What are the feared "Future Restrictions" driving up gun sales?

[ol' scratch]

I would add things like required "ballistic fingerprinting", micro-stamping, and cosmetic feature bans on things like collapsible stocks and pistol grips. Also having to go through a background check to purchase ammo, and limits on ammo quantities, having to be licensed to have certain amounts, etc. Those are all things that have been recently tried. It only takes a shift in the political winds for them to come true.

Everyone saying "it won't happen again, we've made too many gains": look how fast those gains were made. Only 15 years ago, concealed carry was rare, ARs were expensive and heavily regulated, magazine capacities were limited, etc. The antis were in control and thought they had everything locked down. And in a few short years, we're where we are now. That's good for us. But it also shows how quickly things can change. We don't know where things will be 15 years from now. I know we all hope the pendulum doesn't swing back the other direction, but if the past decade shows us anything, it's that the pendulum does swing, and it swings quickly. The moment you say "it can't happen", it will.

I agree with you to a point and also believe that we shouldn't let our guard down, but something else happened during that time...The rise of the internet. Gun owners are mobilized and connected. Gun boards (love them or hate them) help connect gun owners. There are more than ever and more than people realized. The political climate has changed and owning a gun doesn't mean you are a radical anymore.

 

[beatledog7]

You know what shocks me?

Just how many gun owners claim a semi automatic of any pedigree to be an "assault rifle." As per usual, fellow gun owners are our worst enemy.

I agree. Browse the Internet and discover all the ammo stash, arsenal room, most lethal SD load, how can I make my Glock go full auto? threads and videos that gun owners post.

How can responsible gun owners stand up to a full-blown conquest of our rights when so many of us can so easily be labelled by the antis as crazy, right-wing vigilantes who are at best itching to pull the trigger and at worst hell-bent on taking over the government at gunpoint?

 

[alsaqr]

"Almost every bill passes."

Pardon me, this is hilarious.

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/54_61/-30466-1.html

Members of the 110th Congress introduced nearly 14,000 pieces of legislation, more than any Congress since 1980, but only about 3.3 percent of the bills actually were signed into law, the lowest success rate since 1976.

While the percentage of bills that pass has dropped significantly over the past two decades, the number of ceremonial bills — naming post offices and other federal buildings — has risen dramatically, squashing the substantive work of Congress into fewer and fewer pieces of legislation.

Of the 449 bills that became law in the 110th Congress, 144 of them — 32 percent — did nothing more than rename a federal building. In comparison, the 109th Congress passed 121 ceremonial bills, about 25 percent of the 483 bills that became law. The 104th Congress — the first time in 40 years that Republicans held a majority in the House — passed 337 bills, and only 35 were ceremonial naming bills, or just over 10 percent. No Congress since 1975 has introduced fewer pieces of legislation than the 7,991 bills and resolutions offered in the 104th Congress.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

I agree with you to a point and also believe that we shouldn't let our guard down, but something else happened during that time...The rise of the internet. Gun owners are mobilized and connected. Gun boards (love them or hate them) help connect gun owners. There are more than ever and more than people realized. The political climate has changed and owning a gun doesn't mean you are a radical anymore.

True. But a high tide raises all boats and so forth. The antis can use the internet too. And the rise of the 24hour news cycle, and blogging means that a shooting in Podunk USA can become national news and fuel a whole new set of laws, whereas before, it might have just stayed in the local or state news.

Look at the recent Zimmerman shooting. Something like that might not have become such a national news topic 15-20 years ago. Now it's the focal point of antis all over the nation trying to paint all guns owners as cop-wannabes looking for a fight. They can get on DemocraticUnderground or MoveOn.org and talk up just as big of a storm against guns as we can for them. The internet and widespread news access can be, and often is, used to spread bad information as well as good. Sure gun owners are getting together and connecting with each other much better. But the antis are connecting too. I frequent other non-gun forums, some that have a pretty left wing slant. And the antis spread the word on ways to encroach on our freedoms just as well as we spread word on how to protect them. The more things change the more they stay the same.

 

[Double_J]

I think that if they tried to retroactively ban ANY magazine that we could fight them on the fact that the last magazine ban did NOTHING to reduce crime and had no impact on anything related to it. The only thing it did was increase the price of pre-ban magazines.

We also have to understand we are a LARGE VOCAL community. We have to stand together and keep pushing as we have only just begun moving the flywheel back in our direction. If the ban were introduced the uproar would be bad, especially with the internet being as prevalent as it is now.

 

[parsimonious_instead]

It would not surprise me to see a permanent and retroactive ban on "high capacity" magazines.

Many avid gun owners see no reason for magazines above 10 rounds.

For me it's less about "I want to have magazines that hold 15, 20, 30, etc rounds" and more about "why should I go from being a law-abiding citizen to a criminal for simply having a spring loaded box that holds more ammunition than the 'acceptable' number."

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

For me it's less about "I want to have magazines that hold 15, 20, 30, etc rounds" and more about "why should I go from being a law-abiding citizen to a criminal for simply having a spring loaded box that holds more ammunition than the 'acceptable' number."

Unfortunately, some gun owners don't care about you. There are hunters for instance who are completely fine with a 5 round limit on all guns, and so long as the politicians don't touch their hunting rifles and shotguns, they will turn a blind eye to laws that limit anything else. It's a case of "we must hang together, or we will surely hang separately". There might be pending laws that limit a firearm you don't care about or don't use. But it's best to stick with fellow gun owners and oppose all of these regulations, because you may need their support when the grabbers come after something you do care about.

Zumbo was one of these types. Thankfully the backlash at his comments was quick and severe.

 

[gbw]

The letter of 2A, Heller, etc. would be satisfied if each person were allowed exactly one single shot .22 and one round of ammunition. No shooting allowed.

Retroactive bans of repeating arms, magazines of any sort, or more than one gun would be simple, if not easy. Make posession after some date illegal with a very stiff fine as a penalty. Enforce on an opportunity-arises basis. For nearly everyone the risk of keeping the contraband would not be worth the costs. See machine guns.

No constitutional issues that couldn't be eaily finessed by a court so disposed, which is quite likely next presidential term. Or they could simply reverse Heller and outlaw it all, stare decisis not withstanding, which I think will also be very much in play.

 

[Orkan]

How can responsible gun owners stand up to a full-blown conquest of our rights when so many of us can so easily be labelled by the antis as crazy, right-wing vigilantes who are at best itching to pull the trigger and at worst hell-bent on taking over the government at gunpoint?

You don't just start acting like the enemy wants you to act just because they give you a label. Opposing forces ALWAYS label each other.

I think vegans are idiots. I label them, and avoid them.
I think anti-gun/anti-hunter/anti-freedom types are idiots. I label them and avoid them.

I sure as hell don't expect them to modify their behavior because I label them idiots. If they were capable of rational thought, I wouldn't have to label them. They say the same thing about me.

This is why there is no point in us trying to appease the anti's. Any compromise will be further loss of liberty. It really is as simple as that. So I'm going to do what I do, with absolutely no care of what they think or say because the only thing they would approve of, is if I were just like them. So if you want to live your life trying to appease the anti's, you go right ahead. I won't do it.

 

[razorback2003]

I don't think there is a desire in Congress for such a law. AR 15's are now accepted in the mainstream gun, target, and hunting community. That wasn't the case in 1994. Shows like Top Shot, hunting shows, even the gun making shows have put guns in more of a positive light that is not harmful or dangerous.

Obama may want a gun law change, but Congress has to pass the law.

 

[Agsalaska]

I don't think there is a desire in Congress for such a law. AR 15's are now accepted in the mainstream gun, target, and hunting community. That wasn't the case in 1994. Shows like Top Shot, hunting shows, even the gun making shows have put guns in more of a positive light that is not harmful or dangerous.

Obama may want a gun law change, but Congress has to pass the law.

I agree. People talk a lot about Obama's ability to utlizize executive orders and squash the constitution. I get it and I agree to a certain extent, but I dont think he could pull it off with any gun legislation. What I could see is stricter NICS background checks or tighter ATF controls on dealers, but I think even most of that would have trouble.

I think part of the problem the Anti-gun nuts have is they do not categorically own the democratis party. There are millions of registered Democrats that are gun owners and a lot of elected Democrats, especially those from places like Texas, Alaska, Nevada, etc, believe a vote on gun legislation could ruin there career. Beyond the Holder and Obama there is just not much of an appetite for it. Heck I am not convinced that Obama has an appetite for it anymore.

