When searching for my AR-15 last spring, I considered several different models as I was a novice in the AR world. After reading several websites and magazines over the period of a couple months, I went to the gun stores to check different models out. It was then I first heard about how many gun companies are under the same ownership. I found out that Remington, Bushmaster, DPMS, H&R, Marlin, and several other famous firearm companies are owned by a holding company called Freedom Group, which in turn is owned by Cerberus Capital Management (the very same Cerberus who owned Chrysler prior to the bailout). Since then, they have acquired ammunition companies and are rumoured to be looking into a powder company.

After reading a little about Freedom Group, I noticed a rumour was spread that George Soros actually owned it and had nefarious plans to circumvent the 2nd amendment by shutting everything down. This led to the NRA investigating and coming out strongly saying that the Soros story was nothing more than an internet hoax and he has nothing to do with Freedom Group. Cerberus also seems to be pretty ruthless when it comes to making money and they have said they started acquiring these companies because guns and ammo was an area hedge funds have ignored and they seen the opportunity to make millions, so there is no risk of any of nefarious intentions (at least while these companies are profitable).

I still am leary about all these names under one roof. Consolidation has already somewhat happened when the old Bushmaster factory was shut down to move it closer to Freedom Group's base of operations (luckily, the former owner of Bushmaster and many former employees formed Windham Weaponry and started producing their own AR's). Having all these names under what is basically a hedge fund can lead to pushes for efficiency (think outsourcing), less innovation, and poor quality control. Plus, we seen how well Cerberus ran Chrysler with major outsourcing happening during their tenure as owner.

Personally, I think I will continue to purchase firearms who are still owned and ran by gun guys. And in case you are wondering, my choice of AR was a Ruger SR556. It seems many gun owners on this site already have quite the collection, but if you are in the market, would the consolidation of these companies under a hedge fund affect your decision on a purchase?

No two social issues create as strong feelings and cause people to dig their heels into the sand as gun control and abortion. In general, (and I realize there are many exceptions out there before I get hammered too hard for making a blanket statement ), those who lean to the left support gun control and oppose any restrictions on abortion while those on the right oppose abortion and any (more) restrictions on obtaining guns and ammo. The funny thing, it seems that neither side can see they make the same arguments on one issue as the other side on the other issue. What comes to mind is the slippery-slope argument. Any attempt to restrict abortions from the right (such as the abhorrent practice of partial-birth abortions and late term abortions where the mother's or baby's life is in danger) is usually met with the argument that doing so is only the first step to banning all abortions (which many on the right want). Any attempt to restrict gun ownership with "reasonable gun laws" is met with the argument on the right that any laws limiting access to guns is the first step to banning all guns (which many on the left want). Neither side, it seems, can acknowledge that their arguments echo each other.

I offer a compromise... a test, if you will, of how strongly you believe in each issue. Every restriction on one issue should earn a restriction on the other. Ban partial-birth and third trimester abortions (except mother's life in danger), ban all high-capacity magazines. Make abortion available only for rape, incest, and mother's life in danger, ban all semi-automatic weapons or handguns. Abortion available for mother's life in danger only, you can only own a bolt action rifle and a pump shotgun. I am those who read this can see my bias of where I lean, not to mention my comment history speaks to my beliefs on these issues (gun-nut, anti-abortion). I would hate giving them up, but I think I would be willing to give up everything but my bolt-action 30.06 and 12 gauge pump shotgun if abortion were limited to mother's life in danger only (I say that now, but I wonder how I would really feel in the parallel universe where this would actually happen).

I appreciate any thoughts, and although at times it is hard to do so with these two issues, please try to remain civil.

Howdy. I know there are several of you who post on this site who own several guns who know far more about them than me. Although I have a couple semi-auto pistols, I am wanting to add a revolver to my collection and for my shooting fun. Without even knowing about the passionate debate about these two guns, I narrowed it down to the S&W 686 and Ruger GP100. I plan on purchasing either the 2.5" or 3" barrel gun on whichever one I decide. So far, I like the looks of the S&W, but the Ruger is more friendly on the wallet. I have also read online about how Rugers are built like a tank. I have yet to hold either firearm, and doing so will play into my decision. I guess what I am asking: do any of you out there have a strong opinion either way about the better of these two firearms and what made you form this opinion? Has anyone out there shot both, and which one did you like better and why?

I know several of you are avid gun owners and I would love to hear your opinion either way. I know you won't let me down.

A real American celebrates the Fourth of July by driving their Hyundai (Made in Korea 1) to Wal-Mart to purchase patriotic decorations and American flags (Made in China 2), a patriotic shirt (made in Pakistan 3), and an American flag hat (made in Cambodia 4). It is then time to go to the food isle and pick up hamburger meat and tomatoes (slaughtered and picked by illegal immigrants). Next, a real American gets back in their Hyundai and goes to the fireworks stand to purchase massive amounts of small explosives (again, all Made in China). They then go home to cook out on their Char-Broil (5) grill, listen to Lee Greenwood on their new stereo system (who knows where that was produced), and then set off their small explosives that end up landing in their neighbor's yard and scaring their pets. They go to bed and wake the next day, turn on cable news, and blame either the government, or big business when the pundits talk about unemployment.

1 South Korea still refuses import our beef while thousands protest against the United States. Hyundai has also invested billions in North Korea's Kaesong district and uses North Korean labor in some of their manufacturing.

2 China holds trillions in US debt, and uses cheap labor to entice manufacturing away from other nations. China's constantly devalues it currency to keep their goods cheap. Their military is consistently developing weapons to challenge the United States such as the carrier killer missile and anti-satellite technology. China also holds a vast majority of rare earth metal mining, needed for electronics (without rare earth metals, we go back to the 1940's in technology), and is slowly stopping exports as they would have a world monopoly on electronics and technology.

3 Pakistan basically harbored Osama bin Laden for over half a decade in relative luxury. Although the United States gives them billions in aid, Pakistan is very slow in helping with intelligence against the Taliban and al Qaeda.

4 Cambodia is the sweatshop to the world. Conditions are so bad in many of these plants that many women would rather go into the sex trade than work there.

5 Char-Broil closed its last American plant in 2006 and now builds all their grills in China. Same with all Kenmore grills. Some Webers and Huningtons are made in USA.

My wife and I often have an argument on what to call the center light of a stoplight. She almost becomes irate when I call it an orange light, because she contends that everyone else in the world calls it a yellow light. I tell her that I have heard people call it an orange light most of my life, and ask her what color the light is closest to...a banana, or an ORANGE.

So commenters and bloggers of the LJWorld, what is your take on this very important issue?