eom

However in France, it is very unlikely they will be relaxed. There is not a gun culture in France like we have here in the US. Most frenchmen would not want people to be able to easily acquire weapons. You can get a hunting gun relatively easily but you still have to take classes and get a permit. Your hunting guns are also registered. I am a dual US/french citizen so I experienced both.

Amazes me how they talk, and guns fly off the shelves, you would think gun control advocates are getting kickbacks for all the guns they manage to sell by simply talking on TV.

I don't know the process in France. However, it has started in Austria were pepper spray, tactical folders, and shotguns are flying off the shelves. Permits are not required to own a shotgun. applications for licenses for pistol and rifles have gone through the roof. Once those permits are processed and approved, those will be flying off the shelves too. Pepper spray in Germany have also increased. If their gun and carry laws were as liberal as ours, yes pistols would be flying off the shelves as well. Most of the purchasers are women.

In the US and Czech Republic, I expect to see more concealed carry and more businesses for instructors. Nothing changes the "only on TV" to "shit that could be me" like spree killers and terrorist attacks. That adds to the interest in CCW interest in gun sales. The spike of reported gun ownership during the late 1960s through the 1970s was partly a reaction to the increase in crime. Many of them sat in sock drawers for decades until discovered by adult children. Now you can pick up a slightly used Smith model 10.

Obama is about to ban guns. The paranoid gun crowd would start buying.

I also acknowledge that it is good for the industry.

Are you new here, or did you just not realize that "assault weapon" is a scare term for the most popular civilian rifles in the United States?

I often see gun control advocates discussing confiscation favorably, poutrage exclaiming that we should "melt them down", Australian gun laws, and other forms of lunacy. Obama himself has shown admiration for Australian gun laws, which if enacted here would amount to confiscation. Hillary Clinton has done the same. Right now, Bloomberg's groups are running a campaign to get Obama to take action on gun control via executive order. Everytown/MDA, doesn't mention what the EO would contain. Hopefully, it's the same EO that the Obama administration has been floating for a few months, which would in my opinion make it easier for private citizens to sell firearms by defining a specific number of sales before someone is "in the business".

The end goal of gun control efforts in the United States is a ban or defacto ban on civilian ownership of firearms.

I support Obama and HRC, I just think they are both wrong on this issue.

when you consider that Hillary announces far and wide that she wants to "take a look" at Australia's confiscatory scheme. Even Obama isn't going to step in that pile.

Frankly, there is the possibility that some gunner activists might post here, posing as anti-gunners with very spittle-flying language about ban, ban, ban. I mean, these possible trolls know what works for them. What do you think?

I can think of a couple of people I have been wondering about.

especially on full auto, pistol usually loses. It all depends on the specific situation and no two would be the same. suicide bomber within range of a head shot is different from someone across the room with an automatic weapon. My plan would be to get out of dodge if at all possible. If I'm cornered, I'm going to make every effort to take at least one of them with me.

Due to the sense of the word "after" meaning in the future, yes, guns sold per unit of time (day, month, decade...) will increase. Gun and arms sales will always increase barring any partial (or total) extinctions of humans. Not because of Paris nor terrorism but because people are prone to established habits like collecting, hunting and, occasionally, killing aggressive predators that attack them.

When an armed individual is attacked, he/she does not benefit from having the aggressor jailed, society benefits. The only benefit for a victim is the swift ending of the violence.

The police work for society as a whole.

If required to stay alive, ending the life of an assailant who presents a deadly threat is not bad thing.

As for the laws in France, there are wiser minds than mine at work on just that. I hope for the best.