A lot of "scalping" going on with pistols

[TGO David]

3 minutes ago, Erich said:

Doh, dont type that out loud. We shouldn't give them ideas, they should have to work for it a little. 

I'd hate to see the ATF's future project whiteboard.

I operate under the assumption I am the least smart person when it comes that sort of scheming and that the government has an endless supply of twisted tyrants on hand who sit around and dream up an endless supply of new ways to trample my freedoms and liberties. 

 

[Erich]

You certainly underestimate yourself

Based on seeing what comes out of staffed personnel on interpretation, I really wonder sometimes where their bar sits.

6 minutes ago, TGO David said:

the government has an endless supply of twisted tyrants on hand who sit around and dream up an endless supply of new ways to trample my freedoms and liberties. 

 

Truer words....I challenge anyone to find them.

[Chucktshoes]

A friend of mine is taking a job in the FATD. He is exactly the kind of folks we need in that position. Lord knows we need help like him on the inside. 

[TGO David]

25 minutes ago, Chucktshoes said:

A friend of mine is taking a job in the FATD. He is exactly the kind of folks we need in that position. Lord knows we need help like him on the inside. 

I hope he has a good exit strategy already in mind, because they'll probably run him out when they learn that he's got a brain. 

 

[Erik88]

On 10/31/2020 at 12:29 AM, TGO David said:

The ATF really has no power to legislate, which is what the people keep letting them do.  The people enable this sort of thing by not firing the politicians that can actually affect the way the ATF functions

Which politicians are you referring to? I hope you mean both parties because I've not seen any evidence the GOP cares what the ATF is doing.. We need to throw them all out and start over and those of us that advocate for a 3rd, 4th, or 5th party get mocked by the hardcore partisans that really only care about defeating the other side, and don't really care what happens after that. 

The GOP has us as captive voting blocs and they don't give a damn about our AR pistols. To them it's another bump stock. Of course the left is worse on guns, but voting for the lesser of two evils isn't doing us any favors.

 

 

[Moped]

10 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

Which politicians are you referring to? I hope you mean both parties because I've not seen any evidence the GOP cares what the ATF is doing.. We need to throw them all out and start over and those of us that advocate for a 3rd, 4th, or 5th party get mocked by the hardcore partisans that really only care about defeating the other side, and don't really care what happens after that. 

The GOP has us as captive voting blocs and they don't give a damn about our AR pistols. To them it's another bump stock. Of course the left is worse on guns, but voting for the lesser of two evils isn't doing us any favors.

 

 

I agree and voted this way. I hope others do too.

[TGO David]

2 hours ago, Erik88 said:

Which politicians are you referring to? I hope you mean both parties because I've not seen any evidence the GOP cares what the ATF is doing.. We need to throw them all out and start over and those of us that advocate for a 3rd, 4th, or 5th party get mocked by the hardcore partisans that really only care about defeating the other side, and don't really care what happens after that. 

The GOP has us as captive voting blocs and they don't give a damn about our AR pistols. To them it's another bump stock. Of course the left is worse on guns, but voting for the lesser of two evils isn't doing us any favors.

 

 

 

Jo really lost me along the way, but you are correct that both Republicans and Democrats have shafted us hard-core on gun rights.

[Omega]

The fact that a vote for any party not an R or a D in the general election is a lost  vote (actually goes against the side closer to your side of issues) fails to register on some folks.  I would love to get some libertarian folks into office, but the best time to vote for them is in the primaries, once you get to the general election, they just bleed off votes from the Dem or Repub and may cause them to lose the election.  I feel that is what happened when Perot ran, he caused the loss of Bush to Clinton.

[robin48]

On 10/29/2020 at 6:29 PM, AuEagle said:

Well, if President Trump is reelected I believe the gun/ammo business will get back to some reasonable level, if biden wins, all bets are off.

If we hold the senate

[Erik88]

9 hours ago, Omega said:

I would love to get some libertarian folks into office, but the best time to vote for them is in the primaries

How would that work? If a Libertarian candidate isn't running as a Republican how would I be able to vote for them in the primary? I didn't think that was possible. 

[Omega]

45 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

How would that work? If a Libertarian candidate isn't running as a Republican how would I be able to vote for them in the primary? I didn't think that was possible. 

Until the Libertarian Party gets more support, at least more toward the 33% of the vote they cannot compete in the General Election.  in 2016 they only got 3.3% of the vote, which is the higher than in 2012 with just 1%, with all previous years at less than 1%.  

If during the Primaries, an alternate party gets a high percent of the vote, it would then let the winner at least know that some of their supporters are not happy with how things are working.  In the Primaries, it may be a good idea to implement a Ranked Choice type of election, that way your vote goes to the party more closer aligned to your view of things.  But in the General election, it is my opinion that votes get wasted if not given toward one the two leading parties.  

https://www.fairvote.org/a_history_of_independent_presidential_candidates

https://www.fairvote.org/rcv#where_is_ranked_choice_voting_used

[Chucktshoes]

12 minutes ago, Omega said:

Until the Libertarian Party gets more support, at least more toward the 33% of the vote they cannot compete in the General Election.  in 2016 they only got 3.3% of the vote, which is the higher than in 2012 with just 1%, with all previous years at less than 1%.  

If during the Primaries, an alternate party gets a high percent of the vote, it would then let the winner at least know that some of their supporters are not happy with how things are working.  In the Primaries, it may be a good idea to implement a Ranked Choice type of election, that way your vote goes to the party more closer aligned to your view of things.  But in the General election, it is my opinion that votes get wasted if not given toward one the two leading parties.  

https://www.fairvote.org/a_history_of_independent_presidential_candidates

https://www.fairvote.org/rcv#where_is_ranked_choice_voting_used

Primaries don’t work like that. They’re a closed system, and held at the discretion of the party. The Libertarian Party doesn’t even hold primaries. Partly because the taxpayers fund the primaries for the two major parties, and only for the two major parties. 
 

I would actually love to see ranked choice voting enacted for all elections, but the duopoly will never allow that to happen because it will break their hold on power. 

[DaveTN]

47 minutes ago, Chucktshoes said:

I would actually love to see ranked choice voting enacted for all elections, but the duopoly will never allow that to happen because it will break their hold on power. 

There isn’t any duopoly or hold on power. An independent has the same chance as a Republican or Democrat. Perot had a good run going, but he bailed. But to think that enough voters would leave party lines and elect an independent is pretty far fetched. Third party candidates are good for popularity contests or voters that want to make it clear they aren’t happy with either candidate. A popular libertarian candidate would pull a lot of votes from a Republican candidate. A popular Socialist candidate would pull votes from a Democratic candidate. If I was a Republican Presidential candidate I would hope a strong socialist could get on the ticket. Right now, I don’t think a socialist could be elected, but I see that quickly changing.

[Swamp ash]

53 minutes ago, Chucktshoes said:

Primaries don’t work like that. They’re a closed system, and held at the discretion of the party. The Libertarian Party doesn’t even hold primaries. Partly because the taxpayers fund the primaries for the two major parties, and only for the two major parties. 
 

I would actually love to see ranked choice voting enacted for all elections, but the duopoly will never allow that to happen because it will break their hold on power. 

We ceded democracy to private political parties who utilize public infrastructure (primaries and general election) to conduct their internal business.

[Chucktshoes]

46 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

There isn’t any duopoly or hold on power. An independent has the same chance as a Republican or Democrat. Perot had a good run going, but he bailed. But to think that enough voters would leave party lines and elect an independent is pretty far fetched. Third party candidates are good for popularity contests or voters that want to make it clear they aren’t happy with either candidate. A popular libertarian candidate would pull a lot of votes from a Republican candidate. A popular Socialist candidate would pull votes from a Democratic candidate. If I was a Republican Presidential candidate I would hope a strong socialist could get on the ticket. Right now, I don’t think a socialist could be elected, but I see that quickly changing.

I see somebody showed up with the jokes. 

[DaveTN]

I don’t know what the prices are doing on semi-auto handguns, but I have been tracking prices on new S&W revolvers from GAG. With no change in MSRP throughout the year the price increases from January were, about 6% to 8% in May, 7%-11% in July, and 10%-18% in November. I don’t think we have ever seen increases like this in a single year from reputable vendors. However, only one gun out of five was IN STOCK in November, and it had the highest percentage. I suspect they keep the prices that are shown low on guns until they get them in stock. (But I don't know that be be fact) Buds doesn’t list a price if they don’t have it in stock; and they don’t have any of the guns I’m tracking in stock. Neither does anyone else.

[Quavodus]

2 hours ago, DaveTN said:

I don’t know what the prices are doing on semi-auto handguns, but I have been tracking prices on new S&W revolvers from GAG. With no change in MSRP throughout the year the price increases from January were, about 6% to 8% in May, 7%-11% in July, and 10%-18% in November. I don’t think we have ever seen increases like this in a single year from reputable vendors. However, only one gun out of five was IN STOCK in November, and it had the highest percentage. I suspect they keep the prices that are shown low on guns until they get them in stock. (But I don't know that be be fact) Buds doesn’t list a price if they don’t have it in stock; and they don’t have any of the guns I’m tracking in stock. Neither does anyone else.

 

There's a couple revolvers I'm interested in and, nobody right now has them. 

[gregintenn]

Hang on, guys and gals. We ain’t seen nothing yet!

[SonnyCrockett]

if you did not learn anything from Sandy Hook im sorry but you were a fool.....When Trump was elected in 2016 gun sales dropped like a stone and so did prices,I hoarded !  Covid hit and prices tripled so I flipped a few ARs for profit ,223 ammo too . Now that trump is heading out to sea and reading bidens plans for gun owners todays prices will look like childs play in about a year.....

Our only hope for a normal market again is a win in 2024.

 

Side note,good time to keep an eye out for Ruger and S&W stocks...Load up!

Edited November 8, 2020 by SonnyCrockett

[Darrell]

I just bought a Ruger Precision Rifle after a fairly long search. The few I saw for sale on-line were priced as much as a grand over the best (but not-in-stock) prices I saw. I paid about $200 more than those best, but unavailable, prices from an out-of-state dealer and had it shipped to my local dealer. 

My guess is that with the apparent Biden win prices are heading north and supply is heading south. Biden was pretty open about his desire to see those scary black rifles and high-capacity mags banned.  With the house continuing to be controlled by Pelosi and the like, and with a couple of RINOs like Collins in the senate, he could see some success in restricting arms that we're all used to owning.

[gary_boom]

It won’t be just ARs and AKs it will be everything. You won’t get to keep your deer rifle or shotgun. Just my opinion.

[Capbyrd]

On 11/1/2020 at 10:21 PM, Omega said:

The fact that a vote for any party not an R or a D in the general election is a lost  vote (actually goes against the side closer to your side of issues) fails to register on some folks.

 

The fact that a large percentage of third party voters view R and D as equal fails to register on some folks.   If I don't vote for whatever third party candidate I like, I don't vote for either.   Because my views don't align with ANYTHING that the R or D actually do, not what they say, but what they actually DO.  

[Omega]

2 minutes ago, Capbyrd said:

 

The fact that a large percentage of third party voters view R and D as equal fails to register on some folks.   If I don't vote for whatever third party candidate I like, I don't vote for either.   Because my views don't align with ANYTHING that the R or D actually do, not what they say, but what they actually DO.  

That's fine, keep voting third party, and get nothing you want advanced by your chosen representative who is sitting at home instead of DC.  My candidate may or may not win, and he may or may not advance anything I would like to see happen, but at least I have a chance, even if it a snowball's chance in hell, but it's a chance.

[Capbyrd]

15 hours ago, Omega said:

That's fine, keep voting third party, and get nothing you want advanced by your chosen representative who is sitting at home instead of DC.  My candidate may or may not win, and he may or may not advance anything I would like to see happen, but at least I have a chance, even if it a snowball's chance in hell, but it's a chance.

Nothing I want is going to get advanced if I vote for your party either.   Why is that difficult for you to understand?  Democrats and Republicans regularly vote and legislate against MY interests.   Why would I give them my consent to continue to do so?  

[Omega]

1 hour ago, Capbyrd said:

Nothing I want is going to get advanced if I vote for your party either.   Why is that difficult for you to understand?  Democrats and Republicans regularly vote and legislate against MY interests.   Why would I give them my consent to continue to do so?  

So what interests may those be?