Firearm salesman of the century

[wmw999 2,155]

8 minutes ago, jimjumper said:

4 million is a lot of ding-a-lings. I think most of them are thinking "better get them while the getting is good!" Considering the  stated platforms of the Democrats, and Biden in particular, I'd say it might be reasonable to assume they're correct.

"The Democrats." As in all of them? Or just the most radical of platforms? And my God, how would a guy survive without being able to buy more than one gun a month? I'm both a liberal and a gun owner, and I'm by no means the only one here.

Wendy P.

[JoeWeber 2,331]

54 minutes ago, jimjumper said:

4 million is a lot of ding-a-lings. I think most of them are thinking "better get them while the getting is good!" Considering the  stated platforms of the Democrats, and Biden in particular, I'd say it might be reasonable to assume they're correct.

Yep, we have a lot of ding-a-lings. In fact we can provide 4 million new ones a month for another 18 months. Now some gun industry back patters are claiming that 5 million in 2020 were first time buyers. Fantastic. A gun is just what someone who knows jack shit about guns needs. But you never know when Soros will come knocking, I reckon.

Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President of General Counsel: “These first-time buyers represent a group of people who, until now, were agnostic regarding firearm ownership. That’s rapidly changing, and these Americans are taking hold of their God-given right to keep and bear arms and protect themselves and their loved ones.”

So we never needed Scalia and DC v. Heller, it's a God given right. 

[brenthutch 388]

1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

"The Democrats." As in all of them? Or just the most radical of platforms? And my God, how would a guy survive without being able to buy more than one gun a month? I'm both a liberal and a gun owner, and I'm by no means the only one here.

Wendy P.

From JoeBiden.com
*  Ban the manufacture and sale of modern sporting rifles and standard capacity magazines. 
* Buy back the modern sporting rifles and standard capacity magazines already in our communities. Biden will also institute a program to buy back firearms currently on our streets. This will give individuals who now possess modern sporting rifles or standard capacity magazines two options: sell the weapons to the government, or register them under the National Firearms Act.

 

[Phil1111 918]

3 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

From JoeBiden.com
*  Ban the manufacture and sale of modern sporting rifles and standard capacity magazines. 
* Buy back the modern sporting rifles and standard capacity magazines already in our communities. Biden will also institute a program to buy back firearms currently on our streets. This will give individuals who now possess modern sporting rifles or standard capacity magazines two options: sell the weapons to the government, or register them under the National Firearms Act.

 

Why not tell the truth? Why attempt to use fear and misinformation to make political points? Don't you understand it makes you appear to be untruthful and a troll?

The Biden Plan to End Our Gun Violence Epidemic

[JerryBaumchen 1,068]

43 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Why not tell the truth? Why attempt to use fear and misinformation to make political points? Don't you understand it makes you appear to be untruthful and a troll?

The Biden Plan to End Our Gun Violence Epidemic

Hi Phil,

Re:  'Why not tell the truth?'

Why doesn't a tiger change his stripes?

Because he cannot.

Jerry Baumchen

[brenthutch 388]

1 hour ago, Phil1111 said:

Why not tell the truth? Why attempt to use fear and misinformation to make political points? Don't you understand it makes you appear to be untruthful and a troll?

The Biden Plan to End Our Gun Violence Epidemic

Not untruthful, just a matter of semantics.  What Biden calls an assault rifle millions of Americans call a sporting rifle.  Thirty round magazines are included when one purchases an AR, I’d say that is pretty standard.  What is untruthful is referring to an AR as a weapon of war as it lacks the burst fire capability of the M-16/M-4. Biden is the liar, not me.

Not only Biden causing record gun sales, he is doing the same with ammunition.

”Big-name shooting sports company Vista Outdoor Inc. reported “over a year’s worth” of backlogged ammunition orders worth more than $1 billion, an official said recently.”

Edited January 10, 2021 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,331]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

Not untruthful, just a matter of semantics.  What Biden calls an assault rifle millions of Americans call a sporting rifle.  Thirty round magazines are included when one purchases an AR, I’d say that is pretty standard.  What is untruthful is referring to an AR as a weapon of war as it lacks the burst fire capability of the M-16/M-4. Biden is the liar, not me.

Wasn't it you that pointed out that Bolt Action rifles were weapons of war? 

[brenthutch 388]

19 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Wasn't it you that pointed out that Bolt Action rifles were weapons of war? 

Yes but Biden thinks only MSRs are.  Under the Biden plan the M-1 Garand (a weapon Patton famously declared “the greatest battle implement ever devised”) would be perfectly legal.

[JoeWeber 2,331]

33 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Yes but Biden thinks only MSRs are.  Under the Biden plan the M-1 Garand (a weapon Patton famously declared “the greatest battle implement ever devised”) would be perfectly legal.

Right, another semi auto .30 caliber. Useless for hunting or home defense but no need to ban it when we have your AR's to confiscate.

[murps2000 86]

3 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Not untruthful, just a matter of semantics.  What Biden calls an assault rifle millions of Americans call a sporting rifle.  Thirty round magazines are included when one purchases an AR, I’d say that is pretty standard.  What is untruthful is referring to an AR as a weapon of war as it lacks the burst fire capability of the M-16/M-4. Biden is the liar, not me.

 

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

Yes but Biden thinks only MSRs are.  Under the Biden plan the M-1 Garand (a weapon Patton famously declared “the greatest battle implement ever devised”) would be perfectly legal.

So let me see if I understand what you're saying. An AR is not a weapon of war because it lacks select fire capability. Biden says it is, so he is a liar.

The M1 Garand lacks select fire capability, but is a weapon of war, at least in the opinion of one of our most celebrated wartime generals. Biden says it isn't, and you seem to take issue with that.

Is that correct? 

[brenthutch 388]

24 minutes ago, murps2000 said:

 

So let me see if I understand what you're saying. An AR is not a weapon of war because it lacks select fire capability. Biden says it is, so he is a liar.

The M1 Garand lacks select fire capability, but is a weapon of war, at least in the opinion of one of our most celebrated wartime generals. Biden says it isn't, and you seem to take issue with that.

Is that correct? 

Biden says the AR is no different than the weapons our military is CURRENTLY using.  I say there is a difference because an AR does not have select fire capability.  Biden says the AR should be banned because it was designed for the military to kill many people quickly.  I just point out the M-1 Garand (semi auto) M-1903 Springfield (bolt action) Henry Repeating Rifle (lever action) Sharps Rifle (single shot breach loader) and Brown Bess Musket were all military weapons designed to kill as many people as possible.  None of those are on Biden’s ban list. (Yet)

Biden’s “weapons of war” argument is intellectually dishonest.

Edited January 11, 2021 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,331]

6 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

I just point out the M-1 Garand (semi auto) M-1903 Springfield (bolt action) Henry Repeating Rifle (lever action) Sharps Rifle (single shot breach loader) and Brown Bess Musket were all military weapons designed to kill as many people as possible.  None of those are on Biden’s ban list.

And I'll point out that your pet AR didn't exist when those guns did. I'll also point out that a Brown Bess with a bump stock isn't a real concern. 

[brenthutch 388]

22 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

And I'll point out that your pet AR didn't exist when those guns did. I'll also point out that a Brown Bess with a bump stock isn't a real concern. 

The Garand did not exist when the M-1903 was designed, the Henry did not exist when the Sharps was designed and Trump banned bump stocks.  (Though one may still bump-fire if one has access to rubber band technology)

There was a time the lowly crossbow was considered an assault weapon.

“under Pope Innocent II in 1139 banned the use of crossbows against Christians. The below seems to be the agreed-upon translation:

We prohibit under anathema that murderous art of crossbowmen and archers, which is hateful to God, to be employed against Christians and Catholics from now on.”

Edited January 11, 2021 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,331]

2 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

The Garand did not exist when the M-1903 was designed, the Henry did not exist when the Sharps was designed and Trump banned bump stocks.  (Though one may still bump-fire if one has access to rubber band technology)

That is pointlessly obvious. Look man, you do not give a shit about gun history. You care about not giving an inch on your precious Scalia given Second Amendment Rights. How odd it is that these crazy pseudo military weapons you love so much that are supposed to save you from fear but yet no matter how many you guns have you are always afraid. Last time I checked there has been no increase in the numbers of Boogie Men, so you know.

[brenthutch 388]

30 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

That is pointlessly obvious. Look man, you do not give a shit about gun history. You care about not giving an inch on your precious Scalia given Second Amendment Rights. Last time I checked there has been no increase in the numbers of Boogie Men, so you know.

Obviously, ARs keep Boogie Men at bay.

[murps2000 86]

2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Biden says the AR is no different than the weapons our military is CURRENTLY using.  I say there is a difference because an AR does not have select fire capability.  Biden says the AR should be banned because it was designed for the military to kill many people quickly.  I just point out the M-1 Garand (semi auto) M-1903 Springfield (bolt action) Henry Repeating Rifle (lever action) Sharps Rifle (single shot breach loader) and Brown Bess Musket were all military weapons designed to kill as many people as possible.  None of those are on Biden’s ban list. (Yet)

Biden’s “weapons of war” argument is intellectually dishonest.

Okay so it sounds like the issue you have is with the language of his policy. If he said the AR should be banned because it is capable of killing too many people at a time, then at least he would be more intellectually honest.

For the record, I don't think ARs should be banned outright any more than I think Ruger Mini 14s should be, but I think there should be some level of restriction because, as in most aspects of society in general, self-policing doesn't seem to work. I am okay with a 10 round mag limit. Considering that deer hunters typically go with 5, I think that is more than a fair compromise. It was the law in California until a federal appeals court ruled it unconstitutional. 

I wouldn't worry too much about Biden. With the courts stacked as they are thanks to McConnell, your 2A rights are probably perfectly safe for some time to come.

[brenthutch 388]

9 hours ago, murps2000 said:

 I am okay with a 10 round mag limit. Considering that deer hunters typically go with 5, I think that is more than a fair compromise. It was the law in California until a federal appeals court ruled it unconstitutional. 

If California’s 10 round limit saved lives, we should see an increase in the number of people being killed with MSRs

after it was deemed unconstitutional.  Likewise we should have seen a reduction in deaths from MSRs, after California banned pistol grips.  I will concede that California’s ban on .50 BMG has reduced the deaths from that caliber to zero, but then again it is pretty much zero in the rest of the country.

 

Edited January 11, 2021 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,331]

14 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

If California’s 10 round limit saved lives, we should see an increase in the number of people being killed with MSRs

after it was deemed unconstitutional.  Likewise we should have seen a reduction in deaths from MSRs, after California banned pistol grips.  I will concede that California’s ban on .50 BMG has reduced the deaths from that caliber to zero, but then again it is pretty much zero in the rest of the country.

 

More Guns + More CO2 = More Happy. Rinse, wash, repeat.

[Faicon9493 120]

On 12/3/2020 at 6:55 PM, brenthutch said:

Biden easily passes Obama as the politician responsible for record gun sales.

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/nics_firearm_checks_-_month_year.pdf/view

Biden and didn't take your guns. All you lost was your 45. Have a nice day.

[Faicon9493 120]

On 12/3/2020 at 7:17 PM, billvon said:

But . . . but .  . . Obama was going to "grab our guns!"  That's why everyone was buying guns.  Now gun manufacturers are trying the same thing again?

Are republicans that gullible?

Apparantly so.

[murps2000 86]

13 hours ago, brenthutch said:

If California’s 10 round limit saved lives, we should see an increase in the number of people being killed with MSRs after it was deemed unconstitutional. 

 

I'm pretty sure you're oversimplifying with regard to cause & effect, but even if you aren't, It's only been like four months. Give it time.

 

13 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Likewise we should have seen a reduction in deaths from MSRs, after California banned pistol grips.

 

Did we?

 

13 hours ago, brenthutch said:

 I will concede that California’s ban on .50 BMG has reduced the deaths from that caliber to zero, but then again it is pretty much zero in the rest of the country.

 

Sounds like we can close the books on that round, then. I'm upset that I can no longer hunt humpback whales from my kayak, though. 50 AE doesn't quite do the job.

Edited January 12, 2021 by murps2000

[brenthutch 388]

On 12/3/2020 at 7:17 PM, billvon said:

But . . . but .  . . Obama was going to "grab our guns!"  That's why everyone was buying guns.  Now gun manufacturers are trying the same thing again?

Are republicans that gullible?

“Typically, Cargill’s customers are mostly conservative, he said, and the people enrolled in his license to carry classes are a mix of Republicans, Democrats and Libertarians. But lately, he said, the majority of the students are coming from the left side of the political spectrum.”

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/10/25/first-time-gun-sales-not-voting-for-trump-430310

Apparently the lefties are no less gullible.

[headoverheels 291]

5 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

 

Apparently the lefties are no less gullible.

No, we just need to put down the right wing fascist uprising. Nothing fake about that.

[brenthutch 388]

10 hours ago, Faicon9493 said:

Biden and didn't take your guns. All you lost was your 45. Have a nice day.

Biden didn’t take any guns, but he is partially responsible for millions and millions of more guns.  That is what makes it so funny.  He aspires to reduce the number of guns but all he accomplishes is adding millions more. 

Edited January 12, 2021 by brenthutch

[brenthutch 388]

6 minutes ago, headoverheels said:

No, we just need to put down the right wing fascist uprising. Nothing fake about that.

With these guys on the ramparts, you have nothing to worry about.