Fear of anti-gun legislation makes gun sales go through the roof in Colorado

I doubt there will be any anti-gun legislation coming up, it seems politicians don't really care about it as much as they used to. And uh yeah cool go buy all the guns you want idc

I am all for people being required to undergo a mental health check, as well as having gun safety courses (particularly handgun safety) before owing a gun. However anti gun legislation is a bad thing, I don't blame people for wanting to buy more guns now in that area, people want to protect themselves and the fear of gun bans looms over head.

I hate how some people are using this tragedy as a platform to push their agenda. Banning guns is not going to solve the issue, we have the right to bear arms and it's one I will protect.

We need mental health checks and safety courses which I think will prevent a lot of problems, but alow citizens who pass those things and have a clean record, allow them to conceal carry. If more people in that theater were armed the gunman wouldn't have killed very many people.

I am all for people being required to undergo a mental health check, as well as having gun safety courses (particularly handgun safety) before owing a gun. However anti gun legislation is a bad thing, I don't blame people for wanting to buy more guns now in that area, people want to protect themselves and the fear of gun bans looms over head.

I hate how some people are using this tragedy as a platform to push their agenda. Banning guns is not going to solve the issue, we have the right to bear arms and it's one I will protect.

We need mental health checks and safety courses which I think will prevent a lot of problems, but alow citizens who pass those things and have a clean record, allow them to conceal carry. If more people in that theater were armed the gunman wouldn't have killed very many people.

ShadowMoses900

Not this arguement again.

Also you are pushing an agenda.....

I doubt there will be any anti-gun legislation coming up, it seems politicians don't really care about it as much as they used to. And uh yeah cool go buy all the guns you want idc

Bane_09

No politician will touch the subject. Gun restriction is a shortcut to losing pretty much any kind of election.

cause and effect

[QUOTE="SAGE_OF_FIRE"][QUOTE="DaBrainz"]Perhaps it has less to do with legislation and more to do with wanting to protect yourself from the crazies. A lot of innocent people would be saved if someone would of shot back.DaBrainz

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"][QUOTE="MlauTheDaft"]

What's the point of this thread? So we're going to see similar shootings?

The lenient gun laws enabled this guy to commit his murders in the first place.

MlauTheDaft

He's a mentally unstable lunatic with a license to wear firearms.

Speculate all you want about his alternative plans, his atrocity was enabled through his constitutional rights.

Assuming that he "would have just got his guns elsewhere" is naive at best.IF one has the balls to even do so, it's still not as simple as passing by the nearest 7/11.

Edit:

Look to inconstency's post above yours, for further reflection.

[QUOTE="noscope-ak47"]

[QUOTE="MlauTheDaft"]

Being raped is still better than being killed.... Or than killing someone for that matter...

MlauTheDaft

I'm sure every single rape victim in the world appreciates your kindness, in evaluating their lives.

Might as well send all rape victims straight to death row, right?

Right?

It doesn't do much. Big and slow is definitely not the way to go with body armor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Z_FgNqwzFo

bigfoot2045

If by "not much" you mean breaking a couple ribs and putting someone flat on their back, sure.

I'd not advocate for the taking away of Constitutional rights because a few people may abuse them. That's ludicrous....LJS9502_basic

Even if it would likely save lives?

(gun control != gun banning (though I'm fine with the latter))

And opposing governments with guns doesn't seem to work so well anyway, Egypt did much better than Syria.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I'd not advocate for the taking away of Constitutional rights because a few people may abuse them. That's ludicrous....Inconsistancy

Even if it would likely save lives?

(gun control != gun banning (though I'm fine with the latter))

Assuming that he "would have just got his guns elsewhere" is naive at best.IF one has the balls to even do so, it's still not as simple as passing by the nearest 7/11.

MlauTheDaft

No, but it IS as simple as stopping by Home Depot, and buying the $hit to make your own gun for less than $10. It won't look nice, but it will work.

For $50 I could even build you an automatic weapon.

Get a few friends to piss on a bale of hay for a few months and I can make you some gunpowder, even. It won't be smokeless, but it'll send that bullet downrange just as well.

For under a grand, I could build you a small GPS guided missile.

(I had here listed simple instructions for turning the above model rocket into a short-range GPS guided missile, but decided it best to edit that information out because it's NOT THAT HARD AT ALL and I don't feel like having a surprise knock at my door...or getting modded).

Wouldn't have great range but it would work.

My point is, once a technological genie is out of the bag, it's not going back in. Making a gun, even an automatic one, isn't difficult at all.

I may need to get a mounted 50 caliber equipped with tank piercing rounds. For self defense, of course.

I may need to get a mounted 50 caliber equipped with tank piercing rounds. For self defense, of course.

sonicare

They don't make fifty-cal rounds that do that, unfortunately.

[QUOTE="MlauTheDaft"]

Assuming that he "would have just got his guns elsewhere" is naive at best.IF one has the balls to even do so, it's still not as simple as passing by the nearest 7/11.

br0kenrabbit

No, but it IS as simple as stopping by Home Depot, and buying the $hit to make your own gun for less than $10. It won't look nice, but it will work.

For $50 I could even build you an automatic weapon.

Get a few friends to piss on a bale of hay for a few months and I can make you some gunpowder, even. It won't be smokeless, but it'll send that bullet downrange just as well.

For under a grand, I could build you a small GPS guided missile.

(I had here listed simple instructions for turning the above model rocket into a short-range GPS guided missile, but decided it best to edit that information out because it's NOT THAT HARD AT ALL and I don't feel like having a surprise knock at my door...or getting modded).

Wouldn't have great range but it would work.

My point is, once a technological genie is out of the bag, it's not going back in. Making a gun, even an automatic one, isn't difficult at all.

People hate to read and even worse they are lazy. If they can't buy it pre-built then they won't do it themselves.

noscope-ak47

People who really want one will.

People hate to read and even worse they are lazy. If they can't buy it pre-built then they won't do it themselves.noscope-ak47

People hate to read and even worse they are lazy. If they can't buy it pre-built then they won't do it themselves.

noscope-ak47

You mean like making meth?

[QUOTE="noscope-ak47"]People hate to read and even worse they are lazy. If they can't buy it pre-built then they won't do it themselves.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I'd not advocate for the taking away of Constitutional rights because a few people may abuse them. That's ludicrous....LJS9502_basic

Even if it would likely save lives?

(gun control != gun banning (though I'm fine with the latter))

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

What's the purpose? It 'was' intended to protect the people from our or another government and its militia, right? Now that you can't oppose your own government's militia, no matter what firepower you could realistically obtain, what is it doing?

If you can drum up enough support to oppose a government violently, can't you do it peacefully as well? A government is just made of people, they can't function if enough people are against them, even w/o firing a shot. If the government shot anyway, you'd be fairly screwed with or without the guns. And Egypt's revolution worked a bit better than Syria's has, much less bloodshed and actual success.

Also, if it ever came to it, the country would be quite divided, and even if the 2nd amendment were removed, states would break off and allow what ever they want. Also, removal wouldn't equal a flat out ban either, you don't have a constitutional right to drive a car, but you certainly may have a license to drive one (if you qualify).

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

I may need to get a mounted 50 caliber equipped with tank piercing rounds. For self defense, of course.

airshocker

They don't make fifty-cal rounds that do that, unfortunately.

:lol:

No, but it IS as simple as stopping by Home Depot, and buying the $hit to make your own gun for less than $10. It won't look nice, but it will work.

For $50 I could even build you an automatic weapon.

Get a few friends to piss on a bale of hay for a few months and I can make you some gunpowder, even. It won't be smokeless, but it'll send that bullet downrange just as well.

For under a grand, I could build you a small GPS guided missile.

*snip*

(I had here listed simple instructions for turning the above model rocket into a short-range GPS guided missile, but decided it best to edit that information out because it's NOT THAT HARD AT ALL and I don't feel like having a surprise knock at my door...or getting modded).

Wouldn't have great range but it would work.

My point is, once a technological genie is out of the bag, it's not going back in. Making a gun, even an automatic one, isn't difficult at all.

br0kenrabbit

But you're falling into the same trap of "some criminals will still be able to procure guns in the event of any sort of restriction, thereforeevery criminal will be able to procure guns". The fact that you and a sub-sect of the population have the technical inclination to create weapons doesn't mean the average murderer will.

Furthermore there's the question of quality: your $10/50 Home Depot gun and hay-piss gunpowder may work, but it's sure as hell not going to work as well as a proper gun with proper ammunition, plus the fabrication/testing process makes it far more likely that someone will say "gee, maybe that weird guy next door is up to something".

