Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

106 posts / 0 new
Last post
krogoth's picture
krogoth
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 576
Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

The New York Times

Printer Friendly Format Sponsored By


November 7, 2008

Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

DENVER — Sales of handguns, rifles and ammunition have surged in the last week, according to gun store owners around the nation who describe a wave of buyers concerned that an Obama administration will curtail their right to bear arms.

“He’s a gun-snatcher,” said Jim Pruett, owner of Jim Pruett’s Guns and Ammo in northwest Houston, which was packed with shoppers on Thursday.

“He wants to take our guns from us and create a socialist society policed by his own police force,” added Mr. Pruett, a former radio personality, of President-elect Barack Obama.

Mr. Pruett said that sales last Saturday, just before Election Day, ran about seven times higher than a typical good Saturday.

A spot check by reporters in four other states easily found Mr. Pruett’s comments echoed from both sides of the counter.

David Nelson, a co-owner of Montana Ordnance & Supply in Missoula, Mont., said his buyers were “awake and aware and see a dangerous trend.”

Mr. Nelson said sales at his store had risen about 30 percent since Mr. Obama declared his candidacy. “People are concerned about overreaching legislation from Washington,” he said. “They are educating themselves on the Internet.”

In Colorado, would-be gun buyers set a one-day record last Saturday with the highest number of background check requests in a 24-hour period, according to figures from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation.

“We’re not really sure who is promoting the concept that a change in federal administrations might affect firearms possession rights,” said an agency spokesman, Lance Clem, “but we do know that it’s increased business considerably.”

Federal law-enforcement officials cautioned that gun sales were extremely volatile. Nationally, rifle and handgun sales surged 17 percent, for example, in May, compared with May 2007, according to Federal Bureau of Investigation figures. That was before Mr. Obama had clinched the Democratic nomination. Sales then fell and were essentially flat by September compared with the year before, even as the campaign heated up, before rising 14 percent in October. November figures were not yet available.

What is clear is that every gun seller — not to mention every advocacy group for gun ownership that depends on dues-paying members — has an incentive to stoke the concern that can prompt a gun sale. Political uncertainty, gun dealers say, is great for business.

“Clinton was the best gun salesman the gun manufacturers ever had,” said Rick Gray, owner of the Accuracy Gun Shop in Las Vegas. “Obama’s going to be right up there with him.”

Sales at his shop doubled on Wednesday, Mr. Gray said, to more than 20 guns from three to 10 on a typical day.

Asked if that made him root for Democratic candidates, Mr. Gray said no. “It’s not all about profits; it’s about what’s he going to do for the country,” he said, noting that he had supported Senator John McCain, who was the Republican nominee.

A National Rifle Association spokesman, Wayne LaPierre, dismissed the notion that the group had any incentive to increase gun sales or membership. “Ridiculous,” Mr. LaPierre said. “I hope President-elect Obama keeps his promises and protects gun rights. If he does that, we’ll be cheering.”

The political battle over guns raged fiercely throughout the campaign in many states where gun ownership is common. On Monday, the day before the election, home-delivered copies of The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette arrived in plastic bags that said, “Vote Freedom First” and “Defend Freedom — Defeat Obama.” The bags were paid for by the N.R.A., whose initials were printed on each one.

Democrats fired back all over the country, with mail campaigns in many states with fliers stating flatly that as president, Mr. Obama would respect an individual’s right to own guns.

“Obama will protect our gun rights,” said one flier sent to homes in Minnesota.

In Montana, Gov. Brian Schweitzer, a Democrat, was photographed shooting his guns outdoors.

But some gun buyers and sellers never forgot, or forgave, Mr. Obama’s widely reported comment in April to a group in San Francisco that some Americans “cling to guns or religion” in times of adversity.

“It was an annoying comment, and it showed there’s a lot more to him,” said Mike Warner, 38, of Las Vegas, who was shopping for a gun there on Thursday.

Mr. Warner said he was an N.R.A. member and an owner of two guns but wanted at least one more.

Other people, even some shopping for guns, said they thought that some gun enthusiasts’ fears about Mr. Obama were unjustified. James Sykes, a gun collector who was shopping at the Gun Room in Lakewood, Colo., called the rush to buy guns “a lot of hysteria about very little.”

Mr. Sykes, who said he had voted mostly Republican in the past but supported Mr. Obama this year, said that issues like war and the global economic crisis were more pressing for him right now and that he imagined the same was true for Mr. Obama.

