Guns got sold

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ouze**

source

America's gun: Sales of AR-15s soar

At the GunRunners Gun Show outside Atlanta, the line stretches out the door and around the corner. Dozens of people are waiting, ready to fork over big bucks for everything from pistols to high capacity magazines.

Here, the hottest seller isn't a shotgun, handgun, or even a pair of Angie Whitaker's .22-caliber bullet casing earrings. It's the AR-15 semiautomatic rifle.

"We probably brought maybe 100 AR-15s with us," said vendor George Mazzant, from On the Square Gun & Pawn. "I'd like to sell half of them, and, I'm sure we will. We've been doing that well every weekend."

Mazzant is running a special, selling Stag Arms AR-15 rifles for $999. It's an offer that's too good for show attendee Ken Farrell to pass up.

"I always wanted one," said Farrell. "I'm getting it now just in case I can't later. Since the rumors of the bans, the prices have skyrocketed."

"When you tell the American public that they're not going to have something, they want it," said Mazzant.

The AR-15 is at the heart of the gun control debate. The civilian version of the M16, it's the most popular rifle in the country, with some 4 million in the hands of gun owners and a wildly passionate fan base. Its use in the mass shootings in Newtown, Conn., and Aurora, Colo., thrust the AR-15 into the national spotlight.

"The AR-15 is, essentially, a gun that was designed to inflict maximum casualties, death, and injury, in close to medium range. That's what it does," said gun control advocate and former NRA member Tom Diaz. "The real problem is that we allow that kind of firepower to come into a theater or into a first-grade class."

"It's a question of cosmetics. It's not a question of functioning," said Steve Sanetti, president of the National Sports Shooting Foundation. "The rifles are sane, safe, reliable types of firearms used by millions of citizens for lawful purposes. They are not just killing machines."

But if the gun control debate has some people up in arms, it's had others buying them up — an unintended side effect of the push for stricter gun laws. The most recent measures — President Barack Obama's attempt to strengthen gun laws by expanding background checks, limiting large ammunition magazines and banning certain military-style firearms — were defeated on the Senate floor earlier this month.

Just the threat of a ban has been a boon to the gun business.

"[It's] been a very, very busy year for us," said Mark Malkowski, president of Stag Arms in New Britain, Conn. "Right now we're at about a year's back order, 70,000 rifles at this point."

Connecticut recently passed some of the toughest gun laws in the country, banning the sales of AR-15s. Malkowski has since announced he might be forced to move his company out of the state — taking some 200 jobs with it. Stag Arms is one of more than 30 companies that make the AR-15; together they sell some 800,000 rifles a year, nearly all for the U.S. market.

"The AR-15 now is probably the Number 1 economic engine in the gun industry," said Larry Hyatt, owner of Hyatt Gun Shop in Charlotte, N.C. "We sell every one we get, almost as quick as they come in. We've never seen the demand that's here today."

Gun store owners and analysts alike say it's one of the bestselling guns in the country; roughly $1 billion of the estimated $4 billion firearms industry is made up of sales of AR-15 rifles and their accessories.

"These are expensive guns that people think about a lot before they buy them," said Hyatt. "They're not protesting on the street against the government, they're buying AR-15s and ammunition. It's not advertising, it's not marketing, it's political."

Politics coupled with shifting consumer preference are big drivers of the market, said Wedbush Securities analyst Rommel Dionisio.

"In the last two years, the market has exploded," he said. "It's a fad; it's the cool, new rifle. People used to hunt with bolt action rifles. Now they're using the modern sporting rifle."

According to the sports shooting foundation, an average AR-15 runs about $1,000. They also say the average owner has more than one rifle and spends an additional $483 for accessories. It's a pricey purchase that Diaz says is benefiting from years of industry marketing.

"The names you see now are 'modern sporting rifle,' 'tactical rifle,' " he said. "Those are all just euphemisms for 'assault weapon.' They're being very rational as marketers and as businesses — and as industries. They're only doing what cellphone companies do to make cellphones look different and be more attractive. The difference is what they're selling is lethality."

"They're selling today's rifle," said the foundation's Sanetti. "We call it the modern sporting rifle. And that's exactly what it is."

Whether it's called a modern sporting rifle or an assault rifle, for Atlanta gun show vendor Mazzant, AR-15s are just good business.

"Today was one of the better sales days with ARs," he said. "Everybody in the whole place was lining up to buy them."

Mazzant started off with 100 AR-15 rifles. By the end of the day, he didn't have a single one left.

