Gun Production Up 140 Percent

ColtAR15

There’s finally numbers to back up the old “Obama is the best gun salesmen” sayings. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) stated that gun production has increased 140% during the Obama presidency based on 2013 production numbers. The Hill reported that 4.5 million firearms were produced the year before President Obama took office while in 2013 that number rose to 10.8 million. Out of that huge number of guns produced handguns were at the top of the heap with 4.4 million produced in 2013 with rifles at 3.9 million and shotguns at 1.2 million.

From The Hill article:

“The ATF report confirms what we already know, that Barack Obama deserves the ‘Gun Salesman of the Decade’ award,” said Erich Pratt, spokesman for the Gun Owners of America. “People have been rushing to buy firearms because they’re afraid that Obama will take away their Second Amendment rights.”

The ATF’s annual firearms commerce report tracks the number of guns manufactured in the United States, which provides an indication of gun sales around the country.

The number of guns manufactured increased by 18 percent during the George W. Bush administration, while the Clinton administration actually saw a 9 percent reduction.

But under President Obama, gun production has spiked 140 percent to 10.8 million firearms in 2013, the most recent year for which data is available.

The year before President Obama entered office, gun manufacturers produced about 4.5 million firearms.



Ray I.

Long time gun enthusiast, archery noob, Mazda fan, Sci-Fi nerd, Whiskey drinker, online marketer and blogger. My daily firearms musings can be found over at my gun blog ArmoryBlog.com and Instagram.

Shoot me an email at ray.i@staff.thefirearmblog.com


Advertisement

  • TheNotoriousIUD

    This is why I’m no longer a member of the NRA.
    Rampant paranoia and scare tactics.

    • Jay

      If you think it’s paranoia and scare tactics, you need to look at what happened in other countries. That doesn’t mean it’s only the democrats doing it. The republicans are just as uneasy with the people being armed, but there’s just too many votes they can harvest from gun owners. NRA is not exactly your friend either. For them, it depends what the “industry” wants them to do. If the “industry wants to have full control of the market and not lose business to foreign companies, they support bans of certain firearms.
      You can never be too cautious with this.
      However, I think in USA, thanks to the last few years massive increase in the number of firearms owners, you are in a lot better position than ever. Too many people own firearms, understand them, and can’t be fooled into giving up their rights for some political B.S.
      Still, if people pushed to lift the import bans, things would become complicated quickly.

      • TheNotoriousIUD

        I truly think the NRA and weapons manufacturers pray for a democrat in the White House.

        • Dan

          Why wouldn’t they? If production is up 140% what are sales? And of course we have to increase price on everything due to demand. Even if demand goes down prices stay high because component costs somehow skyrocketed as soon as demand went down keeping the prices the same. Gun industry pays more to the NRA then the millions of members do, so the NRA will do as the gun industry likes. Just like everything else.

        • MrEllis

          The NRA is paid wads of cash to tilt at windmills.

          • schizuki

            Right. I’m sure that if there was no NRA “tilting at windmills”, we’d have the same rights we have today.

            Also, polio immunizations are pointless. Nobody gets polio anymore.

          • MrEllis

            And no love, no air no heartbeats. Stop it. If the NRA is any form of medicine it’s some holistic crap that doesn’t work at the best or more likely something with a bunch of side effects (may include: panic, dismay, gnashing of teeth, hoarding of munitions, hoarding of weapons, lack of logic and facile blathering) and hardly any clinical results.

            The NRA makes a mountain out of every molehill then claims responsibility when the president doesn’t kick in the door and steal your women and children. The NRA has a message that only resonates with their base and they don’t care about any sort of freedom. In a real crunch all the crazy they’ve said would be used against them to eviscerate them in public discourse. Now the money they hand to politicians, those legal bribes, they get votes every time.

            The NRA wants to keep their based panicked and on edge so as to easily work them up when something happens because it sells guns. More people aren’t buying them, it’s the same people who are buying more. If I paid the NRA whatever they make from the industry +1 dollar they’d be preaching the exact opposite.

