I don't know the answer but I do agree it is certainly a strange time in this country.

I think they are ramping up demand by scaring people.

I agree with zone 8. Fear seems to be a very handy tool in getting people to do what they ordinarily might not do. But there's not enough "scare" in the world to persuade me to buy a gun. I seem to be in a minority as gun sales are quite brisk here and pretty much everywhere to the delight of gun manufacturers. Even though this is a big hunting and outdoorsy part of the world, I think hunting can be effective with less firepower than an Uzi.

However, if this takes the direction of pitting those who love guns vs those who don't, it probably ought to be posed over on Hot Topics where there's enough personal interpretation, agenda, and just downright bad information on the subject to keep the Supreme Court chuckling for years.

I suspect the firearms industry is creating a sense of urgency where none may not exist. The recent Supreme Court decision was sensible. It said that to bear firearms is a constitutionally protected right, but that authorities can exert reasonable regulations to ensure that weapons do not get into the wrong hands.

It seems to me, if you're stirring up urgency to get a gun before Obama closes the door, you're pitching your message to people who have reason to worry they won't be able to get one if/when Obama does something, whatever that may be. I think law-abiding people have nothing to fear -- they can pass any background check, and they can do what's needed to get a license, if that's required.

So it seems to me that it's the "crazies" that are attracted by the message to "get a gun now while you still can."

What's interesting, though, is that gun manufacturers are, apparently having trouble meeting demand.

I was personally looking into buying a gun (I do not currently own one), and noticed some news stories about the frenzied gun buying taking place.

After checking the most popular gun dealer web sites, I was stunned to see that the news was so very correct. Man, prices have gone up (at a time when prices are falling on almost everything), *and* lots of stuff is simply out of stock no matter where you look.

Everything was available five months ago when I first looked around.

It would be interesting to get info on the uptick in sales, the significance to local dealers, and how or *if* manufacturers are ramping up production.

Surely, it does no one any good to have nothing in stock.

Gun shows or the usual gang of crack dealers in the town where you live could probably set you up with whatever you need. Why buy new when gently used will do?

"gently" used?

o j

Have any reasons been giving for this in the news articles?

Certainly, it may be the fear of good, law abiding people that new guns laws may prohibit the ownership of guns. It has happened in other countries - and if I have learned anything in the last 40 years, it's that anything can happen in this country.

It could just be the general angst of our economy right now with lots of people being worried about the future and what might occur if really bad times come.

I'm assuming gun manufacturers are international suppliers. We are not the only country in a state of agitation these days. Perhaps others around the world are buying as well.

Maybe???

In general, I am hearing about the Obama gun control concerns in the gun-chat groups.

I suppose it works like stocks. People speculate (bet) on future possibilities.
"Buy on the rumor, sell on the news" type thing.

I saw a clever tag line:
"I carry a gun in my pocket because a police officer is too heavy".

Obama's actions and statements as a Senator and a Illinois politician are what's scaring people, and with good reason.

Despite what he claims, he's no friend of the Second Amendment. He tries to coat it in those time-honored (lies) statements that "We're not going to take your hunting rifles."

The Second Amendment isn't about hunting rifles anymore than the First Amendment is about typewriters.

Yes, gun sales are going strong right now, and with good reason.

Yes, it certainly may be the concern over future gun control measures - and probably with good reasons.

Before the election sitting at the car mechanic's I had the 17 yr old son of the owner filling me in all about how Obama was going to get rid of 2nd amendment rights....etc. etc. etc. All of his innuendo's were disturbing but not surprising.
I think its a totally unsubstantiated rumor that immediately took a very strong hold because the type of people that are additionally gun nuts LOVE nothing more than a threat to their gun nut rights. It gives them something to talk about. They NEED that feeling of THEM vs. US. If there wasn't a commie liberal racist threat how would they justify their need to buy more guns?
I own two guns (a cheap shotgun and one given to me) and may buy a more suitable third. I don't have anything against guns per se. I have my concealed carry. I did four yrs active duty and 21 in the guard.
But I'm not into it. I have so many other concerns that gun rights are way down the list. If they wanted to take them away I probably wouldn't care because I'm not afraid that "THEY" are going to come take my meager possessions (have you ever noticed that the biggest No Tresspassing signs surround the most run down filthy places?) . The need to own an arsenal often comes from a corner of the human personality most people don't want to acknowledge.
I stopped in Cabela's around Thanksgiving - lots and lots of people looking at guns, in Michigan where the economy is terrible. Now hunting is big and venison helps stock the larder. But venison starts getting pretty expensive when you have 2+ hunting rifles all more expensive (and unnecessary) than the last. So I think its about more than hunting and Obama is just an excuse.
I wonder what people do with all their guns when they lose their house?

