What do you think the Arms industry will do if a permanent AWB happens

[ArmedBear]

The US industry might not have any problem with seeing a ban on AK's.

An AR ban, I think they'd fight, since it bans a hot-selling gun that almost everyone makes.

I'm guessing that various members of the US gun industry would do their best to play it for an advantage. Isn't that what happened last time?

 

[saturno_v]

I will try my best of not overstepping too much on politics.

For what I know, and I cannot tell you some of the details of why I know it, this administration will be substantially more gun friendly than previous democratic ones.

Do not forget that the Democrats returned in power in 2006 electing several people in their ranks that had played a role with the Reagan and Bush father administration (one example for everyone is Jim Webb in Virginia), former "Reagan Democrats" and others generally more in the conservative fold compared to the likes of Nancy Pelosi & Co.
These people were disgusted with the deranged and out of control Republican party of the last decade or so.

To put ist as Bill Maher said in his show..."Democrats learned that more people will vote for them if they leave their guns alone"

Obama expressed several time, publicly, his support for the 2nd amendment.

Some "cosmetic" ban is still possible but higly unlikely at the moment..there are other fish to fry.

We can always have some sensational shooting event that could stir things up and then all bets are off...still I do not think anything substantial...the gun industry is still very powerful in Washington.

However, gun activists, the NRA and so on should pre-emptively "strike" and launch a very visible national campaing for responsible gun ownership.

I personally find the doctrine of "wall against the wall" detrimental to our cause, we should "go with the wind" and get the best possible terms

Believe me, these people are not stupid and they do want to remain in power...and they know well that a decent part of their "new" electorate own guns and are against any meaningful restriction.

Personally, I would like to fight more "practical' and useful battles like the establishment of a federal concealed pistol permit honored by every state and county instead of the puzzle we have now rather than concentrate too much energy on stopping, for example, an hypothetical 50 BMG rifle ban.

Another worthy battle is to harmonize all the gun laws at federal level instead of risking being arrested if the police stops me with an AR on my trunk when I go to fill up my gas tank over the California border from Oregon....stuff like that happen.

Actually I would like the concept of concealed permit being scrapped altogether (I know, I know it's not going to happen)...the 2nd amendment is very clear "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
I debated several times with peopel trying to twist things around and saying that what the 2nd really means is the right to bear arms within a militia corp...nonsense....the 2nd is crystal clear and leaves no ambiguity whatsoever.


However, for these that don't know, an historical and respectable chunk of people that vote Democrat (not only int the last 2 elections) are avid gun enthusiast....I'm among them.....I think we gun owners are quite safe, this aministration and congress are not going to commit political suicide.

 

[laguna0seca]

Now as much as I wish every gun manufacturer had stones like Ronnie Barrett, unfortunately they do not. (not that i fault them, money is a pretty important part of business) I would love to watch the government agencies try to figure out what to do when they cant get their guns fixed.

 

[Odd1]

The news I have been watching leads me to believe the only part of the economy booming is weapons and ammo sales.

I would hope that before legislation was passed that cut shut down (or seriously curtailed) any industry in the US some one would bring up the economic impacts.

Of course hope is not a method...

 

[sourdough44]

I think your dreaming if you think AWB II+ isn't in the works.

 

[benEzra]

True. What the folks who are climbing over each other right now to pay top dollar for a SLR-95, SAR-1 or WASR-10 don't seem to realize is that these rifles were introduced smack in the middle of the last AWB. Obama's dreaded campaign promise is only to reauthorize that same (albeit utterly pointless) ban. While I believe in hoping for the best and preparing for the worst (and you bet I've been doing just that), let's try to be realistic of what might or might not happen.

The 1994 Feinstein non-ban is not the only iteration of an AWB that has been proposed. H.R.1022 et seq are more recent, and far worse.

 

[solareclipse]

so many guns floating out there, a ban at this point would be a joke. people stocked up after the last one expired

 

[Golden Hound]

We shall see.I think you are correct.1994 is still very fresh in Democratic minds.

People say this all the time but where's the proof for it? Maybe if you're in your forties or fifties, the difference between 1994 and 2009 doesn't seem very big. After all, you saw huge cultural shifts between the decades, you witnessed multiple wars, you saw the birth of the internet and of high-tech media, etc. But fifteen years is a LONG time ago! Nobody remembers or cares about anything that happened in 1994. That year is not fresh in anyone's mind. The first decade of the 21st century is almost over - the 90s feel like ancient history to a large number of new-generation Democrats, many of whom are in their twenties now and couldn't even vote when the first AWB happened.

 

[Shear_stress]

The first decade of the 21st century is almost over - the 90s feel like ancient history to a large number of new-generation Democrats, many of whom are in their twenties now and couldn't even vote when the first AWB happened.

But this is also a time when nearly everyone and his dog has an AR. These rifles are firmly in the mainstream now, unlike in 1994.

 

[Golden Hound]

Again you're looking at this from a skewed perspective. Everyone and his dog within the shooting community has an AR. But the shooting community is just a small subculture compared to the masses at large - especially those in the cities, who think that an AR is a fully-automatic machine gun and that they're the weapon of choice for armed robbers. Those people still don't know anything about "evil black rifles." You think most Americans know or care enough about our little subculture to do anything if a new AWB is proposed? See, times have changed since 1994, some ways better and some ways worse. One of the worse ways is that news (uninformed, flawed, stupid news) spreads 100 times faster than it did back in the 90s. Another, unfortunately, is that every few months some stupid bastard has to go on a shooting spree in his school (and now these shootings seem to have spread to colleges, whereas they were mostly confined to high schools before) and yet another is that these incidents will now be occurring in a political climate which is overwhelmingly Democrat-controlled. The end result will be, probably, a high profile shooting incident where multiple people are killed, and Joe Biden (not Obama, but Joe Biden) pushing a new AWB through.

 

[pith43]

For what I know, and I cannot tell you some of the details of why I know it, this administration will be substantially more gun friendly than previous democratic ones.

I don't beleive that for a second.

Obama expressed several time, publicly, his support for the 2nd amendment.

He also expreesed support for the DC ban. His actual votes have alway's been anti gun.

Personally, I would like to fight more "practical' and useful battles like the establishment of a federal concealed pistol permit honored by every state and county instead of the puzzle we have now rather than concentrate too much energy on stopping, for example, an hypothetical 50 BMG rifle ban.

I personally don't want to give an inch when it comes to the second amendment. You give them an inch they will take a kilometer.

 

[Shear_stress]

Again you're looking at this from a skewed perspective. Everyone and his dog within the shooting community has an AR. But the shooting community is just a small subculture compared to the masses at large - especially those in the cities, who think that an AR is a fully-automatic machine gun and that they're the weapon of choice for armed robbers. Those people still don't know anything about "evil black rifles." You think most Americans know or care enough about our little subculture to do anything if a new AWB is proposed? See, times have changed since 1994, some ways better and some ways worse. One of the worse ways is that news (uninformed, flawed, stupid news) spreads 100 times faster than it did back in the 90s. Another, unfortunately, is that every few months some stupid bastard has to go on a shooting spree in his school (and now these shootings seem to have spread to colleges, whereas they were mostly confined to high schools before) and yet another is that these incidents will now be occurring in a political climate which is overwhelmingly Democrat-controlled. The end result will be, probably, a high profile shooting incident where multiple people are killed, and Joe Biden (not Obama, but Joe Biden) pushing a new AWB through.

I agree with what you say about the spread of misinformation, though you could also argue that all information spreads at that speed. I also agree that it will take one or two major shooting incidents to trigger more legislation.

However, I still disagree that ARs are only more common in the hardcore shooting-sports subculture. In the last fifteen years ARs have become much more common among the much larger population of people who own a handful of guns but wouldn't consider themselves true enthusiasts. Once you get outside the major metropolitan areas of this country and into the suburbs there are still lots of "casual" gunowners, and the AR has become much more popular among this group. Think of it this way, even before the Obama panic, AR-type rifles were one of the top selling rifles in the country. The situation has changed even more after 11/4/08, when huge numbers of ARs (and other military-style rifles) were sold. By and large, most people of those in the enthusiast subculture already had one or more ARs before the election, so it seems that a lot of these rifles are now in the hands of casual gunowners. Time will tell with what degree of enthusiasm this large group of people will be willing to give up their expensive purchases.

 

[slim76]

Take their word for it

Check the Crime and Law Enforcement section at the White House web site under Urban Policy
http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/urban_policy/

Crime and Law Enforcement
...
"Address Gun Violence in Cities: Obama and Biden would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent."

Remember, "commonsense" and "childproof" can mean whatever they say it means. Also, "closing the gun show loophole" means NO PRIVATE SALES.

 

[rscalzo]

Every major manufacturer already produces much more than firearms. Smith and Wesson and Ruger have a significant portion of their income from forgings for items not related to firearms.

A recent article in a firearm's trade journal stated that no major manufacturer is going to significantly increase production capacity. They will live with the backlogs but not get caught with excess capacity. Sig had a layoff a few months back in anticipation of a slowdown. In a odd turn of events the local newspaper had an article that they are looking for a new location to expand their facilities. But that isn't unusual as the current facility is so overcrowded just finding a parking space is a chore.

 

[saturno_v]

I don't beleive that for a second

We will see...