            I bet if I had enough money they’d argue nunchaku were what the 2nd Amend was speaking of and guns were evil we should all be allowed to open carry nunchuka. Which would be an awesome world because we’d have tons of Youtube videos of idiots nunchuka themselves. They are lobbyists, that’s it.

            Panic and fear are a good marketing tool. The best the NRA could hope for.

    • anonymous

      I’m a life member of the NRA and the state affiliate, CSSA. The paranoia and scare tactics seem par for the course with special interest groups. I don’t like them, but I’m used to them.

      What really bothered me about the NRA, and other gun groups, was their utter incompetence in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting. For all our talk about strategy and tactics, Bloomberg’s Blue Meanies were running circles inside our OODA loop for months.

      That, and Wayne LaPierre is a coward. After D.C. declined to prosecute David Gregory for illegal possesion of a 30-round AR-magazine, LaPierre should have been making public appearances in the District, and on NBC, while prominently displaying a 30-round AR magazine.

      And the TV spots that the NRA was producing at the time — with their “Obama is an elitist” them — were more cringe worthy than Fox’s “Half-Hour News Hour”.

      If NRA membership wasn’t required for membership at the gun club, I would have resigned 2 years ago.

    • Grindstone50k

      While the “ISIS is coming for your mall” stuff is absurd, the ATF did make it’s play against M855 ammo, wrist braces, etc. For every clownish moment, the NRA does great work in the background to help shore up what’s left of our 2nd Amendment-recognized rights.

      • Bill

        The SIG Brace Fiasco was as much “our” fault as “theirs.” People pushed and pushed until the inevitable happened.

        • Kelly Jackson

          It’s only available because there was a public outcry.

          Let’s not forgot this was the SECOND time this administration has tried to limit the supply of ammo. Back in 2009 there was an attempt to stop the sale of surplus military ammo.

          • tts

            Actually that was used brass casings not ammo and they were recycling it for cash. After people complained they reversed policy, which they didn’t have to do BTW, so its a bit conspiracy theory-esque to suggest the Obama admin. was trying to limit the sale of ammo there.

            There is plenty to dislike about the Obama admin. without delving into conjecture

          • Bill

            Doubtful – the number of people who had/have an interest in the SIG brace or M855 is minuscule compared to the entire “public.” Let’s not break our arms patting ourselves on the back.

      • TheNotoriousIUD

        That’s fair enough but their clownish and flat out tone deaf antics are too embarrassing for me to support with my money. I actually believe in common sense gun control laws because I believe if we can keep guns away from the crazies my guns will ultimately be safer from political gun grabbers. How we can accomplish that is of course open to debate. I don’t have a magical solution but the NRA has a horrible public relations department.

        • Grindstone50k

          That great, and the NRA supported instant background checks in the Brady Bill. The problem is with most of the proposed methods of keeping guns away from the ‘crazies’ are more likely to affect the ‘not crazies’ than the actual ‘crazies’. Even in places like Sweden where guns are extremely tightly controlled and all but the most Fudd of hunting rifles are banned, they’re STILL pushing for more gun control laws because criminals are still smuggling in ‘banned’ guns. So things just get harder and harder for the law-abiding, while the criminals are still doing the same thing. Most gun crimes in the US are committed with black market or stolen guns as it is. Making it harder for the law-abiding to get guns is nothing but security theater that only treats an extremely minor (yet sensational and headline-grabbing) symptom and ignoring the disease of mental health and crime itself. Mass shootings are statistically rare, but gangland shootings are not. But which do you hear about the most and which do politicians wave around the most to gain traction to make lives harder for those who are not inclined to commit crimes in the first place?

          • RICH

            Crminals will ALWAYS have guns….. the law doesn’t apply to them! What has to be done is strict and sever enhancements on the ‘existing’ laws involving weapons being used in the comission of crimes…… Add an extra 10 – 20 years consecutively to a prison sentence if a criminal uses a weapon while comitting a crime and make sure he serves every single day of the sentence….. no good time, no parole just do the friggin’ time !

          • Cymond

            I generally agree with you, but it’s a bit disingenous to say that laws don’t affect criminals. For example, a law that criminalizes the act of providing a firearm to a criminal would discourage black market sellers. It’s a similar concept to criminalizing straw purchases.

            Now, I’m not suggesting that as a serious proposal. It would probably cause other problems indirectly. My point is merely that most anti-gun laws are not targeted at criminals directly. They’re intended to have an indirect effect on criminals.

            (No, I’m not supporting anti-gun laws, merely pointing out the logic.)

        • RICH

          As long as there are liberals wanting to control our lives they will continually attack our 2nd Amendment rights. You are 100% right about the ‘crazies’, but how can they be selectivly weeded out ? All of the recent mass shootings were comitted by individuals with mental issues….. and every friggin’ one of them was a registered democrat or came from a democratic family / background. That in itself says volums as far as ‘sensible’ gun control goes….. Democrats should not be allowed to possess a firearm without passing a psych test !

          • Sulaco

            And they attacked in “Gun Free Zones” !!!! Every Damn time! That should tell us all we need to know. The only answer due liberals in this debate as they can not be reasoned with, (facts mean nothing, Constitution means nothing, laws mean nothing to them) IS “Fu&^ You” come and take them.

          • RickH

            Try to get your head out of the sand, and quit relying on right wing talking points for your information.

          • Sulaco

            Oh really? Tell me oh great internet fount of all wisdom and left wing hate, tell me where I am wrong!

          • RickH

            Please, post some facts to back up your claims, oh wise one.

          • Bill

            You don’t expect facts from someone who posts “The only answer due liberals in this debate as they can not be reasoned with, (facts mean nothing, Constitution means nothing, laws mean nothing to them) IS “Fu&^ You” come and take them.”

          • RickH

            Yeah, blame liberals…..get your partisanship out of your head and realize that it’s not just one-sided. The import ban on “assault rifles” started with Bush #1, and Bush #2 had gone on record saying he would support reauthorization of the “Clinton gun ban”. Please, open your eyes.

          • tts

            Exactly, the partisanship is just plain toxic at this point.

            People need to move beyond politics-as-a-team-sport and hold “their”* politicians accountable for the policies they push and not just root for them because they happen to like what those politicians say.

            *scare quotes because most of these politicians don’t work for you, they’re working for their own personal ends, those people aren’t your friends no matter what they say or their political affiliation. Judge them based on their actions not their words or who they’re labelled as.

        • Bill

          The problem will always be what constitutes a “craziness” that would be sufficient to ban someone from possessing a firearm. Unfortunately, we can barely recognize “normal,” as any honest psychologist or psychiatrist will tell you after a couple beers. My biggest fear after Sandy Hook was not that the gov would come for my “modern sporting rifles” (which is a bit of disingenuous marketing that is analogous to calling a M1 Abrams tank a “heavy ATV”) but that there would be a backlash against the mentally ill, a tiny percentage of which commit violent crimes.

          Both sides allow emotion to over-ride logic when it comes to this issue. Both sides label the other. Neither side can discuss the issue without blaming the other for things over which they have no control. Both sides use scare tactics and fear mongering. We can’t expect them to listen to us until we listen to them, and vice-versa.

          • TheNotoriousIUD

            Well said.

    • ItalianAmerican

      There’s good and bad sides to the NRA, much likely. I too don’t like it when they go overboard with plain as rain scare tactics, but I do support them yearly because I know they (generally, with exceptions) do more good than bad.

  • Jose

    And, how they are easy to forget, that the first attempt to ban military style semi-auto rifles, occur during the presidency of RONALD REAGAN!! First, the 1986 ban on machine gun manufacture; it happened during his second term; and his comments against them, which caused big fuzz around the NRA; and his decision to withdraw from them.

