rapter 0
Recommended Posts
There, fixed it for you gender basher!.QuoteI don't want a fat and happy
congressmancongresswoman telling Dakota Arms that... nope, can't make that gun anymore
Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!
piper17 1
How do you explain the dramtic increase in violent crime in the UK and Australia since they banned practically all private ownership of firearm?
Quote
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling
Andy9o8 0
Quotethe left tends to operate from an emotional position. When it comes to straight logic a lot of their arguments can't stand, therefore they like using wedges. If they can get an inch now, pretty soon they will try to get another inch.
ROFL. As if "the Right" doesn't use emotional wedge issues like gay marriage, school prayer and the uncontrollable epidemic of flag-burning.
The instant you simplistically label this a "left-vs.-right" issue, you reduce it to an ad-man's marketing of soap flakes. Childish slogans are no substitute for independent thought.
JohnRich 4
QuoteI obviously touched a nerve with the comment on assault rifles. I really have nothing against the idea of a collector owning these firearms.
Why only "collectors"? What is a collector? Why are they so special, in your mind? Other citizens are just as capable of owning and using so-called "assault rifles" legally as someone who is called a "collector". And we've already explained to you how the political definition of an "assault rifle" is all about cosmetic features, and nothing at all to do about being more lethal than any other semi-auto. Yet, you, who wants to portray yourself as the reasonable listener, has ignored all that, and you're back trying to ban them again. You're not listening, and you're ideas are not reasonable.
QuoteI simply felt that if the anti-gun crowd has that much of an issue with them then it was at least worth posing the question... Do we need assault rifles...I don't know. I think the debate will at some point center around where society draws the line.
Questions are fine. Your questions were answered. Wha'ts not fine, is just automatically banning something just because some part of society doesn't understand them and doesn't like them. Banning things should be based only upon facts and logic. The so-called assault weapons were banned for 10 years, and had no effect on crime. Then the ban expired and they were legal again, and there's still no effect on crime. This is a non-issue. It's only about hype and scare tactics by the anti-gun folks.
I shoot a so-called "assault weapon", an AR15, monthly in shooting competition, at 200, 300 and 600 yards, at paper targets. Does this scare you?
QuoteIn fairness, I see no reason why a guy who likes to colect firearms will become a criminal...
Correct. And likewise, there's the same no reason to believe that the average gun owner will become a criminal either. Gun ownership rights should not be restricted preemptively. Only when they've shown that they aren't responsible, should such rights be restricted.
QuoteAt some point people need to address the fact that a chunk of the voting population are for gun control so it might be better not to respond by drawing battle lines.
And you're suggesting what? That gun owners should just lay down and surrender to the gun-control folks? Just because a few people are scared of guns, is not sufficient reason to ban them from everyone. Some people would like to see blacks relegated back to the status of second-class citizens too, so should America cater to those folks and give them some of what they want? Or should we draw a battle line with them, and oppose their wrong-headed ideas? Just because some people want something, doesn't make it right, and doesn't mean that we should automatically give them what they want.
There are already 20,000 gun laws on the books for the gun-control folks. How many more do they need?
JohnRich 4
QuoteI still doubt that anyone needs an assault rifle but that does not mean I am against them. If the argument is that they do not pose a safety risk and banning would needlessly infringe on ones rights then fine.
You say "fine" when we've shown you that hundreds of thousands of people use them for sporting purposes, and yet you continue to want to find ways to ban and restrict them. So you haven't accepted a "then fine" position. You continue to ignore the information we've given you, and attack a firearm simply based upon personal emotion, unfounded fear, and ignorance of facts.
JohnRich 4
QuoteAnd the firearms business is HONESTLY big business. (SHOT show's coming up... trust me... it's BIG)
Actually, it's not that big, compared with corporate America. A few years ago it was said that civilian gun sales in the U.S. amounted to $5 billion per year. That's from all gun makers, combined. That's also the same gross sales as the garbage company I used to work for (BFI). Compared with most big companies, all the firearms makers, even combined as an industry, don't amount to much.
kallend 1,651
QuoteHow do you explain the dramtic increase in violent crime in the UK and Australia since they banned practically all private ownership of firearm?
Quote
How do YOU explain the increase in violent crime, including handgun homicides, in the USA with the increase in CCW permits?...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
SkyDekker 1,147
QuoteThe flaw is yours, in thinking that a rifle is the same as a nuclear bomb.
I thought you had the right to bare arms, I didn't think it read: The right to bare a rifle.
The question isn't anymore if there should be restrictions, the question has become at what level the restrictions should be in place. Your constitutional rights are already restricted and nobody has a problem with it. As a matter of fact, the far majority of people agree with those restrictions. Hence, the argument is about haw far the restrictions should go, not whether or not there should be any.
I do have a questions for you though, how would you define the arms you are constitutionally free to bare? Where do you draw the line?
JohnRich 4
QuoteHow do YOU explain the increase in violent crime, including handgun homicides, in the USA with the increase in CCW permits?
