Nothing Like a Massacre: Gun Sales Soar After Tuscon Shootings

Gun shops are reporting near record sales after the massacre in Tuscon, particularly of the Glock semi-automatic pistol used by Jared Loughner, 22.

The $499 semi-automatic pistols are “flying out the doors of his Glockmeister stores in Mesa and Phoenix.” The Glock 19 made in Deutsch-Wagram, Austria appears to have impressive many with its capabilities in mowing down the congresswomen and crowd in Tuscan. While many of us were recoiling in horror, a sizable number of people were apparently saying “Wow, I’ve got to get me one of those!”

The article below reports increases in sales across the country. The highest jumps strangely appears to be in Ohio. Notably, gun sales also jumped after the Virginia Tech massacre.

Source: Bloomberg

38 thoughts on “Nothing Like a Massacre: Gun Sales Soar After Tuscon Shootings”

  1. Jill,

    I cannot take credit for the photo but also was drawn to it and had saved it some time ago. It’s a much calmer and more natural puzzle than the world around us, that’s for sure. I do not know the creator. Perhaps online search will offer us that feature not long from now?

  2. These gun buyers are like sheep or maybe lemmings. First, they bought more guns when the NRA and the Right scared them that Obama was going to steal their guns. Now they are buying more guns because they are afraid that there will be a backlash of restrictions after this tragedy. Secondly, how many guns does one need to allay their unreasonable fears? Are they afraid that the enhanced magazines will be outlawed and they won’t be able to shoot 33 bullets without reloading? Are they afraid that congress will reinstitute the Assault Weapons ban? I for one hope that their fear is real, but I do not see Congress actually doing anything to protect normal Americans from gun toting nutjobs. They may do something about protecting Congress, but that is another story.
    rcampbell and Frank, well said!

  3. puzzling,

    “Two warmongering parties are framing an entirely false debate, they lionize our violent government and those within it and take turns stripping rights from the population month by month.”

    This is a very profound statement. This is exactly what is happening. We have to reject this violence in all it’s forms. I’m scared of how this will end also. I hope there’s time to turn it around, but I’m not confident of that.

    BTW, Did you take the photo in the box next to your name? It is truly beautiful!

  4. Jill,

    Powerfully stated.

    When this event first happened, I too briefly called out the disconnect between our violent foreign actions and the panic that results when a tiny fraction of that violence happens within our borders.

    We have taken the lives of thousands of children in illegal wars over the last decade and the American public is virtually silent. Later in the thread I wrote:

    At our hands thousands of unseen children have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, although sometimes we simply call them insurgents and pretend we are a force for great good in the world.

    I linked to the Narang night raid of 2009 which killed 10 school children, something that few even knew about or would recall.

    As you mention, we are broadening multipole wars and terrorizing part of Pakistan’s population with continuous drone attacks that have killed many innocents… all by sterilized remote control.

    And yet the political debate is now about which party has the more consistently violent rhetoric? The nation is lost. This entire conversation is completely out of perspective. Two warmongering parties are framing an entirely false debate, they lionize our violent government and those within it and take turns stripping rights from the population month by month.

    I do not like how this ends.

  5. Jill, how much more information do you need before more efforts are taken to minimize the damages regarding the topic of guns? Ten more deaths? 100 more deaths? I suspect you were never shot at or lost a loved one by gun violence. Unlike you, if either you or I ever got shot at, the shooter can expect return-fire from me, and only receive a speech about rationalization by you. Maddow’s video clip linked on the other gun-topic page was excellent, just how many more victims have to be injured or killed before people like you become angry and actually do something, instead of just rationalizing these horrific events? There are already steps in place to attempt to regulate whether a person like this shooter could ever even purchase a gun legally. Laws or no laws, he could have easily gotten a gun if he wanted. The laws only make it more difficult for him and may allow more time to pass for him to either extinguish his urge or to have help rendered upon him either voluntarily or non-voluntarily. If he had no bullets that fateful day, it is highly likely that any of those victims would have been injured or killed.

  6. This is nothing more than a simple reptilian brain reaction of “get it before it’s gone.”

    The buyers of the guns are simply trying to get their hands on the item before it’s banned.

  7. This gun buying spree does appear to be the result of fears that the guns will be taken off the market. Now I want to address some of the issues surrounding this horrible shooting.

    First, Loughner has a history of mental illness and violence. Until we know more information, it is simply speculation to attribute this shooting to right wing hate speech. In a tragedy such as this, it is my strong opinion that everyone should refrain from speculation. Instead we need clear eyed analysis.

    What has been disturbing is the immediate, not factually based linking of right wing hate speech to this shooting. This allowed propaganda to enter the picture when it should not have done so.

    Now to address right wing hate speech. We have laws that cover when speech becomes criminal and if applicable to this case, they should be used. We should not use this shooting to further restrict speech in our nation. It has been very good that many people have spoken out strongly against the hate speech of the right. This has forced some of the worst offenders to retreat and to lose credibility. I find this heartening.

    So does the US have a climate of violence? Yes. Is this only seen in the case of right wing milita or those whom we nomrally consider right wing individuals? No. The US is the arms dealer to the world. On the same day as this shooting one of President Obama’s drones killed six people, including several children. Is he going to their funeral?

    Violence and love of weapons permeates the society from the top down. If we truly want to stop violence we cannot have a govt. whose major trade is in the most deadly weapons the world has ever known. (BTW, the govt. sells to every side of every conflict.) We must stop the madness and redirect spending into social programs and the creation of jobs. If this were done we would see an immediate drop in violence.

  8. Unfortunately, that shooting likely validated the need to commit such acts by others suffering from the same or other mental issues. I am all for people being armed to defend themselves, but it is inevitable that some firearms will end up in the hands of some questionable people. Still though, I believe the overall impact would be on the positive side verses the occasional negative issue like this massacre. Bullet-regulations might help in the overall scheme of things.

  9. rcampbell:

    More people in the aggregate die when citizens are unarmed (disarmed) than when they have guns.

    This is why you have never seen in America, like Europe or China, tens and tens of millions of slain citizens BY govenment officials. This is why Switzerland never experienced a blood bath throughout the bloody 20 th century: all of its citizens were armed.

    How is it that that Swiss have such a low crime rate and everyoone is armed. That alone disproves your theory.

    Everyone carrying makes for polite society. Only government carrying makes for mass murder.

    You cannot see the forrest because of the trees.

  10. ID,

    As I said to mespo (and indirectly, Bob, Esq.) on another thread:

    “I submit that “culprit” and “likely contributory” as distinct. Clearly, the culprit is the gunman’s mental instability. However, it is not unreasonable to make the leap that incitement exacerbates mental illness and indeed plays to it.”

  11. Per the NYT today, Loughner was a nihilist who believed that his waking life was unreal and that his real life was in his dreams, which is why he kept an extensive dream diary. He was obviously suffering from visual hallucinations as he would ask his friends if they saw “the purple tree over there.”

    It turns out that he had several contacts with the police, which the police are trying to figure out (read “spin”).

    I don’t think either the left or the right can be “credited” with this guy’s “ideology”. I don’t think either the repubs or the dems have nihilism as part of their party platforms.

  12. I guess folks think they might need to have at least the same level of fire power the bad guys have.

    Of course, the guy was disarmed, even by a fellow packing, and a frail woman.

    Nevetheless, not before the damage was done.

  13. I will never accept the misguided opinion that some how America is a better place with all these guns and gun victims. Carlyle Moulton mentioned some of the innocents who have become victims of this mindless adoration of guns. Among others are children playing with weapons (‘cuz it’s so cool to be a cowboy or a cop or to kill animals like dad), domestic violence (both sexes), road rage. How people can justify in their conscience even one dead innocent, let alone the thousands each year, is beyond my comprehension. I often hear the silly analogy to driving cars. Some how in the twisted logic of gunners, people dying in traffic accidents makes senseless gun deaths okay. That’s a very intellectually developed thought, isn’t it?

    Forget the AZ Congresswoman for a moment. If the death of that nine year old girl in Tucson isn’t enough, given her personal story, then the gun nuts will never see how their holding so tightly to that gun makes us a feeble example of a civilized nation and a good example of a paranoid, insecure, violent and dangerous one. We should not be proud of this legacy.

    I know that doing the right thing; removing all guns from our society, is never going to happen, but we should never believe that is the better way. There is no escaping the truth that holding onto that gun of yours tells that girls’ family that your gun is more important than her life. It’s that simple.

  14. The NRA learned long ago that the best way to increase gun sales (which is the real goal of the NRA) is to increase the level of fear in the country. Does not matter if the fear is real or simply imagined, increased fear leads to increased gun sales.

  15. The question is, do Americans really disapprove that much about the occasional assassination? I suspect that many of the right wingers who keep saying that Loughner is a liberal pothead are actually pleased that he whacked the evil liberal Democratic congresswoman and would secretly fantasize about themselves doing likewise.

    The righteous approve of use of guns in righteous violence such as when police shoot a few “innocent” people dead in wrong door SWAT raids for drugs. Many Americans have accepted the fact that they themselves are evil and embrace the concept of inflicting unrighteous violence against good people. Perhaps Loughner was one of these.

  16. I read somewhere that the wreck that killed actor James Dean helped increase interest in Porsche automobiles, and may have helped Porsche sales after his wreck.

    I do not believe after the shooting of President Kennedy there was an increase in sales of the 6.5 mm Carcano rifle such as that used by Lee Harvey Oswald.

    We have to be careful of the Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy here. Rather than “I gotta have one of those,” it may be that folks who wanted one before are now rushing to purchase before there is legislation against them or outright banning.

  17. Odd, these must be upgrades from revolvers surely? After-all, how can you defend yourself against someone who also has a Glock? Shouldn’t you have something more capable?

    (Pick the escalation problem in that logic for a prize of best Australian beer).

  18. The same thing happened in the run up to the election of Obama.
    Anytime the fear that your gun rights are going to be taken away there is always a surge in gun sales.

Comments are closed.