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

I may need to get a mounted 50 caliber equipped with tank piercing rounds. For self defense, of course.

airshocker

They don't make fifty-cal rounds that do that, unfortunately.

why would you want a weapon that would off-balance the tank v. infantry insurget equation?
DO YOU HATE AMERICA?

why would you want a weapon that would off-balance the tank v. infantry insurget equation?
DO YOU HATE AMERICA?

pie-junior

Of course. Or I just want something that blows up tanks better in Battlefield 4.

[QUOTE="MlauTheDaft"]

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"] :roll: Because he is mentally unstable lunatic who would have wanted to do this had nothing to do with it. If they want to do something, they will do it, law or no laws. He was most likely inspired by Batman movies, you want to ban those? Chill out, guns aren't the problem.LJS9502_basic

He's a mentally unstable lunatic with a license to wear firearms.

Speculate all you want about his alternative plans, his atrocity was enabled through his constitutional rights.

Assuming that he "would have just got his guns elsewhere" is naive at best.IF one has the balls to even do so, it's still not as simple as passing by the nearest 7/11.

Edit:

Look to inconstency's post above yours, for further reflection.

Do you ever wonder what your constitutional rights actually do for you? You're concerned with my disregard for the constitution, but how do you feel about arming the mentally ill? Is that a wise? I have ADHD, should I be allowed to carry a gun?

As far as I'm concerned, the constitution can go **** itself, it's extremely dated by now.

Besides, it was always worthless, if strictly adhered to. Pretty sure the forefathers of your young country did'nt expect biblical adherance; and wrote it to promote common sense, for their time.

Do you seriously believe that your constitution does not need a 2012 revision?

something that blows up tanks better in Battlefield 4.airshocker

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]Insane people will always be insane. I'd rather have the opportunity to have a force equalizer and deal with the potentiality of getting shot than being garroted or eviscerated by a knife or bludgeoned with a pipe. bigfoot2045

The idea that some private gun owner is going to take down a mass shooter is just silly. It's never happened. In this case it would have been literally impossible as the shooter was wearing head to toe body armor.

Even if you could take out a mass shooter, why would you want to? You'd be the one left holding a gun when the SWAT team arrives. In all of the confusion, you might even get blamed for the shooting.

But you're falling into the same trap of "some criminals will still be able to procure guns in the event of any sort of restriction, thereforeevery criminal will be able to procure guns". The fact that you and a sub-sect of the population have the technical inclination to create weapons doesn't mean the average murderer will.

Furthermore there's the question of quality: your $10/50 Home Depot gun and hay-piss gunpowder may work, but it's sure as hell not going to work as well as a proper gun with proper ammunition, plus the fabrication/testing process makes it far more likely that someone will say "gee, maybe that weird guy next door is up to something".

Slow_Show

Do you think every drug dealer grows his own weed, or makes his own coke? My point being that as long as a market is there, it will be provided for by someone.

And I have 42 acres. I have neighbors around my house but the back 40 is hill country. Get in one of those ravines and no one is going to know $hit. I'm sure a criminal organization could aquire quite a bit more than 42 acres.

another tank, you silly infantry person or 2nd generation AT missiles. but that calls for camping.pie-junior

Hey, it's not my fault people take the tanks and do god knows what with them when I really need one.

Infantry? Please, I'm like the black death in the attack helicopter: No one is safe.

I am all for people being required to undergo a mental health check, as well as having gun safety courses (particularly handgun safety) before owing a gun. However anti gun legislation is a bad thing, I don't blame people for wanting to buy more guns now in that area, people want to protect themselves and the fear of gun bans looms over head.

I hate how some people are using this tragedy as a platform to push their agenda. Banning guns is not going to solve the issue, we have the right to bear arms and it's one I will protect.

We need mental health checks and safety courses which I think will prevent a lot of problems, but alow citizens who pass those things and have a clean record, allow them to conceal carry. If more people in that theater were armed the gunman wouldn't have killed very many people.

ShadowMoses900

I doubt there will be any anti-gun legislation coming up, it seems politicians don't really care about it as much as they used to. And uh yeah cool go buy all the guns you want idc

Bane_09

A majority of democrats realized in the early 2000s that its a very toxic issue to handle(bar a few very liberal zones).

And when your congressman up for a tight reelection campaign that last thing you want is the NRA making sure every voter in your region aware you voted to stripe them of their rights.

Recent SC ruling cementing the 2nd amendment civilian rights make it an even more toxic issue.

