Sales of AR-style rifles, ammo spike up

Advertisement

Terminology

A quick primer on the rifles and ammunition being debated:

Assault rifle — A rifle that is capable of being fired in fully automatic and semiautomatic modes at the user’s option. Designed for, and used by, military forces and some law enforcement agencies.

Assault weapon — A semiautomatic firearm similar in appearance to a fully automatic firearm or military weapon. Not synonymous with assault rifle, which can be used in fully automatic mode.

AR-15 — Registered trademark of the Colt firearms company, refers to the lightweight rifle designed by Eugene Stoner and first built by ArmaLite. Variants of the firearm are independently made, modified and sold under various names by multiple manufacturers. The military versions are the Colt M-16 rifle and Colt M-4 carbine.

5.56 — Also known as the 5.56x45 mm cartridge. A high-velocity cartridge fired by the AR-15 and similar rifles. Standard issue for U.S. and NATO forces.

.223 Remington — A cartridge with almost the same external dimensions as the 5.56x45mm NATO military cartridge.

WALLA WALLA — A national surge in sales of AR-15 type rifles, as well as ammunition, is apparently being mirrored locally.

“It’s a madhouse,” Jeff Pierce, owner of Double Diamond Tactical in Milton-Freewater said Thursday. “Two weeks ago I could have ordered you pretty much anything you wanted. Now they (distributors) are all back-ordered.”

Although there appeared to be no shortage of many other types of firearms and ammunition in local stores, there was a marked scarcity of the assault weapons that have become a subject of major debate since the Dec. 14 school massacre in Newtown, Conn. Ammunition used by that rifle and other military-style weapons has also been flying off the shelves both locally and nationally.

Pierce said the fastest-selling calibers have been the 5.56 mm, .223 Remington and .22 long rifle, as well as “anything that goes in semi-auto rifles.” Shortages of some handgun calibers, notably the .45 ACP round, are also showing up, he said.

According to national news reports, the fear of a renewed ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines have resulted in sales of AR-15 rifles and similar weapons skyrocketing. According to HispanicBusiness.com, assault weapons have sold out in many Central Florida gun shops following President Obama’s promise to make gun control a “central issue” in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre.

“For the second time in four years, gun dealers reported daily sales matching as much as a month’s worth of business,” the website reported. Similar situations are being reported in other areas throughout the country, including the Seattle region.

According to a post on the Internet forum AR15.com, Brownell’s, a major dealer in gun parts and gunsmithing supplies, has said the demand for high-capacity rifle magazines has been unprecedented. The company said it had sold the “average demand” equivalent of about 3 1/2 years worth of one type of AR-15 magazine in a 72-hour span. It has also sold “an even greater amount” of its own Brownells magazines.

Background checks for firearms purchases have also been hitting new highs. According to news reports, the FBI has said there were 16.8 million background checks through the end of November, the most since 1998 when the agency began tracking the numbers.

Comments

PeggyJoy 1 year, 7 months ago

Are these people insane? I can just see my brother running out to stock up more guns/ammo to add to his collection of over 100. No one, including him needs more than one gun, which they can use for hunting. Guns are made for one reason and one reason only......killing, so I would like to know just who are these gun nuts afraid of, that they want to have a gun to kill it.

Isn't it about time that men put away their toys, and start acting an adult. You want a gun for hunting. Fine. You need one, and one only.

0

barracuda 1 year, 7 months ago

If you are driving downtown on Isaacs, and a Student from Whitman College crosses the street, and you have the misfortune to watch them get hit with a car, most likely after rendering assistance to the victim and calling the authorities, you will get back into the "most dangerous killing machine" and continue on with your days agenda.... My point is, there a way more people killed by automobiles then by guns each year, and we don't ban cars! Also, if you leave a gun in a secure area for a extended period of time.. guess what? It is still there when you come get it! Again, guns don't kill people, and some of us just collect them like some other people like to collect purse's.! It is impossable to pull all of the guns from the people.... Only honest people will give up the guns, and those are the people who we need to keep them! Not the dis-honest crimnals........

3

PeggyJoy 1 year, 7 months ago

My point..........what other excuses can you come up with for owning a gun. That's right! I'm fed up of the excuses that people like yourself come up for owning an item, that is made for one reason and one reason only.........killing. Excuses, excuses, excuses.

My Question............when are the males of this country planning to grow up and get rid of their toys (guns).

0

barracuda 1 year, 7 months ago

How do you know that my wife, daughters and my Mom dont enjoy guns?

0

barracuda 1 year, 7 months ago

Who do you think gave me my first gun for Christmas?

0

Questionall 1 year, 6 months ago

As a woman who owns guns, shoots regularly, and has no plans to go out and kill anyone - I find your question offensive. I have absolutely no plans to rid myself of my "toys" and do not feel it is within anyone's right to tell me to do so or even that I should. The only one who has anything to fear from my guns is the one who tries to hurt my family or myself. Additionally, it was my idea to purchase my son is first .22 and I was the first one to take him shooting with a bb gun when he was 5. Only pop cans were hurt in that adventure, but he has developed a respect for guns, knows safety measures, and I feel safe in knowing that if he is faced with a friend showing him a gun or coming across one in someone else's home, he would act responsibly.

1

goldlizard 1 year, 6 months ago

The 2nd is not for hunting... or sport... but to protect us from people who would take away our rights... THE GOVERNMENT. Obviously you have not, or do not know what is written in one of the founding documents of this country. They are made for killing. My guess is that you never had a gun or shot a gun in your life. I don't care what you think Peggy Joy. You have the right to say what you want but if you try to take away my rights then we will have issues. Criminals don't follow laws anyway Peggy. You are an idiot

1

namvet60 1 year, 7 months ago

I guess we should only have one of each item on a baseball field (1 bat), only 1 tool in your tool chest because a screwdriver or a box cutter or any other item that may be used for a robbery or other devious affair. If you read on the internet that in Chicago (one of the most strict gun law vicinities) number 500 homicides in the year of 2012! People that think that guns kill people really don't deal with reality.

3

PeggyJoy 1 year, 7 months ago

Don't tell us, that we don't deal with reality. Gun nuts like yourself, simply DO NOT want to deal with reality.

0

resers 1 year, 7 months ago

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." 2nd amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Shall we pick and choose which amendment we agree with? I don't think we want other people determining for us what we 'need'. Perhaps someday, we won't 'need' to vote, or have free speech? If the founders really meant to limit arms, why didn't they make spell out the we could have rifles, but not cannons? They said 'arms'. Many do enjoy hunting with AR-15's. Some just want to collect them. Others just love to target practice. It is their business, Peggy Joy. Someone having different interests , doesn't make them insane.

2

PeggyJoy 1 year, 7 months ago

And this so called "well regulated militia," just exactly what kind of "arms" were they talking about? Flintlock muskets and flintlock pistols. The right to bear arms would NOT have been included in the 2nd Amendment, if they had access to the type of weapons we have today. Only a fool would suggest otherwise.

Let's go with your "right to bear arms." One musket and one pistol.

0

barracuda 1 year, 7 months ago

PeggyJoy, How are you going to ask the bad guys to stick to that law? Also, do you really believe that they won't keep these AR-15's, while we turn in our extra rifle's and keep one single shot rifle and one pistol? I am a law abiding person, but if that is going to be the case, I believe I will cross the law, and keep "MY" choice of guns! Here is a scenario.... You watch two thugs with illegally owned AR-15's, kill multiple people, and then point them at one of your friends, or family member of yours' head, and I am there too, all this over the wallet in their pocket, or worse, maybe they like the looks of their daughter. Do you still want me to only have my single shot pistol/ "musket" or do you want me to defend these innocent people with my guns of choice? " Hmmmm, no thanks! It is a little late to make rule to regulate these guns! They are out here in public! Millions of these styles of guns are in the public's hands! Do you really think that a thug who wants to keep his status in his peers' eyes is going to turn in his gun? While his rival carry's a semi automatic 15 clip pistol in his belt, and a AR-15 in his trunk?
If so, it is you who is not dealing with reality!

1

carcrazy 1 year, 7 months ago

Peggy Joy, your arguments lack any common sense. Do you even understand our Constitution and its amendments? Using your warped logic, our farmers would be back to using horses and oxen. As long as your brother is not harming anyone or commiting any crimes, he can have as many guns as he can afford. It's probably his hobby. And gun ownership is most definitely not just for "boys"!

0

prodigy9904 1 year, 7 months ago

PeggyJoy, educate yourself before you argue. The intent of the 2nd amendment was argued in 1788 before the first continental congress. "A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves...and include all men capable of bearing arms". "Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people". "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them." These and many more are direct quotes from our founding fathers. They clearly describe the intent of the 2nd Amendment as they wrote it. The founding fathers did not intend hunting or protection against our neighbors as thier justification for the 2nd amendment, rather protection from government its self. "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- (Thomas Jefferson)

0

goldlizard 1 year, 6 months ago

Again your an idiot. The Musket was the top of line military firearm at the time. Our founding fathers wanted to make sure that ordinary people could rise up and take care of a government that didn't do its job of representing the people. You would be considered a good NAZI Peggy during the late 20's and 30's. They thought the same way you did. The government would take care of them and knew what was best. Trust them...(Unless you were a Jew, Gypsie, etc...)

0

resers 1 year, 6 months ago

Well at the time they did have more than muskets and flint locks. They also had artillery (field cannons, garrison cannons, howitzers, mortars). Perhaps you should know of what you speak PeggyJoy? You might also read some of Madison's and Jefferson's letters. Not to mention Adams documents of the period. They were distrustful of government and felt the people needed to be able to defend themselves from government as well as others with ill intentions. Funny how those without a logical argument resort to name calling. Fools indeed.

1

mtnthc 1 year, 7 months ago

What is the big deal about the occasional massacre of people with assault weapons? Americans just can't get enough them and you know "freedom isn't free" after all.

0

chicoli 1 year, 7 months ago

The symbolism of arms or weapons is a deeply primitive and archaic one residing in the the most instinctive part of the brain. Conceptualy there is nothing noble or benevolent in the idea of weapons or "instruments" (an euphemism liked by the NRA) which main purpose is the killing of a living being. Bragging about the so call collecting, or hunting with arms is as childish as saying "mine is bigger than yours"--- or "I can pee further than you can". It is profoundly more intelectual to learn how to play a real instrument, the piano or a guitar; or to read Emerson's essays. By doing this one will use and develop the neocortex which is the the most advanced, noble part of the brain.

There are many of us who prefer to have the right NOT to bear arms and to be safe. In Canada, England or Germany, just to name 3, where gun control is sensible only 35 (average) people are killed yearly. In Japan is even less than that. In our country 35 people are killed daily. This statistic speaks volums in favor of sensible gun control. At a difference from the USA people feel safer in these countries, children are safer in these countries. Let's grow up!

0

barracuda 1 year, 7 months ago

1 question.... How can we have complete compliance in the gun confiscation? Only law abiding citizens will comply....

4

carcrazy 1 year, 7 months ago

paco1234, you weren't any good as a "practicing professional", and you consistently showed your disdain for rules and regulations, so I put no credibility in anything you preach about. The issue here is people control, not gun control.

1

barracuda 1 year, 7 months ago

Paco1234.... Still waiting for an answer to my question....

0

bobdad12 1 year, 6 months ago

missionman.... i understand gun control i understand the right to bare arms i do understand that bombs will be next on the scene, if we cant bare arms.will we be taking internet away next?a terrific place to to learn bomb making.....hum just a thought? what is right and what is wrong?these things are going to be argued forever.i believe people control,no unregistered guns,no criminal record of assaults nothing on your record,to own a gun.

0

barracuda 1 year, 6 months ago

I agree... How do we take away the guns from the "bad guys" that already have them? They seem to not worry about the laws that already make it illegal to have them own guns...

0

namvet60 1 year, 7 months ago

One question for paco - you have an individual or individuals gain entry into your casa - what would be your solution - "read them some Shakespeare" - Give me a break!

3

carcrazy 1 year, 7 months ago

paco is a professional psycho-babblist, he would definitely try to talk his way out of trouble.

1

namvet60 1 year, 7 months ago

That sounds about right but its the healing that takes the time and pain - happy therapy? Or if you make it out alive!

0

jkruchert 1 year, 7 months ago

To get ready for the Zombie Apocalypse of course! :)

1

chicoli 1 year, 7 months ago

Do I really want to respond to these chain of childish ( proves my point above), small talk, inconsequential rants fron these guys? NAAAH!!!!!! Well, maybe in the case of the malicious, slanderous comments from carcrazy, my lawyers could. Goodby!

0

namvet60 1 year, 7 months ago

Well we survived the end of the world (Mayan Calendar) :)

0

namvet60 1 year, 7 months ago

paco - your deranged comments that ramble on should probably be limited to a few words - garbage!

0

JnJRit07 1 year, 7 months ago

PeggyJoy, you speak of 1, gun, to be used for hunting? and when mentioned the words to our Second Amendment you respond with " Flintlock muskets and flintlock pistols. The right to bear arms would NOT have been included in the 2nd Amendment, if they had access to the type of weapons we have today. " i can respect your right Not to own a weapon, that is a Choice you made. But, as one Fool to another, if they had access to the type of weapons we have today, I would say it not only would still be in the 2nd Amendment but would not be quite as limited and would cover more in greater detail! you see the second Amendment was Not About Hunting, it was about the fact that they just finished (loosely said) fighting against a tyrannical government. one that lets its people go hungry while amassing its own wealth, overly taxed it's people to the point where they could no longer support there own families, and had enough of being Ruled by government that cared more for there own well being, and there own needs, then its people. and you think i am going to give up my Right to Bear Arms? Only a fool would suggest otherwise. Lastly, but more importantly I do Not want to Kill anything, that is Not what my Guns are for. My guns are to Protect My family, My friends, and My neighbors! in fact Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people then my guns! John Ritchie.

2

prodigy9904 1 year, 7 months ago

Peggy, educate yourself in the constution before you argue against it. Intent by our founding fathers is very clear regarding the 2nd amendment. "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present dayStrong, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that is good" (George Washington), "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armedStrong." (Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8), "A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves...and include all men capable of bearing arms." (Richard Henry Lee, Additional Letters from the Federal Farmer (1788) at 169), "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- (Thomas Jefferson)

These and many more were the arguements made to ratify the 2nd amendment. Peggy, consider yourself educated.

1

prodigy9904 1 year, 7 months ago

Gun ownership is not only a constitutional right, it is a constitutional responsibility.

1

PeggyJoy 1 year, 6 months ago

I've read ALL your comments. Unbelievable comments! Your ALL afraid of something, either other people or the government. Are you ALL insane! In fact, after reading all your comments, I certainly would not feel safe with any of you having a gun.

By the way............I was raised with a family of hunters. Each one of us kids took a gun safe course. So I know my way around guns, and you know what, there are very few people, that I actually feel safe around, when handling their guns; and especially people that seemed threaten by our government.

Oh, and you that believe you would or could actually shot/kill a person with your gun/guns. You would most likely freeze up, and then start shooting wildly around killing people you were trying to protect. Do you have any idea the adrenaline, that would be running through your veins, when you had someone point a gun at you. None of you. NOT ONE.

So get off your macho act, and grow the hell up.

0

barracuda 1 year, 6 months ago

PeggyJoy... I will ask you the same question(s) as I did above, "How can we have complete compliance in the gun confiscation? Wont only law abiding citizens will comply?" There are hundreds of thousands of these styles of guns in the publics hands. I ask this in all sincerity, and I am really interested in the answer, so If someone would please answer that question, I believe it might win some of us over.....

1

Questionall 1 year, 6 months ago

Peggy Joy ~ Can I ask where you have studied that you are able to identify that anyone who isn't agreeing with your point is "insane"? Or is this just a word that you regularly through out?

I also find it interesting that you know the personal stories of all these individuals and can say that NOT ONE would know the feeling of gun pointed at them. I myself have had a gun pointed at me by someone with a serious mental health issue. He was able to be talked down and tragedy was avoided. You are right, it is a life changer and not something that anyone should experience. However, it solidifies my feeling that I will not be a victim nor will I allow only criminals to have weapons while the masses obey laws. I have a constitutional right to own a gun. I have a legal and moral responsibility to ensure that it is safe and used responsibly. No one has anything to fear my any of my guns unless they are threatening my family or myself. I would rather have my gun for a hundred years and never use it, than to have one moment that I could have reacted to save someone.

You have the right to not own a gun. You have the right to not have a gun in your home. However, you do not have the right to tell me that I should give my firearms up. Mass shootings are a senseless tragedy, I feel deeply for the individuals affected. Don't make this into a situation where many are punished for the actions of the few. I feel gang ties and mental health issues need to be addressed for gun ownership - if this means a tax on ammunition or better screening process to identify issues, then lets work on that. The answer is not in taking guns away, but in finding ways to prevent tragedies. It could have easily been a bomb, made with easy to obtain ingredients and directions from a google search, under a school bus or inside the school that took so many innocents. Making accusations, calling people insane, or telling them to grow up when the opinion is different than yours only makes YOU look unhinged.

1

barracuda 1 year, 6 months ago

Just a couple of points...

1) The 16 year old boy who wanted to do mass killing in a school in California this week was using a pump shotgun.... This point was verified by all of the media and Sheriff's Dept. Pump shotguns are NOT on the list of to be banned guns... YET!

2) People don't seem to care that there is a much bigger killer that kills thousands worldwide EVERYDAY! It kills people individually and in multiples! A want to-be killer can use it to kill hundreds if so choosing.. Yet we get back into our Automobiles every day without a single thought! In those cars we have the power to do mass destruction to our fellow humans. We dont cry for a ban on cars... (yet)

GUNS DONT KILL ANYTHING! It is the idiot behind the trigger.. (or behind the steering wheel)

0

barracuda 1 year, 6 months ago

I am sorry for the font/color of this entry... I cant find out why this happened.. Sorry!

0

campbell_rd 1 year, 6 months ago

Here are a few famous quotes lest we get complacent:

‎"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government" -- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Men trained in arms from their infancy, and animated by the love of liberty, will afford neither a cheap or easy conquest. -- From the Declaration of the Continental Congress, July 1

"Taking my gun away because I might shoot someone is like cutting my tongue out because I might yell `Fire!' in a crowded theater." -- Peter Venetoklis

False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. -- Cesare Beccaria, as quoted by Thomas Jefferson's Commonplace book

0

namvet60 1 year, 6 months ago

I hate to jump on the beat up wagon but peggyjoy if this is your first attempt as amateur psychologist you failed miserably. Given a scenario - You go for a walk in the woods and are confronted by a carnivore (wolf, bear, mtn lion or bobcat) are you armed or unarmed? So if you are unarmed please leave a pre-trip plan so we know where to bring the bodybag to pick up the remains if they can be found - if you are armed - do you drop the gun and run - do you throw the gun at the carnivore - or do you shoot and then take a picture with your phone and go home and talk about it? Your major rant has really caused concern for your mental health!

0

pdywgn 1 year, 6 months ago

namvet 60: I have to disagree, peggyjoy has done a great job at her first attempt at psychologist. She is showing great signs of dysfunctional thought, disassociation with reality, can diagnose behaviors of people she has never met and she was capable of doing all of this with a gun safety course. Now compare that to paco 1234 and his years of education.

0

namvet60 1 year, 6 months ago

pdywgn :) I believe they both deserve a seat in the front row for excellence?

0

Sign in to comment

Click here to sign in
4 free views left!