Post-election buying panic mega thread of power

here here.

Golden Rule of Ammo #7) You must buy at least twice as much ammo as you shoot (fubar).

You will be able to find AR's at pre-election prices for a while here and there. Most places will increase prices. Expect a climb in price and a decline in availability short term. Long term, it's anyone's guess.

In the last two days we've had more heads-up emails and phone calls for transfers than we would normally get in two weeks.

Custom builds - more orders in two days than in a normal month, no hesitation about dropping $4-5000 up front.

Prices are not going to drop. Frankly, if you waited this long to buy and you're a price-shopper, wait for deals in Jan/Feb after the tax cuts get repealed and part-time employees get their hours cut to less than 30 per week. Once those wallets start getting hit early next year, you'll see deals on used guns.

Warp said:

So are you worried about what might happen soon, or what might happen in 2.5 years?

Click to expand...

The answer is: YES. As a person with very little disposable income, it makes sense in my mind to buy stuff now, a little at a time so that if and when something bad comes, I will have at least a modest supply for myself and family, whether something happens or not. There is nothing wrong with stocking up.

Warp said:

For two years after 2008 the Democrats had the House, Senate, and Presidency. Why no anti gun legislation then??

Click to expand...

This has been answered by myself and many others. The president is now free of the constraints on himself because he no longer has to worry about re-election. In other words, they didn't do anything because he had to worry about being re-elected. He has been re-elected.

Also, I have made it clear that I am worried about the inevitable supreme court appointments. The two during his previous term were nothing to worry about because they replaced liberal judges. The next two will replace much more gun friendly judges. This is another reason why I am more worried about his next two years than I was his first two years.

Also, there have been a few high-profile mass shootings lately and should they continue, the dems and the media will work it to change the public's desire for gun control.

helitack32f1 said:

The answer is: YES. As a person with very little disposable income, it makes sense in my mind to buy stuff now, a little at a time so that if and when something bad comes, I will have at least a modest supply for myself and family, whether something happens or not. There is nothing wrong with stocking up.




This has been answered by myself and many others. The president is now free of the constraints on himself because he no longer has to worry about re-election. In other words, they didn't do anything because he had to worry about being re-elected. He has been re-elected.

Also, I have made it clear that I am worried about the inevitable supreme court appointments. The two during his previous term were nothing to worry about because they replaced liberal judges. The next two will replace much more gun friendly judges. This is another reason why I am more worried about his next two years than I was his first two years.

Also, there have been a few high-profile mass shootings lately and should they continue, the dems and the media will work it to change the public's desire for gun control.

Click to expand...

The SCOTUS concern is totally legitimate.

BUT the senate and house both will be concerned with re-election, and even though O cannot run again, what he does will have a significant impact on the next Democrat to run in 2016, and that is always a consideration.

Not going to buy anything.
Just hoping I can hang on to what I have.

Warp said:

The SCOTUS concern is totally legitimate.

BUT the senate and house both will be concerned with re-election, and even though O cannot run again, what he does will have a significant impact on the next Democrat to run in 2016, and that is always a consideration.

Click to expand...

Once again. Obama mentioned his desire for an assault weapons ban during the debate, BEFORE the election. He still got elected. The majority of the country was against the healthcare bill. He and his dem cohorts forced it through anyway and they got away with it. They appear to be okay with doing things to accomplish their agenda, even if it is a risk to their future elections. If more mass shootings occur they can easily sway the public and do as they wish. And the healthcare bill will be used to penalize those who choose to own firearms. And then, there is still the possibility of more executive orders.

fwiw, the market is not betting on prices going down. The two trading days since the election have seen the dow drop 330 points.

How did Smith & Wesson do? Pretty darn good

How about Ruger? Same story

Prices will drop after taxes and unemployment go up in the next few weeks. No one will have any money to buy and vendors will have to sell to avoid the inventory tax on the extra inventory they obtained for the expected post election "windfall".

Being originally from NJ, I know exactly what you mean. Joe

helitack32f1 said:

Once again. Obama mentioned his desire for an assault weapons ban during the debate, BEFORE the election. He still got elected. The majority of the country was against the healthcare bill. He and his dem cohorts forced it through anyway and they got away with it. They appear to be okay with doing things to accomplish their agenda, even if it is a risk to their future elections. If more mass shootings occur they can easily sway the public and do as they wish. And the healthcare bill will be used to penalize those who choose to own firearms. And then, there is still the possibility of more executive orders.

Click to expand...

How many members of congress were elected after voicing support for gun control?

Half? More? Or more like 10%?

My opinion is that they will go up. With no constraints in consideration for being reelected Obama will follow his true anti gun agenda. Just my opinion.

Since the pattern of printing money, thereby making what you have in your pocket worth less continues, prices will continue to rise long term but the government will assure you that there is little or no inflation!

post election surge

We sold out of 7.62 NATO and 5.56 NATO yesterday and sold nearly 200 30-rd AR mags over the past 2 days.

There will always be money in the marketplace looking for product, but the bigger risk will come from Legislative erosion of the Bill of Rights, Executive orders and privilege sidestepping the constitution, the appointment of 2 or 3 Supreme Court Justices, and International intrusion such as the UN.

People elected the president without any understanding of what is coming or what kind of damage can be done in the next 4 years. Companies are going to wait and see what the Tax increases and Obamacare costs look like before they do any expanding or hiring.

Lets see what people are willing to accept when the deficit reaches $18 to 20 Trillion and unemployment tops 20%.

not much will change. trust me. "gun control" is as popular a topic as is a "abortion ban". the democratic party was smart enough NOT to run on the first topic. they got burned back in the Clinton days with the AWB und trust me, they learned their lesson... yes - some hardcore folks from CA/NY/IL will always push for gun control, but same is true for an "abortion ban" in the other party. in reality - neither will happen, because the majority if the people don't want it and in the end you can only lose with these topics.

will there be another AWB? highly unlikely... it's not the 90s anymore, "evil" Glocks with 10+ rds are widespread and commonly owned, ARs are very common as well. seriously... looking at my pistols here and the ONLY one I own with 10rds or less is a 1911 All others are 12+ or more.

Could Obama ban the import of foreign ammo, guns or do other measures with executive orders (insurance for guns? ammo taxes etc)? sure. he could. but he would also burning his fellow party members who face mid-term elections in 2 yrs down the road and he would harm whoever runs for president after him. so that's not likely to happen.

the ONLY concern I have would be if he would replace a supreme court justice with a notorious anti-gunner. a judge who is known for being VERY anti-gun. but again - that's speculation...

So short- and medium-term I don't think there is a lot to worry about (in terms of gun control). The economy, the national debt, unemployment, Iran, and and and are all issues which are much more urgent than any reintroduced AWB. Obama needs the congress to pass stuff.... so why tick off the republican owned congress with some like a AWB when you need them to work with you on the debt and other things.

I saw some online dealers hiking their prices after the election by 10% +/- ... but these prices will come down. with the economy being where it is... I doubt folks have the $$ to go on a ammo buying spree like back in 08/09 (=the great ammo drought).

I would not be surprised, at all, if some kind of executive order/change in policies or procedures does have an impact. Something that makes acquiring ammunition more expensive or difficult is my primary bet. Required loaded ammunition to ship hazmat the way powder and primers do, limits on 'internet sales' of ammunition, identification requirements for internet orders that are a hassle, bans or tariffs or limits on importation from other countries...

Once again. Obama mentioned his desire for an assault weapons ban during the debate, BEFORE the election. He still got elected.

Click to expand...

Indeed Obama mentioned his desire for an AWB however he didn't make it a campaign pledge. While he may intend to enact more restrictive firearms policies, either through purely executive power or actual legislation, I think he is keenly aware that he would lose support if he brought significant attention to the issue. As has been pointed out in this thread, there just isn't much support for 'gun control'.

That voters supported Obama does not necessarily mean they agree with him on every issue -- far from it. When faced with the options of simply not voting because there is no 'ideal' candidate or choosing to support the candidate whom most closely represents one's political views, in general, people usually choose the latter. Individuals voters usually have views which simply don't align particularly well with any single candidate for a particular position -- especially if we limit ourselves to republican and democratic presidential candidates. The only options for a voter are to not participate, start his/her own campaign, or support one of the imperfect candidates.

The other thing to remember is that the number of people who apply a 'litmus test' to a candidate is relatively small. Certainly, some people are comfortable saying "I could never vote for a candidate who supports <insert controversial political view here>". Most, however, are not. Most people look at the whole package.

RCArms.com said:

People elected the president without any understanding of what is coming or what kind of damage can be done in the next 4 years. Companies are going to wait and see what the Tax increases and Obamacare costs look like before they do any expanding or hiring.

Lets see what people are willing to accept when the deficit reaches $18 to 20 Trillion and unemployment tops 20%.

Click to expand...

We ain't seen nothing yet when it comes to a tanking economy. Just wait until Iran uses their ally Syria to reach the sea and attack us with their nukes. After that, the deficit will reach $30 trillion and unemployment will top 35%.

Neverwinter said:

We ain't seen nothing yet when it comes to a tanking economy. Just wait until Iran uses their ally Syria to reach the sea and attack us with their nukes. After that, the deficit will reach $30 trillion and unemployment will top 35%.

Click to expand...

I think you forgot the smiley indicating that you are joking.

It's America. People can believe whatever they want about the loss of our 2A rights or the collapse of the USA and end of civilization. So they should pick their side and prepare accordingly. Exchanging views is important, but after a certain point, there's more heat than light coming out of the "what if" discussions I've seen on gun lists or the media.

Sorry, fell prey to internet lie apparently. He has "only" signed 139 executive orders as of September. Still makes my point though.

Click to expand...

Obama - 140 EOs in 4 years
G.W. Bush - 291 EOs in 8 years
Clinton - 364 EOs in 8 years
Bush Sr. - 166 EOs in 4 years
Carter - 320 EOs in 4 years

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html

Hardly significantly more than any other president. Its easy to say, "Wow, 140 in 4 years, that's a LOT!" without any sort of frame of reference.

Quote:

"Required loaded ammunition to ship hazmat the way powder and primers do, limits on 'internet sales' of ammunition, identification requirements for internet orders that are a hassle, bans or tariffs or limits on importation from other countries..."

Ammo is already shipped with warning labels. Why would they require additional safety? There have been no incidents with exploding ammo being an issue... so justifying that measure would be difficult. Ammo has been shipped for decades that way.

identification requirements for online sales would not make ordering a huge hassle. fax/email a copy of your DL and you are good to go. doubtful that would drive ammo prices up. and as other said: bans or prohibitive taxes/tariffs would be a pretty big deal and would mobilize the NRA and not play well with the public/Reagan Democrats and many voters in swing states.

Warp said:

I think you forgot the smiley indicating that you are joking.

Click to expand...

Following RCARMS.com's post, I wasn't aware we were doing the whole smiley thing.

Neverwinter said:

Following RCARMS.com's post, I wasn't aware we were doing the whole smiley thing.

Click to expand...

It helps make sure nobody mistakenly takes your post seriously.

Tone of voice and non verbal cues don't convey very well through text.

My prediction, a peak for a few months until the hysteria dies down. Then a new peak every time any politician mentions the words 'gun' and 'control' in the same hour.

It is absurd to think that Obama is going to run the next 4 years with no regard to the democratic party. The party that got him elected has more influence on him than he does on it. The Democrats will not allow him to destroy them and kill their chances of winning in 2016.
"
Obama is not going to kill his 'legacy" or his party just because this is his last 4 years. Gun control is not a priority