I expect sales of Glocks, AR-15s, Shotguns, high capacity magazines, and ammunition to increase

[GarroHorus]

Remember what happened with ammo after Obama was elected.

Well, you have every anti-gun extremist coming out of the woodwork now DEMANDING bans, so the reaction will be to get it while you can.

I fully support the second amendment and the RKBA, but own no firearms.

I think the ownership part of that equation is going to change in the next week or so...

[dballance]

1. Didn't Glock Sales Double in the area after Gabby Gifford's shooting? eom

[Glassunion]

18. No they did not.

Overall(not just Glocks) handgun sales following the AZ shooting climed only 5% nationwide.

Glock is an overseas company that does not publish sales figures so it is impossible to ascertain how much of that 5% increase was from Glock brand pistols.

[permatex]

2. You are so spot on correct

I remember after the tragic shooting in AZ that almost cost Gabby Giffords her life, the sale of Glocks skyrocketed because there was talk by some anti pro gun orgs. to ban Glocks.

[permatex]

57. Why would you post such vile bullshit?

I assume you have links for that?

[jimlup]

3. Yep... /nt

[ileus]

4. I was looking at the surefire 60 rnd Ar mags a few days ago

I thought 93 bucks was a little steep. Kinda wished I picked it up now prices are gonna be gouged because of this. Maybe I'll just buy more 20's and 30's instead.

[DainBramaged]

6. Why who are you planning to use them against?

you need MORE 20's and 30's? For what? Should the ATF be interested? Who are you threatened by?

[gejohnston]

7. I'm guessing investment

to gouge at a later date.

[DainBramaged]

13. After his last reply, RUN AWAY

They loves to talk about those magazines in spite of the insensitivity.

[permatex]

11. That would be a big fat none of your business

ATF doesn't give a shit how many or what capacity mags you buy or own.
What does need have to do with it?

[benEzra]

14. Magazines are consumable items, like tires on a car. They wear out.

If some yahoo were talking about banning all future sales of tires more than 10cm wide and your car takes 235/45's, I dare say you might buy an extra set or two.

Those of us who shoot competitively (or shoot a lot recreationally) will go through dozens of magazines over time, so hedging against the unlikely possibility of a future ban makes sense for those of us who remember 1994.

[DainBramaged]

15. A future ban

of course, why didn't i think of that

[permatex]

16. I know I'm on ignore

but why don't you take your hateful comments elsewhere, you add zero to the debate and it's not wanted.

[DainBramaged]

5. Wow are you scared now? Of what?

People who art anti-gun are not extremists like the NRA supporters. Otherwise, they wouldn't find a need to bring their guns to political conventions.


But what do you care? Intimidation, that's what the NRA stands for. Weak people who thinks holding a gun makes them special.

[GarroHorus]

8. From where I sit, the anti-gun people are EXTREMISTS in the EXTREME

I hate the NRA and don't currently own a weapon.

The talk of bans by the anti-gun EXTREMISTS has made me change my mind on the ownership part.

[DainBramaged]

9. the NRA has 4.3 million members

the NRA are the extremists.

[gejohnston]

10. Brady and VPC have

about one percent of that, if that many.

When you compare the number of gun owners with NRA members, you have some point. I will say the board of directors are extremists.

[GarroHorus]

12. I put both the NRA nad the anti-gun nuts in the same bucket of extremism. nt

[Clames]

19. That's called balance.

I see the NRA as a necessary evil. Balances against the Brady Campaign, VPC, MAIG, LCAV and others that adhere to the extreme on the other side of this issue. Advocates for unlimited ownership and advocates for total bans are equally as ignorant.

[DainBramaged]

23. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

people who want life and sanity are extremeists.....


Jesus, hold that gun tighter..

[Clames]

24. You just hold your DU handle tighter.

Life and sanity from the Brady Campaign....

