Well, no crap.
Government data show the number of people looking for gun permits is surging before Election Day – the 18th straight month of record numbers, according to the system for tracking background checks on gun sales.
In October, 2.3 million background checks for gun-related purchases were processed, setting an all-time monthly record, according to the FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS.
“The approximate number of firearms units sold has increased. Part of that is because we’re seeing a population increase across the country, it’s currently hunting season and there is a pre-election impact,” said Jurgen Brauer, an economics professor at Georgia’s Augusta University who specializes in the firearm industry. “Right now, there is a likelihood that a Democratic candidate is going to win, and industry sales reflect that.”
As you can imagine, the comments section on this article is cute. I pulled one to discuss.
- Is this not the most regurgitated line ever? “Nobody is banning guns!” No, not all at once. But we know no gun control measure is ever enough. Once they get one thing they demand, they move on to the next. And that is a never ending cycle.
- Maybe certain types. Again, same as above, once they get one, they move to the next. Also, Hillary has spoken of Australia as a good model to follow. That would be most of the guns out there and a mandatory buy back, which is a nice way of saying confiscation, even if it is with compensation that is always way less than what the gun is actually worth or you paid for it.
- My guns are my personal property. Like about 99% of the legally owned guns out there, mine have never been used in a crime, have never hurt anyone (with the exception of a little recoil to the shoulder), and have never killed anyone (with the possible exception of some military surplus rifles that were used in war). Banning and confiscating those guns – even if it is only one of them – is theft. Period. They are mine, purchased legally with my own money, and I have done nothing wrong.
- Once you allow the government to read the Constitution as a “living document,” you give them the ability to interpret any piece of it any way they wish. That is what a “living document” basically is. “It says what I want it to say, not what it actually says.” So if you happily allow them to take even one gun because they interpret the Constitution to say that it is alright, you won’t have any leverage when they come for the rights you like. If they want, they could decide term limits on the president are outdated. You won’t be allowed to say anything that offends anyone. You won’t be able to reference any religion outside of your own home or unmarked house of worship. Because, after all, the Constitution is a “living document,” and you voted in the people who believe that.
- This same person went on to say in a later comment that she hasn’t and isn’t losing anything. That’s kind of the point. You’re perfectly fine with rights being taken away, as long as they aren’t rights you are using. Look. A lot of you know I don’t give much of a crap about what people do. Things like marriage… I don’t think the government should be telling you who you can and cannot marry. So personally, if two people of the same gender want to get married, if they can find a religious group to marry them, have at it. It doesn’t effect anyone but those two people. It’s not a right I am using. I am not homosexual, nor am I married (and don’t desire to be). But I don’t want to take away anyone’s right to marry. I believe marriage is a religious institution. If your church approves, great. The government shouldn’t be involved. I’m also a Christian. But I don’t care if you aren’t. If you wish me a happy Hanukkah, I’ll wish it back to you. I’m very live and let live. All I ask is that you give me the same respect. Leave my guns alone. Leave my electronic cigarette alone. Leave my SUV alone. Leave me alone. And stop banning stuff!