• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Assault weapons and the Profit Motive

Is it about business and profit or the 2nd Amendment?

  • Total voters
    5
  • Poll closed .
DaveFagan

DaveFagan

Iconoclast
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
10,090
Reaction score
5,056
Location
wny
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Selling the Shooting

"Understand the bottom line here, best described by an astute observer: "I think the real problem gun manufacturers face is an inability to build planned obsolescence into their products. Unlike other instrument with moving parts, a gun can continue to shoot for a very, very long time. Hence, for gun manufacturers to remain profitable, the number of firearms in society and their lethality must continually increase if for no other reason than to maintain enough novelty to encourage new purchases."

"There it is.The root of the problem.
The NRA and the gun lobby in general getting into bed with the Republicans and the far right, all the shouting about freedom and the Constitution, is just window-dressing to the gun-makers. They don't believe that baloney; they just use it to sell their products, because unlike a Toyota or a blender, their products pretty much last forever."

Is this the real assault weapon problem?
Are we over-reacting?
The loudest crybabies are the ones that will lose profits from reduced sales?
Why isn't this perspective debated?
Just another Corporate subsidy?
 
DaveFagan said:
Selling the Shooting

"Understand the bottom line here, best described by an astute observer: "I think the real problem gun manufacturers face is an inability to build planned obsolescence into their products. Unlike other instrument with moving parts, a gun can continue to shoot for a very, very long time. Hence, for gun manufacturers to remain profitable, the number of firearms in society and their lethality must continually increase if for no other reason than to maintain enough novelty to encourage new purchases."

"There it is.The root of the problem.
The NRA and the gun lobby in general getting into bed with the Republicans and the far right, all the shouting about freedom and the Constitution, is just window-dressing to the gun-makers. They don't believe that baloney; they just use it to sell their products, because unlike a Toyota or a blender, their products pretty much last forever."

Is this the real assault weapon problem?
Are we over-reacting?
The loudest crybabies are the ones that will lose profits from reduced sales?
Why isn't this perspective debated?
Just another Corporate subsidy?
Click to expand...

The old adage, "Follow the money," always proves true.

Thoughtful point. Thanks. (We forget that way too often.)
 
Gun people are similar to car people, in that they like their bells and whistles, and all the little goodies that go along with the hobby. It's nothing to do with corporate subsidies or profit motive. People like guns, and the manufacturers are willing to produce the product that has a demand. That's one of the great things about capitalism. It generates jobs and income, and without jobs and income, our society will crumble.

It's the same as with my air rifle hobby. I buy a vintage air rifle. Then I want a new scope. If the air rifle doesn't shoot up to my expectations, then I can buy a kit to tune it. I can decide I want to try open sights, and buy a new WIlliams peep sight for it, to add to my enjoyment. I will also buy targets and pellets, and all the other accessories to add to my experience.

There's no conspiracy at work here. Just a group of people who like their guns, and willingly spend money on what they enjoy.
 
I have many friends that sell at Gun Shows and are definitely good people and upright citizens. Business is good because old weapons keep on tickin' and are in demand. New weapons are Big Boys Toys and ladies too. These individuals incomes are threatened by this and I can certainly sympathesize with their dilemna. Paperwork requirements alone could kill these small businesses. We all love guns. Nice precision machining. Nice wood finishing. Some great new lightweight stuff. Most of all, it doesn't depreciate, so it makes for great investment potential. It's not like your car that looks so good on you while eating a hole in your wallet. Do we have a love affair with guns? Hell, yes! What's not to love?
 
 
You are ignoring some serious reality here. Gun makers simply supply what the market wants, as any other business does. They actually benefit, just as car makers do, from gov't "meddling" as it changes the demand (cash for clunkers?). Why we "trade in" (resell) cars has little to do with the old car not being useful, just that a new one has more features and is perceived to be better. The old one is usually picked up by one seeing it as still quite useful and far less expensive than a new one (we own a 1995 Ford Explorer with 230K miles on it bought 9 years ago for $1,000).

The crazy thing about this gun regulation is that the old gun may now be "better" than the new one, easier to repair/maintain, has more capability/features and thus increases its "fair market" value. The gun maker can take advantage of this (and surely does) as the new gun, of lesser actual value (cost to make it/features) can then be sold for more money since its only competition is held by those lucky enough to have bought one before the "ban". As we have seen recently, a "run" on buying guns (boosting their market price) has resulted from this moronic talk of "banning" new gun sales for many popualr models.

Even following the "ban" law flury, many will (rightly) think that buying more guns is a good "investment" and will surely buy some "extra ones" for that very purpose. After the flurry of gun legislation dies down, rest assured that these "excess" guns will be sold "on the sly" to attain some quick, tax free cash, and many of these will filter down to the very criminal elements that the law sought to deprive of guns. In short, this moronic legislation will result in significantly more guns being made/sold/owned and will increase the value (and demand) for them, perhaps also greatly benefitting those very "gun nuts" and their "interest groups" that the libtards sought to "punish".
 
DaveFagan said:
Selling the Shooting

"Understand the bottom line here, best described by an astute observer: "I think the real problem gun manufacturers face is an inability to build planned obsolescence into their products. Unlike other instrument with moving parts, a gun can continue to shoot for a very, very long time. Hence, for gun manufacturers to remain profitable, the number of firearms in society and their lethality must continually increase if for no other reason than to maintain enough novelty to encourage new purchases."

"There it is.The root of the problem.
The NRA and the gun lobby in general getting into bed with the Republicans and the far right, all the shouting about freedom and the Constitution, is just window-dressing to the gun-makers. They don't believe that baloney; they just use it to sell their products, because unlike a Toyota or a blender, their products pretty much last forever."
Click to expand...

The NRA is a 2nd amendment advocacy group. Right wingers typically support the 2nd amendment. Right wingers tend to be or support republicans.So the NRA generally supports republicans and even some democrats with a strong 2nd amendment record. Anytime the anti-2nd amendment crowd screams we want assault weapon bans,high capacity magazine bans, ban on online sale of ammo, and all sorts of other anti-2nd amendment laws of course the NRA is going to say something.Why the hell shouldn't groups like the NRA,GOA and other 2nd amendment groups counter anti-2nd amendment scum who come out like roaches to try to use tragedies to **** on the 2nd amendment?

Is this the real assault weapon problem?
Click to expand...
No there isn't. Most murders are not committed with so called assault weapons or so called high capacity magazines.

Are we over-reacting?
Click to expand...
Yes, you anti-2nd amendment people are overreacting.There has only been a handful of mass shootings in our country. Most of those did not involve the use of a so called high capacity magazine or the use of a so called assault weapon.

The loudest crybabies are the ones that will lose profits from reduced sales?
Click to expand...

The loudest crybabies seem to be the ones who scream we needs an assault weapons bans, we need a high capacity magazine ban,we need to ban online sales of ammo and all kinds of other absurd ideas every time a mass shooting happens.


Why isn't this perspective debated?
Just another Corporate subsidy?
Click to expand...

Because that perspective of yours sounds like it belongs in the conspiracy forum section.
 
What, do you want manufacturers to make unreliable guns that break down after a few hundred rounds? No thanks, I wouldn't wan't to bet my life on the result of "planned obsolescence."

I always hate when someone states "the profit motive" with no other explanation as if that were a sign of evil.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom