Hunters Richer than "Assault Weapon" Owners?

[drewtam]

I think you guys are reading too much into that quote. When I first read it, I interpreted that hunters are a much larger group of gun owners and so just a little bit of cash from each is alot of money. While the "black rifle supporters" (myself), are a much smaller group so we have less politcal money to throw around. On the other hand, what we lack in size and money we make up for in vocality.

Drew

[Matthew Carberry]

I think you guys are reading too much into that quote. When I first read it, I interpreted that hunters are a much larger group of gun owners and so just a little bit of cash from each is alot of money. While the "black rifle supporters" (myself), are a much smaller group so we have less politcal money to throw around. On the other hand, what we lack in size and money we make up for in vocality.

Drew

...and firepower. 

[drewtam]

...and firepower. 

Hallelujah, amen.

[Strings]

In my own experience (and I think Dick'll back me on this), your "I'm just a hunter" types really don't do as much for our cause as some think: at least here in Wisconsin, they seem to be dead weight dragged along by the rest of the shooting community. If there's a bill that might impact them (Doyle's attempted "Anti-Terrorism bill", which wiould have effectively outlawed ammunition), then they wake up. But if things are kept quiet, or they don't see a direct impact against "their sport", then they're no help. An AWB in Wisconsin would fly quite well: the hunters wouldn't care...

 Do they have more money: not necessarily. And all the money in the world doesn't help if there aren't folks rattling the cages of the legiscritters directly...

[Monkeyleg]

Bill, Wisconsin does have one of the highest percentages of NRA membership in the country. The hunters do care about their rights; many of them just don't care about CCW. However, the number who do seems to have increased over the years. Don't know why, but there was much better response in Shawano, Onalaska and Antigo in the last legislative session than in previous sessions.

As for the subject of hunters being richer than EBR owners, I can't cite any statistics. Anecdotally, though, I think they run the gamut. I see deer hunters coming from every economic level.

When you get to groups like the Safari Club, though, there's definitely a difference.

[Matthew Carberry]

Would it be useful to analyze expenditures on ammo and weapons vs. trips and stands and accoutrements?

The shooters who buy case lots of ammo and reloading supplies, multiple magazines and, weapon for weapon, a lot more per rifle (on average), have to be spending more within the firearms industry (not clothing, accessories and guides and such) than hunters.

Not all the hunters are buying $5000 Parkers, most are shooting $700 Remingtons and buying a few hundred rounds of ammo a year.

[Gewehr98]

Lest we forget, there is a difference.

This past week has amazed me.  A single dumbass writer posts some idiodic drivel  on a blog and suddenly everyone who doesn't hunt starts calling every hunter a an elitist FUDD.

Every hunter is by no means a Fudd.  However, there are some hunters who are Fudds.  And that's where the big problem is.

I have evil black rifles, and a beautiful walnut and steel Browning BAR, Ruger #1S, and Remington 700 BDL Custom Deluxe, somewhere in a pile of guns that approaches 200 as of this week.  Depending on my whim, I may bring home venison with my AK-47, or my Browning BAR.  Why would I disparage a fellow hunter their choice to do the same?  But throw me under the AWB ban bus, and I'll do my very best to make sure that Mr. Fudd's evil scoped long-range sniper rifle gets banned next. 

[The Rabbi]

I would also distinguish between deer hunters and wing hunters.  In my own limited experience, it costs much more to hunt birds than deer and the people doing it tend to have more disposable income than people who hunt deer.  People who hunt big game are clearly in a different class, as their "outings" cost in the thousands.
fwiw, I don't care about hunting, not doing any myself.  But the divisions between "hunters" and "gun guys" is not healthy.  Can't we all just reload together?

[Matthew Carberry]

I would also distinguish between deer hunters and wing hunters.  In my own limited experience, it costs much more to hunt birds than deer and the people doing it tend to have more disposable income than people who hunt deer.  People who hunt big game are clearly in a different class, as their "outings" cost in the thousands.
fwiw, I don't care about hunting, not doing any myself.  But the divisions between "hunters" and "gun guys" is not healthy.  Can't we all just reload together?

If we stop publically undercutting each others rights we'll get along fine.

[Lee]

The problem here is that hunter vs shooter is not THAT divided.  Just because the AR/AK rifle guys don''t hunt doesn't mean that the hunters don't own and use AR/AK/FAL/HK rifles. I probably have a dozen close friends (and myself) that hunt with bows, crossbows, muzzle loaders, AND ARs.  Not to mention, that most of us have AR's AK's SKS's. FALs etc.  We spend money on guns, ammo, mags, permits, clothing, bows, arrows, gear, the NRA, Ducks Unlimited, and even magazines like Outdoor Life and Field and Stream.  So where do you lump us in this argument?  And I think we are more the rule than the exception these days. 
Conversely the AR/AK guys focus, primarily on guns and ammo.  Were you guys really reading Jim Zumbo in Outdoor Life when the bruhaha hit?  Who do you think started the assault on Zumbo?  What kind of companies dumped him? Who do they cater to? Who buys their mags and gear?  Does Remington sell semi-auto hi cap rifles and pistols to the public.  Do you think Field and Stream, or Remington, or Mountain Spices (or whatever it's called) really care what non- hunting shooters think?  Maybe I'm wrong...but I don't think so.   

[Matthew Carberry]

As you say, Remington doesn't have a dog in the EBR or hi-cap evil pistol market.  Of all the cancellations, theirs (especially given how quickly they acted) smacks pretty strongly of principles.  Only their ammo was at risk.

In fact the cancellation of all those non-EBR companies testifies to their belief in the "mix" of shooters/hunters vs. a sharp divide.

[Gewehr98]

Remington, does, in fact, manufacture and sell an EBR - it's an AR-10/SR-25 variant, in .308 Winchester.  However, it's not sold to John Q. Public (yet). 

That info leaked out during the early hours of the Zumbo fiasco, when the Remington CEO moved quickly to sever ties with the formerly-employed columnist.  IMHO, perhaps Remington put some distance between themselves and Zumbo to protect something they may eventually sell on the commercial market.

I've got a bunch of venison in my garage freezer, taken with a single shot by my SAR-1 and a 125gr softpoint handload, or so I was led to believe when I put the front sight on that doe and squeezed the trigger.  Maybe I'm wrong, maybe she just dropped dead from sheer laughter at the audacity of a guy using an AK-47 to put supper on the table.  Regardless, the 7.62x39 load I used was not particularly different in exterior ballistics from the venerable .30-30 Winchester, that popular deer rifle cartridge from way back in the day.  I'd be more than happy to share that venison with any Fudd who believes an AK cannot hold its own in the woods vs. a Winchester Model 94. Hell, 25 years ago I took whitetail with a bone-stock Rockola M1 Carbine and Winchester softpoint ammo.  Perhaps I was a terrorist then, too?

I have a pre-'94 Olympic Arms forged lower that I've kept in my gun safe since 1994, debating what I want to do with it.  I believe I will assemble it into a 6.8 SPC 16" carbine, and use it next deer season - based solely on the principal of the thing. I've got all sorts of beautiful walnut and blued steel commercial sporting rifles, but I bristle when somebody tells me I can't use a given rifle when it's perfectly legal to do so. 

I'd wager the "rift" as mentioned by the article in the beginning of this thread has been there for some time, and propogated much more by Fudds and Perazzi shooters than those on the AR/AK side of the fence.  I experienced it firsthand when I was a range officer in Cape Canaveral, FL during the regional skeet matches, and it still disgusts me.      

[Art Eatman]

Seems like people love divisiveness, whether it's about race or economics...

By and large, hunters are not all that active as shooters.  From some eight years of moderating rifle forums at TFL and THR, I'd venture that the EBR group spends a helluva lot more money after they prchase their rifles.  The ammo thing.

Then look at the AR group:  Look at the R&D that's been done for civilian shooting.  All that stuff that can be added onto a poor little old AR-15, or make it a tack driver came from civilian money, by and large.  And look at the $$$ for all these add-ons.

Like Barrett has said, the civilian market keeps his doors open.  Military sales aren't enough to make his business profitable.

Pistol shooting:  The IPSC and IDPA guys spend beaucoup $$$ on reloading gear and components.  And IPSC pistols aren't cheap.

A hunter might buy a $2,000 shotgun, but he doesn't buy heaps, gobs and bunches of them.  One shotgun will last a lifetime, as will a deer rifle.  What matters to the overall "gun ecoomy" is the care and feeding after purchase. 

I think it's that "lifetime" thing that has the gunmakers coming out with all the varieties of, e.g., Remington 700, and Winchester's short magnum ammo/guns.  Hype and sell.

But the gun-grabbers essentially make no distinctions within the ultimate aim of eliminating all individual possession of firearms--except in lying rhetoric.

Art

[Ben]

Thinking more about this, especially from the strictly "political contribution" side of the author's statement versus just the "richer / poorer" argument, my personal experience is directly the opposite. I got into guns at a young because of hunting. When I was "just a hunter", I wasn't an NRA member, and I really wasn't all that involved in any of the politics of gun banning. I was NEVER a "hunting arms only" kind of guy, but was pretty ambivalent about the politics of it all.  It wasn't until I expanded my interest into a wider variety of firearms, in a great part because I could afford to, (and got older and wiser I suppose) that I became more politically active.

Now, as both a hunter and shooter, I'm an Endowment Member of the NRA, belong to the GOA and Calif Rifle and Pistol Association, and make regular monetary contributions to all three organizations. Though my happiest times are when I'm walking in a field with my dog and my shotgun,  I don't make my political contributions to protect the shotgun I hunt with, I make them to protect the Combat Commander my mom gave me on my 18th birthday.

In my opinion, when it comes down to it, rich vs poor is not necessarily a good gauge of how a group contributes to a political cause. Even if the author's statement was accurate, a million of those "poorer but passionate" EBR owners contributing $35 a year to the NRA can make a much bigger difference than twenty or thirty thousand limousine liberals contributing a few hundred dollars a year to the Brady Campaign.

[El Tejon]

Hunters wealthier than shooters?  No possible way.

I pay more in P-R taxes per year than they pay in new guns.  Who do they think is burning up all the ammo that is sold each year?  A box of year to a Flabby Flannel so he can shoot from a bench?

To go hunting Elmer pays $200 to Wal-Mart for an 870.  To be evil, I pay many times that for an LRB or a DSA FAL.  I will shoot more many thousands of times with my LRB M14 than Elmer will with his 870 or thutty-thutty.

Shooters are carrying the Elmers on our backs.  Ya know what?  I don't mind.  But, what makes me absolutely livid while I'm carrying their bloated, bag of mayo behinds on my shoulders is when they start whining about how only "their guns" are legitimate and how special they are.

[Lee]

There's always the exceptions ET.  Now by boss for example thinks that spending 100K a year on hunting trips is a bargain..and the den in his 6000 sq ft home displays his full body lion mounts and shoulder mounts of zebras and tigers and bears oh my.  Spending 250K on guns isn't an issue for him either. 
I suppose he could afford a few cases of commie block ammo for his EBRs as well...so perhaps that why the Governor will take his calls. 

[Trip20]

I respect your recollection of your NRA days, but that still does not account for the $millions, if not $billions spent on the activites of hunters....including travel, lodging, food, permits, gear, etc.

With my hunting experience being contained to the east coast and mid-west, my observation on this is that most "hunters" (which has yet to be defined for purpose of discussion), are the type who hunt in their own back yard so-to-speak.  Their greatest expense is the processing of their deer (if they don't do it on their own), and now as of late, gasoline driving back and forth between home, and their stand.

[SteveS]

Hunters wealthier than shooters?  No possible way.

I pay more in P-R taxes per year than they pay in new guns.  Who do they think is burning up all the ammo that is sold each year?  A box of year to a Flabby Flannel so he can shoot from a bench?

To go hunting Elmer pays $200 to Wal-Mart for an 870.  To be evil, I pay many times that for an LRB or a DSA FAL.  I will shoot more many thousands of times with my LRB M14 than Elmer will with his 870 or thutty-thutty.

Shooters are carrying the Elmers on our backs.  Ya know what?  I don't mind.  But, what makes me absolutely livid while I'm carrying their bloated, bag of mayo behinds on my shoulders is when they start whining about how only "their guns" are legitimate and how special they are.

Wow, I am interested in where you got your data from.  I haven't met these hunters.  The reality is that there are some that don't spend much and some that spend thousands on a fancy double or a custom bolt-action.  I have probably spent twice as much on my non-hunting guns, but about the same on ammo. 

BTW, hunters, as a group, are no fatter than mall-ninjas, gun shop commandos, and tactical teds.  I don't get the impression that you know much about hunting.

[Monkeyleg]

I know some varmint hunters who spend a ton of money. Whether they're rich or not is another question.

