AR dealers, collectors, owners

Are you buying, selling, or holding fast?

I have a Sig Sauer SWAT Patrol I'd like to sell, or trade for a good accurate AR with a fixed stock. I don't mean the bitty toy stocks a lot of these rifles come with, but a real solid stock with a 13.5-13.75 LOP.

I can see counter-arguments which way the AR market will go. Recently the market has been glutted, but have the Dems with their gun control stifled or stimulated demand?

On the one hand, better buy while you can. On the other hand, if the Dems ban and institute a buy-back program you'll lose a lot of money. Their buy-back programs won't pay a fraction of the guns' worth.

So which way leans prevailing sentiment? Buy, sell, or keep?

Jim

I see no reason to sell, in my opinion. I don't own an AR, but if things start to go south or a liberal gets in the White House I will definitely be buying one.

If the Dems take the White House and the Senate, while keeping the House, look out, cause the prospects of thereafter owning legal ARs and ten-round magazines are slim to none.

Their idea of just compensation will be maybe a hundred bucks a gun.

Jim

I own lots of plastic 55 gallon ground-burial-rated barrels.

If it becomes illegal to own one, and you can't hunt with them or take one to a shooting range, what will you do with them? Will they be traded illegally and hidden away. It would seem to me that the risk of being found with them in your possession would risk the loss of all your guns.

"Molone labe" would be my response, gryhkl.

Exactly, gryhkl. Get caught with an illegal weapon, and you'll find yourself a felon.Then ever after you can watch the background system from a distance, since you'll be banned from owning firearms.

Jim

I should clarify that I would never illegally purchase or sell a firearm. The second a lib gets into the White House I'll be buying one legally before laws can be made.

It amazes me they are stupid enough to think a buy back program is going to work.

My ARs were lost in a tragic canoe accident in the middle of a deep lake.

Jim

Yes, our lake here where I live is 1,200+ feet deep. I fear the same may happen when I take them out on the canoe or boat.

If you wait that long, expect to pay double what you could buy/build one for today.

I don't have a use for one. First time I fired a m16 I thought it was junk. I'm not going to buy one just to give Pelosi another reason to have a shot of vodka.

What bothers me is that Americans are ready to tolerate a confiscation plan with the name changed to buy back. " My guns fell in a lake and his will get buried." Good grief.

IF they get a confiscation plan passed, (its not a buy back its theft) anybody that doesn't stand in the open and say no doesn't deserve to call their self an American. If you think letting socialists take your AR will keep you owning the old 72 caliber springfield your great great great grandfather used in the civil war you don't deserve to have it either.

Exactly

Danny, you are right. Making excuses like they fell in the lake won't fly. We need to stand up for our rights given to us by our Founding Fathers. My previous comment of "molon labe" stands for any confiscation of any guns that I own. I'm a Marine. You don't take a Marine's rifle away from him. At least not willingly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ClCMR58LV8

well said danny

Ooh-Rah!

I don’t own one either. But I certainly do support them and the people that use and enjoy them.

Someones going to go door to door? That's the only way to get them in volume, they better call out the National Guard. They're will be millions that will not cooperate and 10s of 1000s will die.

I did not forget both things more ways then one. Also alot happened on the trap line . The State of MA had a ban on bump stocks and that is before any other one that is now ,there was only one turn in . The cops was mad because they where going to use them them self .Also look at what happened in CT on there mags.

david koresh and randy weaver were both marginalized from everyday people. one a cult leader and the other a white supremist. if the local sherriff stands up on national tv and says no, it will be a different story. honest americans outnumber atf and the other alphabets by a bunch. the socialists will have no choice but back down or invite a foreign nation to invade. which is always a possibility but I think it unlikely.

If it turns into a civil war I would rather take my turn at dying than be a slave.

Give your ARs and AKs to illegal immigrants....the government will never find them !

Don't fall into the trap of thinking you are alone. All this talk on tv about how the majority of Americans want semi autos banned, want to have a confiscation, blah blah blah blah blah, is being repeated over and aver and over again, to make you doubt your own convictions. Throw your tv in the dumpster and do what you know is right.

if you allow your semi to be confiscated it wont be 10 years before our arms laws look like England's and our kids will be slaves in their own country.

non compliance is already happening in some states , NY and CA haev somthing like a 5-10% compliance rate they figure with the "assult weapons" registries

heck years later Australia has amnesty days to turn in gun that were never turned in

Since when has differing religious views or belief in racial purity, no matter how flawed or incorrect, become illegal?

Shall we go after the 1st Admendment as well as the 2nd in establishing "thought crimes"?

