Why Are People Stocking Up On Guns? Fear Of Government

[there4eyeM]

Dreams of glorious valor!

Combat is not glorious and armed conflict has nothing to do with the emotion of feeling right. An untrained, unorganized gang against a tough core of trained warriors will only provide casualties, not victory.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Dreams of glorious valor!

Combat is not glorious and armed conflict has nothing to do with the emotion of feeling right. An untrained, unorganized gang against a tough core of trained warriors will only provide casualties, not victory.

Why do you think members of America's military will follow any orders that will kill their fellow American citizens? Not to many members of the military will follow orders that take away the rights of American citizens?
Liberals cheer more for terrorist than they do for their fellow Americans defending their rights.

 

[there4eyeM]

If liberals realize the realities of warfare, then perhaps you are correct. I would not know, personally.

 

[candycorn]

People are stocking up on guns because the gun retailers of America have an excellent viral marketing campaign that goes something like this:

OBAMAZ CUMMIN FER YER GUNZ!

I don't know if it is "marketing" per say but if you buy into the argument that the conservative republicans are the ones buying the guns (I feel that Democrats are probably doing some stocking up too based on the "warheads" principle), it does fall in line with the recent bit of irrationality:

They believed Obama was a Muslim. Some still do.
They believed Obama was a Kenyan. Some still do.
They believed Sarah Palin was a good choice for VP. Some still do.
They believed that the ACA would never pass. It did.
They believed that dealmaking was invented to pass the ACA. Some still do.
They believed that 2010 was a conservative renaissance. Some still do (remarkably).
They believed that the ACA would be overturned. Some still do.
They believed that Mitt Romney was going to win the election right up until 10PM election night.
They believed that Obama and the Democrats must have stolen the election. Many still do.

Now they believe that gun confiscation/restrictions is/are right around the corner due to twenty-six students at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT. It may be but if the last 10 or so murderous rampages on campus are any indication; there won't be a single concrete thing done to make the public safer.

Irrational behavior is the new calling card of today's conservative movement it would seem. Do you all remember such irrationality when Clinton was in office?

 

[candycorn]

All that will do is cause people to find a way around the tax.

I am not interested in it enough to look it up at the moment, but I would suppose that the vast majority of firearms transactions are between private individuals. The odds of collecting taxes from those sorts of transactions gets worse the higher the tax goes too, I'm certain.

Yeah, that needs to change too. Of course when the gun is registered there should be some sort of requirement to show you paid the tax. Like when I get my car inspected, I have to have proof of liability insurance.

What happens is that sales will decrease and thusly manufacturing will decrease. So fewer guns are produced meaning that eventually fewer guns will make it onto the street. Same thing happened with cigarettes and now usage is at an all time low.

wrong on 3 counts
(1 ) prof of insurance is a state requirment ONLY IF you use the vehicle on public roads .
(2 )ownership of firearms is guaranteed by the constitution ratified at least 3 times by SCOTUS ,owner ship of a car or tabacco product is not
(3 ) tabacco is a danger to the health of the user **and others * whether used legally or not

1). Non-sequitor. Kind of like saying you only should be worried about pollution if you breathe.
2). Different court
3). I'm sure that matters to the dead.

 

[candycorn]

This thread certainly demonstrates the sad state of mental health disorders in the United States. Paranoia is a serious mental disorder that can lead to detachment from one's family and social circles. It can also turn into violence the more the patient becomes detached from reality.
Fortunately, Paranoia can be successfully treated with the help of mental health experts, pharmaceuticals and in some severe cases, in-patient treatment.

Is this what passes for argumentation in the "no labels" party?

Allow me to recap.

Obama says he wants to ban guns again.

People buy the guns before he gets an opportunity to ban them.

Please, patronize me by pointing out the "paranoia"?

I've been attending a lot of holiday parties and traveling quite a bit. Did Obama say he wanted to "ban guns"? Quote please.

 

[candycorn]

So you don't think poor people should be allowed to exercise their Constitutional Rights... Got it.

They have the right to keep an bear arms. Nothing says they should be able to get them for free. I have the right to free speech. I don't have the right to expect a radio station to give me free air time.

Do try to keep up.

Your position has been made very clear... A privately owned radio station's air time has nothing to do with your wish to usurp people's Freedoms by pricing guns out of the hands of poor people due to ridiculous Taxes imposed on them... Nice work Comrade.

At no point did I say I wanted to ban guns--yes my position is very clear. The airwaves are owned by the public by the way.

Taxes are not ridiculous when the costs of the item being taxed is measured in body counts and other forms of destruction. We tax cigarettes to the point of it being hard to attain by poor people also or at least some poor people.

Nice work doofus.

 

[candycorn]

Not when you run out of ammunition for those two guns and have 48 more guns in different calibers with corresponding ammunition left to choose from. I'd say it's very smart.

Yeah...spending hundreds if not thousands of dollars to fight a revolution that won't ever happen. Insanely stupid; but stupid is as stupid does. Fools and their money are soon parted.

Every 'gun' that I've purchased during my life time has gained in value, in some case 10 time or more than I paid for them. Like Gold they are a good investment along with peace of mind if defense is necessary.

Peace of mind...oh okay.

 

[candycorn]

It wasn't him to whom I was referring.

Ahh....I don't want to ban guns either. I want to tax the holy shit out of them though.

Just another good reason to buy them now, pre-candycorn tax...don't ya think?

Good idea except my "mayhem tax" is just on this board. I doubt the people going to K-Mart to stock up on bullets are all subscribers to this obscure forum.

Fail.

 

[candycorn]

It wasn't him to whom I was referring.

Ahh....I don't want to ban guns either. I want to tax the holy shit out of them though.

Since when has your shit become holy?

I do admire that you're able to post without quoting some b-rate bush-league "news" source. I didn't think you had it in you sparky. 332-206 he he he

 

[candycorn]

How would all 175,000 of them fair against 20 million armed citizens?

Victorious. After the first shot, those who were not peeing in their pants would be surrendering. Those who were not peeing in their pants or surrendering would be trying to boot up their computer to complain on this forum about it or brag about how victory is close at hand....332-206.

This just shows how ignorant you are about civilian gun owners. You are projecting when you claim that people would just pee themselves. You might not have the discipline to fight but there are people that do and they are legion. Add that to the fact that many people would simply not take up arms against civilians on American soil (myself included) and you realize exactly how possible it actually is for an armed insurrection in this country.

Again, when we have an armed uprising, I'll apologize. "they are legion"....yeah, okay.

It won't happen but not because of your asinine claims that people are incapable of it. Not because the military is so powerful either. Both of those accounts are flat out false, the millions of armed civilians are more than a formidable force. It won't happen because things are not bad enough in this nation to warrant it. People with fat bellies and warm homes do not revolt. You barely get people out to the voting booth on election day let alone get them to take up guerilla warfare against a trained military. We are nowhere close to that level of need. Unfortunately, when we get there it is likely to late but that is another topic for another thread.

I would wonder what the average weight of the NRA member is--do you guys keep stats like that? I wonder how it would compare to the non-armed society.

 

[candycorn]

Ahh....I don't want to ban guns either. I want to tax the holy shit out of them though.

Just another good reason to buy them now, pre-candycorn tax...don't ya think?

I missed the section of the Constitution that said candycorn gets to decide what income bracket is allowed to own firearms... Apparently she thinks it's OK to Tax out the poor from the ability to exercise their Constitutional Rights... How very thoughtful that she doesn't advocate banning guns, just pricing them out of reach for many Americans. What Forward thinking she possesses.

It's next to the section determining the right taxation on tabacco products, the taxes for cell phones, etc....

 

[candycorn]

In that case, a registration regime would need to be implemented nationwide, as not all states have that now. Here again you have an enforcement problem, as a firearm is a whole lot easier to hide than a vehicle. Hell, I have guns that haven't seen the light of day in years and that only I know about. Therefore, any sort of registration would be de facto voluntary.

Well, if you know about a law and decide to break it, that's your business I suppose. Hopefully, you're a law abiding citizen who doesnt get search warrants executed on their property often. I'm sure of that. But criminals who attract the law may not be so lucky.

The same thing goes with people who make moonshine over in South Carolina. My grand father knew about them, we always had some around the holidays. It's a step in the right direction.

The difference of course is that the moonshine doesn't get fired at anyone. Still illegal though.

So then the only people that would be punished (and that is the basic intent of the tax in question -- a method of altering behavior) would be those who are of a law-abiding nature, and who are really not the problem.

I forget, weren't the guns used in Connecticut last month legally purchased?

If you can think of a method of keeping firearms out of the hands of those with violent intent in mind, I'm all ears. I just don't see the sort of registration being described as being anything other than counterproductive.

Lets look at your arsenal. I'm guessing 3,000 guns. If there was a tax on the 3,000 guns you purchased, maybe you'd purchase only 2,000 of them. So that is 1,000 guns that theoretically didn't get bought. So that is 1,000 guns less likely to be sold off after you croak. Translation; 1,000 less guns were sold so they don't find their ways into pawn shops, on the floor of the convention center.

If you wanted to buy a brand new 8-Track tape of the new Limp Bizkit album, you likely would have a hard time finding it. Why? They stopped producing them because nobody buys them any longer. Eventually, the decrease in sales will lead to the same decision made in the Smth and Wesson board room.

 

[Contumacious]

Is this what passes for argumentation in the "no labels" party?

Allow me to recap.

Obama says he wants to ban guns again.

People buy the guns before he gets an opportunity to ban them.

Please, patronize me by pointing out the "paranoia"?

Well, the liberals can not believe that after spening 12 years at government braniwashing centers ,many Americans still have the will to defend their lives and do not trust their government.

Public education has failed.

.

Indeed. They should have removed your tinfoil hats and given you a dunce's hat instead.

HOLOCAUST AT MOUNT CARMEL

.

 

[Crackerjack]

Well, if you know about a law and decide to break it, that's your business I suppose. Hopefully, you're a law abiding citizen who doesnt get search warrants executed on their property often. I'm sure of that. But criminals who attract the law may not be so lucky.

The same thing goes with people who make moonshine over in South Carolina. My grand father knew about them, we always had some around the holidays. It's a step in the right direction.

The difference of course is that the moonshine doesn't get fired at anyone. Still illegal though.

So then the only people that would be punished (and that is the basic intent of the tax in question -- a method of altering behavior) would be those who are of a law-abiding nature, and who are really not the problem.

I forget, weren't the guns used in Connecticut last month legally purchased?

They were legally purchased as far as I know. Technically they were stolen from the rightful owner (mother), so I guess you could go either way with that. However, legally purchased firearms represent a small percentage of firearms used in violent crime.

If you can think of a method of keeping firearms out of the hands of those with violent intent in mind, I'm all ears. I just don't see the sort of registration being described as being anything other than counterproductive.

Lets look at your arsenal. I'm guessing 3,000 guns. If there was a tax on the 3,000 guns you purchased, maybe you'd purchase only 2,000 of them. So that is 1,000 guns that theoretically didn't get bought. So that is 1,000 guns less likely to be sold off after you croak. Translation; 1,000 less guns were sold so they don't find their ways into pawn shops, on the floor of the convention center.

If you wanted to buy a brand new 8-Track tape of the new Limp Bizkit album, you likely would have a hard time finding it. Why? They stopped producing them because nobody buys them any longer. Eventually, the decrease in sales will lead to the same decision made in the Smth and Wesson board room.

So I buy my firearms outside of the taxing and registration regime, tell my heirs about them outside of the will and they split them up off the books, too.

The other problem with your analogy is that I would never want to buy anything at all by Limp Bizkit.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Civil war.

Not to pick on you because there are plenty of rw gun nuts who are just as stupid but, saying that you nutters would take on the biggest military the world has ever seen is like saying a marshmallow could take on a forest fire.

 

[Crackerjack]

Civil war.

Not to pick on you because there are plenty of rw gun nuts who are just as stupid but, saying that you nutters would take on the biggest military the world has ever seen is like saying a marshmallow could take on a forest fire.

You have to admit that watching Americans kill Americans would make you get all funny in the pants though, wouldn't it, you sick fuck?

 

[Zoom]

Good luck fighting the fucking marines.


dumb asses.

What makes you think Marines would side with Unconstitutional tyranny? Dumb ass.

re you insane? Obama is not gonna take yer gunz redneck kool aid sipper. Keep buying them though, it helps our economy. Dumb ass.

 

[kiwiman127]

I hunt, I have guns. This is fearmongerng.
Do we have a GOP controlled House?

I don't know. Up until the last week, I thought another assault weapon ban was assured.

Today I would say it is only somewhat likely.

Even with GOP control of the house, people feel better when they do something...anything...even if it has zero chance of improving the situation.

It makes them feel like they have some measure of control.

The GOP pretty much proved this week that they are not above forgoing their principles to assuage negative public opinion.

I think anyone who has concerns about some ulta-crazed liberals taking their guns can count on the GOP controlled House to stop that kind of move in it's tracks.

 

[Crackerjack]

I hunt, I have guns. This is fearmongerng.
Do we have a GOP controlled House?

I don't know. Up until the last week, I thought another assault weapon ban was assured.

Today I would say it is only somewhat likely.

Even with GOP control of the house, people feel better when they do something...anything...even if it has zero chance of improving the situation.

It makes them feel like they have some measure of control.

The GOP pretty much proved this week that they are not above forgoing their principles to assuage negative public opinion.

I think anyone who has concerns about some ulta-crazed liberals taking their guns can count on the GOP controlled House to stop that kind of move in it's tracks.

All I count on the GOP to do is cave in at the worst possible moment.

I will pass on trusting my rights to politicians, thankyouverymuch.