Profit motive a factor in gun rights ...

Profit motive a factor in gun rights struggles

There are 15 comments on the Chambersburg Public Opinion story from Apr 9, 2013, titled Profit motive a factor in gun rights struggles. In it, Chambersburg Public Opinion reports that:

While I appreciate the efforts of citizens to rally to protect our civil rights, I hope we do not fail to recognize that the recent rally in Chambersburg, intended to encourage citizens to defend the second amendment to the Constitution, was sponsored by a gun shop.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chambersburg Public Opinion.

Right Rights

Carlisle, PA

#1 Apr 9, 2013
Great letter...

Gun nuts seem to think guns are some sort of natural resource...

Notice the constitution only says "keep and bear" - you have no right to manufacture.

That's why 3-D printing will become so important in gun rights...and suddenly - the corporate gun monster - will become the gun owners biggest enemy.

Mark my words.
Right Rights

Carlisle, PA

#2 Apr 11, 2013
Guess nobody wants to touch this one!!!

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#3 Apr 11, 2013
Right Rights wrote:
Guess nobody wants to touch this one!!!
There is a very narrow range of debate the pro-gun crowd is skilled at. Evidently this falls outside their area of expertise/cut-n-paste sources.
Obamanation

Manchester, MI

#4 Apr 11, 2013
Right Rights wrote:
Guess nobody wants to touch this one!!!
No one has replied because your argument is pointless. Guns don't grow on trees - they have to be manufactured, fabricated, acquried or in some manner be created so that they the public can "bear" them.
Right Rights

Carlisle, PA

#5 Apr 11, 2013
Obamanation wrote:
<quoted text>
No one has replied because your argument is pointless. Guns don't grow on trees - they have to be manufactured, fabricated, acquried or in some manner be created so that they the public can "bear" them.
Correct.

You have no right to a multinational manufacturer...nor do they have obligation to supply you with guns.
Right Rights

Carlisle, PA

#6 Apr 14, 2013
I told ya...the money.

==========

Remington Opts to Stay in NY State After Securing $80M Government Contract

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/guns/r...

Remington Arms, a gun manufacturing company, will remain in New York after landing a hefty contract with the US government.

There have been waves in the world of gun industry recently as politicians pass stricter gun control laws. Just recently, Beretta announced that they would move out of Maryland following new gun control legislation. Similarly, rumors abound that HiViz and Magpul will leave Colorado in favor of more gun friendly states.

New York certainly doesnÂ’t top the list for pro-gun states, so there was uncertainty surrounding the fate of Remington Arms. Based in Herkimer County, Remington potentially faced legal complications after Legislature passed a law banning the sale of military-style rifles.

Remington CEOs have decided to stay in New York, however, following a meeting with Sens. James Seward, Hugh Farley and Joseph Griffo, as well as Assemblymen Marc Butler, Claudia Tenney, and Anthony Brindisi. Shortly after the meeting, Congressman Richard Hanna announced that the Pentagon would award Remington an $80 million contract to make 5,000 sniper rifles over the next decade for the US Special Operations Command.

According to reports, Remington announced plans to invest $20 million into their plant, which currently employs 1,200 people.

Reading between the lines leaves Americans with an obvious suspicion: a quid pro quo between Remington and the senators would keep everybody in the green. Remington gets a hefty contract while the senators and assemblymen could take credit for keeping jobs in New York.

Since: Aug 12

Arnold, MO

#7 Apr 15, 2013
We don't need a gun shop to tell us that when guncontrol was passed that crime and death increased, compared to surrounding areas that didn't. We don't need a gunshop to tell us that most government sponsered studies were so bad, the most famous one had to include households that lied about not having guns to those that didn't, even though the fact they had lied was in the very study data, to make them safer then households that were forced to tell the truth due to gun shot wounds..
Right Rights

Carlisle, PA

#8 Apr 16, 2013
Drake_Burrwood wrote:
We don't need a gun shop to tell us that when guncontrol was passed that crime and death increased, compared to surrounding areas that didn't. We don't need a gunshop to tell us that most government sponsered studies were so bad, the most famous one had to include households that lied about not having guns to those that didn't, even though the fact they had lied was in the very study data, to make them safer then households that were forced to tell the truth due to gun shot wounds..
Well, apparently you did need a gun shop to tell you.

Otherwise, why would the event organizers solicit sponsors?

Since: Aug 12

Belleville, IL

#9 Apr 17, 2013
The same as most events I assume, to cover expenses.
And I haven't bothered to ask or local gun shop. I enjoy reading for myself.
The Traveler

Clearfield, PA

#10 Apr 17, 2013
Right Rights wrote:
<quoted text>
Correct.
You have no right to a multinational manufacturer...nor do they have obligation to supply you with guns.
The Constitution doesn't mention you have the right to manufacture toilet paper either, you dumbass. I think it does mention how to deal with treasonous presidents though.

Perhaps Dan the Man will chime in here since he is the expert on every subject.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#11 Apr 19, 2013
The Traveler wrote:
<quoted text>
The Constitution doesn't mention you have the right to manufacture toilet paper either, you dumbass. I think it does mention how to deal with treasonous presidents though.
Perhaps Dan the Man will chime in here since he is the expert on every subject.
I wonder what toilet paper was like during the Civil War. Or were they still doing leaves and pinecones? Man, that's definitely a huge factor in why I'm happy to be alive today and not back then.

Who knows, maybe 200 years from now, people will scoff at the notion of toilet paper. Three shells anyone?
Post Turtle

Wiseman, AR

#12 Apr 19, 2013
It wouldn't anymore than they've already been infringed. I have a cc permit which required a State and FBI check. I also have a license for business that requires an FBI background check. The problem with the simple 'expanded background check' they are promoting is that, although it SOUNDS innocent enough and helpful, they are simply NOT being honest about their intent. We LEGAL gun owners want nothing more than for criminals to be stopped. We love our families and want no harm to come to the public. We have been 'criminalized' by the gun grabbing politicians who are trying to make a name for themselves or are trying to turn everyone's attention to emotional things so we don't concentrate on the horrible things they are doing in office- like ignoring the economy, wasteful spending, healthcare, etc. Was the 'healthcare bill' what we were promised? NO!! It was WAY more over reach and ridiculousness that has and will actually do more harm than good AND has already cost more than we were 'promised'. THAT is one small example of how we know they are not to be trusted. They want far more than background checks. Don't be fooled into believing anything else.

Since: Aug 12

Saint Louis, MO

#13 Apr 27, 2013
__The current system is Not a list of who Can keep firearms, it is a list of who can not own weapons. This some times causes problems if in filling out the check form they can tell for sure if you are the disqualified person on the list. But you can dispute this and they will give you a number to use in place if you don't want to use your Soc. Sec. Number, the usual cause of uncertainty.
--what they want since they believe it is the only way to control guns, since shooting a rogue predator in his or her tracks by law abiding folk is to messy, is to have a list of persons with guns.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#14 Apr 30, 2013
Post Turtle wrote:
We have been 'criminalized' by the gun grabbing politicians who are trying to make a name for themselves or are trying to turn everyone's attention to emotional things so we don't concentrate on the horrible things they are doing in office- like ignoring the economy, wasteful spending, healthcare, etc. Was the 'healthcare bill' what we were promised? NO!! It was WAY more over reach and ridiculousness that has and will actually do more harm than good AND has already cost more than we were 'promised'. THAT is one small example of how we know they are not to be trusted. They want far more than background checks. Don't be fooled into believing anything else.
I was with you up until this point. Now who's the one politicizing? This has nothing to do with healthcare, it was the Newtown shooting that reignited this debate.

Responsible, law-abiding gun owners are not criminalized. While there are some gun-control activists on the left who want to infringe on your rights, I truly believe they are a small minority. Many of us just want a little more common sense injected into the discussion. Despite overwhelming public support for background checks - which is far less than the original proposals to limit assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines - it's still being treated as the ultimate infringement on your rights as a gun owner.

And it's sad and frustrating to me, because what we really need are responsible gun owners such as yourself advocating for common sense regulations like this one rather than fighting everything tooth and nail and blaming it all on the liberals. Because when you fight EVERYTHING, eventually what you'll be left with is something worse.
Sam I Am

Mountain Home, AR

#15 May 1, 2013
Good video, Turn the sound up...

https://www.youtube.com/v/za_8TOQFA8o

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

National Rifle Association Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
obama to sign executive order to take over america 20 hr ericweiss 1
Australia made a change on Assault Weapons , so... Jun 23 Mick Beet 1
Orlando Jun 13 CarolCluelessCurler 1
9th Circuit Jun 9 Chuck 2
UCLA Shooting Jun 1 craftsjames 1
Sign the petition to get Katie Couric fired May '16 Franklin 1
News Trump: Hillary Should Give Up Her Armed Security May '16 Three Days 1
More from around the web