I personally don't want to give an inch when it comes to the second amendment. You give them an inch they will take a kilometer.

I do not want to give anything either...is called political negotiation and constructive engagement with people of different opinion.

I would give up the 50 BMG and Full Auto that really serve no practical purpose whatsoever (we have to draw the line somewhere..after all we cannot own howitzers or tanks) but I would gladly get in exchange a federal carry permit and an harmonization of gun laws at federal level to avoid, for example, paranoid legislation in states like California.

You make room for negotiation and make clear that you will not retreat one inch from that buffer.

You engage your opponents and "educate" them explaining that a semi auto AR or AK is less lethal than a "benevolent" semi auto deer rifle in 30-06 like the Remigtons used my millions of deer hunters....looks doesn't make them more dangerous.

I would not give up at all high capacity magazines.

Overall, the main issue right now is to be VERY VISIBLE to counteract the Anti-Gun paranoia.
Make your point across, be reasonable....turn the table..make "them" look unreasonable!!!

Slogans like "I want the right to own anything that a government can own" which sounds like a great principle is not going to win any friends
We need to be realistic.

Remember that in a SHTF scenario the Goverrnment has ALWAYS bigger guns than you

 

[Duke of Doubt]

saturno v: "... after all we cannot own howitzers or tanks ..."

Yes, we can.

 

[UhKlem]

Re: Saturno V: "I would give up the 50 BMG and Full Auto that really serve no practical purpose whatsoever (we have to draw the line somewhere..after all we cannot own howitzers or tanks)..."

I take it YOU don't own any of these items or see "any practical purpose whatsoever". The fact is people do own these items and see utility in them or they wouldn't haven't invested their own money in them, including big bore distructive devices and armored vehicles.

People spending money on things you don't approve of has a name: it's called liberty. There's is no "utilitarian" evidence in support of banning legal ownership of big bore, or destructive device, or full auto, or armor in clothing, vehicles, or home construction. Even if criminal misuse of these items could be proven, that has nothing to do with the legal acquisition, possession and use of said items. You think the wolves will be satisfied when you pragmatically throw the "no practical purpose" baby from the sleigh? You have only shown that you can compromise, which to a liberal/socialist means making concessions. Why concede any ground? Fear of looking unreasonable? You can't reason with the phobic, as phobia is an unrational fear.

The free market is the most democratic institution there is. Even not voting there (withholding spending of money) counts. Freedom is messy, but it works. Economic knowledge and freedom are local phenomena, not subject to central control without horrible unintended consequences.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

You'll take my howitzer when you pry it from my cold, dead lawn.

 

[5knives]

Is there anyone here from Australia or familiar with the situation there, who would care to explain to us what's happened to their Firearms Industry since the gun bans there?

I ask that because some pretty knowledgeable folks see us in exactly the same boat before the next 4 years are up.

Regards,

 

[saturno_v]

We can with live ammo???

I know you can own a Jet Fighter once removed from every weapon system and few very rich and very lucky people do.

In Italy, for example, where gun laws are much more restrictive than the US you can own a cannon or a tank for collection purposes but not the ammunition.
And the cannon firing ability has to be rendered unoperative permanently.

So who can legally own the "Destructive Devices" as codified int he National Firearms Act of 1934??

Can people own ammunition??

What about their use???

 

[saturno_v]

Ok guys....

Who can legally own a 155 mm Howitzer with ammo on his front lawn??

Please educate me because I'm ignorant about Destructuive Devices legislation.

If you can I would not mind a South African G5....

And where you can use them???

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Destructive Devices:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destructive_device

Note the last paragraph. This covers things like Civil War cannons and vintage field pieces used for fireworks shows.

 

[saturno_v]

Duke of Doubt

Ok I read that...

Please tell me, in practice, what I have to do to (let's say I want to buy a functioning old 155 mm Howitzer)

1) Buy the device

2) Bring it in my lawn

3) Use it occasionally.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Well, there are howitzers and then there are howitzers.

If you want to park a modern howitzer on your front lawn, it will be easier if it's deactivated. Loading and discharging a live howitzer in your yard may be subject to everything from discharge and noise ordinances to hazmat rules. It may constitute reckless endangerment if you use live ammunition to amuse your neighbors.

Most civilian use of howitzers takes place at re-enactments, fireworks displays, and Class III shoots. Actually shooting live rounds could take some substantial research and permitting, depending on your location.

 

[5knives]

Thanks for the response Johnny Dollar, I was curious about what their ban did to their Manufacturers, distributors, dealer base, etc.

Though I believe most of their firearms came from the U.S and Europe with very little local manufacture, I do not know if that is an accurate perception or not.

There have been a lot of statements about the situation there, some sounds probable, some does not, I was hoping someone could report on the reality of current conditions there.

Regards,