Surging gun sales driven by paranoia

[Rider]

I understand that, however, there are a great number of liberals, progressives and 'lefties' who put their money and votes in that direction due to their support of other social issues. Yes, I know plenty who support gun control etc, but I also know plenty who either don't give a rats butt about it, or are in support of gun rights, but still vote democratic because they oppose many other republican agendas.

This is exactly the problem. Both parties are now nothing more than a fixed package of issues, and by voting for one party or another, you support the entire package. There is no room for nuance, any deviation from the party line can lead to your being destroyed by your own party(like when you see Dems being ousted for being too moderate) and there is no tolerance for new ideas or solutions.

At the end of the day, you are choosing between two parties that want to control your life. The important difference for this forum is that one of those parties still allows us to protect ourselves, while the other one wants you to trust that they would never overstep their authority, so you should let them protect you from, well, them, all in exchange for something called "fairness".

 

[calsdad]

See, that is pretty cool. Perhaps MA could become more like that. It won't help if everyone hates on gun owners who have different politics though.

From my perspective there are a lot of people out there wishing for something that can never be.

A political party - or a government - that has as it's aim to have complete power over your life - will not tolerate the free ownership of military weaponry by it's populace.

Those two things are completely at odds with each other.

This is WHY we have the 2nd amendment to the Constitution. Some of the founding fathers thought that as long as the people had the military means to combat an out of control government - that hopefully liberty would be maintained. I don't think they really thought of a people progressively voting away all their rights - till there was little of them left - and they were standing there armed - with nothing left to defend.

 

[jelildude]

From my perspective there are a lot of people out there wishing for something that can never be.

A political party - or a government - that has as it's aim to have complete power over your life - will not tolerate the free ownership of military weaponry by it's populace.

Those two things are completely at odds with each other.

This is WHY we have the 2nd amendment to the Constitution. Some of the founding fathers thought that as long as the people had the military means to combat an out of control government - that hopefully liberty would be maintained. I don't think they really thought of a people progressively voting away all their rights - till there was little of them left - and they were standing there armed - with nothing left to defend.

Awesome post.

 

[Wa Sai]

So throwing the baby out with the bathwater is a good thing?

When you have a party in power that makes it their main goal to get their allegedly small government involved in dictating uterine activities, bedroom actitivites etc.. right there you are going to get a very very large number of people to vote against them regardless of what they think of gun rights.

I can also think of a large number of people who support gun rights who would vote against a party in powr with the goal of gutting environmental protection laws. Regardless of what anyone thinks of big govt. the libertarian view of 'people will sort it out themsevles' or the 'market will take care of it' is not an honestly realistic of what it takes to protect the natural environment and even, like, public drinking water, against massive corporate interests. We can go on pretending that our govt, big or small is not totally beholden to massive corporate money, but it is very transparent. To try to enact policies that refuse to acknowledge this reality while removing the only thing currently (halfway) functional that challenges that money is these days very transparent. A lot of people will vote against that, even if it hurts gun rights, because it is about priorities. Guns may not be THE most important thing to them, even though they support the right.

Then additionally, there is another large number of people who will never vote for republican gun rights supporting candidates because they align themselves with either religious and/or culturally exclusive causes, such as exclusively Christian, or exclusively white or whathaveyou.. You (whoever) may not see it if you are part of the religious or cultural group they appeal to, however those outside that group DO see it, and they may vote against that movement over anything else, out of a fear of being persecuted of having their rights and interests taken away having nothing do with gun rights.

Just things to understand..

 

[DrRansom]

I can also think of a large number of people who support gun rights who would vote against a party in powr with the goal of gutting environmental protection laws. Regardless of what anyone thinks of big govt. the libertarian view of 'people will sort it out themsevles' or the 'market will take care of it' is not an honestly realistic of what it takes to protect the natural environment

Please provide evidence to back up this ridiculous statement. After being sold a shit pill called "anthropogenic global warming", having it proved conclusively wrong, and all the data falsified, there's no basis in fact for this. If you're worried about the environment, I can think of some countries that do a hell of a lot more damage than we do.

To your latter point, all immigrants face this problem. If they can't handle the nation, why would they immigrate to it?

 

[drgrant]

See, that is pretty cool. Perhaps MA could become more like that. It won't help if everyone hates on gun owners who have different politics though.

MA is culturally defective, though, and that will never happen. This is reflected in a bunch of very bad people getting elected to various government positions/offices.

-Mike

 

[Wa Sai]

Please provide evidence to back up this ridiculous statement. After being sold a shit pill called "anthropogenic global warming", having it proved conclusively wrong, and all the data falsified, there's no basis in fact for this. If you're worried about the environment, I can think of some countries that do a hell of a lot more damage than we do.

I think your idea about it being "proved conclusively wrong" is equally as ridiculous, but it really depends where you get your 'facts' I guess.

Regardless of the global warming debate, there are many other issues that concern those who are concerned about the natural environment and the environment they live in. Even a local polluter supported by a multinational moneyed corporation cannot be easily (not even close) stopped by 'the market' or the local populace against a huge bankroll and connections to govt. The niavete of claiming that a libertarian ideal govt would also have none of this corruption is astounding as well. Reality is that corruption will always exist. Pretending something inevitable must magically disappear in order for your system of small govt to work is no more ridiculous than Marx and Engels claiming world-wide socialism would magically occur so that their ideal of socialist utopia would function.

 

[DrRansom]

I think your idea about it being "proved conclusively wrong" is equally as ridiculous, but it really depends where you get your 'facts' I guess.

Well, if noting that all the theories' correlational data regarding the rising temperatures is statistically insignificant and the coincidental falsifying of all relevant data doesn't do it for you, then I guess nothing will. Everything you've said thus far in all the threads you're in is nothing but garbage, parroted BS from whatever indoctrinated shithole you just crawled out of.

Have a great day.

 

[Wa Sai]

Well, if noting that all the theories' correlational data regarding the rising temperatures is statistically insignificant and the coincidental falsifying of all relevant data doesn't do it for you, then I guess nothing will. Everything you've said thus far in all the threads you're in is nothing but garbage, parroted BS from whatever indoctrinated shithole you just crawled out of.

Have a great day.

I am having a great day, thanks.
Good luck with the rest of that ideology.

 

[chinalfr]

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

It is absolutely amazing!!!

There's a hundred years worth or more of modern U.S. historical records of the continued and unabating assault on citizen's rights to keep and bear arms and these people have the F'ing BALLS! to call people paranoid or to attribute their behavior of buying guns while they still can, as being paranoid?

When the shit hits the fan, these will be the first people looking for a gun to protect themselves. Make note and make sure they never get one if you can.

 

[Bt74]

Just as an indication of the jump in gun sales, I posted that I'd bought a Tantal from J&G tuesday morning...they had 67 in stock at the time. I checked at about 3pm today, and they were down to 11. Checked a few minutes ago, and they are sold out! I guess thats one more side of obamanomics.

 

[Deer Slayer]

Why would GFA even talk to these people?

 

[Zappa]

TIME Magazine, late as usual, finally figures out that gun sales are on the rise.

Must Be an Election Year: Bullets Are Flying Off the Shelves

Another election is approaching and it's no coincidence that 2012 is shaping up to be a huge year for sales of bullets and guns. President Obama is even being referred to as "salesman of the year."

Full Story >>> http://moneyland.time.com/2012/06/19/must-be-an-election-year-bullets-are-flying-off-the-shelves/

Perhaps, though, there’s another force other than President Obama causing the increase in firearm sales. We speak, of course, of zombies.

The recent rise in fear/fascination of a zombie apocalypse, buoyed on by high-profile instances of cannibalism, has manifest itself in several parts of the economy, including some clever (mostly ironic) marketing.

 

[Jose]

When you have a party in power that makes it their main goal to get their allegedly small government involved in dictating uterine activities, bedroom actitivites etc.. right there you are going to get a very very large number of people to vote against them regardless of what they think of gun rights.

I can also think of a large number of people who support gun rights who would vote against a party in powr with the goal of gutting environmental protection laws. Regardless of what anyone thinks of big govt. the libertarian view of 'people will sort it out themsevles' or the 'market will take care of it' is not an honestly realistic of what it takes to protect the natural environment and even, like, public drinking water, against massive corporate interests. We can go on pretending that our govt, big or small is not totally beholden to massive corporate money, but it is very transparent. To try to enact policies that refuse to acknowledge this reality while removing the only thing currently (halfway) functional that challenges that money is these days very transparent. A lot of people will vote against that, even if it hurts gun rights, because it is about priorities. Guns may not be THE most important thing to them, even though they support the right.

Then additionally, there is another large number of people who will never vote for republican gun rights supporting candidates because they align themselves with either religious and/or culturally exclusive causes, such as exclusively Christian, or exclusively white or whathaveyou.. You (whoever) may not see it if you are part of the religious or cultural group they appeal to, however those outside that group DO see it, and they may vote against that movement over anything else, out of a fear of being persecuted of having their rights and interests taken away having nothing do with gun rights.

Just things to understand..

How quickly do they out themselves......

 

[Yazz]

If you want to see paranoia take away the EBT cards.

 

[bfm]

Guns are fine. Mass paranoia isn’t.

There's mass paranoia, or Mass paranoia? Either way I better go buy some guns before one of those paranoids gets me.

 

[Gibbs]

Surging gun sales driven by paranoia

I know I'M surging...

 

[BerkshireHunter]

There are about 1000x more gun oriented shows on cable tv these days.

 

[second]

Man that was a terrible article.

Is that really all it takes to become an author, let along a journalist these days?

Its not journalism, its propaganda. Journalism died a long time ago

 

[fivepak]

Unfortunately ammo prices will also surge.

 

[Auntie Crazy]

Fascinating conversation. I feel like I'm getting back into the "hobby" of exercising my right to self-defense just in the nick of time.

AC