    Then came George Bush, Senior; and he banned the importation of semi-auto assault weapons,in 1989; in response to the various acts of brutal violence, caused by individuals driven by madness; and using Chinese made AK’s as their weapon of choice.

    After Bill Clinton took office in 1992, talks about banning local manufacture of assault weapons, and the importation of foreign components, resulted in the 1994 ban. While most
    Republicans, and some Democrats, opposed, a number of Republicans supported it, in exchange to include a provision that the ban should be reach it’s end in ten years.

    Republicans got control of the Congress in that same year, with promises made by Newt Gingrich, to repeal it, but he didn’t do nothing. The rising of the Militia movement, along with the propaganda of Liberal gun grapping, ultimately resulted in tragedies; like Ruby Ridge;The Davidians and the FBI shootout at Waco; and the bombing of the Federal building in Oklahoma City. And the Republicans, who won seats on Congress, with promises to repeal the ban, got cold feet.

    So much for fear mongering.

    • RickH

      Thank you for your intelligent non-partisan post!

  • micmac80

    Colt and Surefire still managed to go broke.

    • Not_a_Federal_Agent

      “Two companies that sold overpriced products in an over saturated market managed to go broke”

      Wow what a surprise

    • Bill

      At least in Surefire’s case there was this terrible outbreak of peace, so they lost a lost of .mil sales (that could pick up again at any moment the way things are going) and they got a lot more competition than they had back when I was first amazed by the blinding output of the original 65 lumen 6P. But now that I think about it, that was when if you wanted an AR-15, you had to buy an AR-15. From Colt.

      • Vitsaus

        They went full HK and as they lit up their cigars with 100 dollar bills, smuggly proclaimed “Its a golden age for military contracts… one that will never end… and if the peasants want quality flashlights, let them eat cake.”

  • USMC03Vet

    American manufacturing jobs in action.
    Love it!

  • ghost

    This is why I despise the government, rampant paranoia and scare tactics. I love my country, but, yes, I despise the government.

    • tts

      Much if not all the paranoia and scare tactics are coming from the NRA and gun/ammo manufacturers though and not the govt.

      And no policies you don’t like aren’t ‘scare tactics’. Even the ones I don’t like do not count as such. They’re just policies and they can be reversed as easily as they were made so I don’t know why people feel the need to engage in such outlandish hyperbole or conspiracy theories.

      None of which help anyone.

      They just help to create and/or maintain a atmosphere of paranoia and fear which drives away regular people from gun ownership and helps to contribute to the meme that gun owners are more than a bit loopy.

      • ghost

        I did not buy my two firearms out of fear or paranoia, (I have always kept two firearms, rotated them out as needed, over the years). They are all I might need some dark and stormy night. The Government is not Our Government. Once legally elected all bets were off. What we have here is a difference of opinion. The whole thing has become one against the other. “Anything that ain’t me, is the enemy” mentality. I still despise the government. The NRA is not my friend either. The 2nd Amendment does not require fear, uncertainty, or despair to have a right to bear arms. All it requires is a free people that wish to remain free. Do I think The Government is coming for our firearms? Of course not. I think they will make laws, rules, regulations, and circumvent The Constitution in ways that will, in effect, make us all criminals for owning a firearm.

      • Scott P

        Name one executive order on firearms that has ever been rescinded if you are even aware they exist like the Chinese ban for example. That was supposed to be a “temporary policy” too and they did a lot less than the Russians have done. The AWB doesn’t count since it sunset only because Congress did not want to renew it when Bush II was all eager to sign it.

        I am waiting…….

        • tts

          Executive orders and laws which haven’t been rescinded also aren’t scare tactics even if you don’t like them either.

          I’m beginning to wonder if some of you actually know what a scare tactic is and are really just using the phrase to mean “bad”.

