Forget free gasoline. Car buyers want free guns

Little-Acorn

New member
This made my day.

Apparently a car dealer in Missouri is including a certificate with each new car he sells, good for either $250 of gasoline or $250 toward a firearm at a local FFL.

He says no one has chosen the gas yet.

Also says the promotion was inspired by Obama's "bitter people clinging to guns and God" comment.

This car dealer is my kinda guy. Too bad I'm not in the market for a new ride - I'd head to Missouri in an instant, just to boost this guy. :clap:

Course, California has a program to stick anyone who buys a new car out of state and brings it in, for the full tax bill he would have paid if he had bought it here, PLUS a hefty fine for bringing in a car that doesn't have certified California emissions equipment. Never mind that what the manufacturer puts on the car for Missouri, matches what they put on for California cars. It doesn't have the little sticker!

-----------------------------------------

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64942

Forget free gasoline! Car buyers want free guns

Dealer aims to please by providing $250 coupon for firearms

By Andy Barnett
Posted: May 21, 2008
7:00 pm Eastern

BUTLER, Mo. – A Missouri car dealership is triggering interest by offering customers free guns or gasoline with any purchase, and despite the skyrocketing price of fuel, patrons are going for the guns.

"We are aware of the gasoline and crime problem in America," states an ad on the website of Max Motors. It goes on to note it "wants to be part of the solution and not part of the problem."

http://www.wnd.com/images/story/gunsgas.jpg

"What we're doing is giving everyone who buys a new or used vehicle a free handgun," said Mark Muller, the dealership's owner. "We have guns to display, but we can't actually give them a gun, so what we do is give them a coupon for a local gun dealer here in town so they can pick out any gun they want. We recommend a semi-automatic."

The certificate is good for either $250 at Alton Arms or for $250 worth of gas. Muller told WND no one has chosen the gas so far.

The promotion, which goes through the end of this month, has caused a stir among anti-gun-rights activists who turned up at the dealership to protest.

"Six people came by – a bunch of long hairs who think the '60s are still going on, and who obviously don't have jobs," Muller said. "We all went out there with our cowboy hats on and told them we'd stomp 'em, and they left."

John Alton, owner of Alton Arms, doesn't see any problem with the campaign.

"I'm a federal firearms dealer and we're registered with the federal government. Any gun I sell requires the customer to fill out the standard forms, and I do a background check on them," he said.

Local law enforcement took calls from the media after the promotion was announced, but found nothing wrong with what the dealership is doing.

"They're not doing anything illegal," said Lt. Randy Beshore of the Butler Police Department. "I think the misconception is that people thought they got the handgun right there at the dealership."

Even so, the dealership has received threatening phone calls.

"Someone who said they were with the ATF called and said 'You need to shut down this promotion right now or we're shutting you down.' I told them to bring their attorneys, I don't know if [the call] was real or fake," Muller said.

"I don't see what the problem is, we have a right to bear arms. It's in the Constitution and the reason we have [Amendment] No. 2 is to protect No. 1."

When asked if Sen. Barack Obama's recent comments about people clinging to guns and religion inspired the promotion, Muller said yes.

"My next promotion is to give away a free King James Bible to any Muslim that converts to Christianity," he said.
 
Why is this a bad promotion? If he were giving away $250 towards a new tv everyone would say its great. The gun is an inanimate object. It is a tool that can be used to defend or or murder. Why is it that some people think it is the gun that is the problem?
 
I don't think it is a bad promotion at all, and 250 would buy me the CZ 75BD I have been looking at. Or put about 1/3 down on the Kimber 45 I want
 
$250 won't buy much of a gun, but it might make the difference between buying junk and buying a nice firearm.
 
Why is this a bad promotion? If he were giving away $250 towards a new tv everyone would say its great. The gun is an inanimate object. It is a tool that can be used to defend or or murder. Why is it that some people think it is the gun that is the problem?


Guns don't kill people! People kill people!

Kind of a logical fallacy.

Guns and people are two parts of a system, and the killing couldn't happen without one of the parts.
 
Guns don't kill people! People kill people!

Kind of a logical fallacy.

Guns and people are two parts of a system, and the killing couldn't happen without one of the parts.

No gun has killed anyone without a person being involved, but lots of humans have killed people without a firearm being involved. So the logical fallacy is to say that guns are the problem.
 
There are lots of uses for firearms besides shooting other people.

I have been hunting and shooting for most of my life, and I have never fired a single shot at another person. I know dozens of target shooters and even more hunters, but I only know a select few who have ever fired a weapon at a person.

And the states that have banned private ownership of firearms, or made it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to obtain firearms, have seen an increase in violent crime.

But the states that have more open CCW laws and gun laws that favor private ownership have seen a decrease in violent crime rates.
 
There are lots of uses for firearms besides shooting other people.

I have been hunting and shooting for most of my life, and I have never fired a single shot at another person. I know dozens of target shooters and even more hunters, but I only know a select few who have ever fired a weapon at a person.

And the states that have banned private ownership of firearms, or made it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to obtain firearms, have seen an increase in violent crime.

Did you catch that slight of hand? Its like saying the army started requiring helmets to keep their soldiers from being killed but saw an INCREASE in casualties, ergo helmets are a useless thing to mandate. If you're not a moron, you know the difference between casualties and fatalities, and the same goes toward GUN CRIMES and violent crimes.

But the states that have more open CCW laws and gun laws that favor private ownership have seen a decrease in violent crime rates.
Pulled out of your ass. Show me where a more open CCW law or statute has been passed and a subsequent drop of violent crime has occurred.
 
Violent crime and its causes and solutions is a difficult thing to measure. Political "solutions" to problems are often nothing more than people throwing wild darts out based on their emotions and prejudices. I've heard 10,000 different contradictory policies that began in the 90's attributed to the decline of crime in that time. Its difficult to know what factors made it happen, but they all say that it was theirs, since crime declined during the period that they instituted so and so policy, so of course it must have worked. It may not of had anything to do with any of the policies at all, but don't tell them that.

This is generally how society has been governed since the beginning of time...
 
Consider the incredibly small amount of people who actually carry weapons per capita then consider whatever drop in "violent crime" you find and then try to justify in your own head how such a miniscule amount of people could have any impact at all on violent crime.

In fact, I'll bet you could only pull up a handful of newspaper reports from whatever state you choose pertaining to someone actually using their concealed weapon to prevent a crime out in the community somewhere. A handful. That can hardly be pointed to as the cause of a statistically significant drop in violent crime.
 
Actually, no I did not pull that out of my ass.

Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. Between 1987 and 1996, these changes occurred:

The homocide rate in FL dropped 36%, while the national homocide rate dropped 0.4%. The gun homocide rate in FL dropped 37%, while the national gun homocide rate rose 15%. The FL handgun homocide rate dropped 41%, while the national handgun murder rate rose 24%.

These facts come from the NRA. While the NRA may be unpopular with the anti-gun crowd, I have seen nothing that has challenged the accuracy of these facts.
 
Actually, no I did not pull that out of my ass.

Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. Between 1987 and 1996, these changes occurred:

The homocide rate in FL dropped 36%, while the national homocide rate dropped 0.4%. The gun homocide rate in FL dropped 37%, while the national gun homocide rate rose 15%. The FL handgun homocide rate dropped 41%, while the national handgun murder rate rose 24%.

These facts come from the NRA. While the NRA may be unpopular with the anti-gun crowd, I have seen nothing that has challenged the accuracy of these facts.
These facts are all true. I believe that CC had some effect but I also know that during the years 92-96 Florida got an increase in police on their streets through grants from the federal government, and an increased police presence had to have caused SOME decrease in the crime rate in florida as well. That being said, the Gun Fraidy cats predicted that Florida would become the wild west with concealed carry. That road rage shootings would sky rocket, that over-reactions would occur and lots of people would end up shot when shooting would be excessive. Those predictions ALL turned out to be WRONG.
 
There was also a question of whether the miniscule percentage of the population having CCWs would effect the much larger number of crimes.

It is not so much that armed citizens thwarted any individual crimes. (although this has happened) It is much more that the news media reported the increase in armed citizens, and the criminals were afraid that they would be met with armed resistance. Most criminals are more scavenger than predator. They want the least resistance.
 
I'd like to point out that the $250 gift certificate is for a firearm. There is nothing about it being a handgun or assault rifle. It could be used for a hunting rifle or something as innocuous as a .22 target rifle. To assume that the certificate will be used to purchase something that is a danger to society is simply wrong.
 
I'd like to point out that the $250 gift certificate is for a firearm. There is nothing about it being a handgun or assault rifle. It could be used for a hunting rifle or something as innocuous as a .22 target rifle. To assume that the certificate will be used to purchase something that is a danger to society is simply wrong.
Because ANY GUN in and of itself is NEVER a danger to the community. SOme humans are dangers to the community, they then get guns and realy become a danger.
 
Because ANY GUN in and of itself is NEVER a danger to the community. SOme humans are dangers to the community, they then get guns and realy become a danger.

I agree wholeheartedly. I was only trying to make the point that the certificate may be used to purchase a gun which most anti-gun folks are more comfortable with.

My apologies for making it sound as though some guns are "evil" and some are not.
 
Back
Top