This ammo shortage is getting to be outrageous!

[eye95]

I provided a hint, you missed it. So, here it is again, the "Walmart syndrome." Some call it the "Walmart effect", but I hold that Walmart has a more sinister intent.....as all free market players should. Our Founding documents permit the feds to "regulate" commerce and thus "protect" us from the Walmarts, Googles, and Microsofts of the world. The fact that the feds have abused this power is irrelevant.

I accept the fact that a "economic market operating by free competition" does not exist as I would like it to exist.

The post to which you were responding was insultingly pedantic.

Pedantry has its place. As a matter of fact, I am going to get a bit pedantic now.

Syllogisms are useless unless the underlying premises are true. Even when they seem to be true, they are always questionable. One of the fundamental lessons from Euclidean Geometry is that ALL conclusions, no matter how many syllogisms through which one must trace back, are based on postulates or axioms that the logician is accepting as true without proof.

If folks participating in a discussion are operating from diametrically opposed axioms, they can only argue in circles. If they manage to isolate their axioms for discussion, even that cannot be fruitful, as, again, axioms are, by definition, unprovable and accepted without proof.

Someone being insultingly pedantic ain't gonna change that.

 

[KYGlockster]

....................../´¯/)
....................,/¯../
.................../..../
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯\
........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
.........\.................'...../
..........''...\.......... _.·´
............\..............(
..............\.............\...

Again: struggling college student. Not my fault.

You don't have to stop doing what you're doing, but you might as well stop trying to excuse your way around the fact that it makes you a selfish *******.

Listen, guys. Nobody's saying we don't understand hoarding, or we want to ban it.

We're merely saying, well, see above. No different from how you treat us, really.

WELL, TO GET BACK ON TOPIC OF THE OP:

I too am a struggling full-time college student and I also have a full-time job as a peace officer. I have two little girls that require my care as well, so needless to say I am feeling the effects of our current economic situation.

I did, however, purchase as much ammunition as I could afford every time I received a pay-check over the last four years. Anyone with an open mind should have thought of the possibility of this happening with the current administration in Washington, and should have prepared accordingly. Any time you have a known anti-gun politician as our president then instances such as this could happen at the drop of a hat.

I now have several thousand rounds of ammunition in every caliber I own, and I obtained this stock over several years buying a box or two at a time. Yes the economy is in decline and the lower class is certainly feeling this, but we are still able to purchase important items if we do so intelligently.

Eventually all of those that purchased this ammunition at eleveated prices will wish they hadn't and they will have to either set on it or sell it for a loss. Once this happens I would recommend buying as much ammunition as you can whenever you can. We can ALWAYS use ammunition and having it setting in the safe is better than not having any at all. Develop a budget that will allow you to purchase a few boxes of ammunition each month and try to keep some of it stored back.

Storing ammunition in quantity is not hoarding, but rather an intelligent choice. We never know what can happen tomorrow, and keeping plenty of ammunition on hand for our firearms is just good sense.

 

[marshaul]

WELL, TO GET BACK ON TOPIC OF THE OP:

I too am a struggling full-time college student and I also have a full-time job as a peace officer. I have two little girls that require my care as well, so needless to say I am feeling the effects of our current economic situation.

I did, however, purchase as much ammunition as I could afford every time I received a pay-check over the last four years. Anyone with an open mind should have thought of the possibility of this happening with the current administration in Washington, and should have prepared accordingly. Any time you have a known anti-gun politician as our president then instances such as this could happen at the drop of a hat.

I now have several thousand rounds of ammunition in every caliber I own, and I obtained this stock over several years buying a box or two at a time. Yes the economy is in decline and the lower class is certainly feeling this, but we are still able to purchase important items if we do so intelligently.

Eventually all of those that purchased this ammunition at eleveated prices will wish they hadn't and they will have to either set on it or sell it for a loss. Once this happens I would recommend buying as much ammunition as you can whenever you can. We can ALWAYS use ammunition and having it setting in the safe is better than not having any at all. Develop a budget that will allow you to purchase a few boxes of ammunition each month and try to keep some of it stored back.

Storing ammunition in quantity is not hoarding, but rather an intelligent choice. We never know what can happen tomorrow, and keeping plenty of ammunition on hand for our firearms is just good sense.

Sorry, I just don't think storing ammo is so cool. It's bulky and expensive.

I reload.

I might somewhat increase my .22 LR buying habits, but I ain't gonna stockpile a round with so little survival utility.

 

[OC for ME]

The post to which you were responding was insultingly pedantic.