  • Wolfgar

    You forgot about all the state gun bans which occurred under this administrations propaganda. Gun rights is a never ending battle. If your happy living with Australian type gun laws by all means quit the NRA, but for my self I will continue supporting all the pro gun organizations including the NRA. When you have a media and population that took a big yawn when white genocide occurred in Zimbabwe yet goes berserk over an elderly lion that was shot in the same country you need to understand the insanity the NRA and pro gun movement has to deal with daily.Wake Up!

    • Sulaco

      He was shot with a cross bow!

      • Wolfgar

        He was shot with a cross bow and then shot with a rifle 40 hours later. Is this relevant?

        • Joseph Smith

          “WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?!?!?!”

          Seems appropriate.

    • Bill

      You can’t blame the feds for what states do, then cite other nation’s federal governments as examples of what might happen here. We don’t have Australian-type laws, for firearms or football. And Zimbabwe? Really? Besides, changing state law is a ton easier than changing federal law. I can only think of two states that made radical changes, and I would think that the number of Coloradans who are pro-gun could push a ballot initiative.

      • Wolfgar

        Yes you can. Its called money that is given to the states for any type of fed control actions the feds want passed. It happens with our school systems highway projects and even promotion of gun control laws.Back ground checks is a fed sponsored law. Zimbabwe was a example of peoples mind set or lack of in this country.Our fearless leader keeps espousing the gun laws of Australia as a goal to achieve in this country while bashing the NRA. There are many states now where you go to jail if you own a standard capacity magazine or hunt with a modern sporting rifle with the blessing of the feds. Like I stated before wake up! Or maybe you secretly like these draconian gun laws and are just trolling here.

        • Bill

          “Many states?” Really? How many? State a fact. Zimbabwe? How so? Compare and contrast Zimbabwe and the United States please. That ought to be interesting.

          If you think guns laws are “draconian” now I’m guessing that you haven’t been a gun owner, or an adult, very long.

          • Wolfgar

            I have been a gun owner long enough to remember when it was legal to purchase firearms from catalogs without filling out any forms or back ground checks. I remember being able to carry my shot gun to grade school and leave it with the principle so I could go duck hunting after school with my friends with out locking the school down and SWAT teams speeding to arrest us. I;m old enough to remember when it was legal to take my 22 rifle and shoot targets in our school basement with the Boy Scouts. I remember being able to purchase any new or old full auto made in the world . As far as states that have banned modern firearms and or standard capacity magazines They are California, Colorado,Connecticut, Hawaii,Maryland,Massachusetts,New Jersey, New York and Virginia. As far as Zimbabwe and Australian draconian gun laws please re- read what I wrote but this time please read it much more slowly since you missed the point completely and must have a severe problem with reading comprehension. Hugs and kisses.

          • Bill

            That’s 18 percent of the states. 18% is a lot if you are a Republican running for the Presidential nomination, otherwise, not so much. And none of them have banned “modern firearms,” they may have banned particular types, and you may have to reload more often. If you are that old you probably remember when cars came without seatbelts and people still got polio – news flash, times change.

            So essentially you can still get the same guns you could then, even better ones – you’re just PO’d because you actually have to do paperwork, pay a fee, be checked to see if you have a criminal history, and honestly answer whether or not you’ve been adjudicated mentally ill. SARCON// yeah, that’s horrifying //SARCOFF

            While I appreciate your concern, I don’t have a reading comprehension problem, and while I appreciate your sentiment, I’m not gay, so please, no hugging or kissing. You still haven’t explained what Zimbabwe, an African nation born out of apartheid Rhodesia, has to do with the gun laws in the United States, other than the fact that both nations had institutionalized racism. Apparently you must be old enough to remember segregation.

          • Wolfgar

            Hey Bill, now that you have shown your true colors as a leftist, and lover of a nanny state I’ll let this discussion end like your ability for critical thinking. As far as you not being gay I guess that depends on ones opinion. Hugs and kisses!

