• #3
    it 1 thing the libs will never admit, Clinton is responsible for the majority of people who rushed out and bought AK 47 an AR fifteens. like anything else when the government says you're not going to be allowed to buy something most people run out and buy a couple of them. the same thing is happening right now. in the next few months there will be more AR 15 sold then have been sold in the last 5 years. and that's okay the more the merrier
  • #16
    @bsking LOL!, I'm talk about personal weapons not supplying a whole army. Like drainage pipe capped at both ends.
  • R Load more replies

  • #2
    I'd say to remain privately owned. Stocks rise and fall for many reasons. Sometimes sales, sometimes because the people who own your stock want to "distance" themselves from your company (stock dump). Knowing that people are "knee jerkers", I suspect it was the latter, as I know I just purchased a 2nd gun before the "knee jerkers" try to stop (or make more difficult) the sales of them!
  • #4
    yeah stock dump shows which people have more faith in government shutting down legitimate business. but I think I missed the point on this 1. if there was 300,000,000 Guns and circulation last week 6 months from now they'll be 400,000,000.
  • #7
    @bsking Stock dumps have a tendency to bring price of stock down, like flooding the market with a product does (but hey, I'm not the brightest light buld in the
  • #8
    @bsking Nah, always figured when the zombie Apocalypse hits, I'll just pry a couple out of the dead hands of the one who panic. Besides, I was trained in hand to hand, so there are a 1000 ways I can hurt/kill......lmao
  • #11
    @stepped_in_it I used to tell people I stop carrying a knife what I learned how to kill with my bare hands...
  • R Load more replies

  • #49
    Now is the time to BUY! Business is going to boom if they keep shouting about banning or restricting guns! Wish I had enough money to buy some stocks with.:-(
  • #48
    they are panicking, over the possible effect of gun laws and restrictions. which does not reflect, the attitudes of gun purchases.;
  • #43
    All it means is that guns are not very popular today with Wall St. investors. For those who don't have time to pay attention to such things, stock brokers and investment company executives are all human beings, subject to the same emotional responses to terrible tragedies as the rest of us. Even the weather affects trade. If you want to know how the market will do tomorrow, barring any earth-shattering news, just look at the weather report for New York City, then watch the numbers go up and down accordingly. It ain't rocket science.
  • #41
    I never buy stocks from military contractirs, nuclear utilities, alcohol, tobacco and firearms. Plenty of other good stocks to make money in. But as to your general point, that is my philosophy as well, esp. with dividend yeiding blue chips, utilities, etc. And though i won't buy these companies the reaction when legislation gets serious is gonna be an uptick in gun sales...
  • #30
    This is highly conflicting with a news story I just heard. It claimed that business was booming because people are worried Obama will take away their right to defend themselves.
  • #28
    Not a thing. The Hoplophobic propagandists are now trying to attack guns through the financial avenue.

    Why would what this fair tale is alleging happen?

    People who OWN Smith and Wesson stock are going to shoot themselves in the foot (pun intended) and take a financial loss to protest? Ridiculous!

    Added to the the stupidity of that concept... people buy and sell stocks as a means of making money, you buy low and sell high. Traditionally when something like this CRIME happens, the hoplophobic professional politicians like Diane Feinstein jump up in hopes of using the blood of the victims to grease the skids of their political aspirations with silly legislation like bans and added restrictions.

    Gun owners usually BUY MORE GUNS to assure that the stupid new laws don't effect them.

    People BUYING MORE GUNS means added sales for Smith and Wesson which translates to dividends for share holders.

    I'm NOT Charles Schwab so I have no idea why Smith and Wesson Stock dropped but my guess is it will recover and continue to grow. I am absolutely positive that we WON'T read about that. It doesn't suit the agenda of the writer and biased media's purpose.
  • #22
    I wouldn't hold my breath. With the way ammo prices have risen and some configurations are in short supply, I'm thinking about loading my own.
  • #24
    @Thunderchicken I thought maybe it be like a going out of business sale, in case they manage to stop or restrict the selling of guns.
  • #6
    Somewhat odd thing going on here. The investors seem to be turning away from the stock yet the companies themselves are still selling and operating at record levels. Seems like a recipe for companies to take themselves private again. I expect that the onslaught on new gun regulations that may be coming from the federal and state level is going to push manufacturing and sales through the roof. Surely this is a scenario the gun control crowed doesn't want but is a side effect of their efforts. I think they need to decide if there goal is to reduce guns or if they goal is to reduce mass shootings. I think they believe they are one in the same but that line of thinking is flawed. The reason I believe this approach is flawed is because:
    1. It is the only idea they seem to have.
    2. Gun control offers no plan to deal with the guns particularly assault weapons that are already out there. You not much of a realist if you think people are simply going to hand those guns over freely and without compensation. They aren't cheap items.
    3. Gun control doesn't deal with eliminating the knowledge of converting non assault weapons into assault weapons. Its not rocket science and information is available to anyone with just a few clicks of a mouse.
    4. Focusing on a banning particular type of gun or the number of rounds it cane shoot is a specious argument. To ignore the fact that selective banning of anything has almost a 100% failure rate with anything else means that your are simply thinking emotionally and not logically. Example of this is putting Sudafed behind the counter to curb meth production. All this did was make it difficult for those with allergies to get Sudafed and meth production is still at an all time high.
    5. The biggest problem with gun control is that it doesn't address the motive and reason for committing the crime. All the control in the world doesn't deal with what makes people do it in the first place. Someone who is motivated will find a way and until you find a way to address that, nothing is going to work that will yield real and measurable results.
    6. Like it or not agree or not guns are a constitutional right.
  • #50
    Right now there is an overreaction. We need to look at the long term effects. If an assault weapon ban takes place, fewer new guns will be manufactured and sold down the road. Won't that help keep guns out of the hands of criminals (again, down the road, after the gun owner sells the weapons or passes away)?
  • #40
    CORRECTION: the sub-headline should read...

    "Smith & Wesson, Sturm, Ruger & Co. facing fallout after President and Democrat Party declare their intent to ram through gun control legislation
  • #33
    Since so many value their "right" to have what are essentially mini WMDS (assault rifles and high capacity clips) over the lives of children we will see no improvement on our gun laws. If you don't value morality in the companies you own stock in now would be a smart time to buy gun maker stock.
  • R Load more comments...