
Since 2010, Gun Stores Have Grown 4.7 Times Faster Than the Population - negrit
https://www.buildzoom.com/blog/since-2010-gun-stores-have-grown-4-7-times-faster-than-the-population
======
AcerbicZero
This could be viewed as a good thing, as guns sold via a gun store (Or just a
licensed dealer) include a background check, unlike private party sales.

I'm by no means opposed to private party gun sales, and my own anecdotal
private gun buying experience has been that sellers are taking more steps to
ensure they're selling to legitimate parties, i.e. only to CCW holders, or
requiring an in-state drivers license, etc.

~~~
serge2k
> requiring an in-state drivers license

Such rigorous checks, how does anyone acquire a firearm in this country!

~~~
abduhl
Requiring an in-state drivers license prevents one of the many loopholes
touted by gun control advocates whereby strong gun control in one state is
easily gotten around by driving to the next state over.

But I assume your reply was meant more as a "GOTCHA" snark comment than a real
conversation starter.

~~~
Ntrails
Surely the advocates are after federal level gun control laws rather than
looking to make sure people have to abide by disparate state rules..?

~~~
travisby
You cannot buy a handgun in a state you do not reside, and a gun must be legal
in both the state where the transaction is occurring, and the home state of
the buyer. (that's federal law)

Although it's illegal to "knowingly" sell against those rules, most buyers
don't live by the "don't ask, don't tell" methodology. So in a lot of cases
(don't have statistics on it), sellers will want to verify the buyer's home
state, and probably even keep a receipt with the name incase the gun is used
in a crime, and the ATF comes knocking at the buyer's door.

~~~
rascul
Seems like the state residency requirement was struck down earlier this year.

[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/11/federal-
cour...](http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/11/federal-court-rules-
residency-requirements-pistol-/?page=all)

~~~
rascul
Er, last year. Forgot the year changed.

------
jff
It's not entirely clear from the article, but the data they're using appears
to include all types of Federal Firearms Licensees. FFL01 is the license for a
traditional gun store. However I hold an FFL03, which is a license to collect
Curio & Relic firearms. These comprise guns over 50 years old and some special
items on a federal list. With this license I can purchase C&R-eligible guns
and have them shipped direct to my door, unlike the general public who must
transfer Internet purchases through a FFL01 licensee. I am not, however,
allowed to _deal_ in guns, just to make an occasional sale when I decide I
don't want a specific gun any more.

AMA about FFL03 if you're curious, I guess.

~~~
OopsCriticality
I think it would be instructive if you spoke on needing to keep a bound book,
dealing with inspections, and the time/money cost of attaining and maintaining
your FFL.

~~~
jff
Sure!

I've only used my FFL03 once, to order a Mosin Nagant rifle, but it still
worked out cheaper than a single gun transfer in California ($30 for the FFL03
vs. $60+ for a transfer at a gun store)

Part of having a FFL03 is the requirement that you maintain a "bound book" of
all transactions done under that license. You can buy these online or print
out sheets, but basically you must record who you bought it from, when, for
how much, the serial number, etc.

It has not happened to me in 3 years of licensing, but the BATFE may request
to inspect your bound book and your firearms to make sure everything's in
order.

As for attaining the FFL, I filled out a form (ATF form 7CR) with a bunch of
personal information and mailed it off with a $30 check. They did their
background checks and after a month or two mailed back my license. You need to
renew it every 3 years, but it's basically a matter of making sure the
information is correct and sending in a check.

The benefits of having an FFL03:

\- Eligible guns can be shipped direct to your door (no handguns shipped in
California)

\- You can buy C&R eligible guns out-of-state and bring them back with you.

In any case, you must provide the seller with a copy of your license prior to
purchase.

------
fnfs2000
This is not a measure of gun stores, this is a measure of licensed dealers.
Many, many dealers do not operate a "store", so the title is totally
misleading.

~~~
ctdonath
That used to be the case, but now a "brick and mortar storefront" is a de-
facto requirement, the Clinton Administration having aggressively ended
"kitchen table gun dealers" and reduced the total number of dealers by some
75% nationally. The only practical exceptions are "gun show vendors".

ETA: other dealers do exist, yes, but nowhere close to the numbers of some
years ago, and not to the point of making "the title totally misleading".

~~~
F00Fbug
In the last three years, I've bought five guns from a FFL dealer who has no
store, while sitting at his kitchen table in his house. (In Maryland, no
less!)

~~~
mcjon77
Did you actually buy five guns from that dealer, or did you do five transfers
with background checks? I have done a ton of transfers with my local FFL
dealer, but have never actually bought a gun directly from him. He just can't
compete with online prices.

~~~
F00Fbug
Good point! I bought two of the five from him.

------
negrit
And yet San Francisco has no gun store anymore[1]

[1] [http://missionlocal.org/2015/10/san-franciscos-last-gun-
shop...](http://missionlocal.org/2015/10/san-franciscos-last-gun-shop-closing-
after-city-passes-new-regulations/)

~~~
NiftyFifty
Ya, I saw that. However, SF is the most liberal city in the country if I were
to guess. It's so far leaning in that direction, it's not of any surprise.
However, I have to say ... nicest place on the West Coast. I can only compare
it to Toronto during the summer!

~~~
thrownaway2424
I don't think SF is even the most liberal city in the Bay Area, much less the
entire country.

------
rottyguy
It does make me wonder if the gun industry secretly/financially supports the
democrats in elections.

~~~
Jgrubb
It's not without irony to me that Obama appears to be the best gun salesman
the industry every had.

~~~
HoHoHoNowIHaveA
Obama is, legislatively speaking, one of the worst Presidents regarding gun-
control. He does very little and received an F by the Brady Foundation.

[http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/76717-gun-
control...](http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/76717-gun-control-
group-gives-obama-an-f)

The media manipulation that Obummer is coming to get people's guns is quite
simply staggering.

~~~
rhino369
>The media manipulation that Obummer is coming to get people's guns is quite
simply staggering.

It's because he would if he could. He just can't do it.

~~~
HoHoHoNowIHaveA
No evidence supports that. None.

Including his public statements on the matter advocating private gun
ownership. Certainly not his background as a Constitutional Law Professor.

Obama is, was and remains one of the most authoritative serving politicians on
the Constitution and he has not indicated anywhere in his career that he
intends to remove legal firearm ownership.

UC Law School statement: The Law School has received many media requests about
Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992
until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a
professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a
Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses
per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School
faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-
track.[1]

[1][http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/obama-a-constitutional-
law-...](http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/obama-a-constitutional-law-
professor/)

Note: My guess is that he, like most sane adults, question the need for
possession of a or multiple military-grade rifles or sub-machines capable of
killing considerable numbers of human beings in a short space of time.

It's not about taking away the 2nd Amendment. It's about Amending it to make
it compatible with modern life whilst maintaining the spirit of the law.

~~~
marcoperaza
The more that you know about guns, the stupider the proposals sound. Take the
expired Assault Weapons Ban that people keep trying to bring back. Almost all
gun murders are carried out with handguns and there's no evidence that the
ban, while active, had any positive effects. "Assault weapons" sure sound
scary though. The same goes for bans on high capacity magazines and high
caliber guns, mandates for gun locks and safes, etc. This stuff is 100%
political pandering and demagoguery, not serious policy making.

As for Obama the constitutional law professor, I think actions speak louder
than words. When he can't get what he wants from Congress, he's had no problem
twisting the meaning of existing law to legislate from the White House.

~~~
HoHoHoNowIHaveA
Assault weapons hold a symbolic value and are key terrain in the moral
battlefield.

The weapon itself represents the worst attitudes of the pro-gun lobby and form
the crux of the argument about reasonable firearm protection.

~~~
marcoperaza
Please keep your symbolism away from my rights.

------
NiftyFifty
This is media infusion, and political 2nd Amendment fears in the general
population. NICS checks and permit requests are in high demand, so the demand-
supply model general means, stores are going to pop-up because there is money
to be had. Politics aside, the "anomaly" IMHO was driven by the tech industry
and its enabling of EVERYONE to have a voice. It's the "meek shall inherit the
Earth" to some extent, but it also makes the established news sources of the
big 3-4 outlets (NBC, CBS, ABC, and maybe Fox/CNN) to be diminished in their
role to inform us. This diluted the singular and make it the multiple. Again,
not judging any side, but the tidal wave and saturation of market makes
valued, conservatism almost a rare thing to witness. However, when people see
a right possibly being restricted or removed (unlikely in our country) ...
that's the fact, Jack. Ergo, where we are now.

------
JoeAltmaier
I wonder if this simply correlates to more chains store(s) that have hunting
departments now. WalMart, Scheels etc.

~~~
DamnYuppie
That would be an interesting data point. The one thing you would have to find
out is which stores have FFL licenses and which don't. Not all chain stores
sell firearms.

I would also be curious to see where these stores are distributed
geographically.

EDIT: Right after writing that I saw this article
[http://www.citylab.com/crime/2016/01/map-gun-dealers-
starbuc...](http://www.citylab.com/crime/2016/01/map-gun-dealers-
starbucks/423801/) While not exactly what I was looking for it is an
interesting comparison.

------
logfromblammo
Anecdotally, the closest gun store to my current home started in a strip mall
berth, and had its own freestanding building _with firing range_ within one
year.