          • Bill

            As the kids say, whatever. You may wish I was gay, but sorry, if I was I sure wouldn’t have sex with you. Sexual preference isn’t an opinion, but I’ll just add that to the vast amount of things that you don’t know.

          • Wolfgar

            Yup, you got me there. But hey I do know going onto what is called the Firearm Blog and espousing pro gun control opinions shows a need for confrontation and a need to confront those who don’t agree with you. You might try upping your meds a little since your insecurity and hostility is showing.

          • Shawn Lahman

            Sorry, I know it’s not my conversation but allot of gun owners “espouse pro gun control opinions”. I am personally willing to endure far more scrutiny, paperwork, low cap mags, and whatever other hoops they throw at me if it saves even 1 innocent life. If it turns out to be someone you love you can thank me later. Instead of thinking of differing views as “confrontation”; think of them as “discussion”.

          • Wolfgar

            The discussion is really about if gun control and gun ban’s save lives in the long run or kills more people. Look up the university of Hawaii’s study on democide in the last century and it proves to me that the founders of this country created the second amendment for a good reason. The founders tried to retain division of power so no one person or entity would have the complete ability to the power of force over others. Keeping modern firearms out of civilian hands creates this imbalance and the environment for abuse by those in power. We may not agree on this subject and could deliver jabs at each other all week with out changing ether’s opinion but I do appreciate your respectful demeanor. It is too bad people cant just agree to dis agree with out all the mud slinging that tends to follow.

          • go4it

            Baltimore, Ferguson MO – and others – have self-imposed “segregation. What’s your point?

          • ghost

            You so crazy.

          • go4it

            Nah! I just don’t look at the world thru rose-colored glasses, riding a unicorn.

            When I see a growing number of black Americans who want nothing to do with anything “white”, that’s zero difference between white society denying those people the same “thing”.

            Black people living “inside of a wall” is segregation no matter how you slice the pie; doesn’t matter who built it.

          • Adam Fluegeman

            So decreasing the level of freedom we have is progress? Sounds progressive to me. So you must be one of those hunting and sporting gun owners that favors “common sense” gun control. No thanks.

          • Bill

            Nope, I just favor, as Thomas Paine put it, common sense. Every gun I own, with the exception of a couple I inherited, are battle guns. I don’t hunt anything that flys or has more than 2 legs. Our freedoms haven’t decreased, but if you think they have, imagine what life would have been like before SCOTUS decisions like Miranda, Mapp, Terry, Heller, Gideon and a couple hundred more that have placed restraint after restraint on government behavior since the Constitution was drafted.

            There was no fantasy period in American history when you could do anything and everything you wanted, though being a white male gave you a big head start.

    • gunsandrockets

      This looks like it was intended as a reply to “TheNotoriusIUD”?

      • Wolfgar

        It was. It was moved to the wrong post.

    • jeffrey melton

      Clearly the liberal media is obama’s propaganda machine. And it’s more than the media; teachers and professors are also to blame for the spread of the liberal disease.

  • Southpaw89

    I’d love to see the look on Obamas face of someone actually handed him a trophy that said “Gun Salesman of the Year”, oh and make it look like a gold AR-15, the media would have a heyday.

    • Asdf

      That right there is an awesome idea. I would love to see his face and the Mideast blitz

    • That expression on Barry’s face would be my happiest dream Southpaw89.

  • Squirreltakular

    You’ll have someone point out that the reported numbers of firearm owners have been going down, though, which they’ll say is proof that people are just hording guns while less people use them.

    I say that more people are lying when asked if they own any guns, and I understand why they’re doing it.

    • tts

      That is unfounded speculation though.

      Most of the reports on gun ownership are based on multi decade polls through the General Social Survey that show a prolonged trend and not some sort of sudden change over the last 6-12 yr.

      There is also supplemental data from the BRFSS over the last few years that backs up this trend.

      When you have multiple sources of quality data showing the same conclusions from different sources then you can’t just handwave it away. At least not rationally anyways.

      • gunsandrockets

        squirreltakular is closer to the truth than you. The fact is no one has a good handle on the percentage of Americans who own firearms. Though the anti-gunners love to make unfounded conclusions based on fuzzy data.

        http://www.pewresearchdotorg/fact-tank/2013/06/04/a-minority-of-americans-own-guns-but-just-how-many-is-unclear/

        How absurd is to to conclude declining numbers of American gun owners? So absurd that when faced with the increased number of guns in American society, accepting a decline in gun ownership means accepting that one million American households have more than 100 guns each!

        http://ourfuturedotorg/20150316/gun-ownership-is-declining-so-why-is-the-gun-lobby-so-powerful

        • tts

          Well he didn’t post any sources at all to back up what he is saying so you couldn’t reasonably say he close to any truth much less accurate in his statement at all. Its pure conjecture.

          No I didn’t post links either, that tends to get your post auto deleted, but I did cite the groups doing the polling and have 2 different sources which are trivial to google.

          Multi decade polls collected face to face aren’t fuzzy data either. Gallup does the phone polls and is known to bias data by pre selecting many areas that fit certain social groups for quicker and cheaper polling. At least that is how they pitch it.

          Its not so shocking to believe there are a million Americans with what amounts to a small arsenal in their homes. Look at how people collect shoes, jewelry, tools, baseball cards, video games, coins, watches, knives, etc. People love to collect things, guns are no different in that respect.

          • gunsandrockets

            “Its not so shocking to believe there are a million Americans with what amounts to a small arsenal in their homes.” More than 100 guns is a “small arsenal”?

            You find the idea that more than 3% of all American homes contain such arsenals completely credible, yet you doubt people might be reluctant to admit to a pollster they own guns? As red hot as the gun-control issue has burned over the last 25 years? Okay then.

            As to fuzzy math, the polls which measure direct gun ownership show no declines over the decades. Declining gun ownership is only inferred from polls which measure household gun ownership. Can you not see the difference?

            Is the household of 1960 the same as the household of 2015? Of course not. The United States has undergone a great deal of demographic change over that time.

          • Bill

            Gun control hasn’t been a red-hot issue for over a decade. It flickers for a couple days after each mass killing, but its nowhere near as hot as it was in the 70s and 80s.

            Both sides cherry pick their figures. Stats are truth, but malleable.

          • gunsandrockets

            That is a completely silly and inaccurate representation of gun control politics. Even if you restricted your discussion to just national level politics.

            Clearly you don’t live in a blue state.

          • Bill

            How old are you and how long have you been shooting? There is no AWB anymore, there are more states with CCW provisions than ever before, we are awash in battle rifles, you can by an AR in Walmart, suppressors are borderline common whereas 10 years ago they were nowhere to be seen, and there are monthly machine gun shoots within a couple hours drive of my house. Now that may not apply in Cali or NY, but is it worse now than it was 10 years ago? An 8 round mag limit in NY is hardly the death knell for gun ownership.

            Where we you after the assassination attempt on Reagan? THAT was some hard times for gun owners. Where were you when the Dems got disemboweled nationwide when they pushed gun control as a critical political issue? They learned real fast that pushing gun control was a political death sentence, and any politician wants to keep their office more than they want to “win” any political issue. They’ll make the right noises to keep their base satisfied, but at the end of the day, they aren’t touching the gun control hot stove again.

            Don’t believe me? Look at what HASNT happened: any significant federal legislation after incidents like Columbine, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech, Charleston and Chattanooga. A couple days of media noise, then it’s in the wind.

            Yeah, it could happen, but neither party has the guts to take the chance on anything as risky as gun control.

          • gunsandrockets

            So I hit a nerve, eh? As I suspected you do not live in a blue state, giving you a false sense of security.