**Jihadin**

Seriously considering a second AR15/M4 for my wife. Matching set of body armor for I have already...just not as heavy as mine

**Sigvatr**

...what is happening in OT right now? :O

**thenoobbomb**

Sigvatr wrote:
...what is happening in OT right now? :O

I have no idea. I want to know though.
Expecting lock in 3..2..1..

**Cheesecat**

Not enough threads on guns.

**Jihadin**

Ouze pointing out one of the hottest weapon on sale is the AR15. For fear of a perma ban on them.. I perfer them because I am so fimiliar with these type of rifles and know what I'm I can and cannot do with these weapon.

**Ouze**

Yeah, AR's are just bananas - they're the new tickle-me-elmo.

I think the sentiment of them getting banned is somewhere between super-unlikely and impossible, but rationality rarely plays a part in a tulip craze.

**Jihadin**

I agree. I thintk Hollywood and video game FPS like BF2 glamorize them. Granted its not a weapon I wouldn't go hunting with but its a weapon I will carrry to watch over my wife back when she goes hunting.. Mention before. I know my weapon

**Howard A Treesong**

So if you've not bought one before now, surely it wasn't so high up your list of priorities that the very hint of a ban should send you running to the shops to panic buy. People are just being silly, an outright ban on these things isn't likely. The fact that the use of one if these in a school massacre has ultimately led to a surge in their sales shows how distorted the view of guns is in the US and how totally alien it is to most of the rest of the world. It's a bit sad really, and exposes the desperation and paranoia many Americans have for overpowered weapons.

You don't reasonably need these for home defence, you can't carry it in the street, and as for hunting, it's not a hunting/sporting rifle, it's an assault rifle that can shoot things to bits. Odd idea of 'hunting' IMO. I can't see many good reasons for normal people to own these things, they're just big man toys. I'm not completely anti gun, I don't have an issue with genuinely responsible Americans owning handguns for home defence or even hunting as a true sport, but selling thousands of these rifles to the public just seems stupid and is taking the 'right to bear arms' to its absurd conclusion. I don't think tooling up the public with these weapons is what they had envisioned when writing the constitution.

**Seaward**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
You don't reasonably need these for home defence, you can't carry it in the street, and as for hunting, it's not a hunting/sporting rifle, it's an assault rifle that can shoot things to bits. Odd idea of 'hunting' IMO. I can't see many good reasons for normal people to own these things, they're just big man toys. I'm not completely anti gun, I don't have an issue with genuinely responsible Americans owning handguns for home defence or even hunting as a true sport, but selling thousands of these rifles to the public just seems stupid and is taking the 'right to bear arms' to its absurd conclusion. I don't think tooling up the public with these weapons is what they had envisioned when writing the constitution.

Can you tell me what the difference is between a .223 semiautomatically fired from an AR-15 and a .223 semiautomatically fired from, say, a Ruger Mini-14?

**CptJake**

Seaward wrote:
Howard A Treesong wrote:
You don't reasonably need these for home defence, you can't carry it in the street, and as for hunting, it's not a hunting/sporting rifle, it's an assault rifle that can shoot things to bits. Odd idea of 'hunting' IMO. I can't see many good reasons for normal people to own these things, they're just big man toys. I'm not completely anti gun, I don't have an issue with genuinely responsible Americans owning handguns for home defence or even hunting as a true sport, but selling thousands of these rifles to the public just seems stupid and is taking the 'right to bear arms' to its absurd conclusion. I don't think tooling up the public with these weapons is what they had envisioned when writing the constitution.

Can you tell me what the difference is between a .223 semiautomatically fired from an AR-15 and a .223 semiautomatically fired from, say, a Ruger Mini-14?

Easy. One is from an 'assault rifle' as Treesong would define it, the other is not.

**Monster Rain**

One looks scary, and would seem to an ignorant person that it is somehow more dangerous because of this.

**d-usa**

Good old NRA, the #1 lobby of gun manufacturers. Make sure that people are scared and buy more weapons. There is a reason they never see a penny from me.

**CptJake**

d-usa wrote:
Good old NRA, the #1 lobby of gun manufacturers. Make sure that people are scared and buy more weapons. There is a reason they never see a penny from me.

You think they paid Reid to put those bills up for vote? Or got Feinstein to put her bill together?

It would seem if the Democrats quit putting forth bills in an attempt to limit gun ownership the NRA would lose the ability to scare people....

**d-usa**

CptJake wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Good old NRA, the #1 lobby of gun manufacturers. Make sure that people are scared and buy more weapons. There is a reason they never see a penny from me.

You think they paid Reid to put those bills up for vote? Or got Feinstein to put her bill together?