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

I may need to get a mounted 50 caliber equipped with tank piercing rounds. For self defense, of course.

airshocker

They don't make fifty-cal rounds that do that, unfortunately.

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"][QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Common sense would dictate that. Dumbass could be robbe easily.

Also, none of those are automatic if they are all legal. It's still illegal to have a fully automatic weapon without a proper license (which is extremely difficult and expensive to get).

Person0

I youtubed it and found a few vids showing how to do it.

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

I am all for people being required to undergo a mental health check, as well as having gun safety courses (particularly handgun safety) before owing a gun. However anti gun legislation is a bad thing, I don't blame people for wanting to buy more guns now in that area, people want to protect themselves and the fear of gun bans looms over head.

I hate how some people are using this tragedy as a platform to push their agenda. Banning guns is not going to solve the issue, we have the right to bear arms and it's one I will protect.

We need mental health checks and safety courses which I think will prevent a lot of problems, but alow citizens who pass those things and have a clean record, allow them to conceal carry. If more people in that theater were armed the gunman wouldn't have killed very many people.

BossPerson

I never hear about legally licenced people stopping theft or murder or whatever. My theory is that those people, or the majority of them are just compensating for something (guess what) and most don't have the balls to actually pull the trigger when they see crap go down. Otherwise we'd hear about tales of heroism all the time instead of on a rare rare rare occasion.

Do you think every drug dealer grows his own weed, or makes his own coke? My point being that as long as a market is there, it will be provided for by someone.

And I have 42 acres. I have neighbors around my house but the back 40 is hill country. Get in one of those ravines and no one is going to know $hit. I'm sure a criminal organization could aquire quite a bit more than 42 acres.

br0kenrabbit

But you're conflating twovery different markets. There's no doubt that a black market for weapons would exist in the face of more onerous firearm restrictions, but by nature of the product it would be a much smaller and less pervasive marketthan that for weed or coke, the result being a significant barrier to entry for those who aren't already part of the criminal community. That's exactly the case here in Canada: everyone and their dog knows a guy who knows a guy who can score you any drug under the sun and weapons are trivially easy to smuggle in from the US, but unless you travel in the right circles there's no way you're going to get your hands on an illegal firearm.

Again, it's an issue of markets. You may have 42 acres, and the larger criminal organizations won't have trouble getting 42+ acres, but your average loner psycopath, meth-head, husband-who-just-caught-his-wife-in-bed-with-another-man etc. doesn't. It's not an all-or-nothing deal -- gun violence will never be completely eliminated, but that doesn't mean it can't be significantly reduced.

[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

I am all for people being required to undergo a mental health check, as well as having gun safety courses (particularly handgun safety) before owing a gun. However anti gun legislation is a bad thing, I don't blame people for wanting to buy more guns now in that area, people want to protect themselves and the fear of gun bans looms over head.

I hate how some people are using this tragedy as a platform to push their agenda. Banning guns is not going to solve the issue, we have the right to bear arms and it's one I will protect.

We need mental health checks and safety courses which I think will prevent a lot of problems, but alow citizens who pass those things and have a clean record, allow them to conceal carry. If more people in that theater were armed the gunman wouldn't have killed very many people.

TopTierHustler

I never hear about legally licenced people stopping theft or murder or whatever. My theory is that those people, or the majority of them are just compensating for something (guess what) and most don't have the balls to actually pull the trigger when they see crap go down. Otherwise we'd hear about tales of heroism all the time instead of on a rare rare rare occasion.

You don't here about them as the media prefers to report on tragedies and death as they are statistically proven to garner higher ratings.

But you're conflating twovery different markets. There's no doubt that a black market for weapons would exist in the face of more onerous firearm restrictions, but by nature of the product it would be a much smaller and less pervasive marketthan that for weed or coke, the result being a significant barrier to entry for those who aren't already part of the criminal community. That's exactly the case here in Canada: everyone and their dog knows a guy who knows a guy who can score you any drug under the sun and weapons are trivially easy to smuggle in from the US, but unless you travel in the right circles there's no way you're going to get your hands on an illegal firearm.

Again, it's an issue of markets. You may have 42 acres, and the larger criminal organizations won't have trouble getting 42+ acres, but your average loner psycopath, meth-head, husband-who-just-caught-his-wife-in-bed-with-another-man etc. doesn't. It's not an all-or-nothing deal -- gun violence will never be completely eliminated, but that doesn't mean it can't be significantly reduced.