That all being said I also agree that we would be absolutely foolish to put our guard down. The battle will last as long as America does. As pointed out earlier the tide changed rather quickly in our favor. It could happen again.

 

[beatledog7]

I think vegans are idiots. I label them, and avoid them.

Last time I checked, nobody is in Washington trying to make vegans eat beef.

Frankly, I don't see any disagreement here. You original statement was that we are our own worst enemy. I simply added a couple of examples.

 

[parsimonious_instead]

Unfortunately, some gun owners don't care about you. There are hunters for instance who are completely fine with a 5 round limit on all guns, and so long as the politicians don't touch their hunting rifles and shotguns, they will turn a blind eye to laws that limit anything else. It's a case of "we must hang together, or we will surely hang separately". There might be pending laws that limit a firearm you don't care about or don't use. But it's best to stick with fellow gun owners and oppose all of these regulations, because you may need their support when the grabbers come after something you do care about.

Zumbo was one of these types. Thankfully the backlash at his comments was quick and severe.

Then we need to tell these people who think that their guns are safe from any legislative harm that it *can* happen to them.
Put it to them this way: "why do you even need five rounds in your rifle/shotgun?" or "how would you feel if a four-round limit were imposed on all hunting weapons and suddenly you're a criminal for having a bolt-action 30.06 that holds five shots?"

 

[Midwest]

There are millions of registered Democrats that are gun owners and a lot of elected Democrats, especially those from places like Texas, Alaska, Nevada, etc, believe a vote on gun legislation could ruin there career.

Here in Kentucky our Governors who have signed PRO GUN legislation into law have been Democrats. Also Vermont is heavily democratic and they do not require a conceal carry permit there.

 

[Seattleimport]

I agree with the person who joked that the gun lobby should donate to Democratic campaigns. Since Obama was elected, gun and ammo sales have skyrocketed while gun laws have loosened. The only gun law that Obama signed was allowing folks to carry guns in parks. The facts of the matter are that since Obama was elected, more people are buying more guns and are allowed to carry those guns more places.

Google "obama gun law", search-restrict the results for just the past month, and you'll see a slew of new articles all with a similar theme and the same talking points. Clearly a new PR campaign was executed to whip up the gun-owning voting base. Which makes sense; it's an election year.

The articles are nonsense. Simply put, there's no actual evidence that Obama (or anyone) is planning some kind of assault on gun laws. And even if Obama was interested in that, there's absolutely no way such restrictions would make it through the current "do-nothing" congress.

We gun owners should be aware that we're being pandered to and manipulated. Personally, all this fear-mongering makes me sick.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...-in-texas-as-nra-spouts-anti-obama-fantasies/

 

[Orkan]

Simply put, there's no actual evidence that Obama (or anyone) is planning some kind of assault on gun laws.

You must be joking. You HAVE to be.

Here's your wake up call:
http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation

They won't be happy until there isn't a single functioning firearm in the United States that isn't owned by LEO or military. During the 80's, gun owners were just as complacent as you appear to be. Do you really need a refresher on what that led to?

 

[Telekinesis]

During the 80's, gun owners were just as complacent as you appear to be. Do you really need a refresher on what that led to?

Orkan, remember that the 80's was nearly 30 years ago. There is a segment of the gun owning community who are fully able to buy, own, and carry everything from rifles and pistols to fully automatic weapons and other NFA regulated toys who simply weren't around to see the "complacency of the '80s."

 

[jimmyraythomason]

I think gun companies secretly dump huge amounts of money into Democratic campaigns. Then they sit back and laugh when money comes pouring in from the panic.

Funny...that sounds an awful lot like this

Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said he is skeptical of claims that firearms sales are way up. But he said the gun industry does work to promote that perception.

"There's no doubt [National Rifle Association President] Wayne LaPierre is out there every day saying that President Obama has a secret plan to take away your guns," Horwitz said. "They want to gin up sales."


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/03/2...-election-year/?intcmp=trending#ixzz1pyKXUH00

 

[Cosmoline]

The fears of a new AWB or mag ban are baseless. Restrictions are likely to come in hidden form, on the manufacturing and import/exprot end. There the Executive Branch can operate without Congressional approval. The federal government has nothing to do with state CCW laws, so there's not much of an issue there.

Apart from a few nutcases from far-left districts, the Dems have learned that gun laws can cost them key seats. The politics of the 1980's, let alone the 1930's, on this issue were VERY different. And for the past four years any overtly anti-gun measures on the Hill have been DOA.

In short, if I was worried I would stock up on weak points in the chain. Primers, first and foremost. Then powder and components. And if you want a high-end imported high tech firearm, this is probably a good time to buy. But don't worry about the black rifles.

I would also be concerned about some "border states" swinging back to the anti camp in a Democrat sweep. But there's not much to be done about that at this point other than move.

 

[Seattleimport]

You must be joking. You HAVE to be.

Okay, "anyone else" was a stretch. Of course there are anti-gun folks out there.

My point is that Obama hasn't demonstrated any interest in pursuing an anti-gun agenda. On the contrary, his actions (the only thing that matters) have been pro-gun. Besides, "Executive orders" are a non-threat; Congress passes laws, not the President, and the current Congress has proven that they're incapable of passing very many laws (see previous quote above showing that this is the least effective congress since 1975).

Bottom line: there is no actual threat to gun ownership. Resist the efforts of the self-interested PR flaks who are stoking fear and hysteria, and approach this issue with a clear and rational mind.

 

[David E]

My point is that Obama hasn't demonstrated any interest in pursuing an anti-gun agenda.

Ever hear of a scandal called "Fast and Furious?"

He then used those numbers saying that "94% (or so) of the guns recovered were from the US," as laying the foundation for future laws and restrictions.

Such as making the border states report EBR sales, even tho there was no authority to do that.

Do you not recall him assuring the Brady folks that "we're working behind the scenes" regarding gun control efforts?

You not paying attention doesn't make it a non-issue simply because you're unaware of key facts.

 

[Orkan]

My point is that Obama hasn't demonstrated any interest in pursuing an anti-gun agenda.

A 10 second google search.


Obama's ENTIRE administration is anti-gun. Every single member of his staff/administration is openly anti-gun and supports anti-gun groups.

Bottom line: there is no actual threat to gun ownership.

Believe what you wish.

 

[Bubbles]

The 0bama administration knows that getting gun control laws through Congress is a no-go, so they have been working behind the scenes. On the industry side there have been quite a few restrictions and/or problems.

As was pointed out, F&F led directly to reporting long gun sales in the four border states - no congressional action needed. In my opinion, had we not ended up with two dead federal agents because of F&F, there would have been some sort of law pushed through Congress to "deal with this problem".

If you follow NFA sales at all, you'll know that processing times for all forms have almost doubled in the last few years. This is because while other parts of FedGov are hiring and expanding, the number of NFA examiners has dropped to less than half the authorized number of positions, and they are under a hiring freeze.

 

[Sky]

Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said he is skeptical of claims that firearms sales are way up. But he said the gun industry does work to promote that perception.

"There's no doubt [National Rifle Association President] Wayne LaPierre is out there every day saying that President Obama has a secret plan to take away your guns," Horwitz said. "They want to gin up sales."

SOUTHPORT, CT –Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc. (NYSE-RGR), announced today that for the first quarter 2012, the Company has received orders for more than one million units. Therefore, the Company has temporarily suspended the acceptance of new orders.

The 0bama administration knows that getting gun control laws through Congress is a no-go, so they have been working behind the scenes. On the industry side there have been quite a few restrictions and/or problems.

As was pointed out, F&F led directly to reporting long gun sales in the four border states - no congressional action needed. In my opinion, had we not ended up with two dead federal agents because of F&F, there would have been some sort of law pushed through Congress to "deal with this problem".

If you follow NFA sales at all, you'll know that processing times for all forms have almost doubled in the last few years. This is because while other parts of FedGov are hiring and expanding, the number of NFA examiners has dropped to less than half the authorized number of positions, and they are under a hiring freeze.

Bubbles my FFL has been getting more and more delays for his customers getting permission to receive their firearms, but we are located in one of the border states..... I do believe you hit the proverbial nail on the head.

 

[Specs]

If it has been posted, perhaps I missed it, but Nobama did manage to install 2 radical antis to the SCOTUS, perhaps the most potent threat to ALL of our rights, not just the 2nd. JUST 1 MORE and they have us.