SkiKing, All I can say is you must be single and not have a family to be able to afford anything but the basic necessessities on $31K a year. Either that or you don't have a house or rental payment. It just doesn't add up.
It looks to me like about the only people that can afford it these days are boomers. You know, the guys with all the Harleys. It wasn't like that 40 years ago.
If you shoot a lot, ammo will surpass the price of the gun...
That would be the point I was trying to make earlier. Competitive shooting can get quite expensive. However, just plain shooting for the sheer enjoyment does not have to be expensive. So what is expensive? Well I figure it this way, $2,000 or $3,000 isn't a heck of a lot of money to invest in a hobby, unless of course you don't have $3,000 just laying around to invest. Then $3,000 is a heck of a lot of money.I would have to agree with the notion that shooting competitively would be more of a luxury activity versus general gun ownership when you add all the costs up. I don't believe that overall gun ownership (be it for concealed carry, home defense, casual target shooting, or hunting), is all that expensive or could be considered a luxury beyond the reach of most anyone.
Each generation has its own rules and difficulties. That never changes.
Back to firearms being a luxury, you get and shoot what you can afford. That's why manufacturers make so many different models. Take a look at some of the iron people use for fun today, like 3000 dollar AR's, firing a thousand rounds for a competition or something, and the awesome increases in the various shooting sports, and I'm sure there are some from the older generations that would think folks are nuts for 'blowing' so much money and ammo on such a thing.
That's no more a luxury than being able to afford a $100,000 car is to some. But, you can also buy a less expensive car, just like you can a firearm.
But as a constant reader of this forum and others, I am fascinated by the number of comments people make referencing the rate at which they buy new handguns or rifles, the amount of ammunition they use at the range or elsewhere, or the amount of ammo and reloading equipment they have amassed in recent years.
Though these are not commonly considered 'collections' as they are not high-value firearms and thus they really aren't investments, they are an enormous outlay of discretionary funds that must be being diverted from elsewhere. Savings, housing, education, who knows? As referenced throughout this thread it is a matter of priority but I suspect there are some who just expect to be able to make these purchases, along with $400/month telecom bills (cable, internet, mobile), a car or two and other of the 'new world staples' that were not expected in earlier times against which some in this thread compare.
Quote:
If you shoot a lot, ammo will surpass the price of the gun...
And if you shoot competition shotgun, you need to add entry fees and the cost of targets as well.
There are more lower class whites then minorities. Connecting this to racism is another suicidal way to lose freedom. 90% of people going around making a living screaming racism are the type that hate this country the founding fathers and Western CivilizationAll these fees and taxes are part of what makes gun control a racist establishment. I think the theory is if you keep poor people from owning guns, they can't rob rich people. That's a crass way of putting it, but if your options are $100 for suitable clothes for an interview or $100 for a cheap pistol, you can buy the pistol and rob a store, and have more than $100 for the clothes and then some for whatever else you want. I disagree with that, but I think that's why people vote for bans on cheap firearms.
The real issue is this: defense control (because historically it's been edged weapons, sword length, whether or not you can learn martial arts) is about disarming the lower castes. Adding fees that are barely noticed by the rich, a bottleneck for middle class, and essentially a ban for low class sets up a caste system where you have no guns on the bottom, a few guns in the middle, and the most guns on top.
This all sounds classist, so how is it racist? Because of the demographics of upper class vs. lower class. A larger amount of minorities are in the lower class than upper class, which means legislation that limits the rights of the lower class hurts minorities more than it does whites.
Think back 100 years. Homes were tiny. New stuff was rare.
Compare your standard of living, life expectancy, medical care, and stuff versus ancestors. Our 'necessities' like cable, new cars, new phones, season tickets, international trips, etc were uncommon or unheard of back then... we have so much...
Take an honest assessment ... we've all got it better than the average person of prior generations,
QUOTE]
That's the problem
Yes we have it better than sharecroppers and factory workers living in slums 100yrs ago.
But do we have it better than our parents and grandparents 25-50 years ago. That's a resounding NO
The standard of living IS absolutely going backwards and has been for long enough to be a trend. Younger working folks don't take international trips or have season tickets those are the baby boomers who you see doing that
That's the crux of my rant. The baby boomers and the folks running the show don't have a clue as to what it's like to raid a family in the post Clinton world. But it won't stop them from believing they have a clue, acting like they have a clue or even telling you they have a clue.
To add insult to injury O-care is kicking in making us buy worthless insurance we don't need further decreasing what we have to get by on in order to make things easier on an older generation unwilling to care for themselves. It's almost like SSI part2
I agree about the changing standard of living. Most of my dad's generation entered the workforce straight out of high school. They owned homes, includindg summer houses/hunting camps, bought new cars, took vacations, and raised families on what they made at mostly blue collar jobs. I don't live as well, overall, as those guys did. Today's young people aren't doing as well as I did at their age and probably won't ever catch up.
Wether or not they will admit it but boomers had and still have it EASY
they worked jobs that no longer exist.
They're on retirements that no longer exist
They bought cheap housing, land and cars that no longer exist
They get health care paid for that will not exist in a few years
They're drawing OUR payroll deductions into SSI which will not exist in a few years
They drove around on roads and infrastructure quickly ceasing to exist
It is amazing the amount of people drawing all this money from working stiffs and it adds a lot of inflation to the economy from the ripple effect. It cannot be sustained much longerPriorities is exactly it. I live on SSI and SSDI and have internet and electricity an a phone but it is amazing how much money I have left since I have cut out spending on crap. I used to drink pop and eat ice cream......no more and I have lost #45 and now have more money for reloading.