            I don’t have to answer to you, I voted for Reagan. I have been on the front lines fighting against gun-control since 1989. I’ve had a legal rifle confiscated by a state gun-control law. So don’t think you can lecture me from your pollyanna perspective.

            I’m well aware that long term the side of gun-control is losing. But I’m also well aware of how dangerous the current balance is at the Federal level. DC v Heller hangs by a thread, and it will only take the election of Hillary to see the 2nd Amendment nullified by a Hillary appointed Supreme Court Justice.

            At the state level we are at the mercy of the blue/red divide. Since McDonald v Chicago, by and large the Federal courts have abandoned protection of the 2nd Amendment, letting the blue states run amok with the limited exceptions of Illinois and Washington D.C. Even as things get ever better in the red states, they are also getting worse in the blue.

          • tts

            Yes it is a small arsenal to have over 100 guns and I gave my reasons why I considered it reasonable to believe a relatively small group of gun lovers might have such large personal collections.

            The polls are done anonymously so its not very reasonable to believe that a significant portion of the population would lie about owning guns. If they wanted to they could’ve just as easily said they didn’t want to do the poll to you know, its not a mandatory poll at all.

            Demographics have changed a lot over the decades but its pure semantics to say that somehow “households” have changed enough to change the poll data.

    • Dan

      I actually don’t have a single firearm or any ammunition. And no you cannot look in my crawl space 🙂

    • Joseph Smith

      There have been several high profile home invasion shootings in (and around) Boulder, CO. Politically, this is an area that shuns guns/gun rights. But when the riff-raff threatens their multi-million dollar homes/lives, they will sure as he’ll go out and buy a gun.

      No, they won’t tell their neighbors or admit to it on a survey. And they won’t talk about it at work. And they will continue to vote against gun rights in CO.

      But they are gun owners today while they probably weren’t 10 years ago.

  • MrEllis

    It’s because he’s taken so many… everyone is having to replace them.

  • lurpy

    And the election is next year. Man, if Obama wants to take all our guns and put white Christians in FEMA camps, he needs to get on that soon. I feel like turning the United States into a Muslim Soviet dictatorship is gonna take more than six months.

    • gunsandrockets

      Have you paid any attention to what the Democratic Party has wrought at the State and City level of government in the last few years? Just because Republicans largely stymie Obama gun-control at the Federal Level, don’t ignore everything else going on.

  • That guy

    It’s not the fear of him taking away 2nd amendment rights more so that it is the riots looting and targeting of well to do people that has brought it on. With all that going on, the police stand idly by ordered to not engage or help those who need it. The message is clear, people need to defend themselves.

  • RickH

    Wow, news items! Nothing you posted is anything that been proven (like Benghazi) or that is nothing but government action as usual. George Zimmerman? Seriously? How ’bout I post up some talking points about the past administration? Cuz that’s all you got there sparky are talking points.

  • Shawn Lahman

    The nra/gun lobby is the big salesman here. They wrapped up the fear with a pretty little bow and we all dropped to our knees, opened our throats and swallowed. Me included since I bought six guns during Obama and only two during Bush. Subconscious fear can get expensive. If the nra had sent me two emails a day back then telling me Bush was gonna take my guns, I might have bought allot more. I’m willing to bet every gun lobbyist votes democrat because during republican reign they make less money.

  • Shawn Lahman

    The nra/gun lobby is the big salesman here. They wrapped up the fear with a pretty little bow and we all dropped to our knees, opened our throats and swallowed. Me included since I bought six guns during Obama and only two during Bush. Subconscious fear can get expensive. If the nra had sent me two emails a day back then telling me Bush was gonna take my guns, I might have bought allot more. I’m willing to bet every gun lobbyist votes democrat because during republican reign they make less money.

  • Jamie Clemons

    I sometimes wonder if he is really intending to do the opposite of what he says.

  • Brad Ferguson

    Forget the firearms Obama has sold…………Think of the how much, ammunition he has sold.