Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

ch-scene - Screen, Guns IV - See it again for the very first time

ch-scene AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: RTP-area local music and culture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Todd Morman" <tmorman AT nc.rr.com>
  • To: "RTP-area local music and culture" <ch-scene AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Screen, Guns IV - See it again for the very first time
  • Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 17:23:03 -0400

Sorry for the delay in replying, but I decided to get a few more facts about
the situation first. You know, since [cough] blogging is journalism and all.

So, I called Bob at the Starlite, having waited to not disturb one of his
remaining good-weather weekends. Here's what I learned by talking to Bob and
Kathy this afternoon:

BOTTOM LINE I: The gun shop is essential for paying the bills in the winter,
but overall accounts for only about 5% of the business' total yearly sales.
Video rentals account for about another 20%. This verifies part of Duncan's
argument. I was wrong to ignore his point in my blog post about this, and
wound up doing exactly what I accused Ruby of, namely, posting without clear
knowledge of the relationship between the various enterprises. Duncan, you
are correct and I apologize for that mistake in judgment.

BOTTOM LINE II:
Question: What group of people make up over 50% of Bob's gun customers?
Answer: Cops.

Most of them are county sheriff's deputies who, Bob says, have to pay for
any "second backup" guns out of their own pocket. Seems that Bob avoids the
50% markup he says most other gun shops charge in favor of a 10% (or less)
markup, and in return gets a steady supply of law enforcement customers
(including SBI, county, city, federal guards at Butner buying pepper spray,
etc.). It seems clear, Duncan, that Bob would at least retain those sales
where he is without the drive-in, which negates part of your argument. Looks
like you're batting .500, so bravo. Of course, the fact that Bob sells most
of his guns to (ahem) law enforcement officials at just a little over cost
(ahem) means it's even less likely the gun shop can be said to support the
drive-in.

Sorry, James.

BOTTOM LINE III: Bob said he has no plans to sell any assault-type weapons,
and certainly none that were covered under the now-expired ban. This is
good. He did point out the old news that many assault weapons were legal to
sell under the ban. He also noted that he reserves the right to refuse sales
to anyone.

[BOTTOM LINE IV - for Duncan's eyes only: I initially replied to Ruby in the
comments section of Lisa's original post (see
http://www.spacepod.org/rtp/archives/001579.html, where I was the one who
first posted that Inc. article). Not sure how you could have missed the fact
that I *started out* with semaphore signals in this one, but there it is.
Just thought I'd note that Ruby's lack of response to the business point,
either at Lisa's site or in the comments at her own, helps explain why I
took the discussion back here. It worked, too. Amazing, that democratizing
power of nonheirarchical communication, eh?]

Anyway, I was curious, dug around, found some info and reported it as
clearly as I could. Fucking journalism. Oh, and any print outlet using this
information without crediting me is clearly made up of a bunch of jerks. I
know how you people are.

FINAL BOTTOM LINE: Assuming Bob's answers were truthful, which I have no
inclination to doubt, it looks like the instinct that led some to accept the
gun shop without further investigation was correct. Others whose acceptance
was based solely in the 2nd Amendment will probably feel better anyway about
the way Bob handles things. Finally, Bob says most of the Starlite's current
crop of guns was quickly liquidated to raise money for the rebuilding, but
he still sells ammo and some guns to non-law enforcement buyers and plans to
continue doing so in the future, so it still seems to me that anyone who
could write this:

"If you think it's a good thing that they sell guns and ammo at the
drive-in, well I presume you don't mind getting held up at gun point in your
driveway, having kids get killed in the crossfire of gang wars, or mentally
unstable people going off their meds and shooting random passers-by."

...would have to be quite a hypocrite (i.e., not of the minor daily variety)
to point angry fingers at those who support the business, or support that
business him- or herself. I'll probably write this up for my site later
tonight but wanted y'all to be first to know. You know, loving Usenet as
much as I do.

todd wow the Indy prints letters without confirming the identity of the
sender that *does* open up fascinating new possibilities morman




  • Screen, Guns IV - See it again for the very first time, Todd Morman, 10/04/2004

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page