[4th law of robotics]

25. Who is arguing for death and insanity?

[southernyankeebelle]

27. Since when has the Brady group become an extremist organization? My goodness.

I don't think they want to outlaw your rights to protect your home or even hunting. What has this world come to?

[Upton]

28. They originally wanted to outlaw handguns..

they've tempered that position some over the years because of a lack of interest. And though they've become largely irrelevant, I'd without a doubt consider them extremists..

[southernyankeebelle]

29. How sad about that. Thank god for the Brady's of the world who care. I don't share

your view. But then again you have every right to have your view. But somewhere in the middle people should be reasonable about some control. Protect your property and your hunting rights yes, I agree with that. But somewhere along the line your (I mean that in general) right to arm shouldn't get in the way of my (in general) to feel safe in public. Until people can discuss that issue nothing will ever be solved.

[Clames]

40. It doesn't get in the way.

You probably pass people with legally concealed guns everyday and never knew it. Probably never crossed your mind as you went about your business. People should be slowed to protect themselves as they see fit. You have your choices, others have theirs.

[southernyankeebelle]

41. Why do we have law enforcement? This isn't the wild west. I just read on another post

where a guy in WalMart was going into his pocket to get something out and his gun fell out and he and 2 other shoppers were hurt. Now that is a case to me where your right to carry a gun gets in the way of feeling safe in a public place. Now this gun had a license to carry. But I know you'll say how stupid of him and he should know better. However, it takes just one accident and someone could die.

[Clames]

44. Because they have duty to protect the public in general.

They have no duty to protect individuals except those in custody. And even in your Hollywood notion of the Wild West there were Sheriffs, Federal Marshals, and other LE. It was stupid of that person but you just made another error. That was not an accident, that was negligence. There is a difference even though I doubt you'll catch the significance of differentiating.

[gejohnston]

45. ready for a history lesson?

Law enforcement protects the public at large and keeps social order, just as the term implies. They do not have an obligation to protect individuals unless directed to. Even if they did, it would be an impossible task.

To the history lesson:
The wild west was not wild. More people carried concealed pistols in the cities on the coasts and the south than the west. Why? Upper middle and middle class folks there were concerned about street crime. That was true in the US and true in Europe as well. From the 19th century advertisements I have come across, it seems like they were aimed at middle class women. To the west and the myth. The TV westerns were not documentaries. Not all the cowboys were clean shaved white guys. None were clean shaved. About one in four was a former slave. Some went to Texas, some went to Wyoming and Idaho.
What about the small pistols you see in museums and movies? Growing up in the west, I wondered that too. None of them were family heirlooms in any family I knew. Larger handguns and long guns, yeah.
They did exist in the west, mostly gamblers and other people of questionable repute. But the average farmer, rancher, etc. did not. Why?
Small concealable pistols lacked power and range (they still do to some degree. Shoot a moose or bear with a .32 or .25, he'll shove it up your ass even today.). What they needed was range and power for dinner and protecting livestock from mountain lions. There was the occasional range war, but that was with rifles. Self defense from humans (at close city ranges) were not really an issue. Why?
Stronger sense of community, people felt safer. Even in Dodge City, once the drovers sobered up and went back to Texas, the place turned back into Mayberry.
There was a better social safety net provided either by the community or nature.

Edit to add one more thing. Law enforcement did exist. There were town cops, county sheriff, US Marshall's, and Secret Service (though there few if any counterfeiters and identity thieves). Railroads had (and still do) their private police forces.

[southernyankeebelle]

46. I don't need a lesson. I am not going around shooting people. I feel pretty safe. The NRA

has managed to put the fear of god into everyone. The NRA as far as I am concerned is all about money and raising money. I was listening this morning on a talk show and a woman from TX called in and said her husband is a member of the NRA and they got a robo call raising money on what happened in CO. My goodness I think the NRA is evil, evil, evil. I don't care if people want to have a rifle to protect their homes and go hunting. No problem with that. I don't want to see people carrying them in churchs, stores, or any other public place that I go to. If I need help I'll call the police. That is what they get paid for. I don't need your history lesson. Especially since the NRA gets it wrong in the first place and no need to try and talk about it. To me NRA = Nothing but death.

