Gun sales have remained strong during the Trump era. Through the end of May, 2018 is trending to be the second highest year on record. The NICS checks through May of 2018 are 97% of those of 2016. Political writers and gun industry writers, and those who are both, have speculated that politics have been the major driver of guns sales for the last decade. The latest Rassmussen poll shows evidence of a deeper reason people would fear to be disarmed. From rasmussenreports.com:
Thirty-one percent (31%) of Likely U.S. Voters say it’s likely that the United States will experience a second civil war sometime in the next five years, with 11% who say it’s Very Likely. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 59% consider a second civil war unlikely, but that includes only 29% who say it’s Not At All Likely. (To see survey question wording, click here.)If you are concerned that a second civil war could break out, many would not wish to be unarmed. Conversely, one could very well wish for the opposition to be disarmed.
Democrats (37%) are more fearful than Republicans (32%) and voters not affiliated with either major party (26%) that a second civil war is at hand.
But 59% of all voters are concerned that those opposed to President Trump’s policies will resort to violence, with 33% who are Very Concerned. This compares to 53% and 28% respectively in the spring of Obama’s second year in office. Thirty-seven percent (37%) don’t share that concern, including 16% who are Not At All Concerned.
This dynamic plays well for the soaring gun sales during the Obama administration and the strong sales during the Trump era so far. Most Constitutionalists, Second Amendment supporters, and Trump supporters (with lots of overlap) already see the opposition of Leftists, Progressives, or Socialists/Communists, take your pick of titles, as being disarmed. On the other hand the Hillary supporters now see a significant reason to be armed themselves.
The Rassmussen poll shows 37% of Democrats are fearful, while only 32% of Republicans are. The smallest number is of Independents, at 28%.
31% of the electorate is a huge number to think civil war likely or very likely. I do not count my self among that number.
But the possibility of armed conflict in the United States is a reality. A good article on the chance of a nationwide violent revolution in the United states, as 37% in a lifetime.
The math presented by BJ Cambell is persuasive. From Medium.com:
Stepping through this, the average year for colony establishment is 1678, which is 340 years ago. Two qualifying events in 340 years is a 0.5882% annual chance of nationwide violent revolution against the ruling government. Do the same math as we did above with the floodplains, in precisely the same way, and we see a 37% chance that any American of average life expectancy will experience at least one nationwide violent revolution.The U.S. has been one of the most politically stable places on the planet. Almost everywhere else, the odds are much, much worse.
If you believe civil war is likely within five years, why wouldn't you want to own an AR-15, a pistol or two, and plenty of ammunition?
©2018 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
A major reason gun sales remain strong: Washington D.C. and the people in it.
ReplyDeleteAnother reason gun sales remain strong: Many other American cities,and the people in them.
I HAVE BEEN TO WAR I DON'T WANT TO SEE WAR ON AMERICAN SOIL, but but but if THE LIBERAL COMMUNISTS IN THIS COUNTRY KEEP PUSHING THEIR SOCIALIST AGENDA AND CONTINUE THE VIOLENT ATTACKS ON CONSERVATIVES, THEN MY LAST 15 YEARS OF PREPARATION WILL PAY OFF AND I WILL BE HAPPY TO PROVE TO THE TRASH WHAT WAR IS LIKE. DEMOCRAPS HAVE USED MINORITIES FOR MANY DECADES. THE MORE THEY CAN CREATE DEVICIVENESS AND UN REST AND GET MORE IEGALS INTO THIS COUNTRY FOR THEIR ARMY THE STRONGER THEY THINK THEY ARE. 30 MILLION VETERANS ARE A FAR BETTER ARMY THAN 50 MILLION LIBRALS. ANTIFA MAY BE REALLY GOOD AT DESTROYING PROPERY BUT VETERANS ARE BETTER AT BLOWING THE HADS OFF OF COMMUNISTS. WE DON'T EMPTY A MAGAZINE AND HIT NOTHING. THE FIRES WE START WILL BE FOR BURING DEAD BODIES. If THEY WANT A WAR BRING IT ON, I HAVE A BIG PILE OF MATCHES. MY PILE OF MATCHES IS FAR SMALLER THAN MY PILE OF AMMO.
ReplyDeletePut into context, here is a "List of incidents of civil unrest in the United States."
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States
As you can tell from the list, Americans always seem to be cutting up rough somewhere. And yet it has almost never resulted in even regional insurrection, much less civil war.
Add to this that the Supreme Court has decided that federal courts have supremacy over state courts, and congress has supremacy over state legislatures. But it has never found that the President has supremacy over state governors. So the biggest chance for conflict is between the President and a governor, the governor calling out his national guard, and the President sending in the Army.
Other than this, there is very little possibility that the political left could create, arm or manage a group of fighters with any staying power, against almost anyone: the Army, the state national guard, the state police, local police or even the citizenry. Of these, their worst opponents would be the citizenry, as they would have no obligation to try and arrest.
No so. The president has the authority to take the national guard of every state to use as necessary, and by presidential authority the president can command a governor. for the governor to refuse to comply is insurrection. whom ever wrote the above comment needs to do some more in depth study of the constitution because he sure has no understanding of the constitution and federal authority. Worthless opinions are not constitutional law.
ReplyDelete