Pedantry has its place. As a matter of fact, I am going to get a bit pedantic now.

Syllogisms are useless unless the underlying premises are true. Even when they seem to be true, they are always questionable. One of the fundamental lessons from Euclidean Geometry is that ALL conclusions, no matter how many syllogisms through which one must trace back, are based on postulates or axioms that the logician is accepting as true without proof.

If folks participating in a discussion are operating from diametrically opposed axioms, they can only argue in circles. If they manage to isolate their axioms for discussion, even that cannot be fruitful, as, again, axioms are, by definition, unprovable and accepted without proof.

Someone being insultingly pedantic ain't gonna change that.

Quite true. "The Walmart effect" is a proven effect on free markets. The federal government holds a very similar position as Walmart, as a consumer of goods, in one half of the free market. Walmart then resells their purchased goods which then places them in the other half of the free market. The feds are, with very few exceptions, in the business of selling the goods they purchase.

The post I responded to is nothing more than obstinance on display.

 

[OC for ME]

Quite true. "The Walmart effect" is a proven effect on free markets. The federal government holds a very similar position as Walmart, as a consumer of goods, in one half of the free market. Walmart then resells their purchased goods which then places them in the other half of the free market. The feds are, with very few exceptions, in the business of not selling the goods they purchase.

The post I responded to is nothing more than obstinance on display.

Dang!! :banghead:

 

[marshaul]

The post to which you were responding was insultingly pedantic.

OC for ME: If you felt my sarcastic tone rose to the level of being insulting, you have my apologies.

 

[OC for ME]

OC for ME: If you felt my sarcastic tone rose to the level of being insulting, you have my apologies.

No apology necessary. Good sarcasm. Not everybody gets it. +1 to you Sir.

By the way, how much (roughly) reloaded ammo do you store before use? Include all calibers and gages. I keep around 1000 for each weapon on top of planned target shooting and training kids on guns and marksmanship. Though, my 14 y/o seems to be intentionally not shooting well so as to prolong the practice times. Costing some money on the .243 .308.

 

[marshaul]

No apology necessary. Good sarcasm. Not everybody gets it. +1 to you Sir.

By the way, how much (roughly) reloaded ammo do you store before use? Include all calibers and gages. I keep around 1000 for each weapon on top of planned target shooting and training kids on guns and marksmanship. Though, my 14 y/o seems to be intentionally not shooting well so as to prolong the practice times. Costing some money on the .243 .308.

Kind of depends. I don't shoot all calibers extensively. I primarily shoot .45, .22, and .223. Rarely will I have more than 500 rounds or so of .45 ACP loaded, but I usually have the components for a couple thousand more. Give or take. I don't mind doing a reloading session frequently, though. Sometimes I do a session right before I shoot, and just shoot however many I made that day.

.22 of course I don't reload, but formerly I usually would have about 2 or 3 bricks on hand. Maybe I'll double that in the future.

I'm still waiting on a die and a trimmer for .223, but .223 I actually do plan to load up a whole ammo can or two, and leave them untouched. From there'd I'd probably wanna have 500-1000 rounds around for practice, and again the components for a couple thousand more.

I never buy brass so I'm limited by how much I've acquired. I only have maybe 2000 .45 ACP cases, and given they won't all be clean and loaded at any given time, that means my capacity to make more is larger than how many I'm likely to actually have ready to go.

 

[Flounder]

If after the first election of Obama, people didn't learn a lesson about making sure they have the ammo they need, then it is their own fault. I don't think anyone can be blamed for scarffing up what they can, when they can. It's kind of like having 7 cars and not being able to get any gas, they are then deemed useless.

What about those of us who were not old enough to purchase a handgun "last time"? I just bought mine about a month ago, and have been slowly buying ammo. I have a .45 and get to travel a lot and have been able to find moderately low prices. Or at least what I think are moderate prices. I am not sure because I never paid attention to it before I bought the gun.

I am fortunate enough to have a well paying job, and my expenses are under control and well under my wages. So I have "extra" money to spend. This has allowed me to purchase around 2500 rounds over the last 4 weeks. About 1400 of it has gone through the gun which leaves me about 1100 rounds. Of that, 500 are SD rounds (various brands and such, still testing out which I like better). The remaining are FMJ for shooting. I have found several places here in KY that have ammo, and I continue to buy 200-400 rounds a week. I am hoping to have a "stash" of 4000-5000 rounds.

I also have been keeping my brass because I am shopping around for reloading equipment. None of this should make me a hoarder. I enjoy shooting, I am still getting acclimated with my gun, and I have the ability to purchase.


ALSO if you are anywhere near Bardstown, KY, the LGS down here (KY Gun Co) has PLENTY of ammo. They do limit boxes per day, but they have 9, 40, 45, 22, 223, and just about everything else. Prices on some are high but I just picked up 100 rounds of 45 FMJ for about 48.

 

[marshaul]

What about those of us who were not old enough to purchase a handgun "last time"?

What about you?

"I've got mine, so **** you."

Sorry, but the only moral thing for me to do is gouge you. Free market, doncha know.

/eye95

 

[Flounder]

What about you?

"I've got mine, so **** you."

Sorry, but the only moral thing for me to do is gouge you. Free market, doncha know.

/eye95

And I have no issues with that. I will just choose to buy elsewhere. I was only responding on the comment that it was MY fault for not buying sooner.

 

[marshaul]

And I have no issues with that. I will just choose to buy elsewhere. I was only responding on the comment that it was MY fault for not buying sooner.

Haha, that post was called "sarcasm".

 

[eye95]

Where did I ever say that the ONLY moral thing to do was gouge?

I don't expect honesty from that poster and rarely get it.

Folks, if you want to know my opinion on rising prices when supply and demand get horribly out of sync, please read what *I* write, and not what someone dishonestly tries to represent for me.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[marshaul]

Where did I ever say that the ONLY moral thing to do was gouge?

You're right, which is why I didn't actually quote you. I hyperbolized (obviously I'd say), but not by much:

There is nothing wrong with gouging. In fact, it is quite moral. Sell things for what the market will bear. If you sell it for less, folks who don't really need it will buy it just because, under the circumstances, it is a good deal. Folks who really need it, badly enough to pay the current market price, will then be denied.

It's called free enterprise. It works. When it is messed with, it doesn't.

The reason for the current shortages is that sellers have not jacked up prices sufficiently to account for the imbalance between demand and supply.

Frankly, I don't know why you brought morality into it in the first place. Gouging, or not gouging – neither is aggressive.




To the forum: eye loves to play victim, but on this very page I called him out for doing exactly what he accuses me of: creating a straw man and "putting words in" another's mouth, as you all can plainly see. So, he's no victim.

 

[Flounder]

Haha, that post was called "sarcasm".

Meh. Wasnt sure. But now I know!

 

[stealthyeliminator]

Government should not be regulating the free market.

The government can't regulate a free market... The moment it's regulated (by government, as this is in every case unnatural manipulation), it's no longer free. Monopoly of coercion is the/a premise of government, and there's never anything free about it, or anything free about anything it does. The moment it drops monopoly of coercion it's no longer government, it's a competing business.

 

[eye95]

Again, where did I say that gouging was the ONLY moral thing?

I avoid this word like the plague, but the obvious and malicious deception here demands it: In this matter, this poster is being a liar.

Anyway, having fully pointed out his LIE, I will move on.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[OC for ME]

The government can't regulate a free market... The moment it's regulated (by government, as this is in every case unnatural manipulation), it's no longer free. Monopoly of coercion is the/a premise of government, and there's never anything free about it, or anything free about anything it does. The moment it drops monopoly of coercion it's no longer government, it's a competing business.

I respectfully disagree and submit the below for your review.

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

I have omitted several powers not related to commerce. All of these affect, regulate the free market. Congress has, with the blessings of the SCOTUS, traveled very far beyond what our Founders envisioned re the powers of Congress to regulate commerce. But, regulate the "free market" Congress does and does as "directed" by the Constitution.

It is my view that the Kelo decision in 2005, I think that is the year, was the third or second to last nail in the coffin.....so to speak.

 

[marshaul]

Again, where did I say that gouging was the ONLY moral thing?

I avoid this word like the plague, but the obvious and malicious deception here demands it: In this matter, this poster is being a liar.

Anyway, having fully pointed out his LIE, I will move on.

Where did I ever say that the ONLY moral thing to do was gouge?

You're right, which is why I didn't actually quote you. I hyperbolized (obviously I'd say), but not by much:

There is nothing wrong with gouging. In fact, it is quite moral. Sell things for what the market will bear. If you sell it for less, folks who don't really need it will buy it just because, under the circumstances, it is a good deal. Folks who really need it, badly enough to pay the current market price, will then be denied.

eye95 is lying about my having lied. I didn't say he said "ONLY", freely admitted he didn't, and in fact willingly quoted his exact words. He's, therefore, a liar himself. And he must have missed that story about casting the first stone.

 

[CDT COX]

I have 2100rds of 5.56 and 1000rds of .380acp. I need more!