Gun Sales And Permit Applications Soar In Metro Atlanta

Drudge has a link to an AJC story about gun sales and concealed carry permit applications have increased since the tragedy in Newtown, CT. It’s not all that surprising with all the talk of gun control legislation (and, who knows, maybe an executive order or 20 from President Obama). Not to mention, a Senator from California who has previously stated that she would’ve pushed to ban all guns but didn’t have the votes. In addition to that, you have lawmakers across the country talking of publishing names and addresses of permit holders and just outright confiscating guns that the government (because they know better than you) deems as “dangerous” for responsible citizens.

I know the probate court’s office in my county has been busy with permit requests, and I’m sure it’s a similar story in other counties. What happened in Newtown, CT was horrible. The families and the town have been permanently scarred by this tragedy. However, I don’t believe that gun control laws would have prevented this. The shooter violated the law once he came on campus with a gun. He was a demented criminal. I don’t believe the systematic disarmament of citizens will prevent criminals from committing violent crimes. Perhaps we should consider how many lives would have been saved if there was a teacher or administrator on campus who access to a gun and was properly trained on how to respond to a gunman on campus. No doubt legislation will come about to address this issue in the upcoming session of the General Assembly.


  1. seekingtounderstand says:

    Would like to talk about the politics of this issue.
    Is it a stick issue to take the media off other issues/investigation? Common sense says it will not prevent deaths from crazy people bent on harm.
    No one would use the death of children for politics but yet as an independent voter you get a throw up response when you here them talk of gun control under the theme of protecting human life..
    My first response is “this from the democrats who rally for abortions” and “whom use drones on innocent people frequently in the name of war”? By the way the FHA law allowing drones to hit our air waves starts this year…………….thousands in the air?
    Using the death of children to gain political points and beat up the other side by demeaning name calling?

    • mountainpass says:

      What I can’t understand is how the 2A became a politcial issue to begin with? How can the same politicians swear an oath to the constitution against enemies foreign and domestic then want any law against a constitutional right?

      • seekingtounderstand says:

        That was good point mountainpass. The folks who blog here are smart and they could do a service by educating the rest of us on the politics of issues like this. Charlie this would make a great topic.

    • Jackster says:

      So from a firearm perspective with your drone point, would a surface to air (like a stinger) missile launcher need a permit? I mean that’s the only way you’ll bring one down besides a focused EMP.

    • ieee says:

      “No one would use the death of children for politics” …. of course they would and politicians do all the time. That is the basis of the “SEX OFFENDER” Registries and laws.

      Politicians have *already* used this exact shooting to call for support of new laws that will restrict people listed on a SEX OFFENDER Registry from living near schools. When it comes to “SEX OFFENDER” BS, few people have any shame.

    • seekingtounderstand says:

      Politics of Gun Control and who stands to profit off law changes.
      Ex: Al Gore made millions off climate change.
      Who profits off gun control……………….insurance industries, information gathering companies, revenue for federal government. If you follow the money who would profit?

  2. ieee says:

    I’m not sure what to think about public Registries of the people who own guns. Everyone seems to think they have a “right” to know about neighbors who *could* do them harm so that seems to fit somewhat.

    But the real question really is why are there no Registries of people who have been convicted of crimes that involved guns? There is absolutely no way at all that the SEX OFFENDER Registries can be justified without “gun convict” Registries existing also.

    Right here in our own great state we restrict people listed on the panacea SEX OFFENDER Registry from living near schools, parks, here, there, and wherever. How can we possibly not do the same for people who have shot other people?! It makes a person think that all that talk about the Registries being for “public safety” and “protecting children” are really nothing but a bunch of outrageous lies that are really just a mask for hatred. One thing that is true is that the people who actually know and are serious about protecting people do not support Registries because they know that not only do they not do that, but they are actually counterproductive and cause more of the crimes that they are supposed to prevent.

    • saltycracker says:

      While you are threadjacking with your favorite subject – the sex registry would not be necessary if enough folks were armed to shoot the pedophile dead right on the spot.

      • ieee says:

        Don’t accuse me of threadjacking just because you don’t like the message. Gun wacks need to be controlled. Your shallow, unthinking “shoot pedophiles” comment proved that you are probably one of the ones who needs to be controlled.

        There is no excuse that Registries of gun offenders were not created over a decade ago by every state in the U.S. and there should be federal laws today that standardize those Registries and require them. The mention of the SEX OFFENDER Registries is simply to prove that point.

        And what the heck, since we all love laws so much and can’t mind our own business, I’ll go further. People who own guns are a billion times more likely to harm someone with a gun than people who don’t. Therefore, they are more dangerous. I deserve to know who around me is dangerous. I deserve to be kept informed by our nanny governments of people near me who have guns. My children deserve to be safe from gun owners. My children should not be in neighbors’ homes who own guns.

        Guns should be nowhere near children at schools, parks, etc. so people who own them should not live near those places. Certainly people who have shot other people should not live or be near those places.

        It’s just common sense.

        • political arsonist says:

          When a firearm is used during a crime, it is a FELONY. A Felon can no longer have a gun. What part of that do you not get?

          People who buy guns legally, are not dangerous. Ignortant people like you are dangerous.

          • ieee says:

            “When a firearm is used during a crime, it is a FELONY. A Felon can no longer have a gun.” Okay, so do you have a point? Is there some reason those people should not be Registered, forced to live and work away from schools, parks, etc., and forced to visit their local criminal government offices many times per year? And of course, it only makes sense that there would be many, many more restrictions/harassments/punishments, with more added each year.

            “People who buy guns legally, are not dangerous.” Gosh, do you suppose that’s a completely inaccurate, sweeping generalization?

        • jiminga says:

          “People who own guns are a billion times more likely to harm someone with a gun than people who don’t.” It must have taken a lot of deep thought to come up with that. And people who carry rocks in their pockets are far more likely to use them in self defense.

          “I deserve to know who around me is dangerous. I deserve to be kept informed by our nanny governments of people near me who have guns.” Hmmmmm…you probably are unaware that more people are killed each year by hammers and clubs than rifles. So let’s have our nanny government inform you of all those owning hammers and baseball bats, which are also assault weapons. Please turn in your tool box to the local authorities.

          “It’s just common sense.” Proof that common sense ain’t so common.

          • seekingtounderstand says:

            Lets face it our society is on its way to registries for everything in the name of lowering healthcare costs or in the name of protecting people.
            STD’s or AID’s Registry
            Had and Abortion Registry
            Gambling Problem
            Color your Hair with chemicals Registry (causes cancer)
            Information to be sold and used for profit

          • ieee says:

            I said much of that facetiously and parroting the “justifications” that people have for the SEX OFFENDER Registries. People feel like they have a “right” to know X, Y, and Z about their “neighbors” and they need nanny governments to tell it to them. They also feel like they have a “right” to create a group of people that they can then treat as one homogenous class and apply more and more laws/harassment to just that group of people. So, we should be able to do that to gun owners.

            Additionally, after reading some of the comments here from people that are apparently gun nuts where they have said they believe it is okay to murder and shoot people, I did come to realize that I would like my nanny governments to Register gun owners. I would like to be able to access all of the relevant information online, including photos. I don’t need to have my children around those people and my nanny governments should be helping me raise my children. If we are going to have nanny governments, I am going to support them harassing anyone and everyone. Remember, if it saves one child, it’s worth it.

            Unfortunately, I can’t imagine that type of gun owner Registry will ever come about. But, I know that everyone supports Registering gun offenders. So why do we not have those Registries? When can we expect those to be created? There are no excuses not to get that done this year.

            • “They also feel like they have a “right” to create a group of people that they can then treat as one homogenous class and apply more and more laws/harassment to just that group of people. So, we should be able to do that to gun owners.”

              There is a huge gap here in your logic. Guns are optional; anatomy (typically) isn’t. Someone who commits a felony with a gun is no longer allowed to own one. Are you suggesting that if we perhaps castrate the sex offender that we can take them off the sex offender registry? You see, a sex offender is using their own body to commit the crime whereas the other criminal was using a tool improperly. Is castration the answer? What about female sex offenders and those committing other sexual related offenses not involving a tool of any sort?

              • ieee says:

                I might not have been clear but I don’t follow what you are saying.

                The SEX OFFENDER Registries are useless for all intents and purposes of preventing sex crimes, so it doesn’t matter if we put anyone on there or not.

                However, if we are going to have SEX OFFENDER Registries, there are no legitimate excuses to not have Registries of gun offenders (people who have committed a crime with a gun). It doesn’t matter in any way if those people are “allowed” to own guns any longer or not. They are people who are more dangerous than 95% of the people on the SEX OFFENDER Registries (and the other 5% would use guns).

                Unrelated to all of the above is, should we Register all legal gun owners (That would not be the same Registry as the “gun offenders” Registry)? And I’m saying that if we need nanny governments to take care of all of us, then sure, why not?

