Anyone shopping assault rifles?

[Thai]

I'm not aware of one thing Obummer has done to impede on gun owners rights, or anything pending.

But since he's a D (and black to boot) and all, the doomsday preppers loooove to stock up on guns and ammo for jesus.

I'm not either, that's why I'm curious.

It all depends on your viewpoint or interpretation of his words:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/IyVldVMA7vU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[KidVermicious]

For some reason I'm not seeing Youtube in my browser today.

Here's the transcript: Presidential debate transcript, questions, Oct. 16, 2012 (text, video) - POLITICO.com Print View

QUESTION: President Obama, during the Democratic National Convention in 2008, you stated you wanted to keep AK-47s out of the hands of criminals. What has your administration done or planned to do to limit the availability of assault weapons?

OBAMA: We're a nation that believes in the Second Amendment, and I believe in the Second Amendment. We've got a long tradition of hunting and sportsmen and people who want to make sure they can protect themselves.

But there have been too many instances during the course of my presidency, where I've had to comfort families who have lost somebody. Most recently out in Aurora. You know, just a couple of weeks ago, actually, probably about a month, I saw a mother, who I had met at the bedside of her son, who had been shot in that theater.

And her son had been shot through the head. And we spent some time, and we said a prayer and, remarkably, about two months later, this young man and his mom showed up, and he looked unbelievable, good as new.

But there were a lot of families who didn't have that good fortune and whose sons or daughters or husbands didn't survive.

So my belief is that, (A), we have to enforce the laws we've already got, make sure that we're keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill. We've done a much better job in terms of background checks, but we've got more to do when it comes to enforcement.

But I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on our streets. And so what I'm trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there's an awful lot of violence and they're not using AK-47s. They're using cheap hand guns.

And so what can we do to intervene, to make sure that young people have opportunity; that our schools are working; that if there's violence on the streets, that working with faith groups and law enforcement, we can catch it before it gets out of control.

And so what I want is a — is a comprehensive strategy. Part of it is seeing if we can get automatic weapons that kill folks in amazing numbers out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. But part of it is also going deeper and seeing if we can get into these communities and making sure we catch violent impulses before they occur.

 

[ndcent]

It all depends on your viewpoint or interpretation of his words:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/IyVldVMA7vU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Whether or not he's done anything to impede my rights as a gun owner actually does not depend on my viewpoint, it's has he done anything?

 

[bofa]

How about MRE's? Stocking up?

Again, this is not an 'end of the world' thread. This is more about buying items that soon may be made illegal... again. You know.. because criminals tend to fear legislation.

I don't follow politics closely - is this something Obama said?

Last debate, when questioned about reintroducing the assault weapon ban, he indicated he would support such legislation. He also is known to be supportive of the UN Gun Ban that's being tossed around in the international forum.

 

[bofa]

Whether or not he's done anything to impede my rights as a gun owner actually does not depend on my viewpoint, it's has he done anything?

He's just been granted a contract extension. You'll find that presidents tend to be more cavalier in their second term, when re-election is not their first priority. While I'm not too fearful of him actually sticking to his words or promises anytime soon, I'd rather get what I want before it could come to fruition. Prices are already creeping up. If new legislation is announced, they will skyrocket in accordance with supply/demand.

 

[KidVermicious]

Sorry, bofa. Didn't mean to kick off a debate in your thread.

 

[bofa]

Sorry, bofa. Didn't mean to kick off a debate in your thread.

No worries... I suppose it was inevitable.

So far I'm looking at:
S&W M&P Sport for the AR
Century Arms GP WASR-10 for the AK
Saiga 12 for the shotgun

I just realized I'm going to be out of town for the next local gun show so I might hold off until the next one, unless I can find some killer deals elsewhere. I like shows anyway as a good place to trade/sell and pick up bulk target ammo at reasonable prices.

 

[Thai]

Whether or not he's done anything to impede my rights as a gun owner actually does not depend on my viewpoint, it's has he done anything?

Sorry, words from horse's mouth is good enough for me. YMMV.

 

[H2O_Doc]

He's just been granted a contract extension. You'll find that presidents tend to be more cavalier in their second term, when re-election is not their first priority. While I'm not too fearful of him actually sticking to his words or promises anytime soon, I'd rather get what I want before it could come to fruition. Prices are already creeping up. If new legislation is announced, they will skyrocket in accordance with supply/demand.

Presidents are often even less effective on their second terms. The House won't let anything anti gun go through and that would include a lot of Democrats. I don't think it is a fight the Dems want right now (taken as a whole). I'm not going into any reactionary purchasing myself. If, by chance, some sort of capacity ban made it through I might not like it but it also wouldn't be the end of the world for me.

 

[rebelbowtie]

 

[JohnsD90]

I'm not as worried about the assault rifles as i am about Obama's antigun thing in general, i just read an article (below) and from the way it sounds that Obama is trying to ban handguns as well, which is unacceptable entirely.

UN gun control treaty will reveal gun laws Obama really supports | Fox News

I'm not 21 yet and getting the training for my gun permit and applying for one will be the first thing i do, and i am worried that i by the time i am it will be too late, especially after reading the article despite the fact that it said the senate likely won't pass it.

Anyone have any thoughts? Thai?

 

[KCcarguy]

There are lots of ways around straight gun bans. Taxes on ammo, making you re-register your gun every year, etc. Just making it generally a PITA to own a gun.

 

[H2O_Doc]

I'm not as worried about the assault rifles as i am about Obama's antigun thing in general, i just read an article (below) and from the way it sounds that Obama is trying to ban handguns as well, which is unacceptable entirely.

UN gun control treaty will reveal gun laws Obama really supports | Fox News

I'm not 21 yet and getting the training for my gun permit and applying for one will be the first thing i do, and i am worried that i by the time i am it will be too late, especially after reading the article despite the fact that it said the senate likely won't pass it.

Anyone have any thoughts? Thai?

Don't get caught up in an opinion piece. It is an agreement that has to do with international gun control, that is sovereign nations trying to get a handle on guns illegally entering their countries, right or wrong.

The position expressed POST election : 'An official at the U.S. mission said Washington's objectives have not changed.

"We seek a treaty that contributes to international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and proliferation, protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meets the concerns that we have been articulating throughout," the official said.

"We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms," he said.

U.S. officials have acknowledged privately that the treaty under discussion would have no effect on domestic gun sales and ownership because it would apply only to exports.'


I frankly think there is a lot of disappointment among the pro-gun lobby industry in the surprisingly nonthreatening positions of the current administration. They are making it hard to raise money and fund lobbying positions. They are looking for anything to keep them funded. While I appreciate having my 2nd amendment rights kept in tact, I think paranoia and misinformation on ANY issue makes it hard to know what efforts need my attention and what causes deserve my support and $.

Just a thought.

 

[graysquirrel]

Any suggested models?

Wyndham Weaponry -- original Bushmaster gunsmiths

Sig Sauer - Sig556

S&W M&P

Colt, DPMS, Stag

Above are all good, affordable AR's.

Daniel Defense is just a notch above Sig.

Top of the line would be Barrett and LWRC.

Expect to pay 900 to 1200 for a good AR

Daniel Defence around 1600

Barrett and LWRC about 2000 to 3000

Stay away from Olympic Arms and Bushmaster Carbon 15. Nothing but problems.

Your life depends on your gun working. If you come to me and say you have probems with your gun and need me to fix it, YOU ARE DEAD.

:sniper:

 

[JohnsD90]

Don't get caught up in an opinion piece. It is an agreement that has to do with international gun control, that is sovereign nations trying to get a handle on guns illegally entering their countries, right or wrong.

The position expressed POST election : 'An official at the U.S. mission said Washington's objectives have not changed.

"We seek a treaty that contributes to international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and proliferation, protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meets the concerns that we have been articulating throughout," the official said.

"We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms," he said.

U.S. officials have acknowledged privately that the treaty under discussion would have no effect on domestic gun sales and ownership because it would apply only to exports.'


I frankly think there is a lot of disappointment among the pro-gun lobby industry in the surprisingly nonthreatening positions of the current administration. They are making it hard to raise money and fund lobbying positions. They are looking for anything to keep them funded. While I appreciate having my 2nd amendment rights kept in tact, I think paranoia and misinformation on ANY issue makes it hard to know what efforts need my attention and what causes deserve my support and $.

Just a thought.

I see, the article is fairly misleading, thank you for clarifying.

 

[WFO_Racer]

There are lots of ways around straight gun bans. Taxes on ammo, making you re-register your gun every year, etc. Just making it generally a PITA to own a gun.

That's why I said before 80/20 is the way to go.Plus it will be bespoke to your needs. I am not a off the rack kind of guy I like custom.

Can't take or register what they don't know about.

Learn to reload too. Sending a round 800 meters and further is easier when you know exactly how that round will perform.

 

[bofa]

That's why I said before 80/20 is the way to go.Plus it will be bespoke to your needs. I am not a off the rack kind of guy I like custom.

Can't take or register what they don't know about.

Learn to reload too. Sending a round 800 meters and further is easier when you know exactly how that round will perform.

I've thought about learning to reload but didn't have the time to dig into it back then. Any suggestions on reloading equipment?

 

[KCcarguy]

The position expressed POST election : 'An official at the U.S. mission said Washington's objectives have not changed.

"We seek a treaty that contributes to international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and proliferation, protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meets the concerns that we have been articulating throughout," the official said.

"We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms," he said.

U.S. officials have acknowledged privately that the treaty under discussion would have no effect on domestic gun sales and ownership because it would apply only to exports.'

That statement is very vague and leaves a lot on the table. We'll just have to see what happens. In the end, even a Clinton-style assault weapons ban isn't really gong to affect the average citizen/ gun owner. Most gun owners will tell you that their home-defense weapon of choice is not an "assault rifle" or hand gun anyway. And so what if I can't go to bass pro and buy a 30 round magazine? But it's just the principal.....you can't punish the masses for the actions of a few.

 

[H2O_Doc]

..you can't punish the masses for the actions of a few.

Of course you can. Maybe you meant we shouldn't and that might be correct in some instances, including the one we are discussing. I would suggest, however, you think of just how many laws and policies target the actions of a few would be bad actors at the cost of some minor or major loss of liberty to the masses. Then think about whether or not you agree or disagree with every instance (law or policy).

 

[KCcarguy]

Of course you can. Maybe you meant we shouldn't and that might be correct in some instances, including the one we are discussing. I would suggest, however, you think of just how many laws and policies target the actions of a few would be bad actors at the cost of some minor or major loss of liberty to the masses. Then think about whether or not you agree or disagree with every instance (law or policy).

OK. Yes, I would have been better saying "shouldn't". And yes, the individual liberty vs public benefit argument can go wrong in each extreme. For instance: What about women who abuse drugs while pregnant time after time. Should they be sterilized? What about the violent mentally ill? Lock them up without reason, or wait for them to do something?
Alcohol consumption?, Violent video games and media being blamed for crimes?....the list goes on and on. Freedom can always be abused.

What are your thoughts?