It would seem if the Democrats quit putting forth bills in an attempt to limit gun ownership the NRA would lose the ability to scare people....

Never mind that the NRA endorsed some of those same ideas less than 8 years ago.

And "keeping people scared" doesn't just mean keeping them scared that Democrats will take their guns.

The NRA, and gun manufacturers by extension, have an interest in making sure that bad guys have guns as well. When violent crime is up more people want guns to protect themselves. Scared people = more guns. Look at the levels of violent crimes during the Clinton years and look at gun sales during those years.

**Seaward**

d-usa wrote:
Never mind that the NRA endorsed some of those same ideas less than 8 years ago.

And Democrats endorsed segregation at one point. Times change.

**d-usa**

Seaward wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Never mind that the NRA endorsed some of those same ideas less than 8 years ago.

And Democrats endorsed segregation at one point. Times change.

Some people get smarter, some people get dumber.

**Melissia**

Ouze wrote:
Yeah, AR's are just bananas - they're the new tickle-me-elmo.

It's disgusting how these clowns are treating a deadly weapon as if it was a toy.

People who don't treat guns with the respect they deserve don't deserve the privilege of being a gun owner.

**CptJake**

Who exactly is treating them as a toy? What is your source for that? Are you saying that just because they are being bought?

By the way, there is no 'privilege' to being a gun owner, it is a constitutionally guaranteed right, which is not quite the same as a privilege. Unless of course you want to consider the ability to use any of our rights, such as the right to freely express political opinions as a privilege as well. Perhaps you believe folks who are irresponsible in how they express themselves should have that privilege taken away too?

**d-usa**

Except the only people talking about taking away guns are a stupid minority on the left and the NRA whispering sweet terrors into the ears of gun owners.

Regulating =/= taking guns away. But this is a useless discussion that has been covered many of times. Sorry for even getting sucked into another pointless thread.

**Melissia**

CptJake wrote:
Who exactly is treating them as a toy?

A large number of "gun collectors" are. There's a distinct difference between someone who is buying a weapon for the sake of self-defense and someone who is just buying it because they want to feel manly or some other dumbarse bullgak. People in the latter category are the reason why gun-related accidents are rising even as gun-related crimes are going down. People in the latter category is also why gun advertisements treat guns like tosy as well.

CptJake wrote:
By the way, there is no 'privilege' to being a gun owner, it is a constitutionally guaranteed right, which is not quite the same as a privilege.

A "constitutionally guaranteed right" which can be and frequently is taken away from people who misbehave.

So... more accurately, a "constitutionally mentioned privilege".

Also, don't try to claim I'm advocating taking away your guns. That would be a lie. Don't start doing it.

**agnosto**

You know what I need? A Barrett sniper rifle. My 30/06 just isn't doing it anymore to kill those blasted deer; they're riding around in tanks now so I really need that Barrett for hunting....yeah hunting.

Come to think of it, I need a drum magazine for my fully-automatic assault rifle too. You never know when an entire gang of thugs is going to assault my home and a regular 15 round magazine just won't be enough to stop them all; I really need to be able to swiss-cheese my house (and my neighbor's too since drywall doesn't stop bullets too well).

And since there's so many people out there with body armor...bad people....I need armor piercing rounds for my 100 round drum magazine....for protection you understand. I've got to protect myself against thugs and people that want to take away my god-given right to protect myself and my family.

Feth it, I need a tank. It's an "arm"; I should be able to keep and bear a tank. A nuclear missile's an arm too while we're at it.

Yeah people will jump through all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify anything. Nevermind the constitution was written in a different time when it took 15 seconds or so to reload the firearm between shots; now one person with one gun can empty a room in that time. Ar-15 has a potential 800 rpm rof. Yeah, I need that for protection and going to the gun range.....and hunting, let's not forget hunting.

**Hordini**

agnosto wrote:
You know what I need? A Barrett sniper rifle. My 30/06 just isn't doing it anymore to kill those blasted deer; they're riding around in tanks now so I really need that Barrett for hunting....yeah hunting.

Come to think of it, I need a drum magazine for my fully-automatic assault rifle too. You never know when an entire gang of thugs is going to assault my home and a regular 15 round magazine just won't be enough to stop them all; I really need to be able to swiss-cheese my house (and my neighbor's too since drywall doesn't stop bullets too well).

And since there's so many people out there with body armor...bad people....I need armor piercing rounds for my 100 round drum magazine....for protection you understand. I've got to protect myself against thugs and people that want to take away my god-given right to protect myself and my family.

Feth it, I need a tank. It's an "arm"; I should be able to keep and bear a tank. A nuclear missile's an arm too while we're at it.

Yeah people will jump through all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify anything. Nevermind the constitution was written in a different time when it took 15 seconds or so to reload the firearm between shots; now one person with one gun can empty a room in that time. Ar-15 has a potential 800 rpm rof. Yeah, I need that for protection and going to the gun range.....and hunting, let's not forget hunting.

So, I'm just curious, what does it take to get a fully-automatic assault rifle with armor piercing ammunition in the US? You make it sound pretty easy, is it stuff you can just pick up at Wal-Mart or the local sporting goods store? I'm guessing you're an expert on firearms because after reading your post I get the impression you really know what you're talking about.

**Seaward**

agnosto wrote:
Come to think of it, I need a drum magazine for my fully-automatic assault rifle too. You never know when an entire gang of thugs is going to assault my home and a regular 15 round magazine just won't be enough to stop them all; I really need to be able to swiss-cheese my house (and my neighbor's too since drywall doesn't stop bullets too well).

Hey, if you passed the extensive six month ATF background check and got your local chief law enforcement officer to sign off on your acquisition of an automatic weapon, as is required, I have no issue with you having a drum mag. You will, of course, because they don't feed that well, but you know.

And since there's so many people out there with body armor...bad people....I need armor piercing rounds for my 100 round drum magazine....for protection you understand. I've got to protect myself against thugs and people that want to take away my god-given right to protect myself and my family.

Your 30/06 should get through Level III.

Yeah people will jump through all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify anything. Nevermind the constitution was written in a different time when it took 15 seconds or so to reload the firearm between shots; now one person with one gun can empty a room in that time. Ar-15 has a potential 800 rpm rof. Yeah, I need that for protection and going to the gun range.....and hunting, let's not forget hunting.

An AR-15's not that great for hunting because the round's pretty underpowered.

A 1911 can run roughly 600 rounds per minute. Rate of fire only tells the full story to people who don't know what the feth they're talking about.

**RiTides**

Ugh, too many gun topics in OT!

**Hordini**

RiTides wrote:
Ugh, too many gun topics in OT!

Seems to be one of the hot-button issues right now. Maybe someone should start another Justin Bieber thread, or post something from the Daily Mail.

**agnosto**

Seaword, please don't patronize me; we both know the internet is replete with ways you can turn your semi-auto ar-15 into a full-auto. You can also make armor piercing rounds if you know what you're doing. They feed well enough if you buy a good quality one and maintain them properly.

Which was sort of my point. I don't need anything more powerful than my 30/06; it puts down wild boar and deer with great accuracy. If you want something for home defence, get a shotgun, not a machine gun. If you live in a high crime area and have a conceal/carry, get a small pistol; heck a .25 caliber will do for someone at close range better than a glock in some situations and takes up less space.

I live in Oklahoma. I grew up in a family where a solid half of us were issued a rifle out of the womb and was hunting on family property at 14 with larger caliber rifles than most military personnel handle on a daily basis. I did not go full military due to a car accident precluding me from it but was a noted marksman on the rifle-team in the Young Marine unit I was in. None of that matters. I still don't need a 100-round drum for anything except if I plan to run out and kill groups of people...or to compensate for a lack in another area.

Yeah and that revolutionary war musket that was used when the founding fathers wrote the constitution? I bet it can kill just as many people in the same amount of time as that 1911 or ar...oh wait, it couldn't.

RoF was used to illustrate the differences in technology. Modern personal firearms have the capacity for mayhem that a gatling gun or maxim gun had in the mid to late 1800's which could still only shoot 200 rounds per minute. 1 shot does not equal 1 kill but if you're able to fill a volume of area with enough rounds, people will die or be seriously injured.

**Seaward**

agnosto wrote:
Seaword, please don't patronize me; we both know the internet is replete with ways you can turn your semi-auto ar-15 into a full-auto.

There's only one way to turn a semi-auto into an automatic. You'd need a machine shop.

You can also make armor piercing rounds if you know what you're doing.

.357 SIG will defeat a lot of body armor. "Armor piercing" is never quite the boogeyman that anti-gun folks seem to think it is. It sounds scary, but dig a little deeper and you uncover that there are varying levels of protection, and varying counters to them, many of which are plain ol' unmodified bone stock common rounds.

Which was sort of my point. I don't need anything more powerful than my 30/06; it puts down wild boar and deer with great accuracy. If you want something for home defence, get a shotgun, not a machine gun.

