What Happens After Calls for New Gun Restrictions? Sales Go Up

[Ridgerunner]

My gut feel is that open carry isn’t as effective as concealed carry in protecting people. Of course, criminals and terrorists can strike anyone anywhere and at any time – including someone who is openly carrying a gun. Or, they can select another target or wait for a more opportune moment. With concealed carry, an attacker has no idea who might be packing heat.

Businesses that, earlier, didn’t bother with 30.06 signs (figuring that if someone is carrying a weapon, nobody will see it anyway) are now posting both 30.06 and 30.07 signs banning concealed carry and open carry on their premises.

People who carry generally do so for personal protection. Why would they advertise that they’re carrying?

Nobody much wants to carry openly. My state has been “open carry” ever since I can remember, but nobody went around with a gun on his hip.

 

[ARSpade]

And as Tamir Rice proved, even in open carry states if a cop thinks you have a gun out in the open they can still kill you with no repercussions and you can expect absolute silence from the NRA.

Except he wasn’t open carrying. Going by security video he was either concealing his “weapon” (which he didn’t have a permit to do). Only time he had it openly displayed was when he was pointing it at people, which is felony assault if you’re not in danger yourself. And when confronted by cops he decided to pull it out (only once when stopped while carrying was I asked to remove my weapon, and then I asked the cop to do it for me).

bearingarms.com/bob-o/2015/12/31/no-tamir-rice-was-not-open-carrying/

 

[oliver927]

Murmurs;13973160:

If bullets start whizzing past my head the last thing I want are MORE bullets with half a dozen trajectories as a bunch of local heat-packing do-gooders start retaliating (“defending”), quite possibly with no knowledge of where the actual shooter is.

Can anybody point me to an example of where this has actually happened? I can not recall an instances of where legally armed persons start indiscriminately shooting because other shots have been fired near them.

Anybody? No, I did not think so. I am going to file the “the last thing I want is more bullets whizzing past my head” comment with "we will see a return of the wild west”, "there will be vigilante justice” and "there will be blood in the streets” comments that are common in the trash heap of false predictions of what will happen if people are allowed to carry guns.

 

[chero23]

It was a serious question and am genuinely interested in your response. Everyone I know is on one side or the other and since you said they both are bad I am wondering what you consider good gun control.

This is what I believe.

*Everyone who wants to buy a gun must get checked (I get it we have some sort of background check, I don’t know how thorough it is, but it’s not working)
—Disqualifiers:
(1) been convicted of any felony (any kind, from murder, kidnapping, rape)
(2) if the person who is wanting to buy a gun, has been investigated by any authority: local, state or federal; for hate crimes, gang/cartel related incidents, terrorism, automatically banned from buying guns
(3) has had 2 domestic violence incidents
(4) I know b/c of HIPPA, hospitals cannot give information about a patient, but if police has gone on a person, 2 times for mental problems, disqualified

If a person is caught with a gun without proper licenses, automatically a felony with minimum of 5 years in prison (the bigger the gun, the longer the punishment)

If you live in a city, a handgun is all you can have. 2 guns per person in a residence.
Country/suburbs, any size, 4 guns per person

 

[Brendan]

(1) been convicted of any felony (any kind, from murder, kidnapping, rape)
(2) if the person who is wanting to buy a gun, has been investigated by any authority: local, state or federal; for hate crimes, gang/cartel related incidents, terrorism, automatically banned from buying guns

So if someone reported someone for hate crimes, and the police investigated and found no evidence, that person is still banned.

Is that what you are saying? The simple fact that they were investigated is sufficient, not actually having any evidence?

If a person is caught with a gun without proper licenses, automatically a felony with minimum of 5 years in prison (the bigger the gun, the longer the punishment)

So having a Brown Bess flintlock is worse than having a 9mm handgun?

If you live in a city, a handgun is all you can have. 2 guns per person in a residence.

Country/suburbs, any size, 4 guns per person

So a person who lives in the city cannot go Trap or Skeet shooting?