[gejohnston]

48. I said history, not shooting lessons

I don't give shooting lessons. I taught my kids the basics when they were kids, but I'm not an instructor. I think you missed the point about something. Of course you call the cops for help. The gun or pepper spray is in case things really turn to shit before they show up.
I'm not a member of the NRA. Haven't been since the Carter administration.

[southernyankeebelle]

54. The right to bear arms when our forefathers were around didn't envision automatic fire arms.

Sorry.

[gejohnston]

55. repeating guns did exist at the time

The one of the points of the 2A, and the Militia act of 1792 (and individual mandate that forced you to buy a gun) was to have a defense force armed with what would be standard military rifle. The view was that a standing army would lead to empire and a police state. As for automatics, if you mean full automatics, see National Firearms Act of 1934.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_Air_Rifle

[southernyankeebelle]

58. I don't care. I don't think they envisioned 100 rounds shooting at innocent people, period.

[gejohnston]

59. you don't know much history

or give them credit. They had bows and knew a skilled archer could. On some level, they are more lethal than some guns.

[Brisket]

64. Well then the clear solution is to pass more laws.......against accidents.

[rfranklin]

51. I was in Home Depot and a guy shot his dick off in the can...

Hard to ignore.

[DainBramaged]

30. They just want no encumbrances to owning nuclear missiles

my dad used to tell me back in the day, when you can't find a seat at the table, it's time to go.


These folks need to go.

[southernyankeebelle]

31. OMG thanks for the laugh. I am watch the Stephanie Millier show. It is shocking to hear

some blaming the victims. The "if they had guns they could of fought back." What crazy talk since the shooter had better protection then the police it turned out.

[HALO141]

35. Yet the shooter surrendered at the first sign

of armed resistance. Go figure.

Even the best armor has weaknesses. Hands, feet, joint areas, face and neck... When rounds start coming your way body armor feels woefully inadequate.

[southernyankeebelle]

42. Yes, funny how he didn't want to die.

[HALO141]

34. Since its inception.

[southernyankeebelle]

39. Well I'll pray they get more extreme in that case. Because whatever they are doing isn't

working.

[HALO141]

60. Pray away.

Try holding your breath, too. That might help.

[HALO141]

33. How does having 4.3 million members

MAKE them extremists?

[DainBramaged]

37. Do they support President Obama?

'Nuff said.

[HALO141]

38. I'm sure some of them do.

Not many, I'll grant you that, but support for any given politician is not a litmus test for reasoned thinking.


Is this supposed to be your idea of a persuasive argument? If all you want to do is belittle your political counterparts then fine but don't expect to actually ever get any problems solved. There are too many real issues that need to be addressed and while it may be emotionally satisfying for you to point fingers and sling insults it's really just counter productive.

[DainBramaged]

43. but support for any given politician is not a litmus test for reasoned thinking.

wanna bet?


On edit


We can't solve shit, period. We're a message board. If we could solve shit, we'd end all wars, poverty, disease, wasteful spending, poverty.......


Get off your high horse. This is an interesting place for me for the past ten years, nothing more.

[HALO141]

47. Yeah, I'll bet.

When I use the word, "we," I'm not referring to DU.


So, when you say, "This is an interesting place for me for the past ten years, nothing more," it sounds to me as if you're saying that you're not interested in thoughtful debate. If that's the case the why ARE you here?

[DainBramaged]

49. Meh

cya

[HALO141]

61. Yeah, that's what I though. n/t

[holdencaufield]

21. Extremists

People who believe what I believe can NEVER be extremists

Only people with differing opinions can be extremists

[southernyankeebelle]

32. Yep, I see what you mean. Foolish me thinking the Brady organization is such an extremist.

[Clames]

17. Already happening.

Went to a local shop Saturday and it was busy. Lots of buying. The Web-based NICS was over loaded and they had to phone in my background check for my purchase. Took at least 20 minutes to go through while last month it took only a few minutes to complete. Also, the 4473 form had a slight change between the one I filled out in June and this month.

[oneshooter]

20. With a Texas CHL you don't have to make a call.

Just show it, put the license# on the form, pay and go.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Kaleva]

22. OP has been PPR'd

"Troll threatening violence."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=284943&sub=trans

[Ashgrey77]

50. I read what he said, and he wasn't threatening anyone.

It was just a general statement about door to door gun confiscation, and how there would be violence if that happened. There was no actual threat. Looks more like a anti-gun mod decided to ban him. Seems to happen alot here, anything pro-gun is always voted against no matter what the context. And anything anti-gun no matter how insulting they it let stand. I've been a liberal all my life and this type of so called "open" discussion is anything but.

[Kaleva]

52. This is what he said

" I have not exercised my second amendment rights

Extremists on the anti-gun side spouting BULLSHIT make me want to because it is ASININE to give up rights over one nut in Colorado.

All I got to say is, just TRY to take away the guns. The bloodbath that would be on YOUR hands would be unthinkable."

If he would have wrote that differently, as I can see how one can think that he'd resort to violence if anyone tried to take away his guns, he'd still would have gotten his point across and would still be here.

[Ashgrey77]

62. Reading is fundamental,

no where in that post did he say "he" would resort to violence. He just said "the" guns, not "his" guns. Pretty clear to me, but I'm not anti-gun and actively trying to find a reason to shut him up.

[Kaleva]

63. I guess one can read it anyway they choose.

What mattered in the end was how MIRT read it and now the poster is gone.

[Brisket]

66. I have noticed the same thing and I wonder if my sister was screwing with me when she

suggested I should come here. (If this little exchange gets us deep-sixed, I guess we'll know the answer)
shrug

[southernyankeebelle]

26. My step-grandson is only 10 and taking Hunter safety course. I don't like guns myself but

if he is going to go hunting with his dad that I am happy he is taking a course. He needs to learn how to handle a rifle.

[Brisket]

65. The "best" way to encourage gun accidents and violence is to keep kids ignorant about them.

Nothing titillates the adolescent imagination more than secrecy and forbidding something. I owned (in the real sense of the word) guns from age 8 (over 55 years ago) and since have owned well over a hundred. Not one of them ever crawled out of the cabinet and shot anyone, nor did I ever shoot anyone using any of them. (I did point a gun a few times during my years at the police department)

[southernyankeebelle]

67. I agree but you and I know there are exceptions to all rules and you can't take back that life.

[HALO141]

36. Ammunition is alreadystarting to dry up

but that has more to do with the approaching Pentagon contract reissue date for small arms ammo.

[spin]

56. Gun sales have jumped in Colorado and Florida since the shooting. ...

Gun Sales Spike After 12 Killed in Colorado Movie Theater

July 24 (Bloomberg) -- Background checks for gun purchases spiked 41 percent in Colorado after 12 people were killed inside a suburban Denver movie theater, according to state data.

In the four days after the July 20 shooting, dealers submitted 3,647 requests for state background checks required to buy a firearm, said Susan Medina, a spokeswoman for the Colorado Bureau of Investigation. That’s 41 percent more than the 2,583 requests during the same four days the prior week and a 38 percent increase over the 2,636 checks during the first Friday to Monday in July.

***snip***

In Florida, there were 7,905 gun-related background checks from July 20 to July 23, a 10 percent increase over the same Friday to Monday period the previous week, according to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

***snip***

“It’s sad,” Hyatt said. “What we see is a lot of people worried these type incidents will cause more gun laws to be passed.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/gun-sales-spike-after-12-killed-in-colorado-movie-theater/2012/07/24/gJQA7suP7W_story.html