Why Are People Stocking Up On Guns? Fear Of Government

[Crackerjack]

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

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.

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.

 

[FA_Q2]

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 think you mean Obama's marketing campaign...I haven't heard boo from gun retailers...

The government has banned these firearms before. It's not like it's a stretch that when Obama Says gun control, people believe him.

So if you are looking to blame someone, it's not very difficult to find the ACTUAL culprit...and it ain't gun retailers.

Say what? Are you stupid?

It is the right wing piss drinkers who keep posting all the "Obama's cummin fer yer gunz" topics, not the left.

Since his first election. Gun sales skyrocketed in 2009 based on the right wing blogosphere's hysteria.

Of course the problem with your contention is that Obama IS coming for guns. Not your guns per se (which is why people are buying them now) but he is attempting to ban certain weapons. He has supported such in the past and is demanding that something be done after sandy hook. Last year I actually would have agreed with you. In light of recent events, I have to admit that I was wrong.


I still have hope that the house is going to shoot down any asinine legislation that the left is trying to push on gun control but with public opinion as fickle as it is, I have no idea what direction the wind will be blowing at the time. The house has already proven that principals are not a factor in what they do.

 

[Crackerjack]

Just a lame excuse to buy more guns.

There's no such thing.

 

[candycorn]

Stupid is as stupid does. I like the guy who has 2 arms but 50 rifles. Yeah...real smart.

That is likely because you don't understand firearms.

Educate yourself.

GENERAL FIREARMS AND SHOOTING PAGE

I'll look to see you back here in six months with a basic understanding.

I've been at this 35 years, and I still learn something new every day.

Coming from the same guy who gave us these gems...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/election-forums/259300-romney-wins-obama-defeated.html#post6266776

http://www.usmessageboard.com/elect...47-r-47-o-in-post-sandy-poll.html#post6275367

http://www.usmessageboard.com/elect...hat-walker-would-be-recalled.html#post6272678

http://www.usmessageboard.com/elect...l-clear-has-willard-losing-2.html#post6223924

http://www.usmessageboard.com/election-forums/255399-lookee-what-we-have-here-2.html#post6181317

I'll stick to my take on why people are buying guns.

 

[Missourian]

You do have a lot to learn, that much is obvious.

And it is equally obvious that you are incapable of taking constructive criticism.

No debate, just try to score a zinger.

There is a difference between having an opinion and having an informed opinion....al the zingers in the world can't disguise the ignorance of the subject your comment denotes.

Guy buys 50 guns to fend off the revolution/invasion that will never come. I tell you what; when it does come, I'll apologize. Deal?

Hyperbole.

Most folks that own many firearms have them because they suit different purposes.

Here's an example.

I have a 22LR that is great for rabbit hunting to 75 yards, but if hunting pastures, a .17 HMR, is good to 200 yards.

Neither of these rifles is conducive to feral hogs...better to have a .223 or 30/30 for that.

The 30/30 is also good for deer hunting out to 200 yards, but if you want to hunt longer range, you'll need a 25-06 or a 30-06 or a 270...

And of those, only the 30-06 will ethically take an elk or a moose or a bear...

And that is how folks end up with a safe full of guns.

 

[tjvh]

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

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.

 

[Wehrwolfen]

Stupid is as stupid does. I like the guy who has 2 arms but 50 rifles. Yeah...real smart.

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.

 

[Missourian]

I didn't think he was screaming about banning firearms.

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?

 

[Wehrwolfen]

I didn't think he was screaming about banning firearms.

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?

 

[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.

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.

 

[FA_Q2]

Good luck fighting the ******* marines.


dumb asses.

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.

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.

 

[tjvh]

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?

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.

 

[Crackerjack]

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.

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.

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.

 

[007]

When obama is done destroying what is left of this country's economy, and the rioting, looting and marauding bands of home invaders start, you'll be damn glad you have a firearm, because cops with be as worthless as tits on a bull.

THAT is why people are buying guns.

 

[JohnA]

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

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.

sure you have the right to free speech who says you dont? and i have the right to say your a ******* idiot

 

[Missourian]

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.

If there is one thing I've learned over the years, it's that if enough folks want something, they'll find a way to get it.

There's an end run around everything if one looks had enough.

This may be it.

It's worked for tobacco and alcohol...not constitutionally protected, but still.

The voter ID debate will come back to haunt them though.

If it violates the right to vote to require an ID that costs a few dollars...then it equally violates the second amendment rights to tax firearms and/or ammunition.

 

[Crackerjack]

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.

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.

If anything, the military would not be used against citizens. They just wouldn't obey those orders.

The police, on the other hand ...

 

[tjvh]

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.

If there is one thing I've learned over the years, it's that if enough folks want something, they'll find a way to get it.

There's an end run around everything if one looks had enough.

This may be it.

It's worked for tobacco and alcohol...not constitutionally protected, but still.

The voter ID debate will come back to haunt them though.

If it violates the right to vote to require an ID that costs a few dollars...then it equally violates the second amendment rights to tax firearms and/or ammunition.

Well they know one thing... Unless they have a fresh tragedy to prey upon people's emotions gun control loses every time when one escapes the liberal confines of places like NYC and Chicago.

 

[kiwiman127]

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.

 

[Crackerjack]

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.

Then I suggest you do your very best to avoid pissing off crazy people.