 

[DeniseNY]

theblaze.com/stories/2016/06/17/gun-shop-files-report-with-atf-accuses-cbs-of-committing-very-serious-crime-for-anti-gun-segment/

A gun store owner in Alexandria, Virginia, is accusing CBS News of possibly committing a “straw purchase and procurement of a firearm under false pretenses,” which would constitute a federal crime.

In an anti-gun segment intended to show how easy it is to purchase an AR-15 rifle, CBS reporter Paula Reid bought the firearm at SpecDive Tactical and then transferred the gun to a “federally licensed firearms dealer” just a few hours later.

 

[chero23]

So if someone reported someone for hate crimes, and the police investigated and found no evidence, that person is still banned.

Is that what you are saying? The simple fact that they were investigated is sufficient, not actually having any evidence?

So having a Brown Bess flintlock is worse than having a 9mm handgun?

So a person who lives in the city cannot go Trap or Skeet shooting?

I’ll answer your question, then I will ask you follow ups.

1)So if someone reported someone for hate crimes, and the police investigated and found no evidence, that person is still banned.

Is that what you are saying? The simple fact that they were investigated is sufficient, not actually having any evidence?

==> My response: Yes. Several reasons, look at the guy from Orlando, he was investigated twice and not enough evidence.
How many times, has a women reported abuse from her partner, “an investigation is done” quote on quote, their cleared and later on he beats her or kills? Has happened quite a bit.

If you think that 1 investigation should not be enough to ban someone, but if your getting investigated 2-3 times for gang/cartel problems, or hate, or even terrorism, something is going on. Sorry to say that.

2)So having a Brown Bess flintlock is worse than having a 9mm handgun?

==> Like I said, why would you have a gun without its permits. If you have a gun with its permits, gone through the stuff I mentioned as background checks, then why worry?

1. So a person who lives in the city cannot go Trap or Skeet shooting?

==>> Why not rent the guns to go the suburb? Or leave the guns with a friend? Or have a rental house?

 

[ucfengr]

I’ll answer your question, then I will ask you follow ups.

1)So if someone reported someone for hate crimes, and the police investigated and found no evidence, that person is still banned.

Is that what you are saying? The simple fact that they were investigated is sufficient, not actually having any evidence?

==> My response: Yes. Several reasons, look at the guy from Orlando, he was investigated twice and not enough evidence.
How many times, has a women reported abuse from her partner, “an investigation is done” quote on quote, their cleared and later on he beats her or kills? Has happened quite a bit.

If you think that 1 investigation should not be enough to ban someone, but if your getting investigated 2-3 times for gang/cartel problems, or hate, or even terrorism, something is going on. Sorry to say that.

2)So having a Brown Bess flintlock is worse than having a 9mm handgun?

==> Like I said, why would you have a gun without its permits. If you have a gun with its permits, gone through the stuff I mentioned as background checks, then why worry?

1. So a person who lives in the city cannot go Trap or Skeet shooting?

==>> Why not rent the guns to go the suburb? Or leave the guns with a friend? Or have a rental house?

So, gutting the 2nd amendment isn’t enough, we also have to gut the 5th and 14th amendments?

 

[chero23]

So, gutting the 2nd amendment isn’t enough, we also have to gut the 5th and 14th amendments?

If you think what I have proposed is gutting then what do you propose?

B/c what we have is not working

The guy who did the shootings in Orlando was investigated twice for terrorism links. Wasn’t charged, wasn’t brought against a judge, but the warning signs were there.

Police have databases of gang members, drug dealers, hate crimes, child molesters, terrorist list.

If you get investigated 1,2,3,4,5 times something is going on.

 

[ucfengr]

If you think what I have proposed is gutting then what do you propose?

B/c what we have is not working

The guy who did the shootings in Orlando was investigated twice for terrorism links. Wasn’t charged, wasn’t brought against a judge, but the warning signs were there.

