Law-induced purchase fear rational?

Status
Not open for further replies.

jephthai

New member
I'm on schedule to make my next purchase -- I want to get a new gun for home security. What I'm concerned about is that I don't want to buy something that is likely to be the target of some future law (e.g., suitably less egregious than HR45 so it could pass).

Current HD gun is a 6" .357. But, I want something in a .45, and I'm thinking about a Baby Eagle (please don't argue about this choice). But, I could get another revolver though, even in .45ACP, and that would render irrelevant (to me) laws restricting ammo capacity and semi-auto actions.

So... is this rational? Is it better to get what I want, even if it means giving it to the cops in 3-5 years because some semi-auto ban happened?

I don't mean to cause a political debate in the handgun forum. But, does anyone else feel pressures like this influencing your purchase decisions?

-Jephthai-
 
I bought a gun recently, but I had that planned reguardless of the election.

the fear is totally irrational. You can be as hard core right wing as you want about an issue like this, but its price gouging, and we won't know untill he's in office.

nuff said.
 
The last ban did not confiscate firearms. It only banned certain types of guns and mags of more than 10 rounds prospectively; meaning, you could keep what you already owned. Personally, I don't see a ban of any type anytime soon. I think there are bigger fish to fry. One of the political mistakes Clinton made when he first came into office was to take on too many battles.

Of course, I have been known to be wrong. Just don't tell my wife. She thinks I'm perfect.
 
I think I may just be looking for some reassuring, so I can go buy the Baby Eagle ;-). I'd be fibbing if I said these ideas weren't bothering me, though.

I suppose another tack would be to buy that and a S&W 325 for the extra guarantee...

-Jephthai-
 
Here's my prediction: First the "new and improved" AWB. Keep what you have.
Then an attack on concealed carry. Pretty good resistance arises. Could be tied up in courts for years.
Then licensing, registration, and eventually "safety inspections" of an ever-increasing list of guns. Suprisingly little resistance. This is sold as "common-sense" stuff.
Little by little, people give up the hassle, or surrender their arms following a "failed" inspection.
Hard-core NRA types like myself look for some kind of resistance movement to participate in.
Then my crystal ball gets foggy.
:(
 
Buy whatever you want, you can afford, and you can legally purchase and own. If they pass such laws, and I really don't think they will. That weapon should be "grandfathered" in. All the more reason to get it while you can if you really think that law is coming. I think they will try. But I believe that firearms have become much more popular thanks to BG's doing bad things to innocent people, some of which are liberals.
 
I hope that's the case. It certainly bothers me that I have to even worry about it. The reason I posted was that I've been actually thinking about it the last week or so, since I have saved up enough now for my next buy. It made me pause and consider that there is a real decision to make. Maybe it's therapeutic to post about it.
 
Well, everybody wanted "CHANGE" and decided that not being attacked at home for the last 7 years was a bad idea, and installed Socialists throughout both houses of congress.
 
I would say that any expectation that there will be no attacks on the Second Amendment is irrational. Read Obama's website. It says right there that he wants to make the Clinton Ban permanent. Congress is controlled by the Democrats; a party that has a history of passing such legislation.

The belief that Obama has too much else on his plate too worry about gun control does not take into account how things really work. Any gun owner who is counting on this is just whistling past the graveyard. If he wants to pretend he is doing nothing but working on the economy, he can do that easily. After all, he doesn't have to do a thing about the AWB except sign the bill that is put before him by Congress. And he will. Or he can create a righteous fervor over evil guns to take attention away from the fact that he can't do anything to positively effect the economy. Either way, you will lose a chunk of your rights.

This chunk will almost certainly involve magazines holding over ten rounds, so pick them up now. Autoloaders themselves are in the sights, so to speak. Yeah, really. It is quite possible that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will greatly limit, or even prohibit, the importation of handguns. If you've always had your eye on a HK, get one now. GCA 68 gives her a lot of power and leeway, and she has no respect for the upper limits of her authority. Come to think of it, no one being handed the reigns does.

Bans and restrictions will be the rule, as confiscation is not as easy here as in other countries. But make no mistake, confiscation is on the table at their most private planning meetings. Besides, if the manufacture, sale, or transfer of a type of gun or magazine is illegal, it will get confiscated and destroyed when you pass away. A couple generations and a few more of these reasonable restrictions down the road, our grand children will be investigating noises in the night armed with single shot BB guns.

As far as the prices are concerned, this is just the reality of a situation like this, and we'll all sleep better if we just accept it. People love to cry "gouging." I don't see it that way. When it's a buyer's market, nobody feels guilty about paying low prices. No one say "hey, this costs too much to design, develop, market and sell to be charging this low, low price. I must pay more." But when the worm turns, and demand begins to rise against supply, all of a sudden the guy on the other side of the counter needs to turn his business into a charity. Sorry, but that's not how a free market works. Dig deep and buy what you can. It's better to buy a 15 round magazine for 50% more than it cost last spring than to not be able to buy it at all. Which will be the case soon enough. Or, maybe Obama can establish price controls on ARs and 10+ magazines!

BTW, I write this from the perspective of someone who is not in a financial position to buy any endangered firearms. I currently own a M1 Carbine, for which I have been hunting down good magazines (which is a chore in the best of times). That is about all I can afford. So it's not like I am rich and don't care about prices. I just have a very realistic view on free market economics. It sucks that this window will close on my opportunity to own an AR or a pistol that holds more than eight rounds in the magazine. But in the end, it's very much my fault for not buying them when I had the chance, and for picking an unprosperous career that has me broke all the time!
 
On the otherhand, the gun industry is thriving, and, attacking one of the few bright spots in the economy might not make a lot of sense...
 
Well, everybody wanted "CHANGE" and decided that not being attacked at home for the last 7 years was a bad idea, and installed Socialists throughout both houses of congress.

Now there's a post that proves irrational thought and that the past eigth years of fear mongering did affect some minds.

Buy what you want and enjoy it. Practice often. And don't be swayed by irrational posts.
 
It is my understanding that the new AWB will include basically every gun ever made anyway.
"Anything that has been used by the Police or military, past or present, or ever tested by either". . . .

Buy whatever you want, as in the end it will still be a gun, and the powers that be are after them all.
Bar none, save the ones used to protect THEM of course.
 
It is my understanding that the new AWB will include basically every gun ever made anyway.
"Anything that has been used by the Police or military, past or present, or ever tested by either". . . .
First, there is no "new AWB" yet. It's all rumor. Second, I don't believe any new regulation will reach very far past the old AWB. I'll rehash a post I recently made on another forum.

A far-reaching ban on currently-legal and existing firearms is highly unlikely because:

1) It would be the best thing to happen to the American mafia since Prohibition.

2) The Roberts Supreme Court could overturn the whole thing and take some pre-existing regulations with it.

3) It would throw away much of the Dems' recent electoral gains in urban areas in the West and South.

We have a constitutional amendment and a recent strong decision by a sitting Supreme Court on our side. We've also got many states with immensely popular CHL laws AND a corresponding drop in violent crime and gun-related death in those states, making it really, really hard for gun-control advocates to argue that more guns equals more dead people.

Their side has... a historic landslide Congressional defeat after the last time they tried something like this. ;)

I'm not losing any sleep over it. :cool:
 
This is the General Handgun Forum, gentlemen, not Legal & Political.

Some might notice that the L&P forum is shut down permanently since political discussions have made themselves unwelcome on The Firing Line.

The legalities of a new proposed prohibitive law that affects our sport and RKBA are probably better posted in the L&CR Forum.

This one is closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top