Sunday, October 12, 2008

Gun Sales Up - Reason: Barack Obama

Via Lawyers, Guns & Money, I came across this fascinating article on the Confederate Yankee site entitled Battleground State of Mind. It's the simple account of a man who goes into a busy pawn shop.

Of the 12 people in the shop when I was there, the 11 others were all looking at firearms. A CZ-58 and an AK-47 variant were on the counter in front of one pair of customers. An off-duty sheriff and his friend were picking up what I think was a DPMS LR-308 complete with scope and bipod. Another guy was looking at a used Polytech M-14, and the remainder were looking at handguns... mostly Glocks and CZ-75s.

The explanation as proffered by one of the gun buyers was a single word, "Barack."

Naturally this made me wonder if some of the usual commenters on this blog are right about Obama's ideas on gun control. In spite of some of his campaign speeches in which he claims to be a believer in the 2nd Amendment and will not take anyone's guns away, many seem to think his record speaks louder and it says gun control is coming.

What do you think? Is Barack Obama really in favor of gun control and lying when he says otherwise? Isn't it possible that he's changed on the issue, that in the past he's voted one way but now as Presitend he'll follow a different path, one more favorable to gon-owners?

Do you think the gun owners who are stocking up on weapons and ammunition are acting on a reasonably likely future scenario? Or are they simply paranoid?


  1. When he says he won't ban guns, he's lying, the same way Clinton and HW Bush lied about raising taxes...or George W Bush talking about Weapons of Mass Destruction.

    As for buying up guns, the same thing happened in the 90s with Clinton's Assault Weapons ban. He sold more guns to private citizens than ever before, and that record has only been Eclipsed by the above story.

    While Obama may very well be the president who oversteps his bounds and invokes the revolution, I personally doubt it.

    What he MAY do is ban firearms and equipment that is now perfectly legal, so people buying guns now are VERY smart, as certain goods may be unobtainable during the next 4 years...if not longer...

    Also when items are prohibited for sale, the value of privately held items goes up substantially.

    When Reagan passed the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 that prohibited civilians from taking possession of new Machine guns, suddenly the few transferable machine guns went up incredibly in price. Now a Mac-10, which has a production value of maybe a few hundred dollars now tips the scales, as one of the most inexpensive Full-auto weapons to buy at around $3000 for a used one in decent condition.

    So not foolish at all, and certainly not paranoid, as events like this have happened many times before, its foolish to think they won't happen again.

  2. Now I'm the one agreeing with Weer'd on what he said.

    Look at what Obama has done and said. Look at how many times he could have said "I fully support the 2nd amendment and will veto any bill that tries to reduce any aspect of that right". He's never said that, he's talked about not taking our guns...then turns around and says "even if I wanted to, I don't have the votes in Congress". That doesn't fill me with confidence.

    Another angle to consider is the financial scene. Anyone paying attention for the last 10 years saw the mortgage crisis coming. The possibility of a depression is high so being prepared in many ways, including firearms, makes sense. During the Great Depression unemployment hit 20%, do you really think that today the unemployed will simply wonder from town to town looking for jobs?

    I'll mention one of the reasonable restrictions that gun control folks like - 'one gun a month'. Who needs to buy more then one firearm a month? How about myself wanting to get into shooting sports. My club offers skeet (shotgun), rifle competitions and pistol competitions. If I wanted to participate, I would have to wait for 3 months to do all.
    The other angle is my family, I'm trying to get my wife and daughter their carry permits. That would be 2 guns there.

    How about another reasonable action that could be taken, higher taxes on firearms? Imposing a $300 tax on any firearm would suddenly make them darn near unaffordable for most folks, I know I wouldn't be buying too many.

    McCain's not much better on gun control with his support of the Assault Weapons ban, but its enough to tip the scales on that issue.

  3. +1 I added to my stocks by 3 last month. Carry gun for me, Carry gun for the wife (Bought as a good deal before she had her license and was not legal for her to buy) and one good deal I couldn't turn down.

    Right now in DC has only one gun shop that transfers firearms to private citizens. He won't even SELL guns to people, just transfer them from other shops in other states, he charges $150 to do this simple task.

    Cost my wife about $300 to get her permit (not counting time and gas money)

    Now couple that with another VERY common "reasonable restriction" of "junk guns" or "Saturday night Specials" If a gun was made so poorly it was a danger to the shooter, the gun maker can and will be sued. Because of this today's guns are over-engineered for safety. Still people like Obama, and his former employers the Joyce Foundation and their subsidiaries make it sound like such guns are still on the market.

    Nope, what they want is to get rid of affordable guns. Dropping $100 on a Hi-Point pistol is cheap enough to allow a single-Mom who lives in a bad neighborhood because the rent is cheap there to get home to her kid every night. Tack $300s in fees on the purchases of that gun suddenly nos $400 might be too tight.

    Here in Mass there is a variation of a "one-gun-a-month" law that isn't going anywhere in Congress, but it states "One firearm or large capacity feeding device"

    So if you buy a normal-capacity Glock magazine, you're done for the month....or if you want to sell off a gun you don't shoot, and it happens to have a few Magazines with it, you can't sell it privately unless you split the sales up across the year...or sell to a gun shop who doesn't pay fair market value because their sale comes with rent and employees and ATF fees. Nothing wrong it, Gun Shops are a great place to sell off a gun you can't find a buyer for, or isn't very valuable....but why be FORCED to take a 20% hit in value for a gun you can easily place in a good legal home?

    No, McCain isn't fantastic on gun control...but Obama is most likely the WORST judging by his record alone.

    Still Sarah Palin was pro-gun long before she ever thought of running for public office...which is a first in a long time...JFK is the only one that comes to mind in the recent past....

  4. No President since FDR has ever followed a policy favorable to firearms owners. It's just degrees of lies on the campaign trail.

    Reagan signed the law that took away new legally transferable machine gun imports and manufacture from the general populace.

    Keep that in mind. An armed populace is the enemy of the STATE and the STATE has never been happy to have an armed populace in anything close to recent times.

  5. Oh, weer'd,
    Friend of mine is a Class III/Title II SOT. He says he hasn't come across anything transferable, even broken, for under $6,000 since last fall.

    I traded a lot of my soon to be worthless dollars for Evil Black Rifles and Cases of Colt and HK M-16 magazines of the 20 and 30 round variety, and Lake City 5.56 and 7.62.

    I expect to make a profit under an Obama administration and they aren't going to ever get cheaper. No gun stuff ever gets cheaper.

  6. How much did the Lake City 7.62X51mm set you back?

    I definitely think my M-14 buy needs to happen by January no matter who will be inaugurated as well as as many 20 round magazines I can legally get.

  7. M118LR at $3750 for 5000 in USGI packaging.

    Issue standard Ball ammo at $2000 US for 3200 linked in M-19 Cans.

  8. man 7.62X51mm is spendy ammo.

    Worth it tho.

  9. Try feeding my Nitro Express rifles...

    Lake City is worth it because you get 5 or more usages of the brass, often quite a bit more.

  10. this is a pointless, silly little nitpick... but i'm just that kind of nitpicker, so...

    Mike, the blog you linked to (and which i comment on myself sometimes) is titled "Lawyers, Guns & Money", not the other way around. just think Warren Zevon and you'll get it right. :-)


    No bigger smoking gun needed. (Pun intended)

  12. weerd, you're not thinking straight. the distasteful Helmke endorsing Obama/Biden is a "smoking gun"... for what, exactly?

    so if i dig up somebody equally distasteful --- perhaps a Klansman, perhaps a Nazi --- endorsing McCain, that would be a "smoking gun" too?

    distasteful people endorse major-party candidates who may or may not support any distasteful policies. you can't use the former as any kind of evidence of the latter.

  13. Nomen, Thanks for that nitpick. Isn't it funny that I inadvertently put the word "Guns" first?

    I get the smoking gun pun. If the Brady Bunch endorses Obama, that means he was lying in that speech and is really as much against guns as some people say.

    What if he's softened in his gun stance? Maybe campaigning has opened his eyes to how important it is to so many.

  14. Mike,

    Even if he's softened his stance, his language doesn't reflect it.

    Consider this quote:
    “If you’ve got a gun in your house, I’m not taking it,’’ Obama said. But the Illinois senator could still see skeptics in the crowd, particularly on the faces of several men at the back of the room.

    So he tried again. “Even if I want to take them away, I don’t have the votes in Congress,’’ he said. “This can’t be the reason not to vote for me. Can everyone hear me in the back? I see a couple of sportsmen back there. I’m not going to take away your guns.’

    This isn't about sportsman, it isn't about democrat or republican, it isn't about liberal or conservative; it is simply about respecting basic human rights.

    Let's look at couple of his reasonable restrictions:
    They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.

    First, there is no "gun show loop hole". There isn't a case of where a sale 200 yards away from a gun show suddenly becomes legal if it occurs at a gun show. Car dealerships have to have a business permit to sell cars, just like a Federal Firearm License holder does. But a person selling a car doesn't need a license any more then a person selling a firearm.
    The point of the "gun show loophole" is to require background checks on every sale, raise the price on firearms, and to outlaw any transaction not tracked and/or approved by the government. If you sell a car, should you have to check to see if the person buying it has a valid license and isn't a felon?

    Childproof firearms can't happen, any firearm incapable of being fired by a child would also make it unable to be fired by someone aged or disabled. Again, the goal is to drive up the costs of owning firearms. More children die from backyard swimming pool accidents then die from firearm accidents.
    There are already laws on the books making it illegal to provide access to firearms to children.

    Obama's statements still show a position of gun control, not strong support for the 2nd amendment.

    If nothing else this would make me question Obama's fitness for office:

    Barack Obama believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right, and he respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms

    The Bill of Rights does not create any rights but limits the Federal government's control over existing rights....something a constitutional scholar like Obama should know.