How about another legal lesson on the portability of the Castle Doctrine? As always, you were so sure and condescending about that one too. And 100% wrong. Or about how 30+ year old cartridges suck (even though on another thread your personal favorite of 7mm-08 is even older than that?). Or how everything needs to be shot in the brainstem?

Knowing a lot about a few things does not translate into knowing everything about everything. Your problem is you simply don’t know what you don’t know. You prove that daily. BS spouted confidently and condescendingly is still BS.

Edit: see the figures presented below showing that hunters drive the spending drain more than all others combined.

Your analogy about the restaurants is 100% false. I worked in a gun store for 3 years in college. I sold more AR15s than just about any rifle COMBINED. And most were sold to people who were buying it for home defense or recreational shooting. Shooters buy WAY more ammo and guns than hunters do.

Now we’ve gone from competition shooters to AR recreational shooters.

Always moving targets in here.....

NP you need to do a little research on how many AR15 style rifles have been bought in the past decade. And I would venture to guess very few are used strictly for hunting.

Probably 50% of competition shooters shoot AR15s

What does that have anything to do with the fact that shooters buy way more guns and ammo than hunters?

If you read the discussion, the point being discussed was that competition shooters buy more than hunters. Then, it changed.

Can you elaborate on your experience with competition shooters?

Which has nothing to do with anything since I am not claiming any expertise on competition shooting. The topic is what drives gun sales.

I haven’t been around that many competition guys but everyone I have ever met was what I would call a “recreational” shooter. Which is why I said it in the first place. My point was that hunters don’t buy near the amount of guns and ammo than guys who just like to shoot. You seem to be dodging the point by nitpicking on the word recreational instead of competition

I’m not dodging anything. The discussion was competition shooting vs. hunting. Not recreational.

If you want to change the discussion to recreational and include black rifle sales, I wouldn’t be nearly as confident about the disparity of the sales figures. There’s a heckuva lot of black rifle sales.

Ok, just some quick numbers here.

https://www.shootingillustrated.com...ns-spend-169-billion-on-target-shooting/

According to this article, target shooters (which I assume includes competition shooters) spend about $16.9 Billion annually (2018 numbers)

https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/n...ns-participated-hunting-fishing-wildlife

According to this article, total expenditures by hunters in 2016 was $25.6 Billion. However this number includes things like clothing and licenses, so a direct comparison is not possible.

Interestingly, the first article states that the number of people who participate in "target shooting" in 2018 is 13.5 million and increasing. The number of hunters in 2016 was 11.5 million and declining. I am sure that a lot of those people are the same in both totals for now.

So, what? Well it seems that hunters do spend more money, but I would still be willing to bet that less than half of that $25.6 Billion was on firearms, ammo or components. On the other hand, I would bet that a majority of that $16.9 Billion was on those things.

So maybe a better argument would be that target shooters, including competition shooters, spend more on firearms, firearm accessories, ammo, and components than hunters do.

As for the comment about marketing, almost all of the ads that I get in the mail or email are targeting the shooting crowd. Nothing specific toward any group more than the other. For those gun companies that mainly make hunting guns, then yes, I would expect that most of their marketing is geared toward hunters. Hornady, Sierra, Federal, Hodgdon, Alliant, VV, and others... not so much.

OK so now you’ve expanded it to recreational shooters too. Even at that, it appears that hunters still drive the spending train.

Thanks for doing the research and presenting it.

Thought the argument was about disparity in gun sales? Those numbers aren’t based solely on gun sales.

I concur, but that does not mean you will not take shots at those who can and are more than willing to as the record shows.

My pleasure.

One of the things that these numbers do help in showing is that those firearms and cartridges that can "bridge the gap" between recreational, competition, and hunting are going to have a lot longer longevity than those that can't.

Which is why the 30-06, .308, .223, .300 Win Mag, and 6.5CM will be still be popular while the 7mm Rem Mag, .270 WSM, .300 BO, and others will be less available as time goes on.
(Sorry to get back to the original topic. )

First, the argument was expanded by you (from competition vs. hunting to recreational vs. hunting). And the original discussion included accessories. So you have been off base from the get-go.
I said that if expanded to recreational I wouldn’t be as confident in there being such a disparity.

Now, the figures are presented showing hunters clearly spend way more than other groups. Some assumptions are made re:guns that are just that - assumptions.

What we do know is hunters spend approaching twice as much on their pursuits than all recreational shooters combined on their pursuits.

I see you’re playing umpire again.

My response:

One man’s presenting facts to set the record straight is another man’s “taking shots”. All depends on whose ox is being gored I reckon.

No, It is just the simple fact that you want to tell others what they should and should not do. You love bringing it up and nobody cares but you and that is why you got to the place we do not speak of. We obviously do not give a [censored] what you think so stop telling us.

P.S. I will not take a deer over 200 yards. It is just a matter of perspective and you have foggy glasses when it comes to this topic.

Now you are changing your tune to include accessories? Because of two random articles? Wow. You really are a piece of work...



I said, recreational shooters. Which includes competition shooters. I also said that guns and ammo are bought in a much greater quantity by "shooters" than hunters. Those articles include accessories and if you know anything about retail sales, accessories and clothing make up more than 75% of the sales. Let me reiterate, your original discussion with someone else means nothing to me. Academy only sells guns because they started as an outdoors store. They make very little on their actual gun and ammo sales.

Damn it, y’all are going to make me buy another flashlight. Have you ever tried to explain why you spent a s-ton on a flashlight? My wife wasn’t impressed at the The tree down the roads foliage and I had my salesman britches on.

It won't be the .243 It's the perfect cartridge for Texas deer hunting and everything else is inferior!

On so many levels 2Beez......

What did I say that was wrong?