“My Second Amendment rights are unquestionably important to me, but so is feeding my family,” he said. “In reality, you won’t be able to afford to buy a gun if your job goes overseas.”

But markets, whether for guns or stocks and bonds, tend to move with their own internal dynamics even in — perhaps especially in — gloomy economic times.

Chris Casella, general manager of Federal Firearms Company in Oakdale, Pa., a suburb of Pittsburgh, said he had been fielding about 30 calls a day from people interested in buying assault-type rifles, especially semiautomatic weapons, often with magazines that could hold lots of ammunition.

“A lot of people are buying them as an investment,” Mr. Casella said. “Better than gold.”

Reporting was contributed by Thayer Evans from Houston; Steve Friess from Las Vegas; Dan Frosch from Lakewood, Colo.; Sean D. Hamill from Pittsburgh; and Pamela J. Podger from Missoula, Mont.

Fogle's picture
Fogle
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: May 18 2008
Posts: 35
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

In a way, you Americanas are lucky with your constitution. It give you the right to protect yourself and your families. Here in Holland you will be jailed if you attack a burglar.

 

Even slingshots are illegal. If a piece of wood looks like a firearm it is considered a firearm! Only air rifles and crossbows can be bought. Them being single shot is the criteria, I think.

 

Ah well, at least we can by cannabis legally. So we can chill out any would-be muggers.

 

 

If I were living in the US I would be stocking up on ammunition. My guess would be that bullets will be worth their weight in gold, one day. Don’t bother too much about the tools themselves (guns in this case), but focus on the stuff that gets used up.

gregroberts's picture
gregroberts
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 6 2008
Posts: 1024
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

"In a way, you Americanas are lucky with your constitution. It give you the right to protect yourself and your families. Here in Holland you will be jailed if you attack a burglar."

 What kind of maniac could come up with a law like that? Makes you think the criminals have taken over your govt.  I think you mice have elected cats, this will make sense if you watch the video...

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

Doug's picture
Doug
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 1 2008
Posts: 3200
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

This happens every time a Democrat is elected to any office.  The right wing gun nuts get their panties in a wad and scare themselves silly.  The gun laws now are essentially the same as they were when I was a kid 45-50 years ago.  The bottom line is you can't buy automatic weapons.  OTOH, there is an energetic black market in guns out there.  Go to any gun show and you can meet people who can get you just about anything short of anti-tank weapons.  And, the legal assault weapons, that have been modified to make them semi-automatic,  can again be modified to make them fully automatic.  Everybody who is into guns knows this.  As a whole we are a very well armed nation.

I wonder, though, if this time the sudden spate of gun buying isn't more a response to the same signs of economic turmoil we talk about here all the time.  Things are looking ugly, and many people respond to bad times by buying guns.

GDon's picture
GDon
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 2 2008
Posts: 86
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

Perhaps a sad but necessary part of human history, that there should ever exist, that last avenue of justifiable violence, beyond rational discourse, or that there exist individuals who would provoke violence against others.

America has a most interesting and unique position in history, that the Framers of it's government felt that an armed citizenry was a necessity.

Interesting to hear what other people in history have said on the issue of guns:

 

Rahm Emmanuel - "We're bending the law as far as we can to ban an entirely new class of guns..."

Janet Reno - "Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal."

Bill Clinton - "There is no reason for anyone in this country -- anyone except a police officer or military person -- to buy, to own, to have, to use a handgun. The only way to control handgun use in this country is to prohibit the guns."

Adolf Hitler - "This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilised nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"

Bill Clinton - "When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans ... And so a lot of people say there's too much personal freedom. When personal freedom's being abused, you have to move to limit it. That's what we did in the announcement I made last weekend on the public housing projects, about how we're going to have weapon sweeps and more things like that to try to make people safer in their communities.....If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government's ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees."

Joseph Stalin - "If the citizenry disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves."

Thomas Jefferson - "No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

James Madison - "Americans need never fear their government because of the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation."

George Mason - "When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually, by totally disusing and neglecting the militia.    To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."


 
krogoth's picture
krogoth
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 576
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them
[quote=GDon]

Thomas Jefferson - "No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

James Madison - "Americans need never fear their government because of the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation."

 

[/quote]

 

2 of the best quotes WHY we should be armed, and armed well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

rlee's picture
rlee
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 18 2008
Posts: 148
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

And this has been a trend for some time now.  Truth be told, we are a very violent nation as a whole, and to think that we as a populous could take to arms against a radical government is certainly not outside the realm of reason.

Someone in my town said very recently that if the doom and gloom predictions of our future governmental structure continues, he would fear not to take arms against the government.  His reasoning was that the police represent less than 1% of the population, National Guard less than 1%, and remaining military less than 1% - and not all of them would agree to attack their own nation.  That's 3% at best against 97% or more - good odds!  

I reminded him that the Islamic Muslims of the world are peaceful people, who want nothing more than to live in peace, and that their moral structure is not unlike any other in this world - HOWEVER, Less than 1% of this group are militarist extremists, bent on destroying anything that is not "them".  And that is the power that rules, and provides the world's perception of, the other 99%!

I'm glad I live in the woods!  I'm going to sit back this weekend and read a good book.  Maybe a light series like Mein Kompf and Zweites Buch, or a quick read like The Communist Manifesto!  I don't want to be left behind when all the new "Change" takes place.

Bob

PS Don't take this post wrong, I'm just trying to put the numbers into some sarcastic perspective.  I'm saying this before somebody decides to call me a right-wing radical hillbilly psychotic. 

joe2baba's picture
joe2baba
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2008
Posts: 807
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them
you right wing hilbilly psychotic
Doug's picture
Doug
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 1 2008
Posts: 3200
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

The military and police may be small in numbers, but they make up for it by having really scary guns.  The notion that we could put up any kind of defense against the government with the guns law abiding people have in their homes is laughable.

At the time of the founding fathers the typical guns people had were the same guns militaries had, except cannons.  It was reasonable to think about putting down a dictatorial gov't with those guns.  But, we don't live in that world anymore.  In today's world there are smart bombs, fighter jets able to take out a town or at least a neighborhood in one pass, ships that can lay down a steady rain of missiles and artillery shells as long as they wish, armored personnel carriers that can deliver large bodies of heavily armed troops virtually anywhere in America in short order, shoulder fired missiles and, perhaps most importantly, well trained military and police.  Going up against that kind of force on its own turf is called suicidal.

Aside from the kinds of arms we have, you also have to recognize that any kind of uprising would at least initially be by a relatively small group of people, and would likely be viewed by the greater society as a threat to civil order.  They would probably side with the gov't.

So, please spare me the rhetoric about protecting ourselves against a tyranical gov't.  We can't.

Now, if you want to talk about having guns for hunting or protecting ourselves from yahoos, I'm on board.

krogoth's picture
krogoth
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 576
Civil War against the man

OK Doug,

 

Once again I will make this point. I really cant envision the Police and Military, in masses, attacking American citizens. Sure we may have a few Ruby Ridge or Waco type incidents where extreme force is used unnecessarily, but full outright combat against cities or areas that rebel? Not likely.

You see, civil servants and the military are in the same boat we all are in, if not worse. They don't get paid much, and they are getting foreclosed on, have lost money in the markets, and are buying things for the same prices we all are.

The soldiers are stretched thin to begin with, and the ones coming back from Iraq are disillusioned for the most part, suffering from mental illness, or badly wounded. The ones that are left really are getting sick and tired of being on the 2nd or even 3rd wave of service when they should have been home already.

You are right, we are in a different time. We are in a time where the police and military are better educated, tired of a lot of the same BS we are, and I seriously doubt will fight Americans.

This is not the civil war, or even the Revolution that made this country. Strong dictators around the world make sure the military is well taken care of, like Cuba, Lybia and Egypt. Paid better than most citizens with good salaries, and have access to even better food and consumer goods. That is to protect them. In America, the military is paid badly, and treated like crap by the government that employees them. Are they the ones who will fight us? Maybe some on a small scale, but I don't think on a large scale. Too much collateral damage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

barrt's picture
barrt
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 25 2008
Posts: 171
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

 

I love american people, but you seem so crazy to the rest of the world when your drooling about your guns.

so much death and suffering, all for some mixed up notion off defending yourselves.

if this crisis does go as bad as it could, the people are going to be the biggest threat to the people, your going to be in danger of all "defending" yourselves into oblivion

surely, if your goverment turns on you, a couple of old pistols under the bed wont help much, they are much more likely to be involved in some senseless tradegy when little johnny finds them

peace, love & truth to you all my brothers and sisters, i worry about you you know.

Bart

gregroberts's picture
gregroberts
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 6 2008
Posts: 1024
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

krogoth,

 Here's a video of gun confiscation after Katrina,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-taU9d26wT4

Aaron M's picture
Aaron M
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 22 2008
Posts: 2373
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

Doug,
I mean this in the nicest way possible - but you sir are unconsciously ignorant.
You don't even know what you don't know.

Your first post:

[quote]The right wing gun nuts get their panties in a wad and scare themselves silly.  The gun laws now are essentially the same as they were when I was a kid 45-50 years ago.  The bottom line is you can't buy automatic weapons. "[/quote]

Every portion of this post is untrue. 
Since "40-50" years ago, we've had:

1. The 1968 gun control act prohibited imports of all nonsporting firearms and created several new categories of restricted firearms and;

2. The 1986 Firearms Owner Protection Act made illegal the production of new Machineguns via the Hughes Amendment (Hughes was some politician from NJ.)

And the now expired "Sunset" Assault Weapons ban of the Clinton era, which arbitrarially banned certain weapons because of cosmetic features - literally vestigial features like collapsible stocks, implying that those made weapons "more powerful". The mitigating factor in any instance is, of course, skill. Crime during this period was not effectively curbed, and its enaction was with utter disregard from the FBI's statistics stating that "Assault" weapons accounted for <1% of all Firearms related crime.

3. You're also incorrect about "buying" automatic weapons. They are legal under the 1934 NFA act, but require a Tax Stamp for puchase. This act "classified" weapons according to the BATFE (More or less to ensure their continuity after Prohibition) which had to be "registered" by a $200 tax stamp. Of course, at this time it was extremely prohibitive for the common person to afford. Unscruplulous to say the least.

Your next, equally uninformed comment: 

[quote]OTOH, there is an energetic black market in guns out there.  Go to any gun show and you can meet people who can get you just about anything short of anti-tank weapons.  And, the legal assault weapons, that have been modified to make them semi-automatic,  can again be modified to make them fully automatic.  Everybody who is into guns knows this.  As a whole we are a very well armed nation. [/quote]

-Anti-tank weapons are legal. As are Grenades, Machineguns, Sound Suppressors and nearly anything else you can imagine. They are simply class III weapons, or Destructive Devices. Certain states have provisions outlawing certain types of weapons, but by in large, money talks. Keeping these weapons out of the hands of the proletarian is the ultimate goal.

-"Legal" assault weapons, as you call them - have not been modified. They are Manufactured to be semi automatic. Features of these rifles Mechanically preclude them from being made "fully Automatic" as you say - especially in newer rifles like the AR-15.
A different bolt carrier, safety and trigger group is used.

Your second post stated (and this made me cringe, as both a Military professional and a person with LE experience)

[quote]The military and police may be small in numbers, but they make up for it by having really scary guns.  The notion that we could put up any kind of defense against the government with the guns law abiding people have in their homes is laughable.[/quote]

-The police and military are no different than anyone else. The military, has tight restrictions on ownership of weapons which makes it extremely difficult to "train" or practice.
-"Scary guns" with no training are noise-makers. Unfortunately, this is common across the board with our armed forces. Many troops, like you, don't know what they don't know.

[quote]At the time of the founding fathers the typical guns people had were the same guns militaries had, except cannons.  It was reasonable to think about putting down a dictatorial gov't with those guns.  But, we don't live in that world anymore.[/quote]

This is incompatible with your own logic presented above - which states that you can buy anything short of anti-tank rockets. Can you justify this double think?
Citizens are the power in any society. Even if EVERY officer of the Law and EVERY soldier turned on their countrymen and fought them - and even if the numbers were equal (which they're not even close), the citizen would have the advantage due to their ability to "choose" the fight - just as we see with insurgents overseas.

[quote]importantly, well trained military and police.  Going up against that kind of force on its own turf is called suicidal.

Aside from the kinds of arms we have, you also have to recognize that any kind of uprising would at least initially be by a relatively small group of people, and would likely be viewed by the greater society as a threat to civil order.  They would probably side with the gov't.

So, please spare me the rhetoric about protecting ourselves against a tyranical gov't.  We can't. [/quote]

This represents a mindset. It is not yours alone, but there are other points of view.
Some believe their liberty, and their progeny's liberty is more important than a temporal life.

Apologies for the long post - it's important to give more consideration to critical matters. I've dedicated my life to the service of the constitution, and I find it sad and discouraging that people would sooner pawn off the defense of their liberty than attempt to stand for it.
Further restrictions on the citizens' right to own comparable firearms should be viewed as what it is - a governmental attempt to disallow the citizen body the ability to defend itself. You'll see quickly that President Obama's "support" of gun owners only extends to duck and deer hunters - and his belief is that no one should carry a weapon, or train in the use of fighting weapons.

Contrary to the constitution - and I emplore you to research Marbury v Madison's finding that anything repungent to the constitution is null and void.

Regards,

Aaron

john50's picture
john50
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 2 2008
Posts: 74
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them
Guns are used by the people who did no preparation to rob those that have prepared. That has been what happens in other countries when things get real bad, the bad have guns. The man that has a generator chained to his home - meets the man that has a bolt cutter or gun. It makes you wonder who to fear, Big Brother or the local redneck Gang?
krogoth's picture
krogoth
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 576
A good point of undeclared Martial Law VS. State of Emergency

Hurricane Katrina

Contrary to many media reports at the time, martial law was not declared in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, because no such term exists in Louisiana state law. However, a State of Emergency was declared, which doesgive unique powers to the state government similar to those of martial law. On the evening of August 31, 2005, New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin nominally declared "martial law" and said that officers didn't have to observe civil rights and Miranda rights in stopping the looters. Federal troops were a common sight in New Orleans after Katrina. At one point, as many as 15,000 federal troops and National Guardsmen patrolled the city. Additionally it has been reported that armed contractors from Blackwater USA assisted in policing the city.

 

Greg,

Under Martial Law, they do have the right to do this. Under Martial law we basically are all screwed, but I think it would be safe to say these individuals had plenty of grounds for lawsuits and constitutional rights violations, as well as the part of not giving receipts considering Martial Law was nominally declared, but this was directed at the looters. I sure as hell would be taking down names and badge numbers, and suing the hell out of these individuals for violating my rights, not giving receipts, etc.

krogoth's picture
krogoth
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 576
The conditions of America not being America anymore

1) When gun's of any kind, by force or surrender are taken away from citizens

2) When we move to a common currency system similar to the Euro or a world currency

3) When we have an international ID system outside a passport

If these things happen, it's the beginning of the end for freedom as we once knew it

 

Feel free to add to this list with what you think some conditions may be. And please, no mark of the beast type silly comments, or the Antichrist coming. Let's keep it religion free.  

 

 

 

 

gregroberts's picture
gregroberts
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 6 2008
Posts: 1024
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

krogoth,

 I have read the constitution a number of times and have never read that in an emergency it can be ignored, in an emergency is when it's most needed.

krogoth's picture
krogoth
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 576
State of Emergency is like a mini Martial Law

A state of emergency is a governmental declaration that may suspend certain normal functions of government, alert citizens to alter their normal behaviors, or order government agencies to implement emergency preparedness plans. It can also be used as a rationale for suspending civil liberties. Such declarations usually come during a time of natural disaster, during periods of civil disorder, or following a declaration of war (in democratic countries, many call this martial law, most with non-critical intent). Justitium is its equivalent in Roman law.

In some countries, the state of emergency and its effects on civil liberties and governmental procedure are regulated by the constitution, or a law that limits the powers that may be invoked or rights that may be suspended during an emergency. In many countries, it is illegal to modify the emergency law or constitution during the emergency.

Aaron M's picture
Aaron M
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 22 2008
Posts: 2373
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

[quote=john50]Guns are used by the people who did no preparation to rob those that have prepared. That has been what happens in other countries when things get real bad, the bad have guns. The man that has a generator chained to his home - meets the man that has a bolt cutter or gun. It makes you wonder who to fear, Big Brother or the local redneck Gang? [/quote]

Kind of short sighted isn't it?

Those very same guns are used by those who'd defend themselves.
If you're not strong enough in your conviction to defend what you've earned, you'll lose it.
You've identified half of that - so do your part and civic duty and learn to use a rifle to defend yourself, your family and your nation.

...And I highly doubt local redneck gangs would be taking your farm over.
That sounds like a totally implausible "city slicker" thing to say. 

I'd be far more worried about urban refugees who lack EVERY elementary survival skill.

TruthSpeak's picture
TruthSpeak
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 26 2008
Posts: 21
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them
Right on Brotha!
MarkM's picture
MarkM
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 22 2008
Posts: 856
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them
[quote=MoyerA]

Doug,
I mean this in the nicest way possible - but you sir are unconsciously ignorant.
You don't even know what you don't know.

Your first post:

[quote]The right wing gun nuts get their panties in a wad and scare themselves silly.  The gun laws now are essentially the same as they were when I was a kid 45-50 years ago.  The bottom line is you can't buy automatic weapons. "[/quote]

Every portion of this post is untrue. 
Since "40-50" years ago, we've had:

1. The 1968 gun control act prohibited imports of all nonsporting firearms and created several new categories of restricted firearms and;

2. The 1986 Firearms Owner Protection Act made illegal the production of new Machineguns via the Hughes Amendment (Hughes was some politician from NJ.)

And the now expired "Sunset" Assault Weapons ban of the Clinton era, which arbitrarially banned certain weapons because of cosmetic features - literally vestigial features like collapsible stocks, implying that those made weapons "more powerful". The mitigating factor in any instance is, of course, skill. Crime during this period was not effectively curbed, and its enaction was with utter disregard from the FBI's statistics stating that "Assault" weapons accounted for <1% of all Firearms related crime.

3. You're also incorrect about "buying" automatic weapons. They are legal under the 1934 NFA act, but require a Tax Stamp for puchase. This act "classified" weapons according to the BATFE (More or less to ensure their continuity after Prohibition) which had to be "registered" by a $200 tax stamp. Of course, at this time it was extremely prohibitive for the common person to afford. Unscruplulous to say the least.

Your next, equally uninformed comment: 

[quote]OTOH, there is an energetic black market in guns out there.  Go to any gun show and you can meet people who can get you just about anything short of anti-tank weapons.  And, the legal assault weapons, that have been modified to make them semi-automatic,  can again be modified to make them fully automatic.  Everybody who is into guns knows this.  As a whole we are a very well armed nation. [/quote]

-Anti-tank weapons are legal. As are Grenades, Machineguns, Sound Suppressors and nearly anything else you can imagine. They are simply class III weapons, or Destructive Devices. Certain states have provisions outlawing certain types of weapons, but by in large, money talks. Keeping these weapons out of the hands of the proletarian is the ultimate goal.

-"Legal" assault weapons, as you call them - have not been modified. They are Manufactured to be semi automatic. Features of these rifles Mechanically preclude them from being made "fully Automatic" as you say - especially in newer rifles like the AR-15.
A different bolt carrier, safety and trigger group is used.

Your second post stated (and this made me cringe, as both a Military professional and a person with LE experience)

[quote]The military and police may be small in numbers, but they make up for it by having really scary guns.  The notion that we could put up any kind of defense against the government with the guns law abiding people have in their homes is laughable.[/quote]

-The police and military are no different than anyone else. The military, has tight restrictions on ownership of weapons which makes it extremely difficult to "train" or practice.
-"Scary guns" with no training are noise-makers. Unfortunately, this is common across the board with our armed forces. Many troops, like you, don't know what they don't know.

[quote]At the time of the founding fathers the typical guns people had were the same guns militaries had, except cannons.  It was reasonable to think about putting down a dictatorial gov't with those guns.  But, we don't live in that world anymore.[/quote]

This is incompatible with your own logic presented above - which states that you can buy anything short of anti-tank rockets. Can you justify this double think?
Citizens are the power in any society. Even if EVERY officer of the Law and EVERY soldier turned on their countrymen and fought them - and even if the numbers were equal (which they're not even close), the citizen would have the advantage due to their ability to "choose" the fight - just as we see with insurgents overseas.

[quote]importantly, well trained military and police.  Going up against that kind of force on its own turf is called suicidal.

Aside from the kinds of arms we have, you also have to recognize that any kind of uprising would at least initially be by a relatively small group of people, and would likely be viewed by the greater society as a threat to civil order.  They would probably side with the gov't.

So, please spare me the rhetoric about protecting ourselves against a tyranical gov't.  We can't. [/quote]

This represents a mindset. It is not yours alone, but there are other points of view.
Some believe their liberty, and their progeny's liberty is more important than a temporal life.

Apologies for the long post - it's important to give more consideration to critical matters. I've dedicated my life to the service of the constitution, and I find it sad and discouraging that people would sooner pawn off the defense of their liberty than attempt to stand for it.
Further restrictions on the citizens' right to own comparable firearms should be viewed as what it is - a governmental attempt to disallow the citizen body the ability to defend itself. You'll see quickly that President Obama's "support" of gun owners only extends to duck and deer hunters - and his belief is that no one should carry a weapon, or train in the use of fighting weapons.

Contrary to the constitution - and I emplore you to research Marbury v Madison's finding that anything repungent to the constitution is null and void.

Regards,

Aaron

[/quote]

 I concur completely.  Thank you for an eloquent and educated response.

 As history has shown, occupations typically end badly for the occupiers.  If an attempt is made to "occupy" this country with our own LE or military,  I feel it will end just as badly for them.  Believe it or not, if push comes to shove, there will be strong supporters of the Constitution in both of these groups.

capesurvivor's picture
capesurvivor
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 12 2008
Posts: 963
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

I'm afraid that I agree with Aaron on a number of points, though all of the posters are partially correct. Too many errors for me to take the time to list. While you folks have the facts right on the gun laws, I think you missed the gist of the concerns. I disagree with many of the assumptions, among them that the military or police would not be a threat to regular folks during a social unrest period (if I understand what you're saying). The police ARE scary... I have evaluated officer candidates professionally for several decades; a disturbing number of these folks might have been criminals if they hadn't become cops. Just watch a video of the MA State Police recently shout down citizens at a public forum who got up to support stopping MA from being the only state out of 50 to require police details, rather than use cheaper civilian flaggers, to monitor construction sites. Read Orlov's "Reinventing Collapse" about his experience in the collapsing former Soviet Union. Citizens ARE outgunned and underarmed compared to their military and police; Jefferson would be appalled. The government would mow down any armed insurrectionists, no matter how noble their beliefs. 

[EDIT TEXT REMOVED:  Sorry, absolutely no instructions, exhortations, or inferences on how to commit illegal acts especially ATF felonies are permitted here]

When it comes down to it, those with high power weaponry will, as usual, make the rules and take care of themselves and their families first. ..

 

SG

dertyoil's picture
dertyoil
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 17 2008
Posts: 9
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

We have heard about the ultra-sound/ULF weapons developed by the NWO folks, Feinstein, MCain,etc  asked it to be tested on them, laughable at the lowest setting to watch them piss their pants. These weapons are real, and deployed, they netralize firearms tactical significance in a fight with the NWO running our government.  With remote drone deployment of such weapons our fight will be jepordized. We need to start arming ourselves with counter-wave energy devices and raptor killer weapons, guns are great for non-NWO home defense, but may be of little value against such new government devices. -------Any takers?------great business.... we could sell them to the Arabs/Chineese the Brits hell it's not a gun but it defends a homeland from a tyrants malice, the world ought to love it....let's use that Yankee ingenuity that we are world famous for, like Colt...Waterbury, Seth Thomas, Elgin, etc.

We MUST match the NWOs tactical E technology 1:1.  Sara Conner was right.

Let's put the smug NWO banksters on notice by neutralizing and downing a few of their drones. I'll bet we see congress shape up after that. Oh..I'd love to see one of those LEs at the control boards North of Vegas piss their pants when these birds start dropping.

I don't think con-gress has made any counter E-weapons manufactruing laws yet , but with our new Obomination chief of sticks and stones, eye 4 an eye , cuss and spew gangster  don't bet on this opening lasting much longer. If I  get the rotting fish package from "them", I'll let you know....

 Derty

 

 

Satyricon's picture
Satyricon
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 7 2008
Posts: 4
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

Thank God in his wisdom we here in England don't have the right to have firearms. The Lord guides us all with who is to die, and who is to live. It's the police here the world should be using as an example of how other countries should do it. If the police dont have firearms, why should it's citizens?

You yanks need to quit living in the Wild West period and get rid of your violent means of having weapons. Just believe in God above, and trust in his judgement. 

 

 

 

Big Ben
Go Manchester United

drb's picture
drb
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 11 2008
Posts: 95
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

Too bad Michael Moore didn't anticipate Obama's election back in 2002, otherwise he'd have one more piece to add to this clip:

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

Daniel (still wondering why this forum was opened up in Chris Martenson's site rather than at http://rightwingsparkle.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-and-gun-rights_21.html (or - was it supposed to speak to the one 'bright spot' in today's economy?) )

drb's picture
drb
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 11 2008
Posts: 95
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them
Oh yeah - I forgot to mention - I entered this while watching 'Future weapons' (cool new guns shown there). 
dertyoil's picture
dertyoil
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 17 2008
Posts: 9
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

Why this "gun blog" belongs on CM.

Like gold and silver, guns/ammunition are elemental powers extracted from the earth, forged, physically shaped and made into a thing of value. These elemental items/products vibrate at a frequency which activates levels of consciousness in the genetic code of humans. How you use them is your FREEWILL. guns/ammunition are therefore an integral part of this website as firearms harbor wealth, and build the propensity to accumulate wealth, vis responsibility and freewill bringing...savings, which is key to the points in the crash courses. Pick up a gold bar, pick up a XD-45, hold them...it's  an amazing affirmation of our own value as humans relative to the elements in the universe. We don't need a stinking "Royal" god to tell us who we are and the complexity of our natures. The British Empire found that out.

The NWO doesn't want you to have savings, gold, silver or guns/ammunition because of the phenomenon of activation and manifestation. They want to subdue us and kill us like cannibals as they are. The NWO  could give a shit about the moral side of their scam, that's why they have started wars since Babylon, and make movies like the last Indiana Jones flick which glorified the out of control use of firearms to the extent it made me sick, unrealistic without appropriate reference, and thus precipitating Columbines everywhere and furthering their End Game. They pervert/co opt the activation of an natural internal code, as a result..people are divided by race, religion and anything else under the sun because of this sick wicked game.

Take a poll....I'll bet you..... "law abiding gun owners" have more "savings" than the those who do not own and respect the power bestowed by these elements manifested in this manner, dignity, and self determination, The number of "subprimers" who own firearms is probably very small. Con-gress wants us weak and without the financial independence and value inherent in our genes..

Thank you Chris...you are a superstar....

Derty

drb's picture
drb
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 11 2008
Posts: 95
Re: Next it will be 'crystal power' for the masses? - please!

[quote] Like gold and silver, guns/ammunition are elemental powers extracted from the earth...These elemental items/products vibrate at a frequency which activates levels of consciousness in the genetic code of humans[/quote]

In light of such a statement (if not given tongue-in-cheek),  any serious discourse is not possible.  

Ray Hewitt's picture
Ray Hewitt
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 5 2008
Posts: 458
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

On the presupposition that silver and gold may some day be contraband and of the chance of martial law, I would be wary about owning a registered gun. It's an invitation to a SWAT team to break down your door and ransack your house. In my opinion, better to make something or buy a gun on the black market.

Aaron M's picture
Aaron M
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 22 2008
Posts: 2373
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

Big Ben, some biblical perspective for you;
He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. – Luke 22:36. 

 And by thy sword shalt thou live, and shalt serve thy brother; and it shall come to pass when thou shalt have the dominion, that thou shalt break his yoke from off thy neck. - Gen 27:40

When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace Luke 11:21

Robert Heinlein is a personal hero of mine. His sort of centraist rational was just devoid of social pretensus and he gave us some great quotes about firearms ownership, and civic responsibility in general.

In "Beyond this Horizion, he said;
[quote]"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." [/quote]

This statement is only true if citizens take it upon themself to shoulder the heavy weight of martial discipline.
He said also;

[quote]A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
-Lazarus Long, Time Enough For Love [/quote]

We have been reduced and diminished by our political handlers. I don't believe in a NWO or vast conspiracy.
Anyone whose spent time around men of Ego know it's nearly impossible to get them to conceed anything.

But there is a philosphy that persists in the world that does intend to subjegate the citizenry; there always has been, and there likely always will be.

Cheers, and thanks for the kind words!

Aaron

Doug's picture
Doug
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 1 2008
Posts: 3200
Re: Buying Guns, for Fear of Losing the Right to Bear Them

Krogoth

[quote]On the 28th of July 1932, Attorney General Mitchell ordered the police evacuation of the Bonus Army veterans, who resisted; the police shot at them, and killed two. When told of the killings, President Hoover ordered the U.S. Army to effect the evacuation of the Bonus Army from Washington, D.C.

At 4:45 p.m., commanded by Gen. Douglas MacArthur, the 12th Infantry Regiment, Fort Howard, Maryland, and the 3rd Cavalry Regiment, supported with six battle tanks commanded by Maj. George S. Patton, Fort Myer, Virginia, formed in Pennsylvania Avenue while thousands of Civil Service employees left work to line the street and watch the U.S. Army attack its own veterans. The Bonus Marchers, believing the display was in their honour, cheered the troops until Maj. Patton charged the cavalry against them... After the cavalry charge, infantry, with fixed bayonets and adamsite gas, entered the Bonus Army camps, evicting veterans, families, and camp followers. The veterans fled across the Anacostia River, to their largest camp; President Hoover ordered the Army assault stopped, however, Gen. MacArthur—feeling this free-speech exercise was a Communist attempt at overthrowing the U.S. Government—ignored the President and re-attacked. Hundreds of veterans were injured, several were killed — including William Hushka and Eric Carlson; a veteran's wife miscarried; and many other veterans were hurt.[/quote]

Do I think the military and police will injure and kill violent dissenters like they injured and killed innocent unarmed combat veterans from WWI?  What do you think?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments