Sometimes I hate the free market: buying frenzy is ON!


PDA






elcaminoariba
January 11, 2011, 06:29 PM
Sigh. I hate this. That damn shooting has caused a buying frenzy. I went to cheaperthandirt to check my knee jerk order (of 3 of the 33 rd glock mags at the 29.99 price :neener: ) and noticed the price has jumped ten bucks in 24 hours. Even though I'm one of the ones who has engaged in the frenzy, I want it to calm down (talk about conflicted :o )

Midwayusa has just lengthened the time for when these mags will be back in stock. It went from Feb 14 to March 7. Sounds like the warehouses got utterly CLEANED OUT in the last few days.

Has anyone seen Glocks flying off the shelves? My favorite local dealer is having trouble getting them, but I don't know about other dealers. A statement from Glock would be cool but probably aint gonna happen because they don't want to be seen as profiting from the actions of a criminal, even though they ARE and never intended to.

Should I hate cheaperthandirt for essentially profiting off the tragedy by raising their prices?

If you enjoyed reading about "Sometimes I hate the free market: buying frenzy is ON!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Dr.Rob
January 11, 2011, 07:01 PM
You realize you are part of the problem, right?

RTR_RTR
January 11, 2011, 07:08 PM
Does anyone actually cc hi cap mags? Kind of cumbersome given the limited chance you'd need 33 instead of 15 rounds. Hell, just pocket or waistband a second 15.

Yo Mama
January 11, 2011, 07:16 PM
Should I hate cheaperthandirt for essentially profiting off the tragedy by raising their prices?

Yes! I can't stand CTD, they never have good prices, and every time they have jacked up their prices to milk us dry.

I'll never do business with them.

Now, for your concern, don't worry about it. Legislation has no chance of passing in the current atmosphere.

I was talking with a gun store owner here, and he said he got slammed with the price he paid for 7.62, vs. what he can sell it for now. He lost alot of money. It all comes down a bit eventually.

elcaminoariba
January 11, 2011, 07:18 PM
You realize you are part of the problem, right? Yes I do, and I essentially admitted as much in the opening post. I couldn't resist to place the order, and I'll also admit that I'm glad I did now that the price has jumped. With those shameful individuals admitting that they're introducing a magazine ban to capitalize on this, that price could be over $50 a mag before my order arrives.

RTR is correct on the bulkiness of the 33 rd mags, but it is nice to have when you're at the range. Remember RTR, the tyrants consider 15 rounds to be "high capacity."

FruitCake
January 11, 2011, 07:23 PM
I've never liked the 33 round magazine anyway.

HOWARD J
January 11, 2011, 07:35 PM
I never liked high cap mags--Way back when---My kids liked to dump 32 rds out of our
Uzi in 4 seconds----guess who was doing the reloading ! ! !

swordsmn
January 11, 2011, 07:36 PM
...>

TexasBill
January 11, 2011, 07:51 PM
You want it to calm down? Cancel your order. Then you have nothing to worry about or get excited over.

Okay, Representative McCarthy says she is going to introduce legislation restricting whatever it is she thinks she can get away with restricting. The Speaker of the House will then assign it to the House Committee on the Judiciary which will shuffle it off to a subcommittee. Incidentally, McCarthy is not a member of any of these committees. There it will join the third filing of the Blair Holt bill in waiting the two years until the legislative calendar is cleared again.

You've got a fairly conservative Republican majority in the House, the new Speaker is rated "A" by the National Rifle Association. You also still have some of the conservative Democrats from the 2008 election.

Even if the bill made it out of committee, there would be debate on the floor and it would still require a majority of those voting to approve it to even go to the Senate where they would debate it and there is no filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

This would all take some time and it would only happen if the bill makes it out of committee, which just isn't likely.

Does any of this sound like anybody needs to be rushing out to buy anything?

TNT in Round Rock
January 11, 2011, 08:02 PM
well put TexasBill

gearhead
January 11, 2011, 08:11 PM
I suppose some parts of a ban could be done through Executive Order, but this administration is too concerned about holding power in 2012.

Sport45
January 11, 2011, 09:21 PM
I had no use for a magazine that sticks past the grip of my pistols before and have no need for one now. Didn't affect me at all.

brandon_mcg
January 11, 2011, 09:26 PM
i'm sure gun store owners feel the opposite.

the owner of my local gun shop said his AR style rifle sales skyrocketed when Obama came into office. I'm sure many shop owners are experiencing the same rise in purchases after this tragedy.

Old Fuff
January 11, 2011, 09:32 PM
Last I knew, CDNN Sports (www.cdnnsports.com) had all of these magazines on sale.

I was truly upset when they didn't have anything for a S&W 1905 Hand Ejector, 4th chg. :neener:

For those that want to freed the frenzy, HAVE AT IT!!

Tomcat47
January 11, 2011, 09:50 PM
I dont forsee any gun control or ban going past a Rep. House!

Be thankful things changed last Nov!

I feel if everyone will just calm down this will go away pretty quickly..

IMO :uhoh:

John Wayne
January 11, 2011, 09:58 PM
Cheaper Than Dirt is notorious for jacking up the price and adding hidden fees. If you still want to get in on the panic buying, I'd do it from some other retailer.

The Lone Haranguer
January 11, 2011, 10:01 PM
You realize you are part of the problem, right?
And CTD - although they're probably not the only one - has no part in it?

Carne Frio
January 11, 2011, 10:13 PM
You can always count on CTD !

Deus Machina
January 11, 2011, 10:16 PM
I had no use for a magazine that sticks past the grip of my pistols before and have no need for one now. Didn't affect me at all.

And that's the beginning of problems. If you don't oppose a ban on extended magazines because it doesn't affect you, you may not oppose a band against magazines above ten rounds because you carry a 7-round 1911, and eventually something comes around that bans anything with a removable magazine, and suddenly the revolver guys with that mindset are on the opposing side.

Ahem. Anyway...

My original point: We have to fear the anti's and fence-sitters more, right now. Even if they're not a majority, the reason this is unlikely to pass is because we worry about this sort of thing. Any reasonable senator knows that confirming your voter base's fears is bad for business.

hso
January 11, 2011, 10:44 PM
As pointed out, McCarthy, who after better than a decade opposing lawful firearms ownership still can't accurately identify the part(s) of a firearm, always submits a "new" sweeping restriction on gunowners every year.

As also pointed out, she has no political credibility and holds no respected positions in Congress (even when in the majority) and as such her symbolic gesture slides into the background noise and disappears.

She's not the be ignored, but she's no fire breathing dragon to be feared.

If you don't want to pay "too much" for firearms or firearms accessories don't participate in the hysteria. Better yet, encourage all your friends and associates to calm down and put their money to better use helping make sure trolls like McCarthy stay in the shadows under their bridge.

Hanzo581
January 11, 2011, 10:49 PM
A retailer adjusting a price according to supply and demand? WHAT?

Boycott cheaper than dirt!

CraigC
January 11, 2011, 11:10 PM
Shooters are so panicky, the sky is not really falling. :rolleyes:

Seriously, squalling about "price gouging" is what the leftists want you to do. The liberal media does it allt he time. How about this, before frothing at the mouth to turn on your own and boycott CTD, try actually doing some research on what really happens when "price gouging" occurs. Bottom line is that the people who actually need a particular product, pay more and actually get said item. Everybody wins. When the government intervenes you have a small percentage of people owning a large percentage of available product. Also known as hoarding. I've seen it in action. When five hurricanes hit Florida in a matter of weeks, those of us who had to actually get out and repair the damage could not get fuel because everybody and his uncle was hoarding gasoline in every container they had. Whether they needed it or not. Then they just drove around all day looking at the damage, clogging up traffic and burning up that precious fuel. Stupid in every way.

Don't be part of the hysterical mob of Chicken Littles. Cooler heads always prevail.

ball3006
January 11, 2011, 11:28 PM
I have some of those mags for my Kel Tec carbine. I don't like them because they are a PITA to load. Besides, the Korean mags don't fit well anyway. I had to do alot of sanding to get them to even seat in the rifle. I like the original Glock drop free mags a lot better. I have more of them than I will ever wear out......chris3

wriggly
January 11, 2011, 11:30 PM
Gun sales were in no decline before the shooting. sales were still breaking records. I went to my local Cabelas three days before the shooting an hour before closing figuring I was being strategic, and it would be slow at that time on a Wednesday night. I could not have been more wrong. The gun counter was mobbed, and as usual the store was grossly understaffed.

They need management on the floor looking at their sales practices. They have to be losing a lot of sales. This is quite the norm at this store. I cannot help but wonder if it is this way elsewhere as well.

The Glocks and Glock magazine thing will run its course, just like all the other panic buying that has taken place over the years. Its one of the last American industries left. Let them enjoy the profits.

I have 4 of the 33 round magazines for my Kel Tech, I dont think I will be needing them anyway.

merlinfire
January 11, 2011, 11:35 PM
Sometimes, gun nuts can be sheeple too.

There will be no ban, nor any new legislation that will amount to anything - as a direct result of this shooting. There is no amount of legislation that would have prevented this man from doing what he did, short of an outright ban and a complete nationwide confiscation, which will never happen.

Balrog
January 11, 2011, 11:52 PM
Also Harry Reid, though a flaming socialist on most subjects, is still Senate Majority Leader, and he is consistently pro 2A, and has an A rating from the NRA.

I do not think new legislation is going to happen.

But if a few more fruitcakes kill a few more Congress people, it is possible the opinion in the House and Senate could change.

atblis
January 12, 2011, 12:02 AM
Meh. I thought about ordering some. I already have one and never use the bloody thing.

$27.99 and supposedly in stock
http://www.natchezss.com/product.cfm?contentID=productDetail&prodID=GLMF17133&src=tpCtg

Korean version for $18. $16 if you order 5 or more.
http://www.wideners.com/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=8832&dir=625|709

HGUNHNTR
January 12, 2011, 12:07 AM
I don't care for ctd, but it has nothing to do with them providing goods for fair market value. Value of products can increase for a variety of reasons, the recent tragedy is just one of many. You can't fault a company for selling items that are in demand, for whatever reason. If no one buys the magazines prices go down, if folks do, they go up or remain the same. This is how our economy was built.

Omaha-BeenGlockin
January 12, 2011, 12:18 AM
Meh---I just bought pistol (SR9c) to go with the hi-caps I had laying around.

Might have to get a M&P9 to go with the other mags I have laying around.

Spec ops Grunt
January 12, 2011, 12:19 AM
Also Harry Reid, though a flaming socialist on most subjects, is still Senate Majority Leader, and he is consistently pro 2A, and has an A rating from the NRA.

I do not think new legislation is going to happen.

But if a few more fruitcakes kill a few more Congress people, it is possible the opinion in the House and Senate could change.


One of my favorite Pro-RKBA people was a socialist.


We need more George Orwells.

Geno
January 12, 2011, 12:33 AM
Per my Advanced Tactical Shooting instructor, the 33-round magazines do have their place, and yes, even for concealed carry. I have several 33-round magazines, but prefer the 17-round magazines for comfort.

While I have seen many THR members speak of their "bug-out-bag", I have yet to see anyone refer to their "football". Anyone who concealed carries, should have the equivalent of the "football". You know....that little bag that never, ever leaves their immediate access. Therein is a wonderful place to carry the 33-round magazines.

I have made posts here at THR regarding my instructors' views on the matter, and so I won't repeat more than a general review. Always carry a primary, a back-up, and as much ammo as you can manage. Get yourself into some Tactical Shooting and Advanced Tactical Shooting courses. Then, go to the range and play with your "football".

Geno

Gelgoog
January 12, 2011, 12:48 AM
more then likely these internet websites selling out of mags in minutes is probably just a few profiteers buying them all up to sell on gunbroker and at gunshows for exorbitant prices.

anybody else remember all those jerks who would rush into walmart during the panic and buy up all the ammo only to go directly to a gunshow and sell it.

Owen Sparks
January 12, 2011, 12:50 AM
The more there is of something the harder it will be to ban.

In 1934 when the National Firearms Act outlawed automatic weapons most Americans had never even seen a Thompson gun outside the movies. But did you know that handguns were also included in the original bill? They were removed due to public pressure because pistols were common enough that many people had them and therefore they were not feared. As modern firearms like the AR15 become more common, the more they will be accepted by the general public as will modern high capacity magazines. It will be very hard for congress to outlaw high capacity magazines at this point because there are so many more of them in the hands of the general public than back when Bill Clinton was president plus any attempt at new gun legislation would be a huge "I told you so" for the TEA party.

carbuncle
January 12, 2011, 01:52 AM
I keep S&W 3rd gen regular capacity mags in my CTD wish list, just checked and the prices are the same.

NMGonzo
January 12, 2011, 02:33 AM
I used to CC a glock35

That did not last long ... to cumbersome and heavy due all the rounds in the magazine.

As a civilian, I really don't give a crap about hi caps or having 10 mags for each gun.

2 reloads for each and I call it good, and if i need more than that I really need more friends.

I have noticed that the inexpensive .223 was gone from the gun store and the handgun ammo was dwindling.

NMGonzo
January 12, 2011, 02:35 AM
anybody else remember all those jerks who would rush into walmart during the panic and buy up all the ammo only to go directly to a gunshow and sell it.

If people don't calm the hell down they just drive the prices up.

sernv99
January 12, 2011, 03:40 AM
I plan to take a trip today to see what is the ammo situation like at the local Walmarts, Dicks, and the local mom and pop stores...I have a feeling the popular pistol calibers will be out of stock...and Glock mags at my favorite gunshop will be sold out...we are our own worst enemy....I bet you Walmart will enact some stupid new policy, even maybe not selling handgun ammo anymore.

Davek1977
January 12, 2011, 04:03 AM
I bet you Walmart will enact some stupid new policy, even maybe not selling handgun ammo anymore.

Oh no!! Then where will all the local shops by their ammo to mark up 100%? :-)

Ignition Override
January 12, 2011, 04:38 AM
It happened with Large Rifle Primers a year ago, due to similar jerks reselling for a decent profit. Remember that?

My first reloading gear was ready to go, but although a Bass Pro guy here claimed that it limited access to one box per customer, I began to wonder.
Only wanted one basic box, in order to learn the process. Even 100 rds. could not be found in Memphis (it seemed).

Weeks later, my brother somehow found a box up in Evansville.

joe_security
January 12, 2011, 06:07 AM
I visited a LGS two days ago....Nothing was flying off the shelves. He had tons of magazines and ammo.

Bubbles
January 12, 2011, 08:11 AM
Panic buying in AZ...
Glock Pistol Sales Surge After Arizona Shootings Amid Fear of Gun Limits (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-11/glock-pistol-sales-surge-in-aftermath-of-shooting-of-arizona-s-giffords.html)

Just One Shot
January 12, 2011, 08:24 AM
CT Dirt needs to change their name to CT Diamonds. I've never purchased anything from them because everything I've check on through them was higher than I could get it elsewhere.

Hendiadys
January 12, 2011, 08:40 AM
The FEDERAL legislation picture may look favorable for the time being, but I'm a little concerned about state and local. My local paper (Lexington "Hurled"-Leader") devoted fully 3/4ths of yesterdays paper to slamming guns. This sways people and their attitudes.

alsaqr
January 12, 2011, 08:49 AM
i refuse to order anything from Midway or CTD. IMO: Both are rip off artists.

Storm
January 12, 2011, 09:39 AM
Thanks Texasbill for your comments that are right on the mark. Time to settle down. We are sometimes our own worst enemy. If folks would have done an analysis silimilar to Texasbill's back when Obama was coming into office we could have avoided a lot of grief. As Balrog has pointed out Harry Reid is pro 2A to the degree that he told Obama "no way" for new gun laws, and if anyone was paying attention even Nancy Pelosi said "no way" to anti-gun legislation with the mid term elections hanging over her head. The writing was plainly on the wall but most chose instead to run around like a chicken with its head cut off. Now lots of folks have AR's that they paid $1700 for that can be had today for $800. How did that work out for everyone?

98C5
January 12, 2011, 09:44 AM
Just like the Obama frenzy and all the EBR's went thru the roof. Those prices have receded. All this gun buying frenzy will settle when another big news crisis/event hits the TV.

Sport45
January 12, 2011, 09:53 AM
Quote:
I had no use for a magazine that sticks past the grip of my pistols before and have no need for one now. Didn't affect me at all.
And that's the beginning of problems. If you don't oppose a ban on extended magazines because it doesn't affect you, you may not oppose a band against magazines above ten rounds because you carry a 7-round 1911, and eventually something comes around that bans anything with a removable magazine, and suddenly the revolver guys with that mindset are on the opposing side.

Whoa! I never said I supported a ban. I just said I didn't care what they cost, 'cuz I ain't buying. There's a lot of expensive stuff out there that doesn't affect me. Ridiculously long magazines just happen to be in the group.

This thread isn't about bans, it's about price hikes.

henschman
January 12, 2011, 09:56 AM
more then likely these internet websites selling out of mags in minutes is probably just a few profiteers buying them all up to sell on gunbroker and at gunshows for exorbitant prices.

anybody else remember all those jerks who would rush into walmart during the panic and buy up all the ammo only to go directly to a gunshow and sell it.

The reason this happened is because even though the market price (which means the price consumers are willing to pay) went up on ammo, Wal-mart did not raise prices to be in line with demand. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that if you can buy something for way less than market value, you can sell it and make money. It doesn't make you a jerk, IMO... just a rational person. What is irrational and stupid is for retailers to not adjust their prices with demand.

I think the word "profiteer" was made popular by statists who do not believe in the concept of free association. Mutually consenting parties have a right to agree to whatever they want to. That goes for every other kind of relationship, not just a business one.

ccw_steve
January 12, 2011, 10:07 AM
Correction: the "regulated, not quite free" market :D

earlthegoat2
January 12, 2011, 10:14 AM
You know what I think is the problem but also the solution:

Gun Newbs

Should have jumped on the bandwagon before Election Day 2007 and after.

I have everything I need already.

But thank you for jumping on because we need every last gun toter to help us out.

Storm
January 12, 2011, 10:18 AM
As to businesses who raise their prices under these circumstances, if it bothers you that much take your money elsewhere. Send an email to the business protesting their pricing, unsubscribe from their email list, and go elsewhere. Continuing to do business with them only supports their policies.

jobu07
January 12, 2011, 10:33 AM
This goes beyond McCarthy, you can expect action taken in the Senate. It is sad that they will try to bend this tragedy to support thier cause. The prices will only continue to climb as this stuff becomes more prevelant.


http://boxer.senate.gov/en/press/releases/011111.cfm
I am particularly interested in California’s concealed weapons law, which requires someone who wants to carry a concealed weapon to first receive a permit from their local sheriff or police chief.

In California, you need to be at least 21 years old, show good cause for carrying and show good moral character to carry a concealed weapon. There is a check – an important check – on who is carrying a concealed weapon.

We need to address the application of the federal law banning people with serious mental illnesses from owning guns. The law needs to be implemented better so that those with mental illness get into the FBI database and do not get guns.

We need to address the gun-show loophole with common-sense legislation that would help track firearms sold at gun shows that are used in crimes. Right now guns purchased at a gun show are exempted from federal gun laws.

I think we also need to reinstate the federal assault weapons ban, which, like the California assault weapons ban, would prohibit the sale of ammunition clips with more than 10 rounds – such as the one allegedly used in Arizona.

Senator Feinstein has long been a leader on the assault weapons ban. I understand that my friends, Senator Lautenberg and Rep. McCarthy, have announced they will introduce legislation to reinstate a ban on high-capacity ammunition clips and I strongly support that.

In this tragic case, the magazine held 30 bullets plus one in the chamber – and all were fired – and were it not for the heroic action on the part of citizens, another clip would have been inserted into the firearm.

Storm
January 12, 2011, 11:00 AM
Yeah Jobu07, they will gladly stand in a high profile pool of blood to push their agenda. But, look at who this is, the same ultra-liberal anti-gunners who are once again pushing the same old rhetoric that has been rejected in the past and has zero chance of success. The Dems just took it on the chin and are not looking to put it on the line to fight a losing battle no matter how much this horrible tragedy might tempt them to do so. There are also a lot of moderate Dems who will not support such legislation, especially those wishing to distance themselves from the liberal faction, and with Obama moving towards the center with 2012 now looming.

But, if both vendors and buyers react as we have in recent times we will be screwing ourselves into the ground nonetheless.

The sky is not falling. This too shall pass.

benEzra
January 12, 2011, 11:15 AM
If you're comfortable with what you own and are confident that these bills won't pass, act accordingly, but don't mock those who decide to go ahead and move a planned "eventual" purchase into the "buy now" category due to ban concerns. Sometimes not having to worry about it is worth a few extra dollars, and certainly enough of us were burned by the 1994 Feinstein law or the Roberti-Roos ban to be cautious.

As a civilian, I really don't give a crap about hi caps or having 10 mags for each gun.
As a civilian, I do. Nothing wrong with not owning any and not caring what the price does, but such a ban would adversely and seriously affect those of us who own and shoot >10-round rifles and pistols---and we are talking about some of the most popular pistols and rifles in the country, after all.

A lot of people forget that magazines are consumable items, like tires or brakes on your car. Well, unless you shoot an AK, in which case magazines will last a thousand years...

This thread isn't about bans, it's about price hikes.
The price hikes are the direct result of proposed new bans and the resulting sharp increase in demand.

I don't think those bans will pass, but back in 1994, I decided the Feinstein bill didn't have a chance of passing, either. So I put off buying a Butler Creek folder for my mini, and ended up waiting 10 years for that stock because the congressional leadership pulled an all-nighter, lied, threatened, and arm-twisted until it passed.

That is unlikely to happen now, but a lot of the ban proponents feel that the end justifies the means, so I am not ruling it out completely.

mcdonl
January 12, 2011, 12:22 PM
The sky is not falling. This too shall pass.

Sure, this too will pass... but will it pass before all of the primers are gone? Will I need to start searching the internet for powder?

I always have enough to load 1000 of any given caliber but when people start talking about buying things up I get nervous and think maybe I should have 5000 primers of each size.

MrOldLude
January 12, 2011, 12:31 PM
I'm just glad there are a few people on this forum who aren't ignorant hayseeds who actually have an informed opinion about the current status of government and economics.

Ronsch
January 12, 2011, 12:39 PM
I do have several 20 round 93R magazines that I carry in my 92FS...It does protrude slightly, but nothing that is too objectionable or obtrusive.

CraigC
January 12, 2011, 12:57 PM
...I get nervous and think maybe I should have 5000 primers of each size.
Which only adds to the problem.

Storm
January 12, 2011, 12:58 PM
Sure, this too will pass... but will it pass before all of the primers are gone? Will I need to start searching the internet for powder?

True enough. That is exactly how these things snowball, and we have the Obama scare as a recent (and arguably current) stark reminder as to how things can disappear very quickly. That folks react as they do is understandable, and, as Benezra aptly points out, too many of us well remember 94.

My plan is to relax and breath easy until such time as I see a real identifiable risk that stands more than a snowball's chance in the Sahara.

I wonder how many people are buying up extended mags for Glocks that don't even own a Glock.

mcdonl
January 12, 2011, 01:12 PM
Which only adds to the problem.

Craig, been there done that. I am just making sure that THIS time I have what I need. It was 2007/8 that got me started on reloading and let me tell you it was a nightmare getting supplies. Now there are even MORE people reloading so the materials will be in even greater demand. I want to be able to not worry about it this time. Thats all.

hirundo82
January 12, 2011, 01:39 PM
I don't care for ctd, but it has nothing to do with them providing goods for fair market value.

This is the company that was selling P-Mags for $70 apiece at the height of the Obama gun-buying panic. There's no way to justify that as anything but price-gouging.

I wonder how many people are buying up extended mags for Glocks that don't even own a Glock.

I have mags larger than 10 rounds for a number of guns I don't own but plan to have in the future. I'm not doing any panic buying now--I've accumulated mags gradually over the past few years--but I don't deny that a "high-capacity" mag ban is a possibility in the future.

Storm
January 12, 2011, 01:42 PM
Yeah, I got back into reloading in the past year and a half. Back in the 80's and 90's I did a heck of a lot of it and really enjjoyed it. As a "just in case" with the ammo shortage I went and bought an RCBS Rock Chucker. I went to do some 9mm just to get back into in it and there wasn't a primer to be found. I can understand stocking up, something that I should have done when I could.

BTW, if you look at the polling numbers a majority of Americans are against more strict gun laws, numbers that have stayed on an upward trend over the years despite past mass shootings. Thank heavens that most politicians are poll driven animals, at least in this case.

Storm
January 12, 2011, 02:01 PM
I've accumulated mags gradually over the past few years--but I don't deny that a "high-capacity" mag ban is a possibility in the future.

I have been in a magazine acquisition mode for the past year or so. It's not out of any panic but just because I have a minimum amount of mags that I like to have for each pistol. Right now I have all of my mags spread out on my pool table organizing them to go into a cabinet. It's quite a sight.

I also understand about buying mags or other accessories for guns not yet owned but ones that are planned to be owned. I do that all too frequently. My thought as to folks buying up the Glock mags was more towards those folks buying them up speculating on selling them down the road for a nice profit. Not saying it's right or wrong, just wondering.

In all honesty, I have somewhere around 70 G3 mags (for a buck each for two rifles) and I have no idea why :o

jcwit
January 12, 2011, 02:03 PM
This is the company that was selling P-Mags for $70 apiece at the height of the Obama gun-buying panic. There's no way to justify that as anything but price-gouging.



I was under the impression that price gouging was ok for a free market capitalist society. At least thats what many proclaimed during the shortage last year.

Dravur
January 12, 2011, 02:03 PM
This is why I never shop Creepier than Dirt

hirundo82
January 12, 2011, 02:12 PM
I was under the impression that price gouging was ok for a free market capitalist society. At least thats what many proclaimed during the shortage last year. I'm not saying it is not OK for a free market--sellers have the right to offer their products for whatever price they want.

I'm saying marking up products several hundred percent over MSRP to take advantage of the political climate is a sleazy business practice and it makes me disinclined to buy from those sellers in the future. That's my right as a consumer in the free market.

Storm
January 12, 2011, 02:26 PM
Technically, price gouging is limited to necessities such as food, water, fuel, pretty much items necessary for survival (especially in emergency situations and coercion). While one might argue that AR mags are a necessity, for purposes of gouging they are not, in a technical sense, that is. The term "gouging" also is often applied to other items of more of a "luxury" non-necessity nature carrying with it the moral outrage appropriate for actual gouging for necessities. Charging a starving man $30 for a loaf of bread (actual gouging) is a bit different from someone asking $70 for a Pmag. Much of the moral outrage of actual gouging seems to carry over to matters that are more of a free market nature.

Sorry, I had to make that clarification with all of this talk about "gouging".

Of course, in the case of a zombie attack, it might be gouging for 30 rounders.

Samuel79
January 12, 2011, 02:31 PM
THU

GambJoe
January 12, 2011, 02:36 PM
The Dems are to worried about votes to start acting like they have a mandate to ban things.

sappyg
January 12, 2011, 02:41 PM
a fool and his money are soon parted.

mcdonl
January 12, 2011, 02:52 PM
Well, unless you shoot an AK, in which case magazines will last a thousand years...

Life is grand :)

I spend every spare penny I have on guns, accessories and reloading supplies. Sometimes I have a specific "need" like right now I need a Bullet guide, and barrel threader for my soon to be converted Saiga.... but when that is done I will just simply put my spare money into reloading supplies. I do that anyway.

Does that make me a fool? Probably, but who cares.

henschman
January 12, 2011, 02:56 PM
yeah, I hear lots of people blaming the "free market" or "capitalism" for this and that... yet nobody who is currently living has probably ever experienced either one of those things. It would be a big stretch to call our current system either of those things.

HGUNHNTR
January 12, 2011, 03:01 PM
This is the company that was selling P-Mags for $70 apiece at the height of the Obama gun-buying panic. There's no way to justify that as anything but price-gouging.


You don't NEED them, and they were selling anyway. Please look up the correct definition of price gouging. It DOES NOT mean a business is charging more than YOU think they should.

Storm--you are correct in your definition.

russ69
January 12, 2011, 03:13 PM
... That damn shooting has caused a buying frenzy...

This is quite normal. For most people guns are not a necessity so when something like this happens, people that normally would not be spending money on guns start using this as an excuse to buy. Here in California it is well documented that every new piece of gun legislation caused a huge increase in firearms sales. People that only had a casual interest in guns ran out and bought a gun thinking it was their last chance and in some cases they were right. We have a large population with plenty of money to spend so when an item gets popular, for whatever reason, prices are going to go up and availability is going to go down.

welldoya
January 12, 2011, 03:49 PM
I think I'll sit this one out. Had enough of the silliness during the last ban.

JohnBiltz
January 12, 2011, 04:02 PM
I bought 4 twenty five round magazines for my 6.5 AR yesterday. I've been meaning to do that for a year and now seemed like the time to get around to it. My LGS had plenty of Glock magazines on hand when I went shooting.

What I think will happen is nothing and the voting public will be reminded that there are a lot of people who want to take their guns away from them.

hirundo82
January 12, 2011, 04:32 PM
Technically, price gouging is limited to necessities such as food, water, fuel, pretty much items necessary for survival (especially in emergency situations and coercion).

That may be true from a legal perspective, but the dictionary defines price gouging (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/price+gouging) only as "pricing above the market price when no alternative retailer is available." I think that applies to the situation in late 2008.

Hanzo581
January 12, 2011, 04:32 PM
I find it hilarious price gouging is even brought up when dealing with non-essential goods.

You guys are funny.

Erik M
January 12, 2011, 05:23 PM
I haven't checked the price tag on Glock's this week but I did read an article that Glock sales alone since monday compared to lkast week have jumped 40-50% above normal.

onebigelf
January 12, 2011, 08:36 PM
CDNN, Palmetto State Armory and What A Country all have the KHAN 33rnd mags for $14.95. The Glock version runs about $35 and up. Not real handy in my G19 (though fun at the range) they are more useful in the Sub2000. And that's only up about $5 over a week ago.

John

CraigC
January 12, 2011, 08:38 PM
Charging a starving man $30 for a loaf of bread (actual gouging) is a bit different.....
And if there is a buying frenzy on bread, "price gouging" is the only way bread will be available to all who "need" it, vs. hoarding by a few. Don't buy into the evening news nonsense.

Hatterasguy
January 12, 2011, 08:43 PM
Gun owners can be a paranoid lot and tend to get worked up about nothing. Frenzy for what reason? No new laws are gong to be passed anytime soon to restrict magazine capacity.


This bill will die in a subcommittee somewhere, save the excitement for when it really counts.

wep45
January 12, 2011, 08:52 PM
Sometimes I hate the free market

another supporter of government control for everything

Neverwinter
January 12, 2011, 09:34 PM
another supporter of government control for everything
another anarchocapitalist

The OP is complicit in the buying rush. If you're rushing to buy mags out of some misplaced or irrational fear, then expect others to also react in the same way.

Redneck with a 40
January 12, 2011, 11:05 PM
If and when this peice of crap legislation ever clear's the house, then I'll start buying some hi-cap mag's. Until then, I'm not worried.

gerrys
January 13, 2011, 10:39 AM
While I know that I'm likely to get jumped on for this post, I feel the need. My question is this: Other than the feeling that any restrictions can impact long-term 2nd amendment freedoms, why object to legislation on high capacity magazines in a CCW? Really, does anyone here want/need/use a 33 rounder in a Glock 9MM? If so, follow-up question is this:
Can't you hit anything?

frankge
January 13, 2011, 10:42 AM
I dunno - I carry a G36 with 6 round mags and another in my jacket pocket. I shoot production with my G34 so I'm opting out of the silliness.

skoro
January 13, 2011, 10:45 AM
Should I hate cheaperthandirt for essentially profiting off the tragedy by raising their prices?

By all means, feel free.

I swore off CTD three years ago. I received their catalog one afternoon, saw they had some items on "sale" at a good price. Went to their website to order a couple, and couldn't get the transaction to take.

Called their customer service number and was informed that the "current" price was double the advertised price. I explained that I had received their latest catalog not 30 minutes ago.

"We're not responsible for the price increase" was their take.

I'm done with them. :rolleyes:

22-rimfire
January 13, 2011, 11:08 AM
Cheaper Than Dirt (CTD) is often not the cheapest. But, I have placed several orders for a few hundred dollars each in the last month. I have no problem with them, but I usually buy from their online catalog which might correct any inconsistancies between a printed catalog and their current pricing. I don't pay much attention to pricing from mailed catalogs anymore other than the catalog may nudge me to go to their website.

The pricing issue may infact be from their distributers. This happened with ammunition.

For me, I have zero desire to purchase a 30-round magazine for a Glock handgun. The loaded magazine will weigh a couple pounds alone. But, the interchangability of Glock magazines by caliber is one of the attractions that law enforcement have with Glock guns in general. We're in the USA, do what you want and that includes buying from CTD.

Guns and more
January 13, 2011, 11:18 AM
Should I hate cheaperthandirt for essentially profiting off the tragedy by raising their prices?
Yes! I can't stand CTD, they never have good prices, and every time they have jacked up their prices to milk us dry.

I'll never do business with them.
I agree.
I wrote CTD off when they were selling .380 ammo for a buck a round.
"It's like playoff tickets, man" Yeah, I got your playoff tickets right here!!!

merlinfire
January 13, 2011, 11:24 AM
Only reason I'm interested in them is for the sub2k.

stonecutter2
January 13, 2011, 01:41 PM
CDNN, Palmetto State Armory and What A Country all have the KHAN 33rnd mags for $14.95. The Glock version runs about $35 and up. Not real handy in my G19 (though fun at the range) they are more useful in the Sub2000. And that's only up about $5 over a week ago.

John
Picked up some of the $5.99 G19 mags and a 33rnd just for laughs at the range, should arrive soon. Had it set up to buy last week, but didn't click buy. This weekend when the news broke, i went and completed it - before any price hikes :\ It's unfortunate, but when demands rises and supply dwindles, businesses react with pricing changes.

No idea how the Asian mags will function (I heard maybe the G19 version work a little better) but I figured at that cheap, it's worth a shot.

JohnBiltz
January 13, 2011, 02:12 PM
I have 6 of the G18 magazines, which is too many but they were really cheap at the time, really cheap. I also have a Sub 2000 which takes them. I'll also say this, a G17 or G19 with a 33 round magazine shoots pretty good. Its heavier and the weight is in a good place, there are competition mods that add weight to the mag well. Its also a pretty good home defense weapon. If I'm surprised in the night and wandering around the house in my pajamas with a gun I probably don't have a pocket for a spare magazine. People also forget they are G18 magazines and a G18 is a pistol.

If you are asking the question your taking a step down a very steep slippery slope at the bottom is ten round ARs, AKs. They are asking if you need 33 rounds but in reality saying you don't need 11.

Justin
January 13, 2011, 10:36 PM
While I know that I'm likely to get jumped on for this post, I feel the need. My question is this: Other than the feeling that any restrictions can impact long-term 2nd amendment freedoms, why object to legislation on high capacity magazines in a CCW? Really, does anyone here want/need/use a 33 rounder in a Glock 9MM?

Not that I expect you'll actually respond to this post, gerrys, as I've yet to actually hear a proponent of such a ban explain how it can be enforced fairly, and in such a way as it would have a demonstrable effect on violent crime, but I suppose I'll give it yet another try.

How, exactly, do you plan to enforce such a law? Are you really ok with charging people with a felony and locking them away in prison simply for possessing what amounts to some extruded plastic/stamped sheet metal and a spring?


How do you counter the fact that the US had a ban on so-called "high capacity" magazines for ten years and during that time there was no proof whatsoever that the ban had any substantive effect on violent crime?

If you cannot rationally answer these questions, perhaps you should stop geeking out over magazines that have a capacity that you arbitrarily believe to be excessive, and start considering what the real and actual solutions are to address violent crime and/or treating the mentally ill before they harm someone.

If so, follow-up question is this:
Can't you hit anything?

Why don't you attend a local practical shooting match and see just how many of the people who use magazines that have a capacity you disapprove of can actually shoot.

Geno
January 14, 2011, 08:31 AM
gerrys said:

While I know that I'm likely to get jumped on for this post, I feel the need. My question is this: Other than the feeling that any restrictions can impact long-term 2nd amendment freedoms, why object to legislation on high capacity magazines in a CCW? Really, does anyone here want/need/use a 33 rounder in a Glock 9MM? If so, follow-up question is this:
Can't you hit anything?

You obviously have never completed a Tactical Shooting, or Advanced Tactical Shooting course. :D

Give my regards to your Aunt Nancy and Uncle Harry.

Geno

Sport45
January 14, 2011, 09:28 AM
I just got an email from Natchez. They're having a sale on high-capacity magazines (http://catalogs.natchezss.com/email/011311hicapmags.html). So not everyone is "gouging".

WeedWacker
January 14, 2011, 09:31 AM
Nothing to worry about from me. I hate Glocks. XDm for the win :evil:

Hangingrock
January 14, 2011, 09:34 AM
If one lives long enough you see and experience life’s vacillations and contradictions. Logic is not a virtue of an elected representative or a public official. They the elected things more often than not are reactionary as opposed to visionary. So with this compulsion to do something they stir the pot.

The elected thing utters a reactionary proposal and the herd stampedes. There are those that simply take advantage of the situation and implement the “Chicken Little Strategy” by yelling the sky is falling- the sky is falling.:what::what::what::what::what: The advantage takers profit from the panic of the stampeding herd.:banghead:

When this occurs we only have ourselves to thank for this example “Primers”.
:uhoh::o

welldoya
January 14, 2011, 09:37 AM
There was an Associated Press story in the local paper this morning. This legislation has zero chance of passing. There's just no support. It said that the political environment now is to give more firearms freedom, not less.
So, I hope the ones that went out and bought up the hi-cap mags really wanted them because this will blow over soon and prices and supply will be back to normal.

Zombie_Flesh
January 14, 2011, 09:44 AM
I don't carry or use a 33 round magazine, frankly I never have seen the need. BUT a 15 round magazine in the Beretta 92 is standard. A 10 round magazine is "neutered capacity" in my opinion.

But I still might pick up a 33 rounder for my Beretta this next show.

RDCL
January 14, 2011, 10:08 AM
FWIW....I was at my local Wal Mart last night. The ammo cabinet was fully stocked, in fact it was stocked fuller than I've ever seen it......45 acp...380...44 mag...38 spcl....357.....9mm.....etc. Everything. Muliple brands of each caliber even.

.....and it is nearly a week after.


(and NO....I did not grab a bunch of it.....just a single box)


Russ

gerrys
January 14, 2011, 01:21 PM
1. I didn't say I was a proponent of such a ban, just that it would not bother me; and having given it more thought, it stilli wouldn't.
2. Didn't know that I was 'geeking out over magazines that have a capacity that you arbitrarily believe to be excessive' - but personally find the 33 with a Glock 19 CCW is not the way I'd go. Once again, I'm not suggesting that passing such a law is my main issue in life, just that it would not bother me and that working in opposition to it is not likely to be my main issue in life either.
3. I DO think, and herein may be the source of my feeling the need to register and post on this forum, which I have never done before, that we (may I say we?) can just get too far out there - I don't need to hear the arguments for civilian ownership of nuclear weapons, and I don't need to hear snark like from Geno, one post below, who decided that he can discern my politics and my training from a very moderate question

Justin
January 14, 2011, 01:57 PM
Awesome. I love how you fundamentally failed to address any of the points raised in my previous post.

gerrys
January 14, 2011, 02:18 PM
You regulate the same way anything else deemed dangerous is regulated, from Chinese toys made with potentially toxic materials to civilian nuclear weapons - not allowed to be manufactured in US, not allowed to be imported, not allowed to be sold.
You don't need to prove the potential danger either.

Justin
January 14, 2011, 03:02 PM
That makes no sense.

1.) Comparing a "high capacity" magazine to a nuclear weapon is ridiculous on it's face, not only for the scale of destruction either is potentially capable of inflicting, but also because nuclear weapons are extremely hard to manufacture, move, or store. They're also much easier to trace. In fact, if you don't want to look silly, I would strongly recommend against trying to draw any sort of comparison whatsoever between a magazine with a capacity that you believe to be evil, and weapons of mass destruction.

2.) If they are completely prohibited from being manufactured or imported, do you believe that police officers and the military should have their magazine capacities limited as well?

3.) So, if, in your ideal world, someone is caught with one of these magazines because they have "potential danger" (whatever that means), you are completely ok with charging the possessor with a felony and throwing him in prison? Even though s/he has harmed no one?

MisterMike
January 14, 2011, 03:05 PM
There is a bit of a feeding frenzy going on amongst antis at the moment, but there is little chance of any federal gun control legislation at the moment. I think that the demand will drop again pretty soon.

phoglund
January 14, 2011, 03:18 PM
I guess I should be pleased I already have 6 of the 30+ round Glock magazines. What for? Well...because I have a Kel-Tec Sub 2000 that takes the silly things and I like the idea of 30 rounds in my carbines...just like the 30 round ones in my ARs! They do also go into my Glock 17 as well of course but they are a bit ungainly in that gun. I also have 6-17 round magazines.

If I didn't already have them I certainly wouldn't buy them because of the recent incident. Remember folks, buy low, sell high! (No, mine aren't for sale)

Paul

TexasBill
January 14, 2011, 04:15 PM
Actually, the attack on Rep. Giffords has prompted many utterly stupid legislative proposals. As Jon Stewart pointed out on the Daily Show, for example, Rep. Peter King, a New York Republican, wants to make it illegal to bring a gun within 1000 feet of a government official (does that include "officials" like city sanitation workers who come to your place of residence?). NYC mayor and anti-gun zealot Michael Bloomberg supports the King legislation and plans to spend bucks promoting it. The downside is King is chairman of one of the subcommittees that review such bills.

What's so crazy is that everyone seems to have forgotten Rep. Giffords is a gun owner and a guns rights supporter. The poor woman is in a medically induced coma much of the time as her body tries to heal the damage and she can't speak for herself. Yet these slimeballs are all co-opting her to promote positions she never embraced.

I don't know what will happen as she recovers; the Bradys were conservative Republicans before Jim got shot. But everyone should give her a chance to speak her own mind.

Fortunately, the more idiotic legislative proposals will likely drive out the less idiotic ones (comparatively speaking) and a generally pro-gun House will let them all enjoy a merciful (and quiet) death in Committee.

Incidentally, one of the local proposals calls for the NYPD to boycott Glocks. Curiously, Bloomberg is opposed to that - all of NYPD's handgun vendors, Glock, SIG and S&W offer what are termed high-capacity magazines and the city would have to boycott them all (Model 10s, guys?) which would leave the city's cops at a firepower disadvantage. Nobody mentioned it would cost a fortune New York City doesn't have to replace all of Glocks in use by NYPD.

As you can see, not all the insanity is at Cheaper Than Dirt.

Gouranga
January 14, 2011, 05:25 PM
To the OP, I would like to announce I have officially joined the buying frenzy with my purchase of an extra man killing, homicidal, 19 round magazine for my R-25.

yeah 4 is great for hunting deer but I'd rather make the most of my time target shooting and have 19+1 at my disposal.

mcdonl
January 14, 2011, 05:31 PM
yeah 4 is great for hunting deer but I'd rather make the most of my time target shooting and have 19+1 at my disposal.

In MY perfect world.... *I* would have all of the ammo I bring to the range with me loaded in magazines. Loading magazines is best done at home IMO....

Erik M
January 14, 2011, 05:54 PM
Im glad I bought my Glock 19C before Christmas. I haven't looked to see if prices have jumped but I assume they will at the box stores and online outlets. I did pass on a $20 +2 mag extension at my local shop, im not sure when/if they raised the prices on them but it seemed a bit steep IMO.

edit: appears that they are going for $578 now, I payed $475 out the door first week of December.

CZguy
January 14, 2011, 10:11 PM
The way I see it. I don't have any use for a 33 round magazine for my Glock. But I have absolutely no problem with anyone else buying what ever size magazine that they feel is appropriate for them. It's a personal choice.

As an aside. I don't like to use the term "Hi Cap Magazines" to me they are standard magazines, designed that way by the manufacturer. By definition, anything less is "substandard".

onebigelf
January 17, 2011, 01:38 PM
The King legislation has a number of problems.

Violates not only the 2nd amendment, but also the 4th by creating a "special" class of citizens for whom special protections apply (our rulers) and a "sub-class" (everyone else).

Also, sound off if you can recognize all 100 US senators on sight. How about all 435 members of the US House? What about every federal judge? Every Cabinet member?
Can you recognize them all at 1000 feet? Can you sense their presence if they are within 1000ft but not in line of sight? The bill doesn't specify. How do you feel about being a convicted felon and losing your right to own a firearm or vote if you are caught carrying within 1000 feet of a judge you didn't see or didn't recognize? Knowing that this could happen, how constrained would you feel about carrying at all for fear of getting nailed for carrying in the presence of a member of our ruling class?

John

mcdonl
January 17, 2011, 01:41 PM
As an aside. I don't like to use the term "Hi Cap Magazines" to me they are standard magazines, designed that way by the manufacturer. By definition, anything less is "substandard".

Just curious... when differentiating between a 1911 .45ACP magazine and a Glock magazine how would you catergorize them? Standard and Sub-Standard?

joeq
January 17, 2011, 02:49 PM
I went to my local Cabelas this weekend. Everything looked to be pretty well stocked. Honestly it wasn't even very busy. They had plenty of mags, including the Glock 33 rounders. It definitely didn't look like any buying frenzy had occured yet. This is at the Buda Texas Cabelas.

whitecoyote
January 17, 2011, 03:55 PM
Threads such as this also help fuel the fire. :uhoh:

speedway
January 17, 2011, 07:27 PM
My local shop has a pile of them for $36 each and they are factory Glock.

Taillebois
January 17, 2011, 11:06 PM
As noted the buying frenzy is on because of the same old fears. Also the suppliers are quite happy to go along with the whole situation as obviously it benefits some of them quite well. And that's even without the price inflation inherent to a panic buying situation.

Politically unlikely any serious regulations will be passed. The only enhanced likelyhood of that would be if the economy continues to seriously sink and our leadership nee' betters genuinely feel their status is at risk. The 1934 Firearms act was in part prompted by the prohibition era/early depression days gang violence but it also was a response to a greatly disaffected population (the Bonus Army really scared the elites although the BA had assembled peacefully). Basically one of the 1934 acts intents was to keep the auto-weapons in governmental hands or the hands of the privilaged.

But mght take a deep breath here, most people got through the last depression with very basic weapons (for food and protection) and due to the enforced frugality of the era used cartridges with somewhat less prolific zeal than we use them today.

And 33 round glock mags, well we have a right to these which should not be infringed but not having such around (because one cannot find one to buy) doesn't really compromise the use of a glock all that much. Much the same as a revolver is still quite useful even if there isn't a speedloader about...

Might also keep in mind Onada had something like 300-400 cartridges and some Arisaka rifles for his 30 some year long sojourn in the Phillipine jungles...and he was fighting an actual war...

So its quite possible we all just might get through a temporary market shortage and a few posturing politicos taking undue advantage of a terrible tragedy. These congresspeople will find out quite quickly that most of their constituants are more worried about foreclosure, being out of work, or another mass spontaneous and involuntary donation to JP Morgan & Co. than how many bullets the weapon they had to pawn last week could have held...

CZguy
January 17, 2011, 11:44 PM
Quote:
As an aside. I don't like to use the term "Hi Cap Magazines" to me they are standard magazines, designed that way by the manufacturer. By definition, anything less is "substandard".

Just curious... when differentiating between a 1911 .45ACP magazine and a Glock magazine how would you categorize them? Standard and Sub-Standard?


I would consider both standard. Let me try and explain my thinking. The 1911 was designed to have a magazine capacity of 7 rounds. (modern mags now hold 8, so I won't quibble.) In my Glock 32C the magazine holds 12 rounds of .357 Sig. So to me both of these fine firearms are equipped with standard capacity magazines. So we have two pistols that hold eight and twelve rounds respectively. Now for the sake of argument, A new law was just enacted that said "ALL PISTOL MAGAZINES MUST BE DOWNLOADED BY TWO ROUNDS". The new 1911 five rounder is substandard, and the new Glock 32C with a 10 round mags is substandard as well. Now let me address a big issue----33 round aftermarket Glock magazines. I have absolutely no need for one, they throw the weight and balance off, and can waste ammo. The point here is, just because of the fact that I don't own one, or see a need for one, means nothing. It's up to the individual to decide his needs.

elcaminoariba
January 26, 2011, 08:21 AM
The free market isn't so bad now because Midway just dropped their price on those evil Glock 33 rd mags. :D

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=116453

You won't get em for a month and a half, but hey, dropping their price was cool. It seems to be a direct response to "cheap"er than dirt raising theirs. I like how Midway tells you when it will be back in stock.

By the way, does anyone have any worn out 33rd mags we could mail to McCarthy? :evil:

HGUNHNTR
January 26, 2011, 08:26 AM
Quote:
Quote:
As an aside. I don't like to use the term "Hi Cap Magazines" to me they are standard magazines, designed that way by the manufacturer. By definition, anything less is "substandard".

Just curious... when differentiating between a 1911 .45ACP magazine and a Glock magazine how would you categorize them? Standard and Sub-Standard?

I would consider both standard.

I totally agree CZ guy. These are the capacities for which the firearm was designed. A 350 v8 in a corvette or a 2 liter 4 cylinder in a Ford fiesta are nothing out of the ordinary and shouldn't be treated as such.

The term high capacity magazine is a marketing tool that anti's like to use to influence voters. This term is not unlike "streetsweeper", "assault weapon", "Saturday night Special", and "Gun Control". It is unfortunate that many gun owners repeat thee terms in conversation.....I guess it makes them feel more manly.

If you enjoyed reading about "Sometimes I hate the free market: buying frenzy is ON!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!