What The Left Won't Tell You About Gun Sales

[Will E Worm]

What The Left Won't Tell You About The Boom In U.S. Gun Sales

As gun sales surged in early 2009 the going joke among employees of gun manufacturers was that President Barack Obama was the “greatest gun salesman of all time.” The trouble with this backhanded complement, however, is Left-leaning news outlets have since used it to avoid something that really scares them.

As ABC put it, Americans are buying more Glocks and Berettas simply because they fear “a second Obama administration might restrict gun ownership.” Their reporting conveniently stops right there.

Before getting into why, I should note they’re partly right. For example, in December 2011 there was a record number of background checks (1,410,937) called into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) this was an increase of 24.5 percent over December 2010. (For those who don’t know, NICS was started in late 1998 to instantly determine whether a prospective buyer is eligible to purchase firearms or explosives. Not every NICS check results in a sale. A small percentage of people are denied for various reasons (keeping criminals from buying firearms is why we have this system), some simply decide not to purchase the gun and so on. So NICS checks statistics are like exit-poll data, they’re a pretty good indicator, but have margins of error.)

Now though the December 2011 number was a record there were actually slightly less, but still over 1.5 million NICS checks, in November of 2011. The only other November to break 1.5 million NICS checks was November of 2008—when President Obama won the presidency.

But the thing is the surge is gun sales didn’t begin in 2008. Over the last 10 years (from 2002 to 2011) there has been a 54.1 percent rise in the number of NICS checks and the increase hasn’t all taken place since 2008. In 2005 there were 8,952,945 NICS checks. In 2006 the number topped 10 million. In 2007 NICS checks pushed passed 11 million. In 2008 NICS checks passed 12 million, and then hit the 14 million mark in 2009. They increased slightly (4 percent) through 2011.

So attributing this entire trend to President Obama’s anti-gun reputation is disingenuous, yet many in the media like this explanation because by saying the increase in gun sales is only about President Obama they can then write the whole thing off as a simple-minded fear from those who “cling to guns and religion.”

To understand what’s really going on, let’s start with some sales figures.

Last January Steve Sanetti, president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), told me, “The $4.1 billion shooting industry has been growing in an otherwise anemic economy. We’re grateful and proud that our industry has helped maintain jobs from the manufacturer through retail levels during these difficult economic times.”

He had good reason to be pleased. In general, firearms manufacturers have been beating the downturn. In one example, last March Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc. (which trades on the New York Stock Exchange as “RGR”) completed the fourth and final quarter of its “1.2 Million Gun Challenge to Benefit the NRA.” During this yearlong challenge, Ruger donated a total of $1,254,000 to the NRA as it built and shipped more than one million firearms.

Smith & Wesson Holding Corp. (NASDAQ: SWHC) saw its fiscal year sales surge 20 percent in 2012. Many makers of handguns and “black guns” (what the Left calls “assault rifles” but the NSSF calls “modern sporting rifles”) also did very well. For example, the number of U.S. semi-automatic pistols produced (imported and exported) was in the 900,000-range from 1998 to 2000, but then fell to a low of 626,836 in 2001. Since then, this category has risen nearly every year. In 2009, some 1,868,268 pistols were imported or exported by U.S. manufacturers, according to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) data.

So why did overall gun sales begin going up well before President Obama was elected? The answer is in the way American’s view guns. In 1959 some 60 percent of the American public favored handgun bans, according to Gallup, whereas today 73 percent oppose such bans and only 26 percent want bans on handguns.

Article

Other Gallup polls are even more interesting. The number of women gun owners in America has gone up from 13 percent in 2005 to 23 percent today. Also, the number of Democratic households with firearms in their homes skyrocketed from 30 percent in 2009 to 40 percent today.

What has been happening is that the NRA, the NSSF and other gun-rights groups have been busy fighting for Second Amendment rights, advocating for participation in the shooting sports, instructing people how to shoot and store firearms safely, working with police officers and the military and doing a myriad of other things. The NRA has also been lobbying, defending the Second Amendment in courtrooms all over the country and growing its membership. As a result, they’ve attracted more Americans to the shooting sports, made the shooting sports safer and helped more people learn to shoot and to defend themselves.

You can see this reflected in the number of concealed-carry permits. From the mid-1980s to today America has become a mostly “shall-issue” nation with regards to concealed-carry permits. (Shall-issue laws typically prevent local governments from arbitrarily refusing to give permits.) Today 41 states have right-to-carry laws and 38 states have “shall-issue” laws. In fact, a total of 49 states have laws that, to varying degrees, solidify citizens’ right to carry certain concealed firearms in public, either without a permit or after obtaining a permit. Only Illinois is without such a provision.

To visualize what a big change this has been, simply log on to Wikipedia. Now Wikipedia can’t always be trusted as a fact-based source, but search under the entry “concealed carry in the U.S.” and you’ll find a color-coded map of the U.S. changing year-by-year from 1986 to today. Over those years the color changes show the spread of shall-issue laws. Nationally, the NSSF estimates there are 6.8 million concealed-carry holders today. This is up from about one million in the mid-1980s.

All of this pro-gun legislation has not only added to freedom, personal protection and a whole lot of fun at ranges across America, but has also grown the numbers of gun owners and increased the sales of firearms.

Now The History Channel’s “Top Shots” and Discovery Channel’s “Sons of Guns” are showcasing how much fun the shooting sports can be.

The Boy Scouts of America reported that the number of “shotgun shooting” merit badges increased 27.8 percent from 1999 to 2010. The NSSF’s “female-participation” statistics in the shooting sports show that from 2002 to 2010 an estimated 30.2 percent more women are now shooting shotguns. The number of hunters actually increased nationally by 9 percent from 2006 to 2011 according to a preliminary report by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. And active-shooting sports, such as 3-Gun and sporting clays, have taken off.

There are many other categories and statistics showing the tidal shift in gun ownership beneath this current wave of sales, all of which are related to legislative successes that freed up Second Amendment rights, judicial victories and a popular shift in the way American’s view guns. With all of this going on it’s a shame so many in the media are ignoring or cynically simplifying the movement behind gun sales. It’s just more convenient for them to say the surge in gun sales is only about fear of new gun-control legislation.

Though I don’t want to discount the fear. After all, when the Supreme Court twice comes within one vote of ruling that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Bill of Rights isn’t an individual right, Americans have a right to be concerned. When an incumbent president seeking a second term has already put two people on the nine-member Supreme Court who would vote away this basic human freedom, they have the right to be fearful. And when you realize that, if reelected, that incumbent president would have a good chance of getting a few more Supreme Court picks, and so could reshape the high court for decades, people have a right to be motivated to buy firearms now.

William Cooper - Handgun Control Inc., Confidential Letter (Pt. 1 of 4) Link

 

[Johan]

Americans are buying more Glocks and Berettas simply because they fear “a second Obama administration might restrict gun ownership.” Their reporting conveniently stops right there.

What the report don't is that people are being lied by Republicans and the NRA who pretend Obama is gonna "take their guns".
Obama never told he's gonna ban all guns. Even if he'd like to it would be impossibnle 'cause even Democrats won't let him do that.
What he's planning to do is to prevent some people that shouldn't be allowed to own and bear guns (people with a criminal record, people with some psychiatric issues, etc...) to buy guns. He's also planning to put some restrictions on the type of guns you're allowed to buy : "AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not on the streets of our cities."

What Republicans don't tell to people is that, if you're just an honest american citizen who wants to buy a gun to protect his family, no one will try to stop you from doing it. But if you're a psycho tryin' to buy an assault rifle to kill everyone in the campus, Obama is gonna prevent you from doing it.

 

[Will E Worm]

What the report don't is that people are being lied by Republicans and the NRA who pretend Obama is gonna "take their guns".
Obama never told he's gonna ban all guns. Even if he'd like to it would be impossibnle 'cause even Democrats won't let him do that.
What he's planning to do is to prevent some people that shouldn't be allowed to own and bear guns (people with a criminal record, people with some psychiatric issues, etc...) to buy guns. He's also planning to put some restrictions on the type of guns you're allowed to buy : "AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not on the streets of our cities."

No, there are no Constitutional restrictions on weapons. (Shall not be infringed)

We can have any weapon the military has. If we have to fight a tyrannical government then we have to have the firepower.
Many people own AKs and guns like them and they are responsible owners.

 

[Mayhem]

The allegation that Obama is going to "take our guns" is flat out bullshit. Only the hysterical believe it.

 

[Johan]

We can have any weapon the military has. If we have to fight a tyrannical government then we have to have the firepower.

So, stop buying Glocks or AK-47 : Buy tanks, attack helicopter, jet fighters and nukes !
Look at what's going on in Syria : People there do have AK-47 and some even have RPG-7 but they are still ougunned massacred 'cause the army has Mi-24, BMP-2, etc...

Truth is if the american people raise against its government and the government is ready to fight back, the people would be massacred

 

[itcouldbeme]

Ain't nobody gonna take anybody's guns... :nono:

Not mine anyway...

 

[Mayhem]

So, stop buying Glocks or AK-47 : Buy tanks, attack helicopter, jet fighters and nukes !
Look at what's going on in Syria : People there do have AK-47 and some even have RPG-7 but they are still ougunned massacred 'cause the army has Mi-24, BMP-2, etc...

Truth is if the american people raise against its government and the government is ready to fight back, the people would be massacred

I suggest YOU look at what is happening in Syria. The rebels have not been defeated and the struggle continues. Even though they are outgunned.

 

[Johan]

Yeah, Syrians rebels are still fighting. But as long as they won't receive help from the UN, they won't stand a chance. Yeah, they happen to take some choppers down. But the Syrian army still have lots of them.

 

[Mayhem]

Yeah, Syrians rebels are still fighting. But as long as they won't receive help from the UN, they won't stand a chance. Yeah, they happen to take some choppers down. But the Syrian army still have lots of them.

Your original point is that it is fruitless for an armed populace to rise up against a tyrannical government. You used Syria as an example. You are still saying that they don't have a chance, even though all the evidence is pointing to the contrary.

 

[Will E Worm]

So, stop buying Glocks or AK-47 : Buy tanks, attack helicopter, jet fighters and nukes !
Look at what's going on in Syria : People there do have AK-47 and some even have RPG-7 but they are still ougunned massacred 'cause the army has Mi-24, BMP-2, etc...

Sounds good. :ak47:

:tank:

Truth is if the american people raise against its government and the government is ready to fight back, the people would be massacred

Same thing people thought when America first fought the British. They were wrong.

Mayhem has you caught in your lies and misconceptions.

Ain't nobody gonna take anybody's guns... :nono:

Not mine anyway...

:clap:

Your original point is that it is fruitless for an armed populace to rise up against a tyrannical government. You used Syria as an example. You are still saying that they don't have a chance, even though all the evidence is pointing to the contrary.

:1orglaugh: Johan :tongue:

 

[Mayhem]

Mayhem has you caught in your lies and misconceptions.

Dial it down. :nono: No one is calling anyone a "liar". Johan and I disagree about the 2nd Amendment and gun ownership. But it is the responsibility of all (all) freedom loving people to engage in civil and constructive debate, and that is what's been going on here.

 

[Johan]

Same thing people thought when America first fought the British. They were wrong.

True.
But what the english had more than the americans ?
Better guns, more horses, more canons, experienced troops.

What the US army had and the US people don't have : tanks, humvees, artillery, helicopter, intelligence, RPGs, etc...

Back in the days you could kill a horse with a rifle. But today, even with an AK-47, you won't take down a humvee.

 

[Will E Worm]

True.
But what the english had more than the americans ?
Better guns, more horses, more canons, experienced troops.

What the US army had and the US people don't have : tanks, humvees, artillery, helicopter, intelligence, RPGs, etc...

Back in the days you could kill a horse with a rifle. But today, even with an AK-47, you won't take down a humvee.

Still trying to justify your denial. Some people can aim well enough to take out the pilot of a helicopter.

The French took out tanks with Molotov cocktails.

And on and on.

 

[StanScratch]

Still trying to justify your denial. Some people can aim well enough to take out the pilot of a helicopter.

The French took out tanks with Molotov cocktails.

And on and on.

I sincerely hope there is a revolution, I hope you are one of the leaders, and I hope it is televised. I really want to see you trying to down a helicopter with a handgun. Just let me know when you are going to do it, Will, so I can set my DVR.

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

Ain't nobody gonna take anybody's guns... :nono:

Not mine anyway...

At this point it would just be futile. I can make a phone call or two right now and I can get a firearm (.45) and I've come across more than you can imagine on the streets that were dirty growing up in the inner city (I'm legit, BTW, so I own legally). The best bet is to do thorough background checks (they are already VERY strict on that matter - trust me, I know) and pray those sad sack motherfuckers like Westminster Movie shooter don't slip through the cracks. At the end of the day, life is fragile - nothing will ever change that. There are so many guns on the streets it's not even funny; best to have sane, sound law abiding good Americans owning than not. Just check Chicago with a monumental murder rate yet strictest gun laws in the country. It's absurd to overlook such a situation.


And they're not going to take mine, either.

 

[Sam Fisher]

The allegation that Obama is going to "take our guns" is flat out bullshit. Only the hysterical believe it.

Mayhem, you are tool and a dip-shit of major proportions!

UN Small Arms Treaty: Barack Obama’s Backdoor Gun Control May Pass

There are always enemies of individual liberty. Many, in socialist and globalist circles, hate the fact that the common US citizen can exercise his or her liberty of free speech, worship without government intrusion, and is protected by ‘due process of law’. However, there is no hate in this world among those who promote and prop up tyranny like there is against the 2nd Amendment: the US citizen’s God-given liberty to own firearms.

This is why men, like George Soros, put in an ‘honest day’s work’ attempting to utilize United Nations powers in order to neutralize US sovereignty and the 2nd Amendment with it. According to John Wolverton, II of The New American, Soros is pulling every little string possible to strip your home of its defenses against crime and tyranny:

George Soros is financing the fight to give the United Nations control of your guns.

"Through his Media Matters organization, Soros is dumping pro-UN gun control propaganda into the mainstream media to coincide with the United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty being held in New York July 2–27.”

While it is difficult to sift through the various UN treaties, the ‘small arms treaty’ is a part of a much larger initiative to curtail individual gun rights. In essence, the ‘small arms treaty’, the ‘Law of the Sea’ treaty, and the ‘Arms Trade Treaty’ can be bundled into one giant effort to remove US sovereignty, giving the UN control over the liberties of US citizens, nullifying protections Americans have enjoyed since the birth of the US.

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have already vowed to sign such a treaty. In fact, both have largely been working behind closed doors, as they know full-well that Americans would surely show staunch resistance if their agenda committed to ‘open war’.

"Regardless of how unlikely it would appear that the U.S. Senate would ratify the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, the antagonism to the right to bear arms in the U.S. by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and our elected officials cannot be disputed. While seeming to loathe the Second Amendment, the majority of their efforts to enforce gun control appear to be “under the radar” to avoid raising the ire of the advocates of the right to bear arms.”

What does this mean for Americans? All of these ‘treaties’ have a common thread, which boil down to 4 directives. Katie Pavlich, the Editor of TownHall.com, reports:

-Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.

-Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).

-Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the anti-gun media never seem to grasp).

-Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.

In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.”

According to various White House insiders, Barack Hussein Obama has not been idle, saying, “I just want you to know that we are working on it,” he continues …“We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.” Perhaps, this is why the President has been curiously silent on the subject, as he does not want to attract attention to what he is truly doing through the various UN treaties.

Either way, this spells bad news for American gun rights. Anthony Martin of the Examiner.com stated:

"As the United Nations prepares its final push to ratify a controversial gun treaty, the U.S. Senate is set to approve the measure which critics say will not only give away U.S. sovereignty but directly attack the individual gun rights of American citizens, according to a report published Thursday at Stand Up America.

Democrats still hold the majority in the Senate.”

If we wish to keep our liberties, then we must send a clear message to our politicians …their jobs will not survive election day if they even consider the ‘small arms treaty’ to be a good idea. The disarmament of the American people will signal the beginning of the end of any semblance of freedom we had left. As the saying goes, ‘Hitler, Stalin, and Mao agree …gun control works.’

http://www.ijreview.com/2012/07/100...-barack-obamas-backdoor-gun-control-may-pass/

 

[StanScratch]

Obama is sincerely a gift for the NRA, as is the ignorance of gun owners on the far right. Enough so, that I imagine that a second term for Obama would actually be the NRA's best friend.
They have been touting for four years that Obama is going to take away their rights. That the 2nd Amendment is being taken away. A manager at work said, on the eve after his election, that everyone at the store should buy as many guns and ammo as they could before Obama took office, as they would not be available after he took over. With this fear and loathing campaign, gun sales have increased significantly.
Meanwhile, guns are quite easy to obtain. Those gun rights have not gone away. Obama has shown no serious (read that again..."serious") interest in knocking away gun rights. Despite this, gun rights advocates on the right foam at the mouth in fear, and continue to collect their over compensation for having a small penis.
Should Romney win, this fear and loathing campaign would stop. Oh, sure, they could run ads about this Senator or this House member...but who takes that shit seriously? Without this fear and loathing, the NRA's power would decrease - and I believe they know it.
But, should Obama win, the fear and loathing bells will ring that much louder. "THIS TIME, he will take your guns! Better buy them all up while you can!" Those bells will continue to ring, loud, for four years. With every mass-shooting, the bells will ring louder. "This will give the left an excuse to take your guns! Better buy them all up while you can!"
Remarkably, their rights will remain the same. Perhaps, even, gun rights become even more lax. But, this will not stop the bells of fear - no money for the NRA when those bells are quiet.

 

[itcouldbeme]

^^ Nicely put Stan, other than the small penis part...

You just couldn't resist could you...

 

[StanScratch]

^^ Nicely put Stan, other than the small penis part...

You just couldn't resist could you...

I try to slip a penis comment into every bit of my conversation, no matter the setting nor the topic. It brings everyone back to a very important common ground: The glorification of my penis.

 

[zeeblofowl_1969]

No, there are no Constitutional restrictions on weapons. (Shall not be infringed)

We can have any weapon the military has. If we have to fight a tyrannical government then we have to have the firepower.
Many people own AKs and guns like them and they are responsible owners.

You must apply for permits to own fully automatic weapons so I do not mind, nor do I believe it unconstitutional to have to pass a back ground check to purchase firearms. Now as to type of firearms I as a responsible American who has never even had his miranda rights read to him should be limited in no way from owning any kind of firearm I desire. Law abiding people should never be limited in what they would care to own or pursue because of the acts of a few 'nut jobs' but oversight is necessary is many cases to ensure public safety. As to keep the populous armed to fight a tyrannical government, I believe the original intention was to be able to mobilize as many armed people as possible to repulse foreign invaders as possible. Imagine if Mexico decided to invade the US??? 250 million armed fighting men??? That's quite the deterrent....