Menu Content/Inhalt
Media questions affordable firearm made in Ohio PDF Print E-mail
Written by Jeff Garvas   
Monday, 21 February 2005

In a span of several days last week, several Ohio television outlets turned their focus of attention to the "problem" of inexpensive firearms which low-income families use to protect their homes.

Although Cleveland's WKYC admits most of the Hi-Point 9mm handguns that are used in crimes are purchased "on the street", the story goes on to blame gun shows and Ohio law for the misuse of these firearms.

Click on the "Read More..." link below for more.

From the story:

    Many are purchased on the streets. But investigators say gun shows have also become a goldmine for Hi-Points in part because Ohio law permits multiple gun sales - and under certain circumstances, with no records - which has helped Ohio become a nationwide leader in guns sold here - and used out of state in crimes.

    But for now, these $99 deals continue to be a blue light special - only to later invade the mean streets of northeast Ohio.
Later in the story, the price issue is raised again:

    … police say that dealers who sell the Hi-Points for $99 are creating an easy avenue for bad guys to arm themselves. So i[s] there anything police can do about the price to maybe make it more difficult to get the $99 guns?

    Hi-Point actually recommends dealers sell them for a bit more.

    But the dealers set the price and unfortunately, police say Hi-Points bought in bulk end up sold on the streets for as little as $20 a piece, which again, makes them attractive to criminals.
Does WKYC honestly expect us to believe there are legitimate gun businesses in this state who would utilize a business-model of purchasing these firearms at cost and selling them at a loss of several hundred percent? How ridiculous.

The bottom line is this: as with so-called "Saturday Night Special" bans, efforts to prevent the sale of these inexpensive firearms, or to force a price increase, would not succeed in reducing criminals' access. Instead, such efforts would only serve to discriminate against low-income citizens, many of whom live in high-crime areas, who can't afford to spend $500 or so to buy a Glock, Springfield, Kimber, Para-Ordnance or Beretta for home/self-defense.