As we covered, it takes an extensive amount of time and money and government scrutiny to get a machine gun. I doubt more than a handful of individuals possess one for the purpose of home defense.

If you live in a high crime area and have a conceal/carry, get a small pistol; heck a .25 caliber will do for someone at close range better than a glock in some situations and takes up less space.

This is extremely bad advice.

I live in Oklahoma. I grew up in a family where a solid half of us were issued a rifle out of the womb and was hunting on family property at 14 with larger caliber rifles than most military personnel handle on a daily basis. I did not go full military due to a car accident precluding me from it but was a noted marksman on the rifle-team in the Young Marine unit I was in. None of that matters. I still don't need a 100-round drum for anything except if I plan to run out and kill groups of people...or to compensate for a lack in another area.

I don't personally need a 100 round drum, either, but I don't believe they should be illegal just because people can't do math.

Yeah and that revolutionary war musket that was used when the founding fathers wrote the constitution? I bet it can kill just as many people in the same amount of time as that 1911 or ar...oh wait, it couldn't.

Know what could, though? The private warships that were perfectly legal at the time of the founding.

RoF was used to illustrate the differences in technology. Modern personal firearms have the capacity for mayhem that a gatling gun or maxim gun had in the mid to late 1800's which could still only shoot 200 rounds per minute. 1 shot does not equal 1 kill but if you're able to fill a volume of area with enough rounds, people will die or be seriously injured.

You seem to be laboring under the illusion that all modern firearms are not capable of doing that, and only the AR-15 has THE POWAH.

**whembly**

Melissia! HI!

Melissia wrote:
CptJake wrote:
Who exactly is treating them as a toy?
A large number of "gun collectors" are. There's a distinct difference between someone who is buying a weapon for the sake of self-defense and someone who is just buying it because they want to feel manly or some other dumbarse bullgak. People in the latter category are the reason why gun-related accidents are rising even as gun-related crimes are going down. People in the latter category is also why gun advertisements treat guns like tosy as well.

I sorta disagree with this premise....sure, there are some who do treat 'em as toyz, but for many, it's a hobby.

CptJake wrote:
By the way, there is no 'privilege' to being a gun owner, it is a constitutionally guaranteed right, which is not quite the same as a privilege.
A "constitutionally guaranteed right" which can be and frequently is taken away from people who misbehave.

So... more accurately, a "constitutionally mentioned privilege".

Also, don't try to claim I'm advocating taking away your guns. That would be a lie. Don't start doing it.

So... who's misbehaving? We're not talking about felons here...

We're talking about a distinctive "right" in the states.

**agnosto**

First, I apologize for not taking the time to multi-quote; I'm lazy today, sorry.

Actually, you don't need a machine shop. There are multiple solutions to give you either a full-auto experience or near to it. One that comes to mind is "Slide Fire" legal and requires no paperwork. The surprising thing with slide fire is you still have a great amount of control and accuracy (I wouldn't have thought so considering the mechanics).

Armor piercing rounds have one use in our society, killing cops. I have law-enforcement officers in my family and have heard enough discussion on the topic to know that there is a huge difference between the various types of rounds available. If people aren't keeping these weapons for defense and they're not suited for hunting, why have them if not to hurt/kill others or just because they thing it's cool. Believe me, owning a firearm because you think it's cool is about as bad as Justin Bieber procreating. A firearm is a tool, not a toy, not a shiny, it has a purpose and it's not to be played with.

Really, the drum mag isn't a huge issue as it takes little time to swap mags anyway; however, I do believe that extended magazines have no real purpose for any legal activities. If you can't kill it or hit it with the first 2 shots, you should sell your firearm and at the gun range you have the leisure to change mags as often as you like.

I fail to see how advising someone to carry a smaller caliber weapon for personal protection is bad advice, especially when said person is licensed (and therefor trained) to do so. It would be better than seeing yahoos walking around with a .44 strapped to their hip or walking through a mall with an ar on their back (sorry personal pet-peeve).

I think you're taking the private warships out of context; read the constitution. Letters of Marque and Reprisal were placed in their for a reason. The fledgling continental congress had no taxation powers, no capital and no way to fund a navy. The psychology of the founding fathers/ times also led to the the right to keep and bear arms; a fear/dislike of standing armies and no tax-base to support one anyway forced them to take a different view. There are other reasons as well, but these were major contributing factors (sorry, degree in history).

I have no illusions. The AR was being used as an example because it's the context for the article in the OP but this could be applied to any firearm. We could have the same discussion (ridiculous though it might be) about the length of knife blades (there are laws about those too but nobody seems to be crying about limiting those rights..)