enough for even an over the top Obama sycophant like you. He would do it, but he can't.
|
|
|
Post by bret on May 26, 2009 9:27:38 GMT -5
At least you recognize that he can't do the things you claim he wants to do. So enough with the Chicken Little arguments.
I think this snipped quote from your link nicely sums up his position.
As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it.[/color][/size]
Some folks would like you to think that NO gun control is a good thing, but how many of us think that everyone has a right to own nuclear weapons? So the line must be drawn somewhere. Obama would like to draw the line at assault weapons, child safety locks, and concealed carry legislation.
Here are some more of Obama's thought about guns in the inner city:
You know, when the massacre happened at Virginia Tech, I think all of us were grief stricken and shocked by the carnage. But in this year alone, in Chicago, we've had 34 Chicago public school students gunned down and killed. And for the most part, there has been silence. We know what to do. We've got to enforce the gun laws that are on the books. We've got to make sure that unscrupulous gun dealers aren't loading up vans and dumping guns in our communities, because we know they're not made in our communities. There aren't any gun manufacturers here, right here in the middle of Detroit. But what we also have to do is to make sure that we change our politics so that we care just as much about those 30-some children in Chicago who've been shot as we do the children in Virginia Tech. That's a mindset that we have to have in the White House and we don't have it right now.
I believe in keeping guns out of our inner cities, and that our leaders must say so in the face of the gun manfuacturer's lobby. But I also believe that when a gangbanger shoots indiscriminately into a crowd because he feels someone disrespected him, we have a problem of morality. Not only do we need to punish that man for his crime, but we need to acknowledge that there's a hole in his heart, one that government programs alone may not be able to repair.
|
|
|
Post by manlyman on May 26, 2009 10:17:39 GMT -5
"I also believe that when a gangbanger shoots indiscriminately into a crowd because he feels someone disrespected him, we have a problem of morality. Not only do we need to punish that man for his crime, but we need to acknowledge that there's a hole in his heart, one that government programs alone may not be able to repair."
There is one government program that can repair this. It's called the electric chair.
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on May 26, 2009 12:46:48 GMT -5
At least you recognize that he can't do the things you claim he wants to do. So enough with the Chicken Little arguments. I think this snipped quote from your link nicely sums up his position. As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it.[/color][/size] Some folks would like you to think that NO gun control is a good thing, but how many of us think that everyone has a right to own nuclear weapons? So the line must be drawn somewhere. Obama would like to draw the line at assault weapons, child safety locks, and concealed carry legislation. Here are some more of Obama's thought about guns in the inner city: You know, when the massacre happened at Virginia Tech, I think all of us were grief stricken and shocked by the carnage. But in this year alone, in Chicago, we’ve had 34 Chicago public school students gunned down and killed. And for the most part, there has been silence. We know what to do. We’ve got to enforce the gun laws that are on the books. We’ve got to make sure that unscrupulous gun dealers aren’t loading up vans and dumping guns in our communities, because we know they’re not made in our communities. There aren’t any gun manufacturers here, right here in the middle of Detroit. But what we also have to do is to make sure that we change our politics so that we care just as much about those 30-some children in Chicago who’ve been shot as we do the children in Virginia Tech. That’s a mindset that we have to have in the White House and we don’t have it right now.
I believe in keeping guns out of our inner cities, and that our leaders must say so in the face of the gun manfuacturer’s lobby. But I also believe that when a gangbanger shoots indiscriminately into a crowd because he feels someone disrespected him, we have a problem of morality. Not only do we need to punish that man for his crime, but we need to acknowledge that there’s a hole in his heart, one that government programs alone may not be able to repair. [/quote] Hey everybody! Let's all watch the Messiah tap dance around the issue because he's afraid to tell the truth about it! Boy! He sure is articulate. Who cares if it's a bunch of mumbo jumbo?
|
|
|
Post by CoffeeShooter on May 26, 2009 15:34:15 GMT -5
Just like pot, cocaine, heroin and prostitution, guns will always be abundant in the USA, regardless of any phony laws. I'm sure the POTUS recognizes this as absolute fact.
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on May 27, 2009 9:19:35 GMT -5
Just like pot, cocaine, heroin and prostitution, guns will always be abundant in the USA, regardless of any phony laws. I'm sure the POTUS recognizes this as absolute fact. Evidently so. When cornered on the issue he makes whatever minimum statement he must to placate whatever side he's speaking to. I suppose that's better than having him crusade on either side of the issue.
|
|
|
Post by CoffeeShooter on May 27, 2009 10:15:33 GMT -5
Just like pot, cocaine, heroin and prostitution, guns will always be abundant in the USA, regardless of any phony laws. I'm sure the POTUS recognizes this as absolute fact. Evidently so. When cornered on the issue he makes whatever minimum statement he must to placate whatever side he's speaking to. I suppose that's better than having him crusade on either side of the issue. If you don't like a person you will always be inclined to disagree with them. Human nature and all of that. The problem lies in the idea that we have to choose sides in the first place. Many people, me included, find the issue to be more rhetoric than anything else. We are a nation with an armed populace. Always have been, always will be. Politicians know this. What is changing are registration of ownership & carry regulations. It is the only way to prosecute offenders. Last week I had to deal with a ATF agent regarding what is and is not an antique gun. They are going to run numbers on ALL guns in antique malls but not gun shows. WTF? My opinion is that a wealthy collector was robbed somewhere in GA. Otherwise, they wouldn't bother to look for a particular reported theft. (Admittedly a few stolen guns were found. ) Speaking loudly for gun controls really only began after Ronald Reagan was shot. Now that personal sized guns are mass produced in Romania & China it is clear that gun control cannot happen. Obviously, guns in poverty stricken areas are a bad idea, constitutional rights and all of that. Getting them out of the ghetto at this point is impossible. I still believe that at a certain maturity level, young people need to be taught how to use guns and other weapons as well. Self-defense is never a bad thing. Even if it has to happen in the schools. Right now poor folks are learning to shoot by aiming at old mattresses in soundproofed rooms and basements. How healthy is that?
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on May 27, 2009 10:37:26 GMT -5
I'd say that's more or less true. Nearly everyone is in favor of common sense controls on the sale, ownership and transfer of firearms but the argument has become so politicized that reasoned debate is nearly impossible.
I would argue that we already have in place plenty of laws that can be brought to bear in the prosecution of gun crimes, but there's always someone who wants just one more. The late move toward ammo tagging is a good example. It simply can't be done and even if it could be, it wouldn't make any difference. The guns themselves have been serialized for decades and that hasn't made any difference, so why bother with an approach that has already failed unless the true aim is to further restrict the rights of gun owners?
|
|
|
Post by tnwaltz on May 27, 2009 14:17:16 GMT -5
i suppose this subject looks a lot different to... a person who lives in a city where the number of murders races against the number of days in the year... or a person who has experienced gun violence first or even second hand... or third hand as with a witness to crime...
i'm not a huge proponent of gun control but i do see some pluses in some of the proposels.
i will say this... contrary to all my gun totin' bible huggin' constitutionalist debate partners opinions... unless you are a soldier or a cop, you don't need a friggin' automatic weapon--and... "because i want one" in not an acceptable excuse.
|
|
|
Post by manlyman on May 27, 2009 14:36:40 GMT -5
i will say this... contrary to all my gun totin' bible huggin' constitutionalist debate partners opinions... unless you are a soldier or a cop, you don't need a friggin' automatic weapon--and... "because i want one" in not an acceptable excuse. How about "Cause it shoots a really cool pattern of holes, rally quick. And, actually, not just anyone can (legally) obtain/possess/purchase/sell automatic weapons.
|
|
|
Post by bret on May 27, 2009 15:36:35 GMT -5
It doesn't bother me that all these yahoos are wasting their money loading up on ammo since Obama took office.
It does bother me that many of them are buying Italian Mannlicher-Carcano M91/38 bolt-action rifles.
|
|
|
Post by CoffeeShooter on May 27, 2009 18:27:58 GMT -5
It doesn't bother me that all these yahoos are wasting their money loading up on ammo since Obama took office. It does bother me that many of them are buying Italian Mannlicher-Carcano M91/38 bolt-action rifles. Most of them will just end up shooting themselves or each other. I know a guy who shot himself in the foot one year and a few years later in the thigh. Dumb ass. I also have a friend who's father shot her brother while cleaning a rifle. My own uncle had a truck with a bullet hole in the roof.
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on May 27, 2009 19:16:39 GMT -5
i suppose this subject looks a lot different to... a person who lives in a city where the number of murders races against the number of days in the year... or a person who has experienced gun violence first or even second hand... or third hand as with a witness to crime... i'm not a huge proponent of gun control but i do see some pluses in some of the proposels. i will say this... contrary to all my gun totin' bible huggin' constitutionalist debate partners opinions... unless you are a soldier or a cop, you don't need a friggin' automatic weapon--and... "because i want one" in not an acceptable excuse. Automatic weapons have been severely restricted for years, and rightly so. I know a guy with a class three license and the restrictions placed on him are severe to say the least. More than once, the ATF has shown up at the door late at night and demanded to see his gun book and storage facility. They have that right under the terms of the license. What bugs me is that the folks on the opposite side always trot out wild scenarios like " we just want to stop children from getting automatic weapons" when they know very well that such a thing is already illegal in several different ways. I'm something of a gun enthusiast, but I haven't the slightest need or desire to own an automatic weapon. I've seen some that I'd sure like to fire, but the damn ammo is too expensive to own one.
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on May 28, 2009 9:16:25 GMT -5
As if conjured, here's a letter from one of the very numbskulls I was referencing. But I’m talking about generally speaking do we really want people toting around guns in our parks? Already, the criminal minds are going to carry them anyway, into parks or anywhere else, but it seems to me that if that element is legally enabled to carry those weapons, it just gives them a free for all opportunity to take their illegal activities and gang violence into the parks in more numbers, unless, of course, we are talking about those hunting enthusiasts who are looking forward to shooting down birds and squirrels for recreation.Who is this bonehead? Does she really thing that the "criminal minds" are going down to the Sheriffs office and getting their carry permits? This chick should seriously consider a reality check. chattanoogan.com/articles/article_152082.asp
|
|
|
Post by bret on May 28, 2009 9:53:36 GMT -5
Most of them will just end up shooting themselves or each other. I know a guy who shot himself in the foot one year and a few years later in the thigh. Dumb ass. I also have a friend who's father shot her brother while cleaning a rifle. My own uncle had a truck with a bullet hole in the roof. Funniest story I ever heard was about the guy in Alabama (I ain't makin this up) who was deer hunting from a tree stand (now there's a real sport for ya), and tossed his loaded gun down to his buddy on the ground. The gun hit the ladder, went off and shot the guy right out of the tree, killing him. Deer 1, Hunters 0
|
|
|
Post by tnwaltz on May 28, 2009 10:42:15 GMT -5
uhmmm.. what did she say...? "i'm talking about generally speaking..."...? followed by one hell of a run on sentence...? gangs and hunters...? i have no idea what she's talking about.
|
|