Your point was the idea of firearms as a legacy, your language defined them as an investment. The two concepts are very much at odds with each other in every aspect but real estate.
Must everything around here be a game of semantics? It is quite obvious that the OP means that per money spent, guns have more yield than almost any other product. And, there are other things to invest than money - time, energy, emotion. Guns provide fun for future generations, and provide a lifestyle which you can hand down to a child, and which they can inherit, at very little actual cost.
Investments should increase your net worth, and unless you only buy safequeens, the cost of shooting alone puts one into the red. IOW, for those that one enjoy shooting, the initial price of the gun (and therefore investment value) over time becomes insignificant compared to range fees, ammo, gas, etc.
I don't think you meant to make the OP's point for him, but you did. Compared to all of those other things - range fees, ammo, gas, etc. - guns are the best
short term investment. The cool part, the part that I believe the OP is talking about, is that these relatively cheap, short term investments, can, with little effort, be turned into long term investments! Something that cannot be done with many things (cars [unless already collectible or super-expensive], TV's, CD's, etc.).
I got what you mean OP, and I feel the same way. There are more important things than money, and a firearm
is an investment. An investment in your time, your safety, your heritage, your legacy, the list goes on. There many other (and better) things to invest than money. Smiles, happiness, fun, love, passion, excitement - these are worth more than money, and a gun brings all of those and more for little true cost, and for hundreds of years.