Here's kind of an interesting topic as it's not so much about anti-gunners against pro-gunners, it's actually something that people within the pro-2A community don't seem to agree about. That is import bans.
Over the decades, there have been a number of bans against the importation of firearms. For example, that whole "point system" that either allows or denies the importation of handguns, or the ban on importing Chinese ammo as well as most Chinese firearms. Or the Clinton-era ban on most Russian-made handguns.
Some schools of thought say these bands are good in that they protect domestic manufactures. With workers in China, for example, earning $100-$300 per month, Chinese-made guns could be priced far lower than any American-made counterparts. Thus widespread availability of firearms from places like China or Russia (where the average worker makes around $560 per month) could seriously hurt American gun makers. This side doesn't think these bans violate 2A is the gov't isn't saying "You can't get an M4" they're saying you can't get one from China.
The contrary opinion is that these bans limit the number of guns and types of guns available to people, and also causes the cost of buying a gun to go up... and anything that limits the kind of gun you can have and makes it more expensive for you to have a gun, is a violation of 2A. This side holds that American manufacturers will do just fine, as the existing import bans still do allow quite a few foreign-made firearms and these don't appear to be hurting American makers. That is if cheap Chinese M4's were available, most buyers would still prefer to buy American.
I tend to side with the latter opinion, but was curious as to what perspectives other people had and what the most widely held opinion is...
Over the decades, there have been a number of bans against the importation of firearms. For example, that whole "point system" that either allows or denies the importation of handguns, or the ban on importing Chinese ammo as well as most Chinese firearms. Or the Clinton-era ban on most Russian-made handguns.
Some schools of thought say these bands are good in that they protect domestic manufactures. With workers in China, for example, earning $100-$300 per month, Chinese-made guns could be priced far lower than any American-made counterparts. Thus widespread availability of firearms from places like China or Russia (where the average worker makes around $560 per month) could seriously hurt American gun makers. This side doesn't think these bans violate 2A is the gov't isn't saying "You can't get an M4" they're saying you can't get one from China.
The contrary opinion is that these bans limit the number of guns and types of guns available to people, and also causes the cost of buying a gun to go up... and anything that limits the kind of gun you can have and makes it more expensive for you to have a gun, is a violation of 2A. This side holds that American manufacturers will do just fine, as the existing import bans still do allow quite a few foreign-made firearms and these don't appear to be hurting American makers. That is if cheap Chinese M4's were available, most buyers would still prefer to buy American.
I tend to side with the latter opinion, but was curious as to what perspectives other people had and what the most widely held opinion is...