Police have databases of gang members, drug dealers, hate crimes, child molesters, terrorist list.

If you get investigated 1,2,3,4,5 times something is going on.

Maybe he should have been brought before a judge then. You don’t get put on a police database for criminals until after you’ve been convicted of a crime. I know this is kind of hard for progressives to grasp, but in the US, the deprivation of life, liberty, or property comes after someone is convicted of a crime, not before.

 

[chero23]

Maybe he should have been brought before a judge then. I know this is kind of hard for progressives to grasp, but in the US, the deprivation of life, liberty, or property comes after someone is convicted of a crime, not before.

But like I said, and I know you have heard of cases. Were a family reports abuse from a family member, police gets called, somebody stays silent and nothing gets done. If you get called on the same person 4-5 times about something serious, that should put up warning signs.

Either
(1) This person is bad and is threatening people
or
(2) somebody is trying to set that person up.

 

[ucfengr]

But like I said, and I know you have heard of cases. Were a family reports abuse from a family member, police gets called, somebody stays silent and nothing gets done. If you get called on the same person 4-5 times about something serious, that should put up warning signs.

Either
(1) This person is bad and is threatening people
or
(2) somebody is trying to set that person up.

I know this is hard, but merely being accused of a crime, or investigated for criminal activity is insufficient to deprive a person of their Constitutional rights. The burden is on the State to convict. Given the power and resources of the State, this seems an appropriate guard on the liberty of the citizenry.

 

[Brendan]

I’ll answer your question, then I will ask you follow ups.
==> My response: Yes. Several reasons, look at the guy from Orlando, he was investigated twice and not enough evidence.
How many times, has a women reported abuse from her partner, “an investigation is done” quote on quote, their cleared and later on he beats her or kills? Has happened quite a bit.

If you think that 1 investigation should not be enough to ban someone, but if your getting investigated 2-3 times for gang/cartel problems, or hate, or even terrorism, something is going on. Sorry to say that.

So let’s say that I did not like someone at work, nothing major, I simply did not like them.
So I make an accusation that they were in the KKK and participated in a cross burning at on a black person’s yard. The police investigated it, and found that the person did not commit those crimes ( and of course he didn’t my accusations were false)

So you are saying that my false accusation should prevent the person from ever
being able to purchase a firearm because I made a false accusation, the police determined the accusations were not true, but it was still an investigation.

2)So having a Brown Bess flintlock is worse than having a 9mm handgun?

==> Like I said, why would you have a gun without its permits. If you have a gun with its permits, gone through the stuff I mentioned as background checks, then why worry?

But since the flintlock is bigger, that should mean that they should spend more time in prison, that is what you are saying?

1. So a person who lives in the city cannot go Trap or Skeet shooting?

==>> Why not rent the guns to go the suburb? Or leave the guns with a friend? Or have a rental house?

Why not keep them at home. They are his property. Why should a person who lives in the city not have the same rights to participate in a sport as someone in the suburb.

As far as leaving them with friend, that is illegal in a large number of states.

Even What if the friend is not home, but his wife is. The wife does not have a license and the shotgun is in her house. According to you, that means that she is guilty of a felony, and thus should be spending mandatory time in prison ( and more than 5 years, as shotguns are pretty big)

 

[chero23]

I know this is hard, but merely being accused of a crime, or investigated for criminal activity is insufficient to deprive a person of their Constitutional rights. The burden is on the State to convict. Given the power and resources of the State, this seems an appropriate guard on the liberty of the citizenry.

But see, I’m going with recent history. The Orlando shooter was investigated twice by the FBI for possible terrorism ties. Both times he was cleared.

what do you recommend?

 

[GaryTaylor]

The FBI intel is clearly overburdened to let the priority of this fellow go by, which only indicates how many radical Islamic terrorism files are out here, and in all 51 states as the FBI director states. That means we should be focused on the radical terrorism threat as a priority. And obviously that same thought and threat of Islamic terror is what is causing these sales…

Gun Shop Owner: AR-15’s Flying Off Shelves at $500 a Pop
By Nick Giampia Published June 15, 2016 Politics

Since the Orlando nightclub shooting on Sunday, gun sales have rapidly increased throughout the United States.

Adventure Outdoors Owner Jay Wallace told Fox Business Network’s Stuart Varney that sales of AR-15s and other firearms have “really kicked up” since Sunday.

AR-15’s may look like military rifles but they are actually semi-automatic guns, which means they can only fire one round with each pull of the trigger. By contrast, military-style guns have the ability to fire multiple rounds with one pull of the trigger. The ‘AR’ in AR-15 actually stands for ArmaLite rifle, named after the company that developed it and does not stand for “assault rifle,” according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

Wallace claimed that he has sold more than 15 AR-15’s per hour and may know the reasons as to why there is such a rise in sales.

“[People] are afraid that the government is going to take [guns] away and there are folks that are in fear because of the times that we are living in today and those are two big reasons,” he said.

foxbusiness.com/features/2016/06/15/gun-shop-owner-ar-15s-flying-off-shelves-at-500-pop.html

ATLANTA —
Following the shooting of more than 100 people inside a gay nightclub in Orlando, many are rushing to buy guns. Even members of Atlanta’s LGBT community are arming themselves.

Metro Atlanta gun stores say AR-15s, the same gun used in the Orlando terror attack, are flying off the shelves.

wsbtv.com/news/local/atlanta/gun-sales-in-metro-atlanta-jump-days-after-orlando-terror-attack/349085098

wfaa.com/money/local-gun-sales-skyrocket-after-orlando-attack/247872920

FORT WORTH – Nearly a week after the Orlando terror attack, gun sales have skyrocketed nationwide.

And just think when he was flipping out at work and in school what was everyone saying; Oh lets not be IslamOphobic?

 

[ucfengr]

But see, I’m going with recent history. The Orlando shooter was investigated twice by the FBI for possible terrorism ties. Both times he was cleared.

what do you recommend?

Since he was very open about his terrorism leanings in social media, maybe the FBI is the place we need to start reforming before we start stripping civil rights from all Americans. I’m beginning to wonder if FBI stands for “Famous but Incompetent”.

 

[GEddie]

51 states?

 

[Sy_Noe]

Some of this depends on where you are and what you do.

Where I live, there are a lot of people who live in pretty remote circumstances. Law enforcement may be thirty minutes to an hour away, if it comes at all. Absolutely everybody who lives in such circumstances has a gun, and rightly so.

In recent years, and due to a number of factors, the wildlife population has exploded. We have feral hogs, bears, coyotes, mountain lions, feral dogs. On the “varmint” side, we have coyotes, armadillos and other creatures that pose other kinds of threats. Armadillos, for example, dig big holes in the ground and if one is driving through a field in tall grass, one could have a fatal accident if a wheel fell into one of them. Coyotes rarely attack humans, but they’re a danger to children, and they are dangerous to certain livestock.
And then there are copperheads and water moccasins. In some places, rattlesnakes.

A person really needs a gun in places like this. And, other than bears, lions and snakes, the very best gun for all of those is an AR-15.

Nobody around here has been killed with an AR-15 in living memory, even though they’re everywhere. So, while cities might ban anything from semi-automatic rifles to big soft drinks if the voters want it, what is the compelling reason for depriving people where I live of any means of self-protection?

Makes one wonder how on earth all these critters and varmints and bears and lions and snakes didn’t take over the world before the advent of the AR-15.

 

[chero23]

Since he was very open about his terrorism leanings in social media, maybe the FBI is the place we need to start reforming before we start stripping civil rights from all Americans. I’m beginning to wonder if FBI stands for “Famous but Incompetent”.

But some people might consider cartel/gangs as terrorism. Or hate crimes like the kkk for example. Why stop at over seas terrorism?

 

[chero23]

51 states?

We might be having a new state added to the union soon?

Announcement soon