Although I grew up in the country, in the 40's and 50's where everyone had guns, anyone could carry a gun, and many had guns in their vehicles, I'm not 'into' guns either. Guns stood behind the doors, or in the corner or hung over the doors. No one worried about gun locks, etc. Everyone knew what a gun was and everyone knew how to use it, and they knew it wasn't a toy.

Now, I am concerned that we will loose the right to own guns - and it isn't just because of this election, I think it has been building for quite some time.

To be told that I couldn't own a gun if I wanted would upset me - not just because it is a gun, but what else will they decide to take? A gun is just a thing - a tool and nothing more. If we have people in this country who behave badly with a tool or 'thing', then let's stop those people. Why has it become the way in this country to punish everyone because of the bad behavior of a few?

If those badly behaved people do not have guns, they will find another way to hurt people. There are just an enormous number of ways to hurt others if that is what you want to do, and not being able to have a gun isn't going to slow those people down very much.

I believe 9/11 happened without guns involved.

It isn't gun control we need, it's people control.

As far as no trespassing signs on run down places, I guess I would say people have a right to their privacy - even poor people. Poor people can probably less likely afford to loose their possession than others. Their home and possessions may look like trash, but it's theirs and they have a right to that run down place as others have in the 4/3 'brikkum'.

I'm thinking people loosing their homes will take their guns with them. Many people own expensive TV's, game systems, etc., who are loosing their homes as well. People have different hobbies, different wants.

The only way you can judge a politician's probable future actions is by his or her past.

Even a quick glance at Obama's past, and even moderate scrutiny of Biden's record in Congress, gives one a very complete picture of where they stand on the issue of firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens.

Currently, the only unsubstantiated rumor is what Obama has said to try to placate gun owners and win their support. There's virtually NOTHING in his history on the matter that supports his statements; quite the opposite, in fact.

His previous actions and his voting record substantiate the fact that he is a gun grabber.

When Bill Clinton ran for the first time in 1992 he said many of the same things in an effort to placate gunowners and lure them into supporting him. Unfortunately, many of them did, the result being two onerous laws that served only to affect law-abiding gunowners and which did nothing to make America safer.

Political promises are just that -- promises, and all too often, they are broken as a matter of expediency, or malice.

"I wonder what people do with all their guns when they lose their house?"

Why, isn't it obvious if you listen to some of the more rabidly anti-gun politicians, and fill in where their innuendo and half-talk ends?

They think we trade them on the street to gangs for crack.

Personally, though, what I fear the most is the complacency and "well I really don't care" attitude taken by so many, no matter what the subject.

The Constitutions and the protections afforded it aren't some arcane museum pieces best forgotten until they're dusted off every so often for a "Oh, isn't that neat/nice" display.

They are a living legacy of what it means to be an American, left to us by the very people who created this county.

It's a sin and a tragic shame that so many people are willing to just throw that away based on disinterest or expediency.

kframe,

I like what you said.

A politician that would deny the rights of someone to own a gun will deny their rights to anything else.

That's the fear I have - one bit at a time.

I agree with marys1000.

I think it is all a bunch of to do about nothing.

I believe Obama supports a ban on assault weapons. Hey...who really even needs one anyway? Are they used for hunting big game in this country? Don't think so. The ban would be on future sales, and not on going house to house collecting all that are presently owned.

Guns have gone up, I believe because unfounded fears has caused a buying frenzy driving prices up. Ammo prices have gone up too, again because of unfounded fear and alarm that it won't be available later. Lead shot and other ammo supplies have also gone up as has everything else....ie metals, and gas to transport anything. BF found it was no longer economical to reload shells, and he has cut back on his shooting. He shoots Registered Sporting Clays.

Can anyone link to exactly what Obama or Biden has said, or what they have voted on?

I suppose it works like stocks. People speculate (bet) on future possibilities.
"Buy on the rumor, sell on the news" type thing.
I agree. If and when assault rifles are no longer sold, anyone owning one will be able to get big bucks for it....a much better return that what the stock market is presently giving at this time.

Sue...who can't even remember where she hid her 38 Special and bullets.

All right - and to all of the fearful out there (and it looks like the fearful is becoming legion) - how much of the Bill of Rights has been taken away from you so far? Methinks, NONE. And I'd bet what's left in my 401k that none of these rights ever will be taken away by anyone in any administration.