One in particular is at the range all the time. He takes a week of vacation every year to hunt prairie dogs in SD. He usually loads up at least 5,000 rounds for that one week.

[Art Eatman]

I don't think that people who frequent the gun boards are anywhere near the mindset of the majority of all owners of firearms.

In the mind of the general public, when you say, "Hunter," you're talking about deer hunters and bird hunters.  That's where most of the familiarity with hunting lies, due to all the publicity over decades of news coverage.

As near as I can tell from many years of hanging out in gunshops and watching deer hunters in camp, cafes, and gunshops, the majority of them have a rifle or two and shoot maybe a box of shells a year.  Sight in and go hunt Bambi.  Most bird hunters, on average, go out two or three times a season and shoot maybe one or two boxes of shells on a hunt.

These folks, generally, range from middle economic class on down to relatively poor (mostly rural or small town) as to money.  IMO, anyway.

As near as I can tell, the upper middle class and the weathy, who support the $5,000 deer and elk hunt deals, are a fairly small percentage of all hunters.

From my years on the Internet, I see more comments about money and the relatively low costs of care and feeding of EBRs than for hunting rifles.  This leads me to believe that a generalization is that conventional hunters might have more net worrth, even though they don't spend as much of their disposable income on shooting.

But I doubt anybody has ever done an extensive survey. 

Doesn't matter.  Hang together or hang separately.  Which is why getting into using "Fudd" is dumber'n dirt.  You don't change minds and make allies by calling names.

Art

[mtnbkr]

I know I've personally spent a lot more on hunting and hunting guns than EBRs.

My deer rifle and scope cost nearly $1k.  I've spent a few hundred dollars on factory ammo and a few hundred on reloading components.  Now that I have a "pet load" and have sighted the gun in, I shoot about 20-30rounds a year through that gun (compared to the 600rnds that went through it the first two years).  I have a few hundred more dollars invested in knives, stands, and other misc gear related to hunting.  There's also the secondary firearms I've purchased for "hunting".

My EBR cost less than $600 (built from parts), it's dedicated case is another $70, and I have about $150 in magazines.  Add to that about 1000 rounds of various types of surplus ammo on hand and another 1000 rounds of fired ammo (either Wolf or surplus). 

Chris

[brimic]

Sport shooters tend to spend a lot more than weekend hunters. Most hunters I know, and I know alot of them, own a rilf eor a shotgun, maybe both, and maybe shoot it once before they go hunting. Guys that shoot trap, skeet and sporting clays spend thousands on their guns and thousands a year on reloading supplies, same with 3-gun shooters, benchrest shooters, bullseye shooters and Highpower shooters.

As far as political clout goes, the guys that are sport shooters with their evil black rifles are the most likely to be members of their state's Rifle and Pistol associations.

[LAK]

A generalization; but dedicated shotgunners tend to be richer than dedicated rifle shooters and hunters.

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

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

[Gewehr98]

There are indeed all kinds of shotgunners, but when you bump into the rich ones, you'll know it right away.

When I was a range safety officer at the Space Coast Gun Club, owned and operated by NASA/Kennedy Space Center via their KARS Park recreational facility, there were 28 skeet positions spread over many acres.  These were top-of-the-line, and the regional skeet matches were held there every year. 

I've seen golf carts and I've seen 4-wheel ATVs. I'd never seen big-wheeled golf cart/ATV hybrids with polished diamond plate, with built-in shotgun racks, ammo lockers, and coolers.  These things were ripping all around the 28 different skeet stations, hauling Perazzis and Krieghoffs around like nobody's business.  These particular competitors were somewhat miffed that the pistol/rifle range, smack dab in the middle of the skeet complex, would have open hours during their big event.  Some even had the audacity to stop and tell us we were intruding in their activities. 

That was the tip of the iceberg, including the ubiquitous "I don't need a rifle or pistol" from the Krieghoff/Perazzi owner.  Before the entire facility was shut down due to hurricane damage and lead contamination, we felt that the rifle/pistol range was always a second-class citizen in the scheme of things.  Looking back at the whole KARS Park operation, the skeet shooters were given best service, and by Gawd, did they ever dump a ton of money into the park. 

But I really hope that's just a small subset of the total gun-owning community.  I'd hate to think between the Fudds and Krieghoff/Perazzi clan that we need that kind of indifference.   

[Harold Tuttle]

poor black riflemen: