Black Friday Gun Sales Hit New Record High

[hueytaxi]

So you don't actually know what he meant then.

Again you only assume and fail to score. Do you? I have read his words and listened to his words. What he thought and what he delivered could be quite different. He was adamantly proclaiming Benghazi was a spontaneous demonstration earlier. So which was it, an attack as he mentioned so often or terrorism as he mentioned in passing 10 paragraphs into a 13 paragraph speech? I could be thinking someone was an idiot to ignore the facts I have given, but I certainly would not write that here.

[hueytaxi]

The 2nd amendment was written right after a new country won it's independence and muzzle loaders were the "arms" allowed.
I'm really all for responsible gun ownership but these are hardly the case when something tragic happens, it's more someone having possesion of a gun illegaly.
Another thing people don't understand is that even the vast majority of police work their entire career without pulling their weapon. That would mean that an untrained, legal, gun owner may cause more harm than good. Of course, it also may mean the cops got there after the fact. : (

I enjoyed your post. The only item I need to comment on is your term about flintlocks being the weapons "allowed". There was no allowance for certain weapons. Hand held rocket launchers and grenades had been in military inventories for several hundred years or since the Chinese invention of the combination of charcoal, saltpeter and sulphur. They also had the blunderbuss capable of multiple kills with a single load. They were the times WMD.
I don't propose that more privately held and carried weapons will be a crime deterrent.

[TigersSlappy]

Sorry for snipping out so much of your post but these are the 2 parts I'd like to address.

6. It's mostly been a problem with younger shooters. Somebody needs to step in before they do something horrible. That's much harder than helping all the people with mental problems, on the streets, in hospitals or prisons. But these people all need help also. And it's not really being cheap, it's trying to find the money when you have 2 parties who are the total opposite.

One thing that has annoyed me as the media went wall to wall for 72 hours or more with this story is the "do something" mantra from them. They don't seem to have a lot of self awareness on that issue. One of the reasons these crazies decide to go out like this is the notoriety factor. Perhaps the media could examine what THEY could do. Something like a blackout on the name/picture of anyone involved in a situation like this. Sounds outlandish on it's face but they quit showing streakers/field jumpers in sports for many of the same reasons.

The 2nd amendment was written right after a new country won it's independence and muzzle loaders were the "arms" allowed.

I've seen this elsewhere on the 'net and I know it was addressed in either this thread or the other one here but this is flat wrong. There were repeating arms available when the 2nd amendment was written and ratified and in fact they had been around for 100 years or more. Were they in general production? No. Were they as reliable as today's arms? No. But the founding fathers were not stupid men, I'm certain they were aware of them and could easily foresee that there would be more advancement in arms. To assert that they were only covering muzzle loaders then and for the future is to sell them very short.

[Gehringer_2]

.. But the founding fathers were not stupid men, I'm certain they were aware of them and could easily foresee that there would be more advancement in arms. To assert that they were only covering muzzle loaders then and for the future is to sell them very short.

This may be true but is still not really useful to know, given that the 2nd amendment doesn't refer to "guns", it refers to "arms" and certainly the modern technology of death and destruction is beyond the wildest dreams of any 18th century pol. So a line is going to be drawn somewhere to make the 2nd amendment a sane proposition for this age. This is a classic case where there is no choice but to re-interpret the words of the Constitution in light of what basic principle the founders might have been after.

But if you want to be a literalist, you can take no position other than the government has no right to regulate any weapon, right up to storing binary nerve gas agents in your bedroom closet and that if you don't like it, amend the amendment. And maybe that is what we should have done 100 yrs ago when technological warfare began to evolve. But the court didn't. It left the amendment in place but gave it a more reasonable reading for the reality of the times. Once that happens, it is pointless to keep harking back to what the founders knew or didn't know. A new line has been drawn and the only guidance we have at this point to keep redrawing it is our own.

[mtutiger]

One thing that has annoyed me as the media went wall to wall for 72 hours or more with this story is the "do something" mantra from them. They don't seem to have a lot of self awareness on that issue. One of the reasons these crazies decide to go out like this is the notoriety factor.

Was Adam Lanza alive for the lead late night telecasts?

[hueytaxi]

I can confirm that at least four types of repeating rifles were available in the mid 17th century until the Revolutionary War. I find no evidence of how widespread their use was in those days. The Cookson Repeater Rifle, the Nordenfelt Gun, the Lalthoff repeater and the Belton Flintlock were a few of the state if the art weapons of war.

[hueytaxi]

This may be true but is still not really useful to know, given that the 2nd amendment doesn't refer to "guns", it refers to "arms" and certainly the modern technology of death and destruction is beyond the wildest dreams of any 18th century pol. So a line is going to be drawn somewhere to make the 2nd amendment a sane proposition for this age. This is a classic case where there is no choice but to re-interpret the words of the Constitution in light of what basic principle the founders might have been after.

But if you want to be a literalist, you can take no position other than the government has no right to regulate any weapon, right up to storing binary nerve gas agents in your bedroom closet and that if you don't like it, amend the amendment. And maybe that is what we should have done 100 yrs ago when technological warfare began to evolve. But the court didn't. It left the amendment in place but gave it a more reasonable reading for the reality of the times. Once that happens, it is pointless to keep harking back to what the founders knew or didn't know. A new line has been drawn and the only guidance we have at this point to keep redrawing it is our own.

But the courts have reviewed the amendment many times coming to the same conclusions. The people have the right to their arms. Other laws regulate WMD so that is a strawman.

[Gehringer_2]

But the courts have reviewed the amendment many times coming to the same conclusions. The people have the right to their arms. Other laws regulate WMD so that is a strawman.

I wouldn't call it a strawman. I'd call it a marker The court has had to come up with some rationale for what it includes and what it excludes because there is no guidance in the text. It's easy to see what lies on one side of the line - say WMD, and pretty clear what is on the other side, say a bolt action 30-06 hunting long gun. But what is the logic that decides where the line is between those two? In the end hasn't it just been whatever the 9 guys decided was 'reasonable'?

For instance, to the best of my knowledge, the so called 'assault weapon' ban was never found unconsitutional while it was in force was it (serious question - I didn't follow that that closely)? Yet it is argued that on technical grounds there is no such classification possible.

[TigersSlappy]

Was Adam Lanza alive for the lead late night telecasts?

That has no bearing, they know they're not going to be alive.

[TigersSlappy]

This may be true but is still not really useful to know, given that the 2nd amendment doesn't refer to "guns", it refers to "arms" and certainly the modern technology of death and destruction is beyond the wildest dreams of any 18th century pol.

I'm not arguing your point. I wasn't arguing most of the points that Sports_Freak made. What I was doing was correcting misinformation. It's very hard to be taken seriously in a discussion when you use "facts" that simply aren't true. In the last week I've seen too many people making statements about guns/gun laws/gun owners that were blatantly wrong. If they're discussing the issue with someone that knows that it weakens any other points they make.

[Gehringer_2]

.... What I was doing was correcting misinformation....

no argument with that.

[ballmich]

Just spent time checking prices as the paranoia sets in. My Pre WWII Moisin I paid about $125 for three years ago asking $350+, AK-47 clones worth $300 a week ago selling at $650-1250. The AR-15 is in short supply and has jumped from $750 bare bones to $1500. 1000 rounds of Russian ammo worth $220 asking $600. I am seriously considering selling some of my semi automatics for some historic items that suddenly became affordable.

You can still find the Mosins at Big 5 Sporting Goods for about $110 (up from $99 last year). I'm not sure about the year or condition, I think you have to sort through them all if you are particular, or want one with the Hex receiver. But I, too, have seen them listed by individuals for $300+, which is a little nutty when you can go to a retailer and buy it for less. Though maybe there are some mods or something included with these private sales. Besides, I suspect the Mosin will be spared in the ban. It's not magazine fed, certainly not a high capacity firearm. And people hunt with them. Although, they hunt with AR-15's too, but no one seems to care about that.

[Sports_Freak]

I'm not arguing your point. I wasn't arguing most of the points that Sports_Freak made. What I was doing was correcting misinformation. It's very hard to be taken seriously in a discussion when you use "facts" that simply aren't true. In the last week I've seen too many people making statements about guns/gun laws/gun owners that were blatantly wrong. If they're discussing the issue with someone that knows that it weakens any other points they make.

Well, I really didn't know which guns were around in the 1700's. So yes, I was wrong. But it seems like many people are either anti or pro gun. I'm neither. I even want the ability to buy a gun someday. And while I'm all for using tax dollars to get people with mental problems the help they need, I'm not sure if it would do much good with these type of slaughters.

I was actually kind of bummed out Snyder didn't allow a carry permit gun owner to carry in schools in Michigan. Allow each school to have a certain number of people to carry at schools, depending on their size. Train them on how to use them in certain situations. As it is now, the people who go into schools with the intent of multiple shooting know they can get in as many shots as they want until a cop shows up.

[T&P_Fan]

I was actually kind of bummed out Snyder didn't allow a carry permit gun owner to carry in schools in Michigan. Allow each school to have a certain number of people to carry at schools, depending on their size. Train them on how to use them in certain situations. As it is now, the people who go into schools with the intent of multiple shooting know they can get in as many shots as they want until a cop shows up.

Yes, lets invite more George Zimmermans to the table. Arming want-a-be vigilantes is not the proper course of action, imo.

I am not sure what to do, but I know the last thing I would ever do is voluntarily put guns into a school, no way.

[hueytaxi]

You can still find the Mosins at Big 5 Sporting Goods for about $110 (up from $99 last year). I'm not sure about the year or condition, I think you have to sort through them all if you are particular, or want one with the Hex receiver. But I, too, have seen them listed by individuals for $300+, which is a little nutty when you can go to a retailer and buy it for less. Though maybe there are some mods or something included with these private sales. Besides, I suspect the Mosin will be spared in the ban. It's not magazine fed, certainly not a high capacity firearm. And people hunt with them. Although, they hunt with AR-15's too, but no one seems to care about that.

Interesting that if you have one of the early ones, BATFE does not even list it as a firearm. Huge stopping power, huge bullet and some call the.223 a high impact round.

[ballmich]

For $235, you can buy your child a "bulletproof" backpack.... sales are up 500% since last Friday.

Bulletproof Backpacks And Combat Apparel Sales Soar | ZeroHedge

[ballmich]

The NRA just shot themselves in the foot by calling for armed guards at every school as their response to Sandy Hook. They are no longer relevant and certainly haven't done their members any favors. The public will not go for this response, and it makes them look incredibly weak and out of touch.

[hueytaxi]

The NRA just shot themselves in the foot by calling for armed guards at every school as their response to Sandy Hook. They are no longer relevant and certainly haven't done their members any favors. The public will not go for this response, and it makes them look incredibly weak and out of touch.

Not unexpected. As much criticized by many, the only thing they have really accomplished is prevention of private ownership of weapons. I quit donating during the Clinton years when every piece of mail was wanting $25, 35, 50 or $100. There are lesser known groups who truly represent us.

My best friend and I were at dinner last night and we both agreed we would give up our hi capacity magazines if it woulod slow down the easy access. I don't have that many. But the term military style assault rifles is far too boaad a brush.

[Gehringer_2]

The NRA just shot themselves in the foot by calling for armed guards at every school as their response to Sandy Hook. They are no longer relevant and certainly haven't done their members any favors. The public will not go for this response, and it makes them look incredibly weak and out of touch.

Yeah - pretty hard to believe their response was to double down. But - I guess that virus is going around this week. Pretty much the same thing Boehner's folks just did for him.

[ballmich]

Not unexpected. As much criticized by many, the only thing they have really accomplished is prevention of private ownership of weapons. I quit donating during the Clinton years when every piece of mail was wanting $25, 35, 50 or $100. There are lesser known groups who truly represent us.

My best friend and I were at dinner last night and we both agreed we would give up our hi capacity magazines if it woulod slow down the easy access. I don't have that many. But the term military style assault rifles is far too boaad a brush.

So you aren't taking the Stewart Rhodes, Oath Keepers, pledge? I would consider turning in some items, after disarmament of the state and local police, FBI, National Guard, elimination of DHS and TSA, and strengthening the Posse Comitatus Act to keep the US military from occupying the country. And probably some legislation to make UN activity of any capacity in the United States illegal. If disarmament is good for me, then it surely is good for them. Lead by example, I say.

Oath Keepers » Blog Archive » My Personal Pledge of Resistance Against Any Attemp to Disarm Us by Means of an “Assault Weapons Ban”

[Gehringer_2]

So you aren't taking the Stewart Rhodes, Oath Keepers, pledge? I would consider turning in some items, after disarmament of the state and local police, FBI, National Guard, elimination of DHS and TSA, and strengthening the Posse Comitatus Act to keep the US military from occupying the country. And probably some legislation to make UN activity of any capacity in the United States illegal. If disarmament is good for me, then it surely is good for them. Lead by example, I say.

Oath Keepers » Blog Archive » My Personal Pledge of Resistance Against Any Attemp to Disarm Us by Means of an “Assault Weapons Ban”

As a side note, a simple quick back of the envelop calculation I just saw multiplied the number of schools in the US by a very modest $45k total compensation package per guard and the result is a $4.3 billion dollar tax bill to pay for them - not even counting their weapons and training. And here I was thinking the NRA and the Tea Party were BFF.

[Sports_Freak]

Yes, lets invite more George Zimmermans to the table. Arming want-a-be vigilantes is not the proper course of action, imo.

I am not sure what to do, but I know the last thing I would ever do is voluntarily put guns into a school, no way.

I'm not talking of having someone like Zimmerman protect our schools. <shudder>
My idea would be to allow certain teachers or other school personal to go through extensive training and testing for anytime an emergency occurs. Put it this way, if one of the teachers would have been carrying a weapon, illegally, in that school and shot the shooter before he killed so many kids, would he/she have been hailed a hero or a villain? Would he/she have been brought up on charges? I find it hard to believe a jury would have convicted such a person after saving innocent lives.

[ballmich]

As a side note, a simple quick back of the envelop calculation I just saw multiplied the number of schools in the US by a very modest $45k total compensation package per guard and the result is a $4.3 billion dollar tax bill to pay for them - not even counting their weapons and training. And here I was thinking the NRA and the Tea Party were BFF.

Not that it matters, because I don't think this idea ever gets off the ground, people don't want firearms or armed guards at their children's school (personally I don't mind, but most people do)..... The idea behind having armed guards at schools is that these will be predominately volunteers comprised of veterans, retired law enforcement, etc. There would be cost, but hard to know how much.

[Gehringer_2]

Not that it matters, because I don't think this idea ever gets off the ground, people don't want firearms or armed guards at their children's school (personally I don't mind, but most people do)..... The idea behind having armed guards at schools is that these will be predominately volunteers comprised of veterans, retired law enforcement, etc. There would be cost, but hard to know how much.

Don't most veterans work for a living? Aren't retired law enforcement type going to be getting a little long in the tooth to take on the predominantly 20 somethings that seem to be the profile? If they are talking an ad hoc volunteer army then I agree it has a pretty small chance of getting off the ground.

[ballmich]

Don't most veterans work for a living? Aren't retired law enforcement type going to be getting a little long in the tooth to take on the predominantly 20 somethings that seem to be the profile? If they are talking an ad hoc volunteer army then I agree it has a pretty small chance of getting off the ground.

If they're working for a living and too busy, I presume they don't volunteer, don't you? Regardless, I don't think the purpose is to have SWAT at every school. Veterans or retired law enforecement would be a good deterrant. It doesn't guarantee anything, but if trained for the job, it would put people on the premises to be the first line of defense or first responder. I don't think it ever gets off the ground, so it doesn't matter.

What I don't want to see is the DHS or TSA take over, and what the NRA has unwittingly done here is probably insured that if this goes through, that you have the TSA groping your children every morning before school.

[Mr. DNA]

Hmm, low-paying or volunteer positions for armed men to be around small children all day.

Like that won't attract sexual abusers, unstable Bernard Goetz-types, and psychotic Lanzas-to-be!

What could possibly go wrong?

[hueytaxi]

Hmm, low-paying or volunteer positions for armed men to be around small children all day.

Like that won't attract sexual abusers, unstable Bernard Goetz-types, and psychotic Lanzas-to-be!

What could possibly go wrong?

Please ease my worry that you will not be applying.

[Yoda]

Yes, lets invite more George Zimmermans to the table. Arming want-a-be vigilantes is not the proper course of action, imo.

I am not sure what to do, but I know the last thing I would ever do is voluntarily put guns into a school, no way.

I'm curious as to why you're so afraid of guns? Used properly they are very safe, and to rule out the likelihood of a trained civilian being able to limit damage in a situation like this seems extremely pessimistic to me.

[hueytaxi]

I know two or our local middle schools and at least one high school has deputies assigned and are called Resource Officers. This has been in place for a few years now.

[hueytaxi]

Pete Williams in a special NBC report now relaying officials statement that it was not only a Sig Sauer 9mm and a Glock 9mm used and found in the building, but there were two more AND the Bushmaster .223 was in the vehicle. Yet the Med Ex claiming all victims were shot with a long gun. there should not be controversy if the shell casings were scattered throughout the crime scene,.



In another video of the scene showing the open trunk, that is not a Bushmaster in the car. It appears to be a Saiga shotgun built on a similar frame to the Bushmaster with a different operating lug.

[hueytaxi]

Proposed AWB has accomplished two things already:

1. Stimulated local economy by panic buying and inflated pricing still rising.

2. As capital investment companies divested their interest in major weapon manufacturers, jobs and stocks nosedive.

If closure of the gunshow loophole requires all transfers of gun ownership to have background checks, who will decide what info will be available to Joe Public? Will there be a loophole to allow heirlooms to be passed within the family, will this be the end of dad giving his son his first rifle?

[DetroitCity313]

I know two or our local middle schools and at least one high school has deputies assigned and are called Resource Officers. This has been in place for a few years now.

Columbine HS also had armed guards. I am not sure of the exact solution to this mess, so while armed men and women in schools may prevent some damage (and may increase damage), it definitely is no solution.

[Yoda]

Columbine HS also had armed guards. I am not sure of the exact solution to this mess, so while armed men and women in schools may prevent some damage (and may increase damage), it definitely is no solution.

I'd love to hear how a guard will do increase danger rather than limit it.

[DetroitCity313]

I'd love to hear how a guard will do increase danger rather than limit it.

NYPD Gunfire In Empire State Building Shooting Wounded All Nine Bystanders, Says Ray Kelly

More gunfire can increase the danger to other students, you never know.

[hueytaxi]

Following up, our sheriff's office has a school resource department and does place deputies in most of our middle and high schools. Their primary duties are no to be roving guards. They are there to assist the staff in special situations that "could" turn into a police situation. I would not expect their presence to deter the sicko such as Lanza.
Our PD and SO not only train on the range they have access to urban training centers which can be "live fire". Not only do they have to enter rooms armed, but also differentiate between friend and foe.

[TigersSlappy]

Following up, our sheriff's office has a school resource department and does place deputies in most of our middle and high schools. Their primary duties are no to be roving guards. They are there to assist the staff in special situations that "could" turn into a police situation. I would not expect their presence to deter the sicko such as Lanza.
Our PD and SO not only train on the range they have access to urban training centers which can be "live fire". Not only do they have to enter rooms armed, but also differentiate between friend and foe.

Huey,
Has anyone linked you to this article yet? Loooooooong, but interesting.

An opinion on gun control « Monster Hunter Nation

[sinister porpoise]

I'd love to hear how a guard will do increase danger rather than limit it.

It would be the introduction of firearms on hundreds of thousands of schools generally free of them. Some percentage of these guns will be accidentally discharged, or otherwise inappropriately used.

[hueytaxi]

Huey,
Has anyone linked you to this article yet? Loooooooong, but interesting.

An opinion on gun control « Monster Hunter Nation

Decent read. Probably the first major point I'm in accord with is the fact than most of the anti gun people speak from emotion with little to no factual knowledge. A vague comparison would be Stevie Wonder complaining about my driving.
They have accepted that all guns are evil if they have the potential to cause harm.

They want me, if I have a home defense weapon to keep it either unloaded, disabled, or locked in a safe. Ludicrous thought process. It is for home defense!

They will have learned from the silliness of the 94 AWB and will not repeat their mistakes. They will also fail to garner the votes to ban all the weapons on their list. There are not enough lame duck politicians on their side willing to risk assured defeat at their next election

There will be concessions to come to agreements such as the banning of manufacture or impost of magazines over 10 rounds. They will not win the ban on detachable magazines. They would put thousands out of work in the US alone.

I can see gunshows only allowing licensed vendors from making sales in accordance with background check laws. Private sales would be delegated to the parking lots and out of homes.

Internet sales will see an effort to stop. Truthful advertising will derail that push as people are educated that internet sales of weapons are already regulated and the vendor must send the purchase to (1) a federal license vendor, who will notify the private buyer of arrival and complete proper paperwork as regulated or (2) send to an individual purchaser who himself holds a federal firearms license. Both licensed vendor and purchaser must keep records available to BATFE of all sales and purchases.

Every gun owner is not a right wing conspiracist. The vast majority are your neighbors and friends. People appalled by the same murders that remain etched upon us. They too want a SOLUTION not a knee jerk emotional reaction.

There are so many false numbers out there now. In a letter to our editor, one listed as less than 1/3 of the nation own a gun. Since the only numbers available are polls, that number is highly suspect. Most states do not register all weapons. I have seen posted on this sight 300.000,000+ guns in private hands, American industry selling 5,000,000 guns a year. By those numbers we must not have had guns 100 years ago. Soft math here.

And then the argument of "guns don't kill people, people kill people". What about the argument "people kill people"? Take that concept and seek causation. If a connection between causation and a weapon exists we have to have the means to either prevent or correct the action. Today we seldom have the opportunity or the technology to predict, prevent weapon of any kind criminal behavior. Even the FBI, a stalwart of gun control fails to keep a database current on citizens who should be denied access to weapon purchases. In Florida where our citizens just passed 1,000,000, concealed carry licenses issued, only 700 individuals have been turned down for their license. I challenge Florida and the FBI to explain that.

I carry on far too long. Anti gun people, I am not against you. My effort is to inform and seek mutual reasonable compromise. We won't solve most cases, but we can begin!

[TigersSlappy]

Every gun owner is not a right wing conspiracist. The vast majority are your neighbors and friends. People appalled by the same murders that remain etched upon us. They too want a SOLUTION not a knee jerk emotional reaction.
I carry on far too long. Anti gun people, I am not against you. My effort is to inform and seek mutual reasonable compromise. We won't solve most cases, but we can begin!

I agree 100% with your last sentence. I'm not opposed to some common sense changes, but I'd prefer those changes be written and discussed by people that at least know something about guns.

Even though it may not seem that way here I'd never qualify as a "gun nut". My dad gave me his dad's 16ga single shot when I turned 8 years old to plink around our farm. That probably sounds awfully young to some but I'd been going hunting with him since I was able to walk so was well schooled in just how careful you needed to be with guns.

The summer I turned 14 I worked all summer baling hay with my uncles for $2 an hour saving enough money to buy my dream deer rifle for my 1st season that fall. A brand new Remington 742 semi auto with a scope, almost $300 which was a LOT of money to a 14 year old back then. I still have that gun and my oldest son will have it after me.

I own a couple other rifles, a muzzle loader and 3 shotguns. I used to hunt a LOT, including before and after school 2-3 days a week and well into my 40's. Physically I can't do it as much now as I used to but I've always considered myself a hunter rather than a gun person.

My kids on the other hand all are much more target shooters and plinkers than I am or ever was. They have CPL's, hand guns and love to go out and shoot for fun, my daughter included. So I do recognize that with guns as with most things it's to each their own.

It upsets me on this issue is to be lumped into a category with the person that did this. It upsets me when people attempt to control and legislate on issues that they're nearly completely ignorant on. It upsets me that these same politicians that seemingly want to inject race into everything ignore the daily slaughter of blacks in the cities while making this killing of white kids in CT the end of the world. That's not to diminish CT, but maybe we need to pay more attention to what's going on in the cities where that many or more die every single week of every single year.

[smr-nj]

Every gun owner is not a right wing conspiracist.

but I'd prefer those changes be written and discussed by people that at least know something about guns.

Perhaps it might also be nice if the same assumptions being made about people who hold a different view than yours could also be as open minded..... as in : "not a left wing conspiracist", and "not ignorant about guns".