Ladies and gentlemen:
I request that you not allow kallend to sideline this discussion with this personal game of his. He's already had his say on it in this thread. There's no point in re-hashing that again here.
kbordson 8
QuoteQuoteAnd the firearms business is HONESTLY big business. (SHOT show's coming up... trust me... it's BIG)
Actually, it's not that big, compared with corporate America. A few years ago it was said that civilian gun sales in the U.S. amounted to $5 billion per year. That's from all gun makers, combined. That's also the same gross sales as the garbage company I used to work for (BFI). Compared with most big companies, all the firearms makers, even combined as an industry, don't amount to much.
I've heard the saying "the way to make a small fortune in the gun business is to start with a large fortune"... but I wouldn't be so flippant to write off the capital gain and revenue generated by the industry.
I did a search and here, I found statistics on firearms production for 2004. Per the ATF, there were 728k pistols, 294k revolvers, 1.325mil rifles, 731k shotguns and 19k misc firearms produced for the year. That would be a total of 3 million firearms. (and the fine point on the first page notes that totals are only for 75% of manufacturers). If we give and average sale cost of $800/handgun, $1000/rifle, $1500/shotgun, then that would give a total sales of 2 billion on firearms made only in that year... not including any of the sales on firearms from resales. And.. if you include all the ancillary equiptment in the field (clothing, ammunition, equiptment, reloading,...) Cabela's alone had a total revune in 2005 of $1.8 billion. (yes, it's dirty math because it includes the profit from firearms sales as well) So maybe it is close to the $5 Billion in commercial revenue (that you hadn't referenced)... but I still wouldn't consider this listing to be all "mom and pop ."
*and you were accusing Kallend of sidelining the discussion?! AGAIN - the main reason that I brought up the business aspect of it was to show that it's NOT just one simple question ("Are .50cal's 'necessary'?"). But if you want to bicker about your defination of "big business"... go ahead and lets sideline this discussion - my first argument: Merriam-Webster - by that defination, the Firearms Industry IS big business.)
craddock 0
QuoteIf we give and average sale cost of $800/handgun, $1000/rifle, $1500/shotgun
WOW! Those are some extremely high averages. I would cut those numbers in half
I own four shotguns and have never spent $1500 on one. I don't own a rifle that cost $1000 new not counting optics.(7 total).
That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.
Really, you better check where your information came from because if you took away all of the sub-$5 billion industries in America there would be no "corporate America" left.QuoteActually, it's not that big, compared with corporate America.
Well I guess if your livelihood does not depend on it, the importance isn't that much.QuoteCompared with most big companies, all the firearms makers, even combined as an industry, don't amount to much.
But I am sure that there are several thousand people that think otherwise and are glad that there are people that don't think like that.Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!
JohnRich 4
Quote*and you were accusing Kallend of sidelining the discussion?! AGAIN - the main reason that I brought up the business aspect of it was to show that it's NOT just one simple question ("Are .50cal's 'necessary'?"). But if you want to bicker about your defination of "big business"...
kallend's "sideline" already had an entire thread devoted to it elsewhere. The subject of how big the firearms industry is, does not. I suppose that judgement is all relative as to what you compare it with, and what you include along with the actual firearms. I would bet that the amount of revenue that Cabella's gets from actual gun sales is a relatively small percentage of their total.
kbordson 8
QuoteQuoteIf we give and average sale cost of $800/handgun, $1000/rifle, $1500/shotgun
WOW! Those are some extremely high averages. I would cut those numbers in half, except the shotguns I would multiply by .333
I own four shotguns and have never spent $1500 on one. I don't own a rifle that cost $1000 new not counting optics.(7 total).
I was averaging ALL the firearms and rifles in that class. Including the 30k shotguns. Just cuz some are cheap, doesn't mean all are.
craddock 0
I know what average means. But for every 30K exotic SBS or O/U, there are probably a hundred 870's out there. If there are a bunch of 30k shotguns out there than I stand corrected, but I truly doubt that to be the case.
That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.
JohnRich 4
Quoteif you took away all of the sub-$5 billion industries in America there would be no "corporate America" left.
Negative. There are lots of corporations with more annual revenue than that. Gun makers rise to that level only collectively as an entire industry. Individual gun companies, of which there are dozens, make far less.
QuoteQuoteCompared with most big companies, all the firearms makers, even combined as an industry, don't amount to much.
Well I guess if your livelihood does not depend on it, the importance isn't that much. But I am sure that there are several thousand people that think otherwise and are glad that there are people that don't think like that.
My comment was regarding the size of any individual gun maker compared to what is normally considered to be "big business". By that comparison, gun makers aren't very large. That was not meant to imply that those gun companies aren't important to the people that work there, nor their customers.
kbordson 8
QuoteI know what average means. But for every 30K exotic SBS or O/U, there are probably a hundred 870's out there. If there are a bunch of 30k shotguns out there than I stand corrected, but I truly doubt that to be the case.
If you want to take the time... calculate the average of this page and get back to me with your math. Some people pay more for their firearms. It's all about the level of quality you want.
You would be surprisedQuoteIf there are a bunch of 30k shotguns out there than I stand corrected, but I truly doubt that to be the case.
I personally know of 4 people within 10 miles of where I live that are in that category and I am not into guns.Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!
Only the good die young, so I have found immortality,
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites