Gun Sales Up In Colorado; 41% incr. background checks in 4 days

While the pundits and the politicals spar about the need to re-evaluate the need for more gun restrictions, background checks for the purchase of weapons in Colorado have increased approx. 41% since Friday's shooting in Aurora. Additionally, instructors are seeing an increase in those taking the required training for concealed-carry permits.

"A lot of it is people saying, 'I didn't think I needed a gun, but now I do,' " Meyers said. "When it happens in your backyard, people start reassessing — 'Hey, I go to the movies.' "

Read more: Aurora theater shooting: Gun sales up since tragedy - The Denver Post www.denverpost.com...

All ya'll calling this a False Flag event leading to stricter gun control might re-evaluate that thought... Long term goal or not...

When tragedy strikes close to home it will inevitably be the kick in the ass that some need to start taking back control over their lives that they may have given up in the false sense of security that the Authorities have demanded, but were not able to provide.

But of course, there is always the other side of the coin:

Tom Mauser, a gun-control advocate whose son Daniel was killed at Columbine High School in 1999, said he wasn't surprised by the numbers.

"To me that's just symbolic of the fear that drives (people)," he said.

And with that... the debate continues...

The concern was regarding Obama signing the U.N. Small Arms Treaty.

You can hardly say that the shooting's theorized outcome can now be deemed bunk.
Wait until he signs/doesn't sign, then we'll get an idea about what's up.

I'm not surprised. This is definitely a wake up call for alot of people. Like the quote that has been floating around here lately. "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away." Thankfully good, honest everyday people are starting to realize that they are not exempt from random acts of violence and taking precautions to protect themselves and their families. And if the media thinks gun sales are high now, just wait until the elections roll around.

Please remember that those are background checks. You can buy multiple guns with one background check, and i can buy a pistol without a background check because i have a ccw. You can also get a background check and then not buy a gun. Thats uncommon though because form 4473 is a pita.

Most likely the conspiracy theorists are buying guns with the false flag idea. i bought a gun he day after the shooting, haha. Also, my gun dealer tells me he has lengthy back orders on ar15s starting pretty much right after i bought mine. Good timing right?

reply to post by LadySkadi


do we know what the figures were for the month previously...5 more guns may have been sold for all we know...percentages can be highly subjective or worse misleading....if one person was murdered in 2012 in a small town and two are murdered in 2013..that's a 100% increase in muder...that sounds crazy but put in perspective although not great it's not as crazy as it sounds...

Reply to post by LadySkadi

This was staged by the. Gun manufacturers and the NRA to get people to buy more guns. Worked like a charm.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by LadySkadi


It all really comes down to one or two questions which people who are against guns will never point blank answer.

Who do YOU want in charge of YOUR safety?

A. YOU

B. Police


If you choose "B" then at least you are consistant.
STUPID, and consistant.

The police didn't do a whole hell of alot for the people in that theater did they?

If you choose "A" then you have another question to answer.

Do you suppose that the best way to defend yourself from a gun weilding maniac is with

A. A GUN!

or

B. Your fists.

If you coose B then at least you are consistant.
STUPID, but consistant nonetheless.


If a gun weilding maniac kicks in your door while you and your family are playing scrabble at the dinner table and demands that you all get down on the ground except for your pretty young daughter whom he intends on taking into the bathroom after he hogties the rest of the family you really wish you had......

A. A .45 1911 with hollow point rounds.

or

B. A spatula.





If you choose A. then congratulations, you are a crazy gun nut who supports the second ammendment of that worthless piece of paper called
"The Constitution of the United States of America".

If you choose B then.....Welll..... at least you are consistant. Consistantly stupid, but.....consistant nonetheless.

reply to post by chrismarco

The article gives figures of 2887 number of background checks in one week, so 43% increase over the previous week and 39% increase over the first week of July.

I don't know the actual figure of sales, that would depend on how long the background checks take and how many weapons each person bought.

Background checks are instant. Theres a hotline your gun shop calls and they might wait on hold up to an hour but i usually get mine in under 5 minutes.....

Gun sales are through the roof cause of obama anyway...

I wouldn't have been surprised by 20% but 41% is a big increase, I'd like to see nationwide statistics in coming days/weeks... Gun control activists won't like it.

reply to post by Sek82


I figure they must love it.

Every time one of them gets on TV and runs their mouth about "assault weapons" or "high capacity magazines" or "common sense measures" sales jump way up.

So best I can figure is that nuts like Bloomberg must have a lot of Smith and Wesson stock.

reply to post by Screwed


And so, what is the best way to defend your self against a gun weilding maniac WEARING BULLETPROOF ARMOR?

A. a gun

or

B. your fist

If you said A, your consistent. Dead and stupid, but consistent.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


Exactly, wouldn't it have been a brilliant plan Smith and Wesson, along with the NRA, to carry out this massacre.

In order to increase sales!

Follow the money, it will alwyas lead you to the answer.

Greed is a mothereffer.

reply to post by Sek82

Gun control activists won't like it

But the NRA would love it.......hmmmmmmmm. Who had the most to gain from this crime?

Follow the $$$$$$$$$

Originally posted by ErEhWoN
reply to post by Screwed

 

And so, what is the best way to defend your self against a gun weilding maniac WEARING BULLETPROOF ARMOR?

A. a gun

or

B. your fist

If you said A, your consistent. Dead and stupid, but consistent.

So were you going to answer my question or....just answer my question with a question?

'Cuz, if you can't bring yourself to answer a simple honest question without answering it with yet another question then well, that's pretty sad, but expected from what I've seen from gun opponents.

reply to post by ErEhWoN


First, it must be considered that "bulletproof" is an absolute misnomer with body armor.

Secondly, general handgun calibers deliver a force equivalent to a decent punch. Therefore, allowing one to deliver "punches" on a target with "bulletproof" body armor from a distance and with cover.

Third, all it takes is two people. One delivers distracting "punches" from a distance, the other takes advantage of the distraction and approaches from outside peripheral vision. Even if the projectiles do not make contact, the muzzle blasts in a dark room will perform the same task. With a gas mask, this is made easier.

Of course, you would need two people actual willing to possibly give their lives to save countless others, rather than trample them in the process of "getting away." This is incredibly unlikely.

The same could be accomplished, without firearms, by a group of individuals. The casualties will inevitably be higher in the bum rush, and one faces the exponential probability of actually finding a group of individuals that are willing to possibly give their lives to save others.

reply to post by sinohptik


Forget all that, I just want an answer to question #1 which it seems none of the gunhaters ever want to directly answer. They just answer questions with questions but NEVER directly answer the GODDAMNED QUESTION!!!!

reply to post by Screwed


I agree.

I assume (you know what they say about that..) that it is because of fear. Many gun control advocates use the most negative stories to support their viewpoint. This also happens with many, many other topics and I suspect it is a symptom of human nature, in the form of confirmation bias.

They also tend to use statistics about gun crimes. Very rarely will you see one also mention that these statistics very, very frequently use any crime which involves a gun as a "gun crime." This would include someone who defended themselves, with a firearm, against someone who would have taken their life otherwise. An interesting use of stats, to say the least.

Most desire to skirt personal responsibility in favor of someone else "doing it." This isnt even exclusive to any one topic, its a worldwide epidemic of sorts. edit: I go into this here, which may or may not be of interest. Its a long read, Ill admit.

Either way, I feel the solution is education and familiarity. Most extreme gun control advocates have never even fired a gun, nor do they have any desire to do so. They also have no desire to be educated on gun safety (obviously involved the handling of a firearm), which compounds the entire issue.

Guns simply are not going anywhere. We should at least "arm ourselves" with knowledge and experience on the issue.

Originally posted by sinohptik
reply to post by Screwed

 

Many gun control advocates use the most negative stories to support their viewpoint. This also happens with many, many other topics and I suspect it is a symptom of human nature, in the form of confirmation bias.

They also tend to use statistics about gun crimes. Very rarely will you see one also mention that these statistics very, very frequently use any crime which involves a gun as a "gun crime." This would include someone who defended themselves, with a firearm, against someone who would have taken their life otherwise. An interesting use of stats, to say the least.

This is why I am staying out of the statistics 'game' and sticking to very EASY to answer PERSONAL questions that cut right to the heart of the matter pretty quickly.

I refuse to be derailed or sidetracked by someone answering questions with questions.

ie, "what would you do if.....XYZ happned"?

"Well, what would YOU do"??

That doesn't answer my question and only proves that you either don't know what YOU yourself think because you haven't examined the issue with a clear mind or....you're willfully ignorant.

I don't mind someone having a viewpoint that is based on fear and ignorance.
I do mind when these same people REFUSE to answer simple questions because they know it will expose them for the irrational cowards that they are.

reply to post by ErEhWoN

Fist isn't going to do anyone *much good against a bear, cougar or wolf out in the woods.

Unless you're this guy. but it wasn't his first choice.

Nor will a fist do *much good against a guy in protective gear with multiple weapons.