Guns bought this year could outfit 2 armies

[WeedWhacker]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=96677


I have to admit I helped make those numbers

"1,529,635,000 rounds of ammunition in just the month of December."

I kinda thought it would have been higher than that!!

WEAPONS OF CHOICE
Guns bought this year could outfit 2 armies
Report cites surge that coincided with last year's election
Posted: April 30, 2009
10:55 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


Guns purchased legally in the United States this year could outfit two armies – and not just any armies, the armies of China and India, according to new government reports cited by a website for sport-shooting enthusiasts.

The federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System database
statistics show there were more than 3.7 million background checks during the first three months of this year, compared to about 8 million annually not even a decade ago, according to the documentation assembled by Ammoland.com.

That's not individual guns, that's background checks, the organization pointed out. If a purchaser obtains two, three or even four guns at a time, often there is only one background check.

(Story continues below)




"You also bought 1,529,635,000 rounds of ammunition in just the month of December. Yeah, that is right, that is billion with a 'b.' This number takes no account of reloading or reloaded ammunition," the report said.

According to the Global Security website, the Indian army is estimated to have about 1 million soldiers. A news report from several years ago estimated the Chinese army at 1.7 million, although recent estimates put that at 2.25 million.

Here is a table documenting the federal gun background checks by month:


Federal statistics on gun background checks

The report cites the quote from Admiral Isoruko Yamamota, a World War II leader for Japan, who said, "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

The report said the evaluation on firearms and ammunition purchases are "based on low end numbers."

"The numbers presented are only PART of the overall numbers of arms and ammunition that have been sold. The actual numbers are much higher."

That's because no private individual-to-individual sales would be included, and there's no assessment of how many guns are purchased through each background check.

"Law abiding citizens appear to be concerned about our 'right to own and bear arms,'" said one forum page participant.

The statistics show that U.S consumers sought 3.1 million gun background checks every three months last year, for an annual total of 12.7 million. The annual averages had been about 8.4 million for a number of recent years, but there was a surge starting last October, when check requests rose suddenly from 970,000 a month to nearly 1.2 million. Totals have remained at that higher level.

The answer is finally here to the real reason why guns and church must mix!

Another forum participant added, "It's logical that gun sales took sharp upturn. The concern is that the super majority of Democrats in Washington will make firearms either harder to obtain or outright contraband. … As for myself, I have all the weapons I could possibly need, so I've just been stocking up on ammo because I think ammo will be subject to new regulations and increased taxes under this president and Congress."

Steve Sanetti, the head of a shooting sports organization, said, "Americans concerned about their ability to purchase many types of home defense, hunting and target shooting firearms in the future are continuing to purchase these products in record numbers today."

WND reported that the usually liberal 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms is "deeply rooted in this nation's history and tradition" and long has been regarded as the "true palladium of liberty," so it therefore must be applied against state and local government weapon restrictions as well as federal gun limits.

But the decision appears to run counter to the general direction sought by the administration of President Obama three months into his tenure.

He's already advocated for a treaty that would require a federal license for hunters to reload their ammunition, has expressed a desire to ban "assault" weapons, has seen a plan to require handgun owners to submit to mental health evaluations and sparked a rush on ammunition purchases with his history of anti-gun positions.

Obama also supported the handgun ban in Washington, D.C., before it was tossed out last year by the Supreme Court.

 

[Ray Ninness]

That is not good news!!

That is not good news, sounds like someone is building a case...

 

[June4th]

Shitatics: used gun sold by dealers or sales between individuals cannot be counted as 'new guns' in circulation. Someone has to sell them first.

 

[Bob P]

I call BS.

 

[mikem317]

He's already advocated for a treaty that would require a federal license for hunters to reload their ammunition, has expressed a desire to ban "assault" weapons, has seen a plan to require handgun owners to submit to mental health evaluations and sparked a rush on ammunition purchases with his history of anti-gun positions.

Cool. It only affects hunters who reload their ammo. Good thing I'm not a hunter!

 

[Mr. Rogers]

Cool. It only affects hunters who reload their ammo. Good thing I'm not a hunter!

 

[sig2009]

Cool. It only affects hunters who reload their ammo. Good thing I'm not a hunter!

The treaty bans total reloading and also gun clubs.

Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading
-- Even BB guns could be on the chopping block


Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Remember CANDIDATE Barack Obama? The guy who “wasn’t going to take away our guns”?

Well, guess what?

Less than 100 days into his administration, he’s never met a gun he didn’t hate.

A week ago, Obama went to Mexico, whined about the United States, and bemoaned (before the whole world) the fact that he didn’t have the political power to take away our semi-automatics. Nevertheless, that didn’t keep him from pushing additional restrictions on American gun owners.

It’s called the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials. To be sure, this imponderable title masks a really nasty piece of work.

First of all, when the treaty purports to ban the “illicit” manufacture of firearms, what does that mean?

1. “Illicit manufacturing” of firearms is defined as “assembly of firearms [or] ammunition ... without a license....”

Hence, reloading ammunition -- or putting together a lawful firearm from a kit -- is clearly “illicit manufacturing.”

Modifying a firearm in any way would surely be “illicit manufacturing.” And, while it would be a stretch, assembling a firearm after cleaning it could, in any plain reading of the words, come within the screwy definition of “illicit manufacturing.”

2. “Firearm” has a similarly questionable definition.

“[A]ny other weapon” is a “firearm,” according to the treaty -- and the term “weapon” is nowhere defined.

So, is a BB gun a “firearm”? Probably.

A toy gun? Possibly.

A pistol grip or firing pin? Probably. And who knows what else.

If these provisions (and others) become the law of the land, the Obama administration could have a heyday in enforcing them. Consider some of the other provisions in the treaty:

* Banning reloading. In Article IV of the treaty, countries commit to adopting “necessary legislative or other measures” to criminalize illicit manufacturing and trafficking in firearms.

Remember that “illicit manufacturing” includes reloading and modifying or assembling a firearm in any way. This would mean that the Obama administration could promulgate regulations banning reloading on the basis of this treaty -- just as it is currently circumventing Congress to write legislation taxing greenhouse gases.

* Banning gun clubs. Article IV goes on to state that the criminalized acts should include “association or conspiracy” in connection with said offenses -- which is arguably a term broad enough to allow, by regulation, the criminalization of entire pro-gun organizations or gun clubs, based on the facilities which they provide their membership.

* Extraditing US gun dealers. Article V requires each party to “adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention” under a variety of circumstances.

We know that Mexico is blaming U.S. gun dealers for the fact that its streets are flowing with blood. And we know it is possible for Mexico to define offenses “committed in its territory” in a very broad way. And we know that we have an extradition obligation under Article XIX of the proposed treaty. So we know that Mexico could try to use the treaty to demand to extradition of American gun dealers.

Under Article XXIX, if Mexico demands the extradition of a lawful American gun dealer, the U.S. would be required to resolve the dispute through “other means of peaceful settlement.”

Does anyone want to risk twenty years in a sweltering Mexican jail on the proposition that the Obama administration would apply this provision in a pro-gun manner?

* Microstamping. Article VI requires “appropriate markings” on firearms. And, it is not inconceivable that this provision could be used to require microstamping of firearms and/or ammunition -- a requirement which is clearly intended to impose specifications which are not technologically possible or which are possible only at a prohibitively expensive cost.

* Gun registration. Article XI requires the maintenance of any records, for a “reasonable time,” that the government determines to be necessary to trace firearms. This provision would almost certainly repeal portions of McClure-Volkmer and could arguably be used to require a national registry or database.

ACTION: Write your Senators and urge them to oppose the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials.

Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center to send your Senators the pre-written e-mail message below.

----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Senator:

I am urging you, in the strongest terms, to oppose the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials.

This anti-gun treaty was written by international bureaucrats who are either stupid or virulently anti-gun -- or both.

This treaty could very well ban the ability to reload ammunition, to put new stocks on rifles lawfully owned by American citizens, and, possibly, even ban BB guns!

There are too many problems with this treaty to mention them all in this letter. The rest can be read on the website of Gun Owners of America at:

http://www.gunowners.org/fs0901.htm

Please do not tell me the treaty has not yet been abused in this way by the bevy of Third World countries which have signed it. We do not expect the real ramifications of the treaty to become clear until the big prize -- the U.S. -- has stepped into the trap.

For all of these reasons, I must insist that you oppose ratification of the treaty.

Sincerely,

 

[terraformer]

Guns bought this year could outfit 2 armies

Could?

 

[T3andme]

dude! your giving away my secret cache

 

[freedom2012]

That is not good news, sounds like someone is building a case...

Actually, I think the article IS good news. The people are well armed. The government has a legitimate fear of its citizens.

As Jefferson said, "When the people are afraid of the government, that's tyranny. But when the government is afraid of the people, that's liberty."

If so many guns and so many rounds have been purchased and are in the hands of the people, it would behoove the government to follow its own creed : Nothing to see here, move along.

 

[cekim]

WOO HOO! Nice Work! Keep it up people - we have to get that giant foam thermometer all the way up to the top!

+1 on Jefferson...

 

[mikem317]

The treaty bans total reloading and also gun clubs.

Yes, I know. It was poking fun of the author. Henceforth the emoticon.

 

[In_God_We_Trust]

"You also bought 1,529,635,000 rounds of ammunition in just the month of December. Yeah, that is right, that is billion with a 'b.' This number takes no account of reloading or reloaded ammunition," the report said.

Hells Bells: The Obama Swine Flu Porkulous Bill bailed out failed institutions with 700,000,000,000,000 dollars. Yeah, that is right, that is a trillion with a 't'. No one seemed to sneeze at that so...eff them.

 

[fubar]

As much as it annoys me greatly that every other shooter out there is buying MY ammo , I have started to look at it as the Other Tea Party.

This isn't going away. We are , in reality , stocking up on a metric crapload of guns & ammo , ... and we are the same group who is the most vocal in disagreement with our new leader. ...

 

[cekim]

I have started to look at it as the Other Tea Party.

Indeed - perhaps the most effective message of all of them being sent to Washington.

The antis are saying it is the NRA's "fear campaign" that is driving sales, but the reality is that Barry is the gun salesman of the century all by himself and I am sure the NRA can tell you that they could never even dream of having one of their campaigns be this effective... Though I am a member, I don't read much of anything the NRA has to say and I certainly don't make decisions based upon it...

I am also pleasantly surprised by Heller and the 9th circuit ruling at a time when they could have easily gone the other way... Without Heller, I fear this would already be a very different situation.

Then there is the "correct" response the public seems to be having to all the media reports of gun violence. Within some notable exceptions, they don't seem to be "biting" as they did in the columbine or LA shoot out eras...

Widespread gun sales as a political message are immune to gerrymandering and media bias when it comes to accomplishing the stated purpose (by the founders) of the 2nd Amendment... (that being a check and balance of the state's military powers against its on people as well as a back-up plan against invasion)

 

[swampy]

http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03/oath-keepers-declaration-of-orders-we.html

check this out for a scare!

 

[Flyer007]

http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03/oath-keepers-declaration-of-orders-we.html

check this out for a scare!

Scare for whom? I hope you mean the govt. It is another positive message that hopefully will help make the govt. think about what they are doing or hope to do.

+1 on making public the outstanding numbers of ammo and weapons bought recently.......these numbers mean so much more then a bunch of signatures on a petition.

 

[dedmeat]

http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03/oath-keepers-declaration-of-orders-we.html

i dont find that scary at all... sure they are a bit more fervent than i am, but i cannot deny that what they stand for is just. there will be nothing to fear from them unless one tries to violate the constitution,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

[cekim]

there will be nothing to fear from them unless one tries to violate the constitution,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Don't know how to get this across to the liberals...

Government that obeys and remains within the confines of the law and Constitution has nothing to fear from a well armed population.

Ignoring the gross mis-characterization of those who are buying arms right now as "unified", "organized", or "right wing" (they/we are none of those things), the idea that one should equate "us" with domestic terrorists is beyond offensive, is libelous and dangerous...

Much as I have no fear of a well armed police officer or member of the military so long as they uphold their oath of office, they have nothing to fear from me as long as I obey constitutional laws of the land...

That is how it is supposed to be - CHECKS AND BALANCES... All aspects of power are distributed both amongst the branches of government as well as between the government and people with inherent self-interests placed in opposition to keep them in check...

President wants more power, courts want more power, Congress wants more power, military wants more power, civilians want more power. Let them all be greedy in-kind, but let them compete so that no one wins this battle, for if any one wins - we all lose...