(1) Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

(2) A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

(3) No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

(4) The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

(5) No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

(6) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

(7) In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

(8) Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

(9) The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

(10) The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

can anyone explain to me the need for automatic weapons,(ie assault rifles)by Joe Q Public?...I don't understand the need for any gun/weapon that is fully automatic? If you want to target shoot,go to a range and rent one from them? Want to hunt with one? Get a life...

can anyone explain to me the need for automatic weapons,(ie assault rifles)by Joe Q Public?

We can ask "why do you need that" of many things? The reality is that legally owned full automatic firearms are the least of anyone's concern. I want to say since the NFA went into effect there have been two murders committed with legally owned automatic weapons and one was committed by a police officer who used his "duty" weapon to kill his wife (or girlfriend).

Yes, there are many things in this country that are dangerous, but legal.

Many people die as a result of automobile accidents. Some use of automobiles is necessary - much is not. So do we make a law that limits the use of automobiles to that which is absolutely necessary? Autos are made to go 120 plus mph. I know of no state that has a speed limit that high. Should we, therefore, limit autos to only go to the legal limit?

Alchohol kills - it kills in so many ways. Why not make it illegal?

We are aware of many of the foods that we get are dangerous and kill - when will the government get around to outlawing that?

The Gov. of New York wants to put an obesity tax on sugared drinks. This, I'm thinking, is going to cause people to began drinking things laced with aspartame. What kind of healthcare problems is that going to cause?

Yes, we have lost rights over the years.

The REALLY BIG ONE -

""" The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.""""""

Now there's a big one -

Can you imagine cars that only go 50 or 60 mph? I am sure that would stop the speeders who travel 45 in a 35 zone.:)
Now the police cars could go faster and therefore stop all those criminals. Why, not being able to speed away might stop those carjackers! ;)

Seriously, I myself have not heard any talk about town, but my brother lives in another state and has heard much talk about an expected increase in criminal activity. Most of it is based on the economy and unemployment, and lack of food as inflation begins to rise.

still haven't heard WHY anyone needs an automatic weapon,forget why anyone needs a handgun to begin with..Please enlighten me WHY an automatic weapon is needed?

ladytexan,comparing alcohol,autos and food to guns has to be one of dumbest things posted here in a long time,seriously..

I have no problem with a hunter wanting a rifle or such to "hunt",but nobody hunts with an assault weapon...

No, I can't imagine a car going 50/60 - just making comparisons about things not needed.

If we look around and let the government make laws against things that can be dangerous and are not necessary, there would be some really big changes in this country. Using that as a critera for outlawing things seems like the very 'slipperiest of slopes'.

The only talk I have heard as well has been on the internet and the most of the angst has been about the economy and perhaps coming bad times. I think that is more what is driving this - but that is just my feelings.

There is also the possibility, people just consider them a good investment. They might be the best one around these days.

ladytexan - I added a smiley face, I hope you didn't take my wisecracking seriously.

qdognj- come on now, lighten up. Ladytexan was just illuminating how the government could make changes if we are not alert.

I don't know anyone who wants an automatic weapon.

but nobody hunts with an assault weapon...
They were designed to hunt humans.

Alcohol and cars seem to be the most "logical" (LOL - no offence) argument; at least by the numbers since that's the one you get all the time.

Even drugs don't get as much attention. Remember the good old days of Reefer Madness? One toke and you're on your way to bigger stuff and living under a bridge drinking your before dinner cocktail out of a paper bag. The problem with guns is there's no rehab from dead - ask the father whose young son killed himself with a loaded automatic weapon at a gun show.

I can only guess from reading this kind of discussion ad nauseam over on other forums that even those who do not particularly want to have a gun themselves simply don't want their right to become a well regulated militia of one at some future date abridged in any way.

Jeez, I hope Woman Against Gun Violence doesn't catch the wrong lobbyist's attention and our right to vote is taken away (19th. Amendment). Now there's a slippery slope.

That's the great thing about this country - we can all take stances and agree to disagree (1st. Amendment). This is one topic where no amount of discussion changes another's mind. though.

rifle? Why not...UZI or AK 47 ? WHY?

Car? 55 MPH is max legal speed, what use for anything over that?? Why?? Stupid ARGUMENT ......

Sorry dave100, we have 70 mph speed limits here.

Remember that the word "automatic" does not imply the kind of "automatic" that you'd find in a military assault weapon.

Automatic simply means that the rifle/gun will fire each time you pull the trigger... it "automatically" reloads the next round for firing.

Revolvers are, for some reason, not included in this definition even though they, too, allow you to fire each time you pull the trigger.

Assault style rifles.... like the M16 look-alikes do not allow you to fire them like a machine gun. You fire them just as you would a hunting rifle: one trigger pull, one shot. No rat-a-tat-tat repeater shooting.

I often think of the zillions of gun shows and similar events going on all the time. With tons of guns and ammo laying around with all kinds of people... and all we have is the one story of the child tragedy?

I see that as an amazing safety record!

How does that compare to amusement parks? I'd bet amusements are far less safe.

So if "numbers of guns" make us unsafe, you'd think that gun shows would involve daily deaths.

buy american guns, help american workers. remember handguns are great stocking stuffers.

Glad to see that someone got the point of the stupidity of the government not allowing people to own cars that run over the speed limit. It is stupid - no more so than the government deciding we shouldn't own guns because they aren't necessary.

We should get to make the decision as to what non-necessities we want to own - not the government.

Amen.

I wondered how long it would be before someone brought up the fearful spectre of ASSAULT WEAPONS!

AUTOMATIC KILLER HYPER DEADLY MACHINES O'DEATH IN THE HANDS OF JOHN Q. PUBLIC!

Certainly sounds good when a politican, who looks grieviously concerned, starts talking about ASSAULT WEAPONS as if they are single root cause of all society problems, right?

Only problem is...

It's a lie.

Or, as Winston Churchill once put it, a "terminological inexactitude."

Why is that?

Because when a politician or newscaster starts yammering about "ASSAULT RIFLES!", he's not talking about the rifles carried by the men and women who comprise our military.

Our military forces carry true assault rifles, which are capable of either fully automatic or three-shot burst fire AND semi-automatic (one shot fired per pull of the trigger) fire.

No, when a politican starts talking about ASSAULT RIFLES!, he's actually a well-thought out lie to engage the hysterical emotions of people who don't know better.

Why? Because the vast majority of the firearms that politicans call "ASSAULT RIFLES!" are, in fact, NOT assault rifles.

The so-called "ASSAULT RIFLES!" that I own, and shoot, are in fact semi-automatic rifles that LOOK like the firearms carried by the members of our military.

They're not capable of fully automatic fire, never have been, and never will be.

Yes, it is true that there are true assault rifles in the hands of some civilians.

However, here's some facts that you may not know.

1. These true assault rifles and other fully automatic weapons are HIGHLY regulated by the Federal goverment (and have been since 1934) and, in some cases, by the states. No one here can simply walk into a local gun store and buy one of these guns.

2. The application process to own a true assault rifle or other fully automatic weapon is months long and requires a full government background check, including a fingerprint search.

3. True assault rifles are prohibitively expensive, depending on the model $5,000 to as much as $100,000, putting them in the realms of collectors, not the average scumbag who is intent on knocking off the local Gas and Gulp.

4. In 1994, Congress passed, and Bill Clinton signed into law, an act regulating "ASSAULT RIFLES!" This law expired in 2004.

What was the effect of this act? According to the FBI, nothing. No reduction in any crime of any kind. Why? Because rifles are used in very few crimes in this country.

So, do the politicans who get all concerned about "ASSAULT RIFLES!" know all of this? Of course they do, and yet it doesn't matter to them, because their intent isn't to cut down on crime. Their intent is to look all concerned and prey on the fears of people who don't know better.

If these politicans were TRULY interested in making America safer, what would then then do? They'd stump for laws to more harshly punish those who do commit crimes.

Oddly enough, though, these very politicans often have the most criminal friendly voting records in Congress.

Odd how that works, isn't it?

I went out and bought myself an ASSAULT RIFLE!

Well, not really, I was intending on buying it anyway...

But, if you listen to some politicans, it's an assault rifle...

Confederate troops who faced early versions of them during the Civil War probably considered them to be assault rifles.

But only in the most convoluted politician's minds could a Winchester Model 1873 lever-action rifle be considered an assault rifle.

But let's not let facts get in the way of their concerned looks and grave expressions and attempts to misdirect those who don't know any better, but who are easily panicked.

"terminological inexactitude."

I like that - it fits.

Yes, our politicians are not above creating a crisis so they can pass laws to 'fix' it. I'm thinking this gun thing is one of those.

If the economy continues as it is gun ownership will be a moot point, there won,t be enough money to buy ammo.

That's a thought.

I hope you are all having a wonderful Christmas - and wish we could have Peace on Earth and Good Will to Men.

Well, even if the economy continues to tank, I won't be left high and dry for ammunition.

I load my own, and have enough powder, primers, cases, and bullets to assemble several thousand rounds of ammunition.

Many true firearms enthusiasts reload their own ammunition.

Why?

Could it be because we want to make our AUTOMATIC KILLER HYPER DEADLY MACHINES O'DEATH even more deadly?

No.

Reloading your own ammunition can save you as much as 60%, sometimes more, over the cost of purchasing factory ammunition.

I trust everyone had a great holiday, and I wish you all a Happy New Year!