                I personally believe that a healthy percentage of legal gun owners are more dangerous to my children than most of the people who are listed on SEX OFFENDER Registries. The children of *good* parents are pretty safe from just about all “SEX OFFENDERS”. Do you know why? Because child molesters nearly always, always groom their victims. It is fairly easy to prevent. Gun owners who carelessly leave their guns around their homes … that’s not so easy to deal with. Or how about gun owners who like to drink and shoot?

        • elfiii says:

          Guns are all around you and your children all day long ieee. The lady behind you in the check out lane at the Publix has a CCW license and is sporting a handsome Kimber Classic in .40 cal in her purse. The guy at the gas pump next to you has a Colt 1911 .45ACP sitting in the console of his SUV and it’s cocked, locked and ready to rock. The young mom in the park who’s kids are playing with your kids on the jungle gym has a classic Walther PPK in .380 tucked in the pocket of her parka. How insouciant of her to sit there and have a normal conversation with you like nothing is wrong and all the time she is packing heat. In a park! Near your kids!

          The one thing they all have in common is they are normal, well adjusted, law abiding citizens who choose to exercise the full pantheon of civil rights and they refuse to be a victim of a “SEX OFFENDER” or some other dirt bag criminal who richly deserves two in the head and one in the chest the moment they commit their next violent felony against persons.

          “Guns cause crime like flies cause garbage” 😉

    • political arsonist says:

      Unlike SEX Offenders, Gun owners are not criminals. If you want a list of Felons, fine but not legal gun owners.

      • Personally, it doesn’t matter to me if people know I’m a gun owner. We’ve even got a sign posted at the farm “Forget the dog, beware of owner” that has a picture of a gun. I’ve got a Glock sticker on one truck and a Georgia Carry sticker on the other. There’s a reason that criminals target gun free zones. I’m happy to inform them that my property is not a gun free zone which will hopefully encourage them to move along elsewhere. 🙂

  3. saltycracker says:

    Haven’t checked the prices lately but a deputy told me this week that gun prices at the shows have jumped dramatically. Yes, it must be a great time to be a gun dealer. Might want to wait until some of the emotion dies down & inventories get back before adding to the collection !

    • mountainpass says:

      Folks are paying 2-5 times more, but it is simply supply and demand at work pure and simple.

      I have never seen anything like it. O is by far the best gun seller ever.

    • political arsonist says:

      AR prices are up but mostly by private sellers. Gun stores are out! Every dealer in America is looking for ARs and high cap magazines and all the distributors are sold out. It did not help that this happened at the end of the year when most manufatures and business are slowing down and taking off.

        • political arsonist says:

          What bait? People are buying what they think this gun-grabbing admin has threatened to take.

          • jbgotcha says:

            Which they haven’t even done yet, and will take a lot of time to do. The panic is as fake as the panic surrounding the “fiscal cliff.” Go ahead and pay 200% more than you normally would for a big ol’ gun. Sounds like a bad investment if you ask me.

            • political arsonist says:

              Yet being the key word. Obama has said he wanted it this month. Once it is done people won’t have a chance to get it so they are buying what they can now.
              Good gun stores are not doubling their prices, individuals are. Like I said before, gun store are out and so are the distributors.

              • jbgotcha says:

                And people are still misinformed, scared, and are willing to pay a ton of money for a false sense of security.

                • political arsonist says:

                  Guess what? If you don’t want it or if you think the price is too high, you don’t have to buy it.
                  What are we missed informed about? The anti-gun crowd, including Obama, are making their wish list. That is fact.

                  • jbgotcha says:

                    I’m not buying it, but I feel sorry for people who don’t realize they are being duped into spending more money than they should. I wouldn’t call gun control advocates “anti-gun” either. They want to have a reasonable discussion about guns and gun violence with the possibility of additional protections for every day citizens and accountability for gun owners. The world we live in operates in such extremes. There always HAS to be a bad guy or boogeyman. Don’t believe the hype.

                    • political arsonist says:

                      Reasonable? Reasonable is blame the criminal not the gun. Reasonable is recognising that there are millions of gun owners that have never used them for harm.

                    • elfiii says:

                      @jbgotcha “I’m not buying it, but I feel sorry for people who don’t realize they are being duped into spending more money than they should. I wouldn’t call gun control advocates “anti-gun” either. They want to have a reasonable discussion about guns and gun violence with the possibility of additional protections for every day citizens and accountability for gun owners. The world we live in operates in such extremes. There always HAS to be a bad guy or boogeyman. Don’t believe the hype.”

                      You are as lost as a year old Easter Egg boy.

                • seenbetrdayz says:

                  Wait a sec . . .

                  Surely you aren’t suggesting that defending yourself is a ‘false sense of security’ but awaiting help from someone else to defend you is somehow safer?

                  To me, a false sense of security is the situation in Britain where they have about 1 CCTV camera for every 14 citizens. Sure, they catch crimes on film, but usually it isn’t enough to stop a youth gang from beating up an elderly person. All it does is give prosecutors a video to look at after the fact.

                  This gun-buy scare came about directly from the way the administration has handled press releases since the Sandy Hook shooting occurred. If you feel disgusted about the profits of the gun industry right now, maybe we should tell Sen. Feinstein to shut her mouth. Right now, she’s the best spokesman for firearms manufacturers.

                  • jbgotcha says:

                    Most people aren’t in a position of having to “defend themselves” from anything. They are paranoid about the POTENTIAL of having to defend themselves.

                    • seenbetrdayz says:

                      I don’t think being paranoid is defined as being worried that a few people might cause a crime, and therefore it is wise to be armed.

                      I think the definition of paranoia is being worried that because a few people might cause a crime, we should restrict the rights of 80,000,000 gun owners.

                      Who’s really being paranoid in this case? (I think you own that one.)

                      We can’t abandon freedoms every time a crisis happens, but at the rate this country is heading, we aren’t going to have much left. PATRIOT ACT, TSA, drone surveillance, no-knock warrants, etc etc etc. Paranoia is locking up thousands of Japanese on the U.S. mainland after the Pearl Harbor attack.

                      The only non-paranoid people in this situation are the ones who aren’t scared into giving up on freedom just because of unfortunate events.

    • Daddy Got A Gun says:

      Prices have tripled at least. Mags that you could have bought for $13 to $15 are now going for $40 to $50. Stripped AR lowers (that’s the gun part for ATF purposes) were selling for $80 to $150 are now $250 and higher. From a high level, it seems prices are starting to come down.

      I don’t think the gun stores are making as much money as it appears on the surface. They have no inventory to sell so they aren’t making any money. If they aren’t resupplied soon, I could see a bunch of them going under.

      I’m hoping the low inventories is due to the lack of ordering inventory because of the holidays and SHOT show (the industry trade show next week).

      • IndyInjun says:

        The AR-15 equivalents, like the Sig M400, that could be had for $600 6 months ago, are now $1850 to $2450, depending on how they are rigged out.

        Ammunition has pretty much doubled for the 5.56.

  4. Daddy Got A Gun says:

    Since this is a Georgia focused blog, we should point out that Georgia has a big opportunity to save the Second Amendment. If Georgia passes a strong pro-gun bill that includes protections against gun confiscation and registration and repeal of all of the gun-free zones, it will send a warning shot to Washington DC that the citizens won’t sit by as the Bill of Rights is shredded and will counter PR efforts by the Governors and Legislatures in CT and NY.

    • Ed says:

      If anyone is worried about Obama doing something drastic with guns…don’t be. He’s put Biden in charge of his gun task force which essentially means nothing will get done.

        • Ed says:

          Yes but it shows Obama isn’t serious about actually getting stuff done. Just the rumors I’ve heard about how the BHO WH works…

      • jiminga says:

        Biden’s task force is a smoke screen that will announce a result that’s already been decided. Obama has famously said he wants to change America, and making it into another Europe is his goal. He is an idealist and is incapable of governing.

  5. jiminga says:

    As I’ve posted elsewhere, the murder of 20 innocent children in Newtown defies comprehension. But Planned Parenthood murders 20 innocent children EVERY HALF HOUR OF EVERY DAY. Where is the liberal outrage about that? It seems some mass murders are more acceptable than others to a liberal.

  6. seenbetrdayz says:

    New details, 911 audio released of the Walker County home invasion where mother saves herself and 2 twins

    ABC News:

    The guy had every chance to snatch up a TV set or computer or what not before turning around and leaving the house. He was actively making his way through locked doors in the house to get to where the mother and children were hiding.

    This is why you don’t assume that if you just ‘play dead’ or ‘hide’ or whatever nonsense we hear about how to handle these situations, that it resolve itself and out comes unicorns and rainbows. This incident could have very well ended up with the victims hurt or killed.

    • seenbetrdayz says:

      Note that the guy got a whopping 6 months for battery the previous year. I’d like to know who the judge is who set that one up, so that I could drop a donation for his/her opponent.

      • jbgotcha says:

        Battery is a misdemeanor. In my experience, most battery cases end in pretrial diversion, a slap on the wrist, or time served. In other words, 6 months is pretty good for a battery charge.

Comments are closed.