I can't help it but I'm pissed

[98SS1LWEE]

okay is selling an ATI GSG 52 4 1200 freaking dollar it's a 400 dollar gun of all the r of all the recent shootings people are doing really stupid things like this and it's ruining our sport I personally enjoy looking for used firearms at a decent price unless I go to the unless I go to the dealer that would be alrigh but nowadays is becomin but nowadays is becoming so hard to get dealers the don't try to destroy you with extreme pricing as well oh how I do miss my it is so much okay ran okay rant completed thanks thanks guys

[98SS1LWEE]

Well my phone ensured that made no sense. I think its as mad as I am. Overpriced guns for no reason, that's the bottom line, the end.

[GlockSpock]

Equilibrium.

 

Equilibrium is where the supply meets the demand. The point in which these two meet is the market price. Anything below the market price and you have a shortage. If, magically speaking, right now 7.62x39mm rounds were going for 25 cents a round, there would be a huge shortage. You wouldn't be able to find it anywhere, at all. That's assuming that 25 cents was as high as they could possibly sale. 

 

Personally, I like knowing that I can buy something (even at a higher rate) due to the market adjusting, vs not being able to buy something because I literally cannot find it. I don't know what people are actually paying for 7.62x39mm ammo, but if they are paying for it at $1 per round, all that would happen if it were currently going for 25 cents a round is people would buy four times as much. It would disappear 400% quicker. If they are paying $1 per round, it is based upon the fact that the supply cannot keep up with the demand. The demand for II Amendment related stuff over the last month has skyrocketed. The only things that can bring price back down are two possible things:

 

Supply catches up with demand.

Demand falls.

 

Both of those are based upon what the speculation of legislation is.

 

If the suppliers feel a ban is coming, do you think they wish to invest capital in expanding production lines? If demand feels a ban is coming, that means they have to purchase everything they want now. 

 

If the suppliers don't feel a ban is coming, do you think they will invest capital in expanding production lines in order to meet the current demand? Perhaps. It depends on how much capital they need to invest vs expected return. If demand feels a ban isn't coming, do you think they will pay inflated prices?

 

Also, I offer this bid of supposed wisdom. People keep complaining about inflated prices. Well, I've also heard the following logic promoted around here, "Don't sale anything that you would regret selling if a ban were to pass". In other words, even if you could sale your AR-15 for $3000 that you only paid $1000 for, is it really worth it if a ban comes within this year? Over the next decade, would you rather have your AR-15 or an extra $3000? 

 

I take that logic and ask the other side of the same coin. If you do not have an AR-15, and you know you want one, is $3000 worth the security in knowing that you have one that you can own today? What if legislative talks this week go haywire and not in our favor? Then AR-15 prices will jump even more. $5000? $10,000? It all depends on demand and supply. If you do not have an AR-15, and want one, and you knew 100% that a ban would pass within a few months, what would you pay? Would you rather have that AR-15 over the next 10 years, or the $3,000, $5,000, or $10,000 that it costs to purchase it. That is called opportunity cost. 

 

There are those that say a ban won't pass. Many people said that in '94. Hell. Remember, supposedly the Hughes Amendment didn't pass. Try paying the taxes on a newly manufactured machine gun as a citizen and see how that goes for you. Look at healthcare. How much of the country was and is against it? Guess what we have now. Tell me the ban won't pass. I hope you are right. But what if you are wrong? One, five, ten years from now, are you going to be spiteful at how much "price gouging" went on in 2013, or are you going to be spiteful that you didn't buy a few more magazines and possibly a gun or two and some ammo? If a ban passes, I doubt it will be the first. 

 

I don't agree with the accepted concept of "price gouging". In order to believe in price gouging, I claim that you must first believe that the seller has an obligation to sell you something. If you own a gas station and a national crisis such as 9/11 happens, who says you have to sale your gas in the first place? What if you wish to keep the tanks full so that you know you have a steady supply for yourself for a while? You might say to yourself, "I am keeping this gas, but if someone wants to pay me $100 a gallon, I'll sell them how ever much they want". A few people might take you up on that, and you might make a huge return on a percentage of your initial investment. But if the price is capped (price ceiling), look what happens. People buy a lot of it and then it is all gone! 

 

Some will disagree with me. I know. Some will agree. I have a very strong belief in the free market system. 

 

Equilibrium 

(It's also a really great movie)

[Dad03]

If its a private owner selling at those prices well their just being an azz hat. No one ever said all gun owners are decent people. If they are dealers they are panicing. Once this ban goes through most will probably shutdown or see sales reduce so much they need to learn the phrase " you want fries with that".

Just think of all the manufacturers of these guns and gear that unless they have the military or LEO contract will be affected.

You would think it would be a bit of the opposite happening. If a dealer is holding on to a stash of these guns and mags because of the stupid prices once the ban hits they end up holding un sellable goods (for at least 4 more years). Edited January 10, 2013 by Dad03

[E4 No More]

Does anyone remember what happened to the politicians who voted for the last AWB??? You can bet the ones that are there now remember.

[atlas3025]

Does anyone remember what happened to the politicians who voted for the last AWB??? You can bet the ones that are there now remember.

 

A big difference then is that the vote was in the same year as the election.  This time the vote would be almost 2 years before the next election.  After what just happened with the Presidential Election, I'm not so sure the Democrats will be so fearful of losing their seats.

[Oh Shoot]

A big difference then is that the vote was in the same year as the election. ...

 

Well, was same year as midterm election, yes. Bill signed into law Sept. 13, 1994. Mid term elections 6 weeks later in Nov. 1994 Voter turnout for that year was on par with normal.

 

Turnout for the full election in 1996 was actually lower than normal.

 

Which all means: something. Maybe.

 

- OS