TallBill
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2001
- 46,017
- 62
- 91
Uh... I collect firearms. I actually have 5 WW2 rifles that I've never shot. I will at some point, but they are definitely a collection. There is actually a government license called a Curio and Relic firearms license that allows certain collectibles to be delivered straight to your house instead of an intermediate dealer.
The only reason I could see to rush to the store right now is to buy magazines. Because if there is a 10-round limit coming soon, their price will SKYROCKET and their availability will drop.
I'll kindly ask you to recant your statement within the next 2 years.
It's not paranoia at all. It's reality. But you are correct, better safe than sorry so why not stock up?
What's that saying again? "It's foolish to hope for the best without preparing for the worst."
Yup, just more jobs for the national guard when we have to go in and take these loons out, right? Coffin makers will make out too.
If I'm not mistaken, many are concerned about H.R. 6257, which, if passed into law one day, would not only ban the sale of assault rifles, but would expand the list of weapons to include all weapons with more than a four round capacity (including one in the chamber).
So, its likely this could become law, which will then make these weapons impossible to find in gun shops. Read HR 6257 before declaring people are easily fooled/lunatics. Its a simple matter of expected availability.
So, its likely this could become law, which will then make these weapons impossible to find in gun shops. Read HR 6257 before declaring people are easily fooled/lunatics. Its a simple matter of expected availability.
If you honestly think that people making more than 250,000$ are the only ones who are going to be hurt by Obama's policies then you are just kidding yourself. Obama isjust lying through his teeth with that whole bull crap tax plan (just like every other politician, but somehow these idiots think everything that Bush says is a lie and somehow think Obama will be different). I would expect that hte cutoff between helped verse hurt by Obamas policies would be more like $50,000, maybe if you make $75,000 Obama won't raise your taxes, but he will sure make it harder for you to find a job. I'm pretty sure hes gunning for my job, and the same can be said for alot of other sectors
+1
After the AWB expired, we saw a surge in pistols made with 13, 15, 17 round mags -- exactly as it should be
The thought of going back to 10-round limit is irritating to say the least and would piss me off like no tomorrow. Of course, that would be political suicide for the Dems so they better not go there.
The other reason to 'hurry and start the buying process' is that some states (like NJ) require you to obtain permits for each pistol you want to buy (4 at once limit). It takes a person ~ 2 months to get the signed permits back after application and backround check. So if you were worried about buying lets say a Springfield XD pistol with a 13 round clip, you'd better get on the stick now if you think something could be signed shortly after Obama takes office. Unfortunately, we can't own anything 'assault looking' in NJ so an AR-15 is a pipe dream for me until I move to PA someday.
Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 44
- 91
I don't know, stock brokers buy and sell stock on more ethereal rumors than this. People saw how expensive things became after the last AWB and they are hoping to buy low and maybe be able to sell high later on down the road. It's not so much an "OMG, gotta buy gunz now so I can fight 'em off" as it is an "Hmmm, it is possible that some form of AWB will return to use and that if I buy a gun now, I have a decent chance of being able to sell it for more money later".
Personally, I'm in the market for a nice little Henry Lever-Action .22 but it's nothing to do with Obama.
As far as a test, the problem there is that it has the potential to turn into a catch-22 sort of test: "If you're sane, you can have a gun, all you have to do is ask. But no sane person would want a gun. So if you ask, you're insane and can't have one. If you never ask, you're sane and are allow to have one, all you have to do is ask. But if you ask, it means you're insane and can't have it..."
Any sort of psychological evaluation is inherently subjective, which has plenty of potential for abuse by either side.
ZV
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
Who's hurting under the Bush/McCain tax plan?
Are you writing tax policy for Obama now?
Because it's so easy to find a job right now under the Bush/McCain economic policy. What'd we lose in October...200,000-ish jobs?
I'm not saying you shouldn't collect guns, I'm just saying it's pretty silly to claim you're collecting something other than weapons who's primary purpose is to kill. And that's fine, like I said, I have no problem with it.
I could see that happening, since that's been a common complaint in the past, although honestly I don't see why either side is making a big deal of it. On the pro-gun side, if you're an average civilian and you have to shoot something more than 10 times without stopping to reload, I think you've taken a wrong turn somewhere. And on the gun banning side, I have a hard time with the idea that it's safer if someone can only shoot you 10 times instead of 14.
If Obama turns into some gun-banning Nazi, I'll change my mind. But since gun bans don't seem to be a major issue for anyone other than pro-gun people trying to scare everyone, I'm not too worried.
Waiting periods make sense when you're talking about a FIRST gun though. "I need to shoot somebody right this second" is a pretty strong indication that the gun store probably shouldn't be selling you one.
You're trying to raise arguments in a thread of posts where their minds are beyond debate. They generally believe people owning guns is bad, and the more that do, the worse off everyone will be. All that's left is to joke about it, not debate.
Personally I plan on getting some firearms in the near future, probably early next year, just in case the lefty lunatics get any crap passed to make it harder or impossible to do so. I just have a shotgun now but i'm thinking about getting a Glock .45, a laser sight / flashlight attachment and a silencer, because of my God given right to own the afformentioned items.
They thought it necessary because Barack Obama's .gov website clearly states he wants to ban the sale of those items.
He also wants to curb the spread of nuclear weapons, does that mean I should feel compelled to go out and buy one? As the second amendment does not specify what "arms" means, I think it seems perfectly reasonable for the government to come up with a definition that allows people to defend themselves without allowing them access to weapons that are far more lethal than necessary. I'm not sure the language of the previous assault weapons ban drew a good line, but I'm not opposed to SOME kind of line. Is it really necessary to buy something you don't need just because it might be banned in the future?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter