Image 01 Image 03

Citizens Set October Gun Buying Record

Citizens Set October Gun Buying Record

2016 set to become biggest years for guns.

Citizens have set an October gun sales record by having the FBI process over 2.3 million background checks, meaning 2016 could become the biggest year ever for guns. Every month has set a record for the past 18 months.

The 2,333,539 checks through the National Instant Criminal Background Check (NICS) in October is 350,000 more than October 2015.

The 2.3 million checks is a 17% increase from September, which set its own record with around 2 million background checks.

NICS processed 23.1 million background checks in 2015. November and December only need 935,737 to beat that record:

With two months to go, 2016 has already seen 22,206,233 NICS checks, making it the second highest year for checks in the history of NICS with only 2015 seeing more.

NICS checks are considered to be one of the most accurate indicators for gun sales because nearly all sales made through federally licensed firearm dealers require a check by law. The number of NICS checks in a month do not represent an exact count of gun sales for a number of reasons. For instance, many states require a NICS checks for those applying for gun carry permits, and many states do not require NICS checks for sales between private parties.

“These statistics represent the number of firearm background checks initiated through the NICS,” the FBI said. “They do not represent the number of firearms sold. Based on varying state laws and purchase scenarios, a one-to-one correlation cannot be made between a firearm background check and a firearm sale.”

Smith & Wesson stated that the company’s “quarterly net sales climbed 40% versus the same period a year ago, citing strong consumer demand.” Outdoor retailer Cabela’s said the company saw “positive sales trends” in the gun department for items like ammunition and optics.

Retailers have also taken advantage of this election year, especially since Hillary Clinton may win. In September, Gander Mountain ran an election sale on firearms, ammunition, and accessories.

A month later, Westside Armory in Las Vegas ran a Pre-Hillary sale, encouraging people to purchase now because prices will probably go up if Hillary takes the White House.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Yep. Americans voting with their dollars.

It’s a beautiful thing to behold…!!!

Yep, before you bitterly cling, you have to buy.

If Hillary should win – the shelves will be cleared like grocery store bread before a big snowstorm.

Ayn Rand was wrong about a few things, but she was right about this: “If America collapses, your guns won’t help you.” I’ll take my changes anyway, though.

buckeyeminuteman | November 2, 2016 at 12:43 pm

I’m glad to have helped the cause!

Ok, it’s not a Glock or a 1911. But it is a pretty bitchin’ gun.

And who doesn’t need a double barreled 20 gauge pistol?


Was $815. Now $699. Get ’em while they’re hot.

I believe in the Hawken rifle, the flathead Ford, the K-Bar, the M-1 Garand, and my Creator.

And maybe the Pedersoli 20 guage pistol.

the other rob | November 2, 2016 at 1:28 pm

Another reason that NICS checks don’t correlate 1:1 with sales is that many of us are exempt from them. For example, my Texas License to Carry is an ATF approved document, so when I buy a gun from an FFL in TX, while I still fill out a form 4473, it just goes in a filing cabinet and never gets called in to NICS.

Henry Hawkins | November 2, 2016 at 4:20 pm

I bought a handgun and a rifle in 2016. Now my walk-in armory is full. Naw. I own eight handguns, rifles, and shotguns. Got a really nice set of pitchforks too, for hunting turkeys in the dark.

Bought a couple guns this year, but my latest purchase was night vision.
Awaiting delivery of ATN X-Sight II 3-14 Smart Riflescope due Friday. Coyotes in my hunting area should leave for safer deer areas immediately.

On a more somber note, especially for those younger folks who weren’t able to vote against bubba twice.
Article is kind of long, but she will follow through bubba’s attempt to kill off gun manufacturers.

Hillary really, really, wants to repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
The papers found in her husband’s presidential archives in Little Rock show why the lawsuits that the PLCAA stopped were so important to his anti-gun plans. A January 2000 question and answer document, probably meant to prepare Bill Clinton for a press conference, asks about his involvement in the lawsuits against the gun industry. It suggests as an answer that he “intends to engage the gun industry in negotiations” to “achieve meaningful reforms to the way the gun industry does business.”
This is noteworthy: the Clinton White House did not see the lawsuits’ purpose as winning money, but as a means to pressure the gun industry into adopting the Clinton “reforms.” What might those reforms have been?
The terms were extensive and drastic:

Gun manufacturers must stop producing firearms (rifle, pistol, or shotguns) that could accept detachable magazines holding more than ten rounds. In practice, since there is no way to design a detachable-magazine firearm that cannot take larger magazines, this would mean ceasing production of all firearms with detachable magazines. No more semiauto handguns.

The manufacturers would be required to stop production of magazines holding more than ten rounds.

Manufacturers must also stop production of firearms with polymer frames. All handguns made must meet importation standards (long barrels, target sights, etc.).

After five years, manufacturers must produce nothing but “smart guns” (that is, using “authorized user technology”).

But those conditions were just the beginning. The next requirement was the key to regulating all licensed firearms dealers, as well. The manufacturers must agree to sell only to distributors and dealers who agreed to comply with the standards set for distributors and dealers. Thus dealers would were not parties to the lawsuits would be forced to comply, upon pain of being unable to buy inventory.

The dealers in turn must agree:

They’d make no sales at gun shows, and no sales over internet.

They’d hold their customers to one-gun-a-month, for all types of guns, not just handguns.

They would not sell used or new magazines holding more than ten rounds.

They would not sell any firearm that fell within the definitions of the 1994 “assault weapon ban,” even if the ban expired.

They must prove they have a minimum inventory of each manufacturers’ product, and that they derive a majority of their revenue from firearms or sporting equipment sales. No more small town hardware store dealers, and no more WalMarts with gun sections.

The manufacturers would be required to pay for a “monitor,” a person to make sure the settlement was enforced. The monitor would create a “sales data clearinghouse,” to which the manufacturers, distributors, and dealers must report each gun sale, thus creating a registration system, outside of the government and thus not covered by the Privacy Act.

The monitor would have the authority to hire investigators, inspect dealer records without notice, and to “conduct undercover sting operations.” The monitor would thus serve as a private BATFE, without the legal restrictions that bind that agency, and paid for by the gun industry itself.

The manufacturers must cut off any dealer who failed to comply, and whenever BATFE traced a gun to a dealer, the dealer would be presumed guilty unless he could prove himself innocent. (BATFE encourages police departments to trace every firearm that comes into their hands, including firearms turned in, lost and found, and recovered from thieves. As a result, it performs over 300,000 traces a year. Thus, this term would lead to many dealers being cut off and forced to prove their innocence on a regular basis).
Bill Clinton knew he had the gun manufacturers on the ropes: the legal costs merely of defending the lawsuits were enormous. If, in addition, just one of the suits succeeded (and many suits had carefully been brought before known anti-gun judges), manufacturers would be filing for bankruptcy.

    Old0311 in reply to 4fun. | November 2, 2016 at 5:44 pm

    The British owned S&W bit the dust for bowing down.

      the other rob in reply to Old0311. | November 2, 2016 at 6:57 pm

      Yes, I still have a (possibly irrational) prejudice against S&W, over that.

      Which I really should get over, as they make the only handgun in a larger caliber than my Deagle.

I never was a fan of the M9

“Less than two weeks after gunmaker Beretta beat feet out of Maryland following the state’s adoption of restrictive gun laws”

Or the Model 700. (Big fan of the M870)

“Remington Arms has called Ilion, N.Y., home since its founding in 1816, employing some 1,200 people in the process, but when it builds a new manufacturing facility with some 2,000 new jobs it won’t be in the Empire State where they’re created, but rather the Heart of Dixie, Alabama, that will reap the bounty.

Such moves are becoming commonplace now. In the wake of the Sandy Hook school shooting, a number of states moved to restrict the ownership or manufacture of firearms. Colorado, for example, adopted a set of laws that, among other things, made it illegal to sell magazines that hold more than 15 rounds. In addition to the recall of two state legislators who voted in favor of the laws, it also had the effect of causing the respected Magpul Industries to leave the state for Texas. PTR Industries left Connecticut for South Carolina, Kahr Firearms abandoned New York for Pennsylvania, and Stag Arms has said it will expand outside Connecticut.”

But I’m more than willing to take a second look.

I used to favor Ceska Zbrojovka. Maybe I was wrong. No, I don’t think I was wrong.

But Remington has earned my business, once again.

This is why you never wait til the last minute to buy weapons and ammo.

I like my Hi point 9 mm , its cheap , it goes bang everytime , and when you run out of ammo , it is heavy enough to take out most people with a well positioned throw.