Slow_Show

You're forgetting how freely information flows in this day and age. The steps to build even decently advanced weaponry are not that complicated and the only reason you don't see a prevalence of homemade weapons right now is because weapons are so easy to purchase openly. Remove that open market and it's a different game.

Look at some old Soviet Bloc countries right now and you'll see that rebel factions are largely armed with homemade weapons. Hell, Palestinians have become quite adept at rocket making, despite the fact that embargoes currently prohibit the import of more advanced components.

Prohibition doesn't work for drugs, and in fact it hasn't even stemmed the flow of drugs (except for possibly LSD, but that's because a two-man team was supplying 90% of the worlds supply in the 90's and XTC has completely overtaken that market since).

Firearm prohibition will be no more successful than any other type of prohibition. Prohibition is a flawed principle no matter the subject being prohibited. Name me one thing prohibition has actually had a real and measurable impact upon and I've got a bridge for you.

It's not the firearms that drive the high crime rates but the underlying causes as to why people use firearms. It's not a matter of the tools being used, but rather of the culture that leads to their use. If you want to decrease the rate of firearm related deaths, that's where we should be looking, not at people like me that collect guns for both hunting and personal protection.

This gentleman should have been at the theater:

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/national-international/71-Year-Old-Man-Shoots-Would-Be-Robbers-at-Ocala-Internet-Cafe-Authorities-162941656.html

Just checked gun prices went up nows the time to sell some old guns.

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501363_162-57479412/fear-prompts-gun-sales-panic-after-colo-massacre/

Firearms sales are surging in the wake of the Colorado movie theater massacre as buyers express fears that anti-gun politicians may use the shootings to seek new restrictions on owning weapons.

In Colorado, gun sales jumped in the three days that followed Friday's shooting that killed 12 and injured dozens of others. The state approved background checks for 2,887 people who wanted to purchase a firearm 25 percent more than the average Friday to Sunday period in 2012 and 43 percent more than the same interval the week prior.

I don't blame them for buying fast - three Congressional Democrats have already started their anti-gun rhetoric (Lautenberg, Menendez, and McCarthy).

tenaka2

Problem 12 people shot dead.

Solution MOAR GUNS!!

Maybe not through the armor of an M1A1/A2 but how about one of those shoddy soviet tanks?sonicare

I would imagine even the Soviet tanks would be able to take on a depleted uranium fifty-cal load.

[QUOTE="joel_c17"]In Australia, I think it was 1996 a man went on a rampage with an automatic or semi automatic weapon and killed something like 35 people. We then banned those weapons, guess how many mass shootings we have had since? 0. Americans - use your brains, we know the NRA are powerful over there, with propaganda and such, but gawd open your eyes already bigfoot2045

This. The answer to gun violence is not more guns.

Civilians shouldn't even have access to assault weapons. They serve no purpose other than to kill other people en masse.

American logic. And people wonder why the most shooting/massacre incidents like these happen primarily in America. :roll: Basically by shouting hick logic like "I have the right to bear arms!" you also have the right to get shot at. So what's the suggestion? Let everyone carry a weapon in case someone get crazy with it? Do americans distrust each other that much?DrTrafalgarLaw

No we don't, we're simply unwilling to give up our freedoms for something that won't even work. There is no way any amount of gun control can work in America. Our country is SATURATED with firearms. Bans on assault weapons prevents law-abiding citizens from obtaining them. Does nothing to stop criminals from getting them.

inb4 domestically owned nukes for self defenseOverlord93

This gentleman should have been at the theater:

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/national-international/71-Year-Old-Man-Shoots-Would-Be-Robbers-at-Ocala-Internet-Cafe-Authorities-162941656.html

GIJames248

[QUOTE="DrTrafalgarLaw"]American logic. And people wonder why the most shooting/massacre incidents like these happen primarily in America. :roll: Basically by shouting hick logic like "I have the right to bear arms!" you also have the right to get shot at. So what's the suggestion? Let everyone carry a weapon in case someone get crazy with it? Do americans distrust each other that much?airshocker

No we don't, we're simply unwilling to give up our freedoms for something that won't even work. There is no way any amount of gun control can work in America. Our country is SATURATED with firearms. Bans on assault weapons prevents law-abiding citizens from obtaining them. Does nothing to stop criminals from getting them.