Are Americans preparing for war?

[GreyGeek]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-29/weaponized-america-sturm-ruger-backlog-doubles-gun-production-shipments-surge

Whether it is due to the recent governmental attempt to enforce assorted gun controlling measures in the aftermath of the Newtown, CT shooting, or, merely driven by the same catalyst that saw a surge in gun sales four years ago, namely the presidential election, one thing is certain: America is weaponizing itself at an unheard of pace, with both Sturm, Ruger shipments and units produced surpassing 500,000 each in one quarter for the first time in history.

Or, could Americans be preparing themselves for what many believe is coming ... civil unrest? 

This story stood out with me because my wife and I were eating out with a few friends and two who were among them, who hold PhD's in psychology and who make a living as mental health counselors, suddenly revealed they were concerned about their safety and asked if I knew anything about guns.  It seems that the part of town where they own a house and have lived for over 30 years has run down and is now a high crime area.   And,  although they cannot prescribe SSRI's, they work with doctors who do, and the mental states of some of their patients concerns them.   They were talking about getting .357 revolvers.  Knowing her hand strength I suggested a .22 or .38  compact semi-auto pistol.  We went through the steps necessary to get a CHP and how much it would cost.   Then I laid the big bomb on them.  Good luck getting either guns or ammo in today's market unless they were willing to pay 3X to 5X what were normal prices.   That didn't seem to phase them.  They were serious.

It isn't just "rural Americans bitterly clinging to their guns and religion".  Most in rural America already own guns.   The new buyers are coming from urban areas.

[Bucket]

I think the data indicates that Americans are buying lots of guns.  Making generalized conclusions beyond that is probably not very productive.  The notion of "preparing for war" suggests an organized, coordinated effort.  I tend to look for the simplest explanations -- The President and the anti-gun left have made a public and determined effort to impose more restrictions on gun ownership.  In light of that clear fact, people are looking to acquire firearms before it becomes more difficult or not possible in certain areas.

I'm sure there are a few people out there who believe in their own minds that they are "preparing for war."  I think most gun buyers (myself included) are making an rational decision to purchase weapons in light of looming restrictions.  The reasons for those purchases are likely as varied as the people buying them.

[Lorimor]

Given the Federal Government's insane fiscal policies, yes, I believe we're in for a bumpy ride in the next decade. 

This insanity cannot be funded indefinitely. 

[GreyGeek]

I think most gun buyers (myself included) are making an rational decision to purchase weapons in light of looming restrictions.  The reasons for those purchases are likely as varied as the people buying them.

I agree.  The author of the article was probably being melodramatic.   But, I believe as many people are buying guns for personal  protection because of what they foresee as potential social unrest as are buying them because they think the Leftists are trying to ban them.   The second reason doesn't make sense.  As Feinstien has pointed out so willingly, IF SHE COULD she'd force all Americans to give up ALL their guns.  In order to keep them when they are being confiscated the new buyers would have to hide them.  But, the info forwarded in the NICS check, which I am sure is being saved by the ATF, would identify them as gun owners and when the armed troops came to demand the weapons what would they say?   They lost them in a boating accident, or someone stole them?  I doubt that would buy them any time and probably tag them as potential "terrorists", as would anyone who owned a gun would be tagged in such an environment as the Left desires.

[bkoenig]

Part of me wonders if the ammo buying spree by DHS isn't also due to the expectation of widespread civil unrest, rather than a nefarious plot to buy up all the ammo or round us up into FEMA camps .

The welfare gravy train can't go on forever, and when the government teat goes dry I'm afraid urban areas could get nasty.

[Bucket]

Part of me wonders if the ammo buying spree by DHS isn't also due to the expectation of widespread civil unrest, rather than a nefarious plot to buy up all the ammo or round us up into FEMA camps .

The welfare gravy train can't go on forever, and when the government teat goes dry I'm afraid urban areas could get nasty.

I think you are giving the federal government too much credit.  Government spends money because it can, it rarely goes much beyond that.  If authorization to buy 7 billion rounds made it through the system, that's what they'd do.  No government agency will EVER give something back unless directed.

[Gary]

J. Carson said as a joke, many years ago, there was a nationwide toilet paper shortage.  Over night, there was a run on toilet paper that lasted weeks, everywhere was sold out.   

The more people worried about not being able to get guns and ammo, the more people purchase what they do not need, just to have it.

Publish a nationwide story of 200 warehouses full of ammo, that cannot be sold because all the stores are full, and the ammo shortage would be over in a day, as people would quit buying. .   

[unfy]

It's a concern with noting, but over sensationalizing it is silly at this point.

Outside of the silly petitions to secede .... there hasn't been much to hint at 'organized civil unrest'.

[ILoveCats]

Zero hedge's spin is silly and sensationalist.   However.... follow the "10-Q" link at the bottom of the blog to the actual SEC filing, and the underlying data and facts in Ruger's submission contain the really good stuff.

The numbers and facts in that quarterly report are simply staggering.  Quote: “Our backlog at December 31, 2012, which totaled 1.5 million units, already represented approximately nine months of production at our current build rates, despite the significant year-over-year increase in our capacity. For reference, the backlog at December 31, 2011 was 337,000 units.”   

Wow!!  If you invested in Facebook, you picked the wrong industry!!

Really, I think the growth in the industry is wonderful and I'm happy for all the Ruger, Hornady, etc. workers, but as a consumer this doesn't bode well for the ammo shortage ending any time soon.

[GreyGeek]

but as a consumer this doesn't bode well for the ammo shortage

Indeed.   Scaling up the 2008 episode to overlay the present one and it looks like it will be the fall of 2015 before we climb back out of this.   IF another Leftist is elected president it could be 2020 or later.

[ILoveCats]

Indeed.   Scaling up the 2008 episode to overlay the present one and it looks like it will be the fall of 2015 before we climb back out of this.   IF another Leftist is elected president it could be 2020 or later.

Maybe, but on the other hand the free market hates for supply and demand to be out of disequilibrium.  The supply curve for highly regulated and politically charged items like firearms may be "sticky" and "price inelastic" (i.e. new manufacturers can't just spring up overnight, even if we consumers would support an unknown gun manufacturer) so we have to rely on known gunmakers expanding production capacity. 

However, the ammo supply curve should be more elastic.  Looking at how quickly ammo items come and go off of www.gunbot.net, I see consumers are absolutely willing to take their chances on relatively new ammo companies, just so long as the price per round is cheap in price.  For your friends wanting to get a self defense weapon, there is really no "shortage" of ultra-premium SD loads.  I see Federal Hydra-Shoks, Buffalo Bore loads, Speer Gold Dots and Golden Sabers (basically, all the stuff that has always been sold in 20-round packs) going for the same price/round as ever.  It's the 50-round boxes (or cases) of cheap ammo that sells out in one minute, regardless of brand.

What all the manufacturers are probably asking is whether the surge in demand is extremely temporary, or longer lasting.

[DangerousDrummer]

I think it is all of the above.

Professional economists are screaming doom and gloom, but they make money from it.

Look at some of the shows on the tube, Revolution and Preppers come to mind.

Then the looney gun grabbers like Bloomberg, Fienstein etc who admit they think they know what is best for us, so they should have guns, but we should not.

Here in Mobile AL we had two cold blooded killings for no reason other than they were white. White Americans were ok with it when blacks kill each other, but those murders really shocked us.

And then there is the government in general. I know more people that fear the government than fear Muslim extremists! So does that make the US government the largest terrorist organization in the world? And their arrogance about who is supposd to be serving who is apalling, from my garbage man to the president.

And last but not least, the idiots that voted these people into office. They want us disarmed "for the children", while continuing to murder a defenseless unborn child every NINE SECONDS. Whether we realize it or not, that sort of illogical thinking leads to a certain amount of distrust for those who are even semi awake.

So is there a reason, no there are a bunch of reasons. And when I cannot make sense of it all I rely on my prime law of logic which is, "when an intelligent person cannot understand the actions of those around him, someone is either lying or hiding all the facts."

[gsd]

i'm not preparing for war, but should it come I'll be ready.

[00BUCK]

i'm not preparing for war, but should it come I'll be ready.

220, 221

[NENick]

i'm not preparing for war, but should it come I'll be ready.

[GreyGeek]

Revolution

And then comes this headline:
http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/poll-29-registered-voters-believe-armed-revolution-might-be-necessary

Twenty-nine percent of registered voters think that an armed revolution might be necessary in the next few years in order to protect liberties, according to a Public Mind poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University.

[unfy]

And then comes this headline:
http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/poll-29-registered-voters-believe-armed-revolution-might-be-necessary

Sigh.  I hate pollsters.

The poll, which surveyed 863 registered voters and had a margin of error of +/-3.4, focused on both gun control and the possibility of a need for an armed revolution in the United States to protect liberty.

863 folks, eh ?  863 out of around 130-160M registered voters.

No thanks.

[GreyGeek]

863 out of around 130-160M registered voters.

Then  you'd LOVE the poll that the LSM are touting which claims that more than 90% of Americans want gun background checks.  The Quinnipiac poll surveyed 1,772 registered voters by phone.   It all depends on how you word the question ... in this case a "push poll":

1) In order to prevent criminals, terrorists and the mentally deranged from easily obtaining firearms, do you support or oppose Legislation that requires background checks be completed on every person that attempts to acquire a firearm?

Put like that most Americans would say yes.   But, if the question werein such a way that is actually representative of what the defeated Manchin-Toomey Amendment would have made law:

In an effort to make it more difficult for criminals, the mentally ill and possibly terrorists from obtaining weapons, do you support or oppose Legislation that would require mandatory background checks for every person attempting to acquire a firearm , even during private sales, trades or transfers amongst people that are well known to each other, such as co-workers, distant relatives, long time neighbors and or friends, even though numerous studies have shown that criminals most often obtain their weapons from black market sales and from theft then any other source ?

then only the LSM based Senators, i.e., the Dems and RHINOs, would have voted for it, which is why it failed.

Now, the "pollsters" are pushing the idea that those who voted against the Manchin-Toomey Amendment are "suffering" at the polls.  This is an obvious political campaign by the LSM leading up to a possible attempt to get the Senate to re-hear the gun bill, in hopes of scaring the no-voters into saying yes in order to "save their jobs".

[GreyGeek]

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107839599438746451936/posts/QGABXNCfems

[Dan W]

Jerry, I don't mind you promoting your blog, but a post needs to have something more than a link in it, or I become hesitant to click it