Barack Obama's imminent takeover, poor economy boost gun sales across country

Forget about guns in national parks and wildlife refuges (the hotly debated subject of a previous Outposts item).

Are more citizens putting weapons in their homes with the economy faltering so -- prompting fears of increased crime -- and now that the Barack Obama administration is so close to taking over?

Most definitely, according to some reports.

Guns are flying from shelves at a rate not experienced since Obama was elected in November, according to store owners around the country.

Obama claims to support 2nd Amendment rights but favors an assault rifle ban. And many citizens, apparently, simply are wary of a Democratic Congress.

"People don't know what Congress or the new president will push, whether there's going to be more strict regulations," Mike Haddox, director of retail sales at Big Buck Sports in Hattiesburg, Miss., told the Hattiesburg American.

Haddox said inquiries are up 30% from this time last year, and that sales would be way up if he could keep enough weapons in stock.

Steve Birchfield of Crowder's Vac & Gun Shop in Tennessee to the Johnson City Press: "I wish they'd extend the inauguration out another couple of months."

Hottest items seem to be AR-15 and AK-47 assault rifles, Glock and other types of powerful handguns.

"It has sure made our month, and that of every other gun shop," Birchfield added.

In Utah, nearly 9,000 more guns were sold in November, compared with the same month last year, and the trend continued into December, according to the state's Bureau of Criminal Identification.

"Mostly it's an election scare," Michael Martin, a representative at Impact Guns, told the Salt Lake Tribune. "Everyone was freaking out about the elections, and now it's not so much about them but about everyone else freaking out about the people who were freaking out about the election. It's a clear and known rush."

But is it a clear and present danger to society? Only if enough people buying those assault rifles literally start freaking out.

-- Pete Thomas

Photo: A .50-caliber Smith & Wesson Magnum (top photo) is perhaps the world's most powerful handgun. Credit: Associated Press. In second photo, a prospective gun buyer in Colorado (left) ponders a semiautomatic rifle.

Comments

[Christopher Hoffman]

Anyone wanting to ban so-called assault weapons IS against the 2nd amendment, even if unwittingly. There was no such term in common use until anti-2A groups created it. The term is now used to identify common semi-automatic rifles, which although military in appearance, are only semi-automatic, not capable of fully automatic fire of which military weapons are capable.

Because these rifles have a menacing appearance, they are excellent target of proposed gun bans, which fact anti-gun folks use to create laws which are cynical, incremental, and disingenuous infringements on our right to keep and bear arms. This point leaves aside the fact that one of the many reasons our founders saw fit to include the Second Amendment in our Bill of Rights, was as a safeguard against future tyranny, both foreign and domestic.

It's is fascinating that the same folks who (pre-Heller vs D.C.) used to argue that the 2nd amendment only applied to Militia (Military) use, now want to ban the very weapons whose design origins would make them categorically the MOST protected class of weapons: Militia or military weapons

As Justice Scalia put it recently n the recent Heller vs. D.C. decision: "It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have lim ited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right. "

This writer further believes that the although the government has shown that it is likely, over time, to develop a greater willingness to infringe on 1st (Speech), 2nd (Bearing Arms) and 4th (Search and Seizure), that it may be a long time before our government may have the stomach to infringe on these rights, when doing so requires them to turn their arms against a law abiding, armed populace.

In short, so-called assault weapons in the hands of law abiding folks (and yes, there are millions of them) are the final gatekeeper which secures and protects the rest of the guarantees enumerated in the Bill of Right for our great grandchildren.

[Brian]

Well said, Chris! Well said...

[andrew wilson]

in Canada we are not used to protecting the right to bear arms as you are in the USA. i have always been impressed by the American interest in preserving liberty and the willingness to sacrifice. you step in when others do not.