We don't have to agree or like those views but as long as they don't act on them to harm another they have every right to be wrong.

What's next? Coming for our guns because we think Roe v Wade is wrong? Coming for our guns for opposing illegal immigration?

If we resist what? Bringing in tanks and burning us out? Sniping family members?

a cult leader or a white supremist is not going to get much public support even if they are in the right.

a national gun confiscation scheme and that will change

The audacity to admit the people you would/will/have voted for will take your guns and then come onto this site (an outdoor, gun related) and ask for advise on how to make/preserve money from it is unbelievable.

Just my opinion.

And my opinion, Hippie.

Mine also hippie.

I wonder if someone will call him in if Alaska gets a red flag law? It sure would be a shame.

I still don t understand who will come after them? The sheriff’s departments, except in a few metro areas, will probably stand with us. The same with many smaller police departments. Are they going to hire thousands of federal agents to enforce it? All it will take is one Ruby Ridge (and this time it won’t be against fanatic survivalist) and all heck will break loose with public opinion. I don’t believe that it will only take one arrest to make an example. This will increase the public outcry. Didn’t New York State ban anything over 7 shells. I heard 98% of the gun owners in New York didn’t comply with anything. I personally know a number of people in New York that have high capacity AR 15 type of firearms and some of them still take them to the range.

all the police and national guard I know that are local ALL own personal firearms. I find it hard to believe they would participate in any confiscation on a mass scale. Would they confiscate someones guns due to a red flag law on a case by case basis whether it was proven or not? Probably.

The danger isnt a mass confiscation. The danger is outlawing stuff little by little. Red flag laws, magazine capacity, types of ammo, amount of ammo, specific types of firearms....Exactly what they are trying to do right now.

You really think they'll word it that way?
Nope, it'll be high cap magazines, red flag laws, domestic violence, felony for any little infraction, mental watches for political protest.

They will never pick the big fight instead picking us off one small group at a time while the rest (This word is unacceptable on Trapperman) and moan about their "rights".

My guess trappers will go down when what we do gets lumped in with the felony animal cruelty laws going into effect.

We're long past worrying about how or who. It's happening and they got the badges to do it.

Question is what will you do about it?

I will do what I said. Say no

Troll.

If anyone here actually believes that if the dems get one of their clowns into the white house, they are going to stop ar AR style rifle. I have a good price on a lightly used bridge you can buy. If they make it , thats when you will need a rifle chambered in 5.56 and 308.

This whole charade is all planned to happen over time ,First they must have the law then possibly a cheap buyback And after that you will be considered a felon in possession of an illegal weapon,And it will have a mandatory prison term with it .You will not have your door kicked in and they wont send the Marshals ,they just plain have to wait you out to expose yourself and take us in a few ay a time.

So half of america will be felons ?

Paitence, they're working on it.

Its the Jims and gryhkls of the world who will rush down and turn them in for 50 bucks , making it harder on the rest of us

Heck, I'd turn you in for free.

Jim

We have illegals sitting in the park in front of the cop shop everyday and they have not been confiscated. Laws are meaning less and less every day. Respect for the law is getting less and less everyday. If you walk past illegals to get in your squad car, don't even think about asking me for my weapon.

I don't own, nor do I want to own, any semi-auto rifles. I have no use for one.
I feel better protecting my home with a shot gun-don't want a bullet passing through a wall and killing a family member and an intruder will not be on his feet if he takes a load of 7 1/2 shot from a few feet away.
Most of my big game hunting is done with a bow, and I use a .22 or side by side shotgun for small game and turkey.
I don't care if others who can pass a background check own semis. But, given the current environment, I certainly would not go out and buy such a rifle now.

I think the current craze of going out and buying 100 round mags and guns that fit what the government calls assault rifles, is unwise. But, this is American, we are all free to do as we wish. Ain't it great?

I personally would rather get shot by an AR than a Bow and Arrow, so I am going to ask that you turn in your Bow and your high capacity quiver. Aint it great?

I don't want to get shot by anything. And why would you want any law abiding American to turn in any weapon? Unless you misread my post, it is clear that i want nobody to have to do that.

I don't want one either. Doesn't have anything to do with the fact there should not be any back ground checks. Or restrictions on what kind of arms we buy.

If you want to jump on the atom bomb thing go ahead. I'm sure there are a small handful of people who could figure out how to build one after several years of research. Right now though information on them is all classified. How big a market would there be for atomic bombs? People who can afford one and want one, like the mullahs in Iran are working hard to develop one. I don't think your neighbor will come up with one. Its a stupid argument.

Yes somebody might buy an f16 or whatever. What are they going to do with it? If you think that will be a problem you have no idea how much just maintenance will be.

A gun confiscation scheme, for any type of firearm is not to be tolerated. I saw hobbies picnic post and I have no problem with people who choose to be unarmed. I will not though let them tell me I cannot be.

I cant understand why anybody thinks they are safer unarmed and signs that say for your protection this a gun free zone are worse than stupid. They can get you killed.

P.S. Except for making old women and stupid people feel safer, the only thing background checks do is waste tax dollars and cause an inconvenience for both outlaws and honest people

I didn't misread your post, Ray Charles could read through your words.

It seems you have somehow allowed yourself to be brainwashed to the point where you read what you want to believe instead of the clear intent of the writer. You should not feel alone. It has become a fairly common affliction.

I don't think we'll see mandatory buybacks or confiscations anytime soon. We will see semi-auto and high capacity magazine bans in the next few years. I bet they will also hit suppressors and bulk ammo because they're politically low risk items. Prices on what's still "legal" will skyrocket.

This bothers me most for my kids. They enjoy shooting and I've instilled it as part of our culture.

I'm not giving any of my property (taxes grudgingly excluded) to the feds.

Stock up!

Do, to be clear, you think everyone who disagrees with you has been brainwashed?

And further, you believe that most Republicans (of which you claim to be one) have had their brains turned to mush by watching Fox News and are incapable of forming their own opinions about anything?

Does that about sum it up grackle?

That does seem to be the same tired message you've been hammering out for years now.

I can think of at least a dozen state laws being regularly broken by all levels of law enforcement here in Georgia. Heck some counties stipulate in contracts that state law is to be broken.

Ah yes, the old saw "who really needs XXXX" as long as they don't come for my "sporting purpose" shotgun.

FYI, self defense with a street sweeper sawed off shotgun isn't really sporting purpose.

I think that I would keep my guns if the government started outlawing them. The second amendment gives me the right to bare arms. Obama said ''that doesn't cover bullets'' and he said a few other things that made me think there are probably some back door attempts to rid Americans of their guns. We had a proposed ''per bullet tax'' here in Illinois that failed.

My Dad tells me all the time that when his brothers were in WWII the countries where people had guns were far better off than where the government took their guns- like Germany.

Clinton banned then once. How did that work? That pendulum swings both ways.

I get a kick out of how you now speak of Dems and Liberals as though you were not one.You voted for hillderbeast,,and promised to vote for "any democrat with a pulse" in 2020.You want to know who to blame for liberal gun grabbing,go look in the mirror.

“The NY SAFE Act prohibits possession of a magazine that has a capacity to hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition regardless of when it was manufactured or when it was obtained. It also prohibits possession of a magazine if it is loaded with more than seven (7) rounds of ammunition, unless you are at a range”.
For you that say the government is coming after us if they make these restrictive laws, PLEASE TELL ME how this law worked in NewYork State. Did everybody turn in or destroy their high capacity magazines? Who is enforcing this law? How many people have been prosecuted? Is law enforcement pounding on doors to get these high capacity magazines and firearms?

I don't believe they ever intended for compliance. But they definitely intended to use it fully while doing other mundane law enforcement duties. Pulled over for speeding find a magazine, instant felony. Welfare check find eight rounds in, instant felony.
This combined with all the other new felonies invented each year will ultimately disarm and control anyone who dares act independent of government.

I don't own, nor do I want to own, any semi-auto rifles. I have no use for one.
I feel better protecting my home with a shot gun-don't want a bullet passing through a wall and killing a family member and an intruder will not be on his feet if he takes a load of 7 1/2 shot from a few feet away.
Most of my big game hunting is done with a bow, and I use a .22 or side by side shotgun for small game and turkey.
I don't care if others who can pass a background check own semis. But, given the current environment, I certainly would not go out and buy such a rifle now.

I think the current craze of going out and buying 100 round mags and guns that fit what the government calls assault rifles, is unwise. But, this is American, we are all free to do as we wish. Ain't it great?[/quote]


Ah yes, the old saw "who really needs XXXX" as long as they don't come for my "sporting purpose" shotgun.

FYI, self defense with a street sweeper sawed off shotgun isn't really sporting purpose.

[/quote]


warrior, Read the type in bold above again. Or, have somebody read it to you and explain what it clearly says. I DON"T CARE IF OTHERS WHO PASS A BACKGROUND CHECK OWN SEMI-AUTOMATIC WEAPONS.
How can that be misinterpreted? I stated what weapons I feel I need to suit the use I have for them. I would never buy something I had no use for, especially when there a chance they will be illegal in the future.

The only problem is they are not going to just stop with AR type of firearms. They eventually want them all and that bolt or lever action will be illegal. So mind as well not own any firearms since there is a chance they will all be confiscated or just make it too difficult to own them anyway.

I agree 100% with gryhkl
I can see no reason for anyone not in the military, or on a police swat team to have a "AR" type gun.
I also disagree that, if controlled, that other guns would be next.
Also can see nothing wrong with back ground checks, OK, now ya'll can pile on.
God bless

Tell me this, does it stink where your head is?

Ole Farte, how about you give an example of gun owners giving in to gun control measures where anti gun people were satisfied and quit trying to get more restrictions.

You have zero clue what the second amendment is in there for.

Well,for one thing,as I read this,thats not what gryhkl said.If you read the last paragraph he said he didn't care if others own a semi.I'm not going to comment on the rest of your writing because its ridiculous.But I will remind all of you when it comes to semi automatics they all shoot the same.I don't care if its a Remington 760 in a 30/06,or a Bushmaster in a .223,they all fire one trigger pull at a time.There's no way you can out law one type of semi automatic without banning them all.I don't own a "Black rifle"of any type,but I do own a Remington Model 11 12 gauge,a GI issue M-1 carbine,2 .22 Remington Nylon 66's,all semi automatic.The carbine,of which was sold on the civilian market by the millions by our own gov't,has been specifically mentioned in Assault weapon bans.This nonsense goes way beyond the current Black Rifle craze.There are millions of semi automatics going back to the 1920's that take box magazines. Some of you people better wake up and smell the coffee,fast.

I disagree with you. Lots of law-abiding shooters who like shooting ARs would disagree too. Shall we go along with banning some fellow outdoorsmen's sport because we like something else?

I've seen ads from antis referring to rifles like my scoped hunting rifles as "sniper rifles." What do you think they'll be talking about banning next, if not my "sniper rifles, as soon as some psychopath shoots up a crowd with one?

Or what will they try to do with shotguns, if those become the favorite weapons of deranged killers.

The gun-grabbers think the Second Amendment is just a relic. We should hold the line at ARs. The antis won't be satisfied until they've collected and destroyed all guns in private hands. (First, having required their registration to aid in rounding them up.)

Jim

Well said^^^^^^

Any gun bought through an FFL is already easily tracked down, so technically we have registration.

if you think insta check hasn't created a registry of gun owners you better think again. yes I know its not supposed to happen but recording every phone call you make and email you send is supposed to be illegal too

What about dryland conibears?

Because a few dogs get caught no one needs conibears.

What's next, snares?

Footholds?

Any trapper should understand what the antis are up to. For any trapper to say no one needs or they're okay with is asinine.

Here's how laws like are enforced in NJ.

NJ banned "assault weapons" and the definition of an assault weapon is very strange in NJ. When the law was passed in the 90's, everybody put their newly illegal guns in their gun safes and planned to get them out someday when they moved out of state. I know a guy who did just this. 20+ years later, his wife gets into an argument with her father and the father calls the police. Some sort of temporary order of protection is issued (which was lifted a few days later when the judge found out that dad had dementia and the daughter was his caregiver.)

The police show up at the son in law's house to remove all guns from the home and open his safes. 25 guns are sent to the state police to be inspected, 5 are found to be illegal. He waited 3 years to find out if he was going to be prosecuted and spend time in prison. In the end, he agreed to a plea deal where his guns were confiscated and he can never own a gun again - but no prison.

Reasonable gun control coming to a state near you!

Thats some serious gov overreach bs right there .



And libtards on here support red flag laws..................good example right here of what to expect

I thought it was the conservatards that support red-flag laws.

And now I feel all warm and fuzzy that we've at last found something to agree on: red-flag laws suck.

Jim

trump likes red flag. what happens to gun laws if he is re-elected and doesn't need to keep gun owners happy?

the guy has spent his whole life in cities. other than work he golfs. that's it. never had to kill a coon in the chicken house or learn how to kill and butcher a hog. his world and our world are on opposite ends of the earth.

Apparently some republican stole Jims computer.

No, we support locking up the insane and making it easier to do so.

Be careful. How do we decide who's "insane," and who decides it?

Jim

You tell me one politician in Washington that has butchered hogs or killed coons.Throwing that at Trump is ridiculous.

Well we could start with party affiliation.

Seriously, a nut job has to actually harm someone before you can even get a hearing. Y'all bottom feeders, oops meant lawyers, done gummed up the works on that.

If someone accused you of insanity, I bet you'd be crying out for a good lawyer to help you.

Jim

Actually I'd prefer a doctor. If my first thought was to call a lawyer that would be prima facie insanity.

What if the doctors say you're nuts because you want to own firearms?

I bet then you would want a lawyer.

Jim

In some of these mass shootings there had been warning signs that were ignored. The laws we have regarding firearms is sufficient. Problem is, following through doesn't always happen.
If we make a public example of the perpetrators in these mass shootings, it would help. Instead, these idiots are locked away and you never hear about them anymore. Let the public see them die by lethal injection, or waste away in prison the rest of their lives.

I'd prefer firing squad, electric chair or hanging. In no particular order.

if they can't prove your a danger to yourself or others using the current 72 hour Psych hold , then they need to let you go and let you be. no ref flag is needed.

the Honest truth is NO list can stop them all , it might get a few but all must be balanced with the number of false positives it will create and Due possess.

the final check has and should always be an armed populous so that when evil people do evil thing there is someone close by to stop them fast.

I recently heard something like 1 in 4 possession of a firearm by a felon is even prosecuted , even when they have a slam dunk case. the jails are so full they are putting truck thieves caught in the stolen truck that was reported stolen right back out on the street , because they haven't the room to hold them. they are putting violent offenders back on the street with 1/12 of a sentence served that is 5 months on a 5 year sentence

need to release drug addicts and keep the thieves rapists and murderers locked up

The Gman said to me "Sir you will not get your SSI money until you turn them in (scuba gear or not )" Its easy for them (they could have your bank account locked )The list is endless !

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:

List of 7 items:

Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.

Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent.

Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.

There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort, and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.

You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information…. The NY Sullivan Act intended to tip the advantage toward Irish criminals, away from Italian criminals, and far away from the lawful.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it’s too late!

The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.

With guns, we are ‘citizens’. Without them, we are ‘subjects’.

During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends.

Most of what is in the post above has is highly questionable or completely false. One should check such pieces for facts before passing along.

Most of this post and the poster is questionable.

Which parts are completely false?

check it all out on snopes

My true feelings, I would prefer public crucifixion or beheading over all others. I was trying to be nice when I mentioned lethal injection.

You and I think along the same lines. We both know it would be a strong deterrent.

Would you vote for a candidate that promised to do it?

unfortunately while the death penalty could be effective it was misused and the sad truth was they executed a number of people who were innocent of the crime they died for.

besides that , in the long run the death penalty with all it's legal requirements costs more than life in prison in many cases.

A Susquehanna University report found that, on average, across all 50 states, a death row inmate costs $1.12 million more than a general population inmate. In July 2018, there were 2,738 inmates on death row. That's almost $3 billion additional expense than if they had all been sentenced to life in prison instead.

And.... nearly all sentenced to death will die in prison from causes other than execution.

Glad i looked at snopes, i needed a good laugh.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/little-gun-history/

"Mass killings of civilians by military dictatorshipsin the 1900's were more often than not preceded by the confiscation of firearms from targeted populations,a task made easier by laws requiring the registrationand or licensing of privatly owned weapons."

Then the liberal site goes on to split hairs tp make the false claim. That's rich and fake news.

You didn't read much of it did ya, hip?

I read that snopes claims its true, with the exception that some laws were already in place (still a gun law in place) and they couldn't find i direct link to people not having guns to defend themselfs and being over-run and killed. DUHH.

If your not smart enough to see the fake news and their assessment is wrong/biased, that's on you.

Snopes has always leaned far to the left. That was obvious when Obama was in office. They did their best to cover for his miscues by minimizing or flat out denying certain things ever happened.

I just googled “how accurate is Snopes.com”. A number of websites such as Forbes and the Washington Times debunked Snopes as very liberal. Of course, the debunkers probably could also be debunked. So who do you believe? Personally, I would never believe a liberal website.

You are missing the point , like usual !

That's very true there were people executed that were innocent. But, there are some cases where there is no doubt as to guilt such as these mass shootings. With new technologies and DNA screening, law enforcement is getting better all the time at weeding out the innocent.

I agree with life in prison for many, but not for the Ted Bundys of the world. Too dangerous for the chance they might one day be released as was the case of Kenneth Allen McDuff. Somehow he slipped through the cracks and was released only to resume another rape and killing spree before he was once again caught. This time he was executed in a short time as he should have been the first time. If he had been, a number of people might still be alive enjoying life today, not rotting away in a grave.

Death penalty prisoners linger too long on death row. That's why it costs so much to house them.