Where are all the guns?
This began as a comment at Sean’s place, but it evolved into a bigger thought.
Friday, I took a few hours off from work and took a tour of the local gun shops. The cases were pretty bare, but there were guns to be found. In my favorite shop, I found and bought a Ruger SR22. Great little pistol; I had hoped that it would fit the kid’s hands well, and it does perfectly. And the model that I got came with a threaded barrel for a suppressor, which is on my buy list soon.
I’ve known the guys in the shop for years, and we had a long talk about the current state of the industry. Here’s what they told me:
- They are getting the same amounts of guns and ammo that they always have; it just goes out the door just as quick.
- The majority of the demand is new people. They are getting a ton of new gun owners and people who have owned guns before, but not in a long while.
- This rush is much, much bigger than 2008. Their suppliers are saying 18 months to two years to refill the pipeline.
- They had several ARs, and a bunch of lowers in stock.
- Pistols were not to be found. No M&Ps, no Glocks, although oddly enough, every shop I went into had a Glock 29. Guess sub compact 10mm isn’t selling too well. Gander Mountain had a bunch of XDs. You could find Taurus and a few Kahrs
So that’s the situation, at least in the Charlotte area.
A note on language
In writing yesterday about the courageous stand being taken by LaRue tactical, I realized that one thing was bugging me about their press release. It had to do with a word choice.
Gunnies are a notoriously picky lot when it comes to nomenclature. Calling a magazine a clip, for example, will almost certainly cause a cacophony of protest. But gun banners are a tricky lot, and they are very good at controlling language. For example, inventing the “assault weapon” and the “high-capacity magazine.” We’ve gotten better about perfecting our responses. Replacing “assault weapon” with “modern sporting rifle” and calling the factory magazines “standard capacity” are subtle changes, but they go a long way to change public opinion.
Which brings me to the heart of the matter. There is one word that LaRue used in their press release that I thought was unfortunate. That word was “civilian.” This is not to take anything away from what LaRue is doing. We all use the word incorrectly from time to time, but it is a bad habit to get into.
I’ve been using an alternative word in place of civilian that I think sums up my position quite nicely. That word is “citizen.” Note the difference:
“There is no reason for a civilian to have an assault weapon!”
vs
“There is no reason for a citizen to have an modern sporting rifle!”
What about:
“There is no reason for a civilian to carry a concealed weapon!”
vs
“There is no reason for a citizen to carry a concealed weapon!”
A subtle distinction to be sure, but one implies equality, and one does not. And I think it is important to draw that distinction.
GRNC Gun Rights Freedom Rally
I had a great day yesterday at the Grass Roots North Carolina Freedom Rally. Sean has the details. Video of the whole rally is here.
I got the opportunity to meet my state senator Tommy Tucker, who was very gracious and spent some time with us on the issues. We were even able to give him some detail on restaurant carry in NC. He’s a friend, but we were able to arm him with some talking points for his colleagues.
All in all, a great day.
Quote of the day
…from Uncle Ted to the reprehensible Piers Morgan:
99.99% of the gun owners of America are wonderful people that you are hanging around with here today. Perfectly safe, perfectly harmless, wonderful, loving, giving, generous, caring people; would you please leave us the hell alone?
Amen!
h/t to Weer’d
Forbes on the gun control debate
Journal news takes down database
The Journal News has taken down the list of Westchester and Putnam pistol permit holders. Pity it led to two break-ins.
A necessary infringement?
Yesterday, I received a response to my letter to NC Senator Kay Hagan. John at NLOGAM, and the Armed Lutheran got similar letters.
The letter seemed mostly positive, and Senator Hagan doesn’t have much of a record on guns. However, the letter contained one cryptic sentence:
As always, it is important that we not unnecessarily infringe on the legitimate Second Amendment rights of responsible gun owners.
So, what the heck, I thought, lets continue the illusion that we are correspondents. I replied to Ms. Hagan:
Senator Hagan,
Thank you for your response on 01/10/2013 to my earlier email. As you may recall, I wrote to tell you that I strongly opposed any new restrictions on our Second Amendment rights.I was encouraged by your letter, however, I did have one question. You wrote: “As always, it is important that we not unnecessarily infringe on the legitimate Second Amendment rights of responsible gun owners.” I am unsure what you mean by this, and looking at the blogosphere, several other people received the same letter and had the same question.
Could you please clarify what exactly, in your opinion, would constitute a necessary infringement?
Sincerely,
George
Not sure I expect a substantive response, but if my fellow Tarheels wrote to the Senator, it would achieve two purposes. First, it would remind her that we are out there and watching. Second, it would alert her to the fact that we are watching very closely. As a Democrat up for re-election in 2014 in a reddish-purple state, I would think she would be responsive to the right kind of pressure.
Quote of the Day
From PDB:
Keep your powder dry, write, phone and email your reps, join the NRA, and write, phone and email your reps again. This fight hasn’t even started yet.
What he said. Do that.
Stay out of the closet
Kathy has a post up about her experience at a pro gun rally.
There is an enormous effort right now to get guns and gun owners back “in the closet.” The Hollywood/Media access is producing sanctimonious videos trying to marginalize shooters and their guns. We can’t let that happen! The way that we will win this is by cutting through the media campaign by providing a face to the shooting community.
Another Front
Sebastian has linked to a an article describing a bill coming thorough the House. It proposes to limit all ammunition feeding devices to 10 rounds or less. It allows existing devices to be possessed, but bans transfers.
The idea of a magazine ban is the worst thing we could face as gun owners. As Sebastian points out, it will impact a large number of shooters. Worse still, I think it could be politically viable. I’ve spoken to gun owners who balk at the idea of a gun ban, but would be perfectly willing to accept a magazine restriction.
I’m writing to Boehner to ask him to shut this down; I suggest you do the same.
-
Do your part!
-
-
-
-