Ammo "bubble" to burst?

[Warp]

^^sure, that stuff didn't happen

Exactly.

And it was plainly obvious that it wasn't going to happen.

And is still plainly obvious that it won't happen.

 

[Jlr2267]

I've seen on line RIMFIRE as low as $.05/rd for Winchester. Problem is people are still buying at $.10-.12/rd I've picked up some Wolf Target recently for $.11/rd which is almost pre SH pricing. With the variety of pricing for the same ammo my guess is it's NOT the Mfgs but the distributors and retailers jacking up the prices. If people all quit buying for even a week or two you'd see the price start to drop.

Lower prices generate even higher demand. Only when all retailers *jack up* their prices will the current supply be enough

 

[kwguy]

And it was plainly obvious that it wasn't going to happen.

And is still plainly obvious that it won't happen.

It's not too obvious to me. Maybe there's some magic or something that I'm not seeing, but the only reason it didn't happen this last go-round, like it did in 1934, 1986, and in 1994 (in the U.S.), not to mention other countries, is because citizens got involved, which influenced the political system, which kept it from happening.

All I'm saying is that we need to keep vigilant for the preservation of our rights, because we are the ones that make things happen, or not happen, as the case may be. We can't just sit back and assume things won't happen, because they have, and will.

 

[DocUSMCRetired]

I just bought 500 rounds of Federal .22LR HV for .06 a round yesterday. I did a comparison for accuracy, and they were just as good as CCI SV. CCI is .01 to .02 cents more a round here right now. So if I can save .02 a round, and still buy what I need monthly I think its reasonable.

 

[xfyrfiter]

Was in Sportsman whse. yesterday and picked up 2 cartons of t-bolts for $25 ea. First .22 I've seen here in 2 years so maybe the drought is almost over they also had mini mags for $8 /100 rd.

 

[leadcounsel]

Was there a national "assault weapon" ban, national magazine capacity ban, national "universal" background check law, White House initiated ban on the importation of ammo, national sales tax on ammo/increase in the FET, etc, that I missed?

Feel free to throw me a link so I can be filled in.

Expensive ammo is part of gun control. It prices people out of the market. Some folks here have even said they'll sell their guns and not buy more. That's the goal of the antis. I know my shooting habits have changed - can no longer dump mags of ammo at the range when a full magazine of 5.56 costs about $10 in ammo... full pistol mag is about $5. An afternoon of shooting can easily cost $100 or more...

There were attempts, and we narrowly avoided those ONLY because there were enough Rs in Congress to prevent it. Replace a few Rs with Ds and we'd almost assuredly have these things you mentioned.

IF he could have, he would have. We will almost certainly see some EOs to continue to tighten ammo and make gun ownership more a hassle. We've seen the EPA shut down lead smelting, which is obviously a major component and cost of ammo. And we've seen the bans on importations too. Can't directly ban the gun, ban the ammo and make it too expensive and price people out of shooting.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...egulations-force-last-lead-smelter-usa-close/

http://conservative-daily.com/2014/03/29/breaking-news-obama-admin-bans-ammunition-imports/

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/f...military-surplus-545-sporting-ammunition.aspx

We've seen outstanding increases in gun ownership, and guns are very affordable today. The penalty for that is however higher demands for ammunition as more folks own guns and shoot them.

So it's a double edged sword. I just hope those people are gun-issue voters.

 

[HOOfan_1]

I'm still waiting to go to the store, or go online and find some W231 powder.....H335 and Unique would be nice to find also. Haven't been able to buy any for 2 years now.

 

[Warp]

There were attempts, and we narrowly avoided thos

I disagree. There was nothing narrow about it. Not even in the Senate did those bills make it out of committee. Don't fall for the anti propaganda and lies. Please realize the truth...they went all in with 9-high and were rightly decimated. There was nothing narrow or close about it.

 

[oneounceload]

Actually before Sandy Hook, Winchester WB 100 rounds of 9mm went for $19 at Walmart, now the same goes for $26. We are not back yet.

And with the devaluation of the dollar, increased demand for raw materials, the implementation of ObamaCare and those increased costs, I would venture we are about as back as we are going to get

 

[leadcounsel]

I disagree. There was nothing narrow about it. Not even in the Senate did those bills make it out of committee. Don't fall for the anti propaganda and lies. Please realize the truth...they went all in with 9-high and were rightly decimated. There was nothing narrow or close about it.

Tell that to the folks in Connecticut, New York, Maryland, Delaware, and Colorado who immediately had gun control passed in the wake of SH. My state, WA, was flooded with Bloomberg anti money and we just sadly passed serious gun control on a state ballot initiative (full of outright lies by the way, I594). May have been a few other states. But at least 1 in 10 states made stricter gun control laws after a single school shooting.

Conn passes very strict gun control after SH.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/04/connecticut-gun-control-sandy-hook-law_n_3011625.html

New York passes gun control after SH - the New York "Safe Act"
http://statelaws.findlaw.com/new-york-law/new-york-gun-control-laws.html

I stand by the statement that the only reason we didn't have national gun control - and the Ds were calling hard for it - was due to enough Rs in the Congress to keep it from gaining momentum.
Here's the POTUS talking about gun control after SH. You can bet he'd have signed any and everything presented if there was something presented.
http://wallstcheatsheet.com/stocks/...eed-one-year-after-sandy-hook.html/?a=viewall

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ne-newtown-gun-control-mental-health/4009051/

Where federal lawmakers failed to act, states debated more than 1,500 gun bills and passed 109 of them. In all of the states which made major changes to their gun laws, one party controls both the statehouse and the governor's mansion.

Several Democratic-controlled states, for example, mandated more background checks for gun purchases. Meanwhile, Republican states loosened some gun restrictions and cleared the way for armed volunteers to guard schools. Special interests, pro and con, spent millions to sway the debate....On the other end of the spectrum, Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, New York and Delaware acted to plug the perceived gap created by federal inaction on gun control. All five states now require background checks for all gun purchases in person or online, including at gun shows. Connecticut, Maryland and Colorado also banned certain types of high-capacity magazine or "assault" rifles. These plans were all considered in Congress, but failed....

And you failed to comment on the other links presented - the lead smelting and ammo import bans.

Ammo faces a pseudo ban based on price and supply... and attacks on the supply industry such as lead and imports. Prices will naturally only go up, in my view, absent changes in the law or raw materials. Shipping however may temporarily go down. Shipping is a large piece of that puzzle. That relies on oil prices.

 

[Warp]

Tell that to the folks in Connecticut, New York, and Colorado who immediately had gun control passed in the wake of SH. My state, WA, was flooded with Bloomberg anti money and we just sadly passed serious gun control on a state ballot initiative (full of outright lies by the way, I594). May have been a few other states.

I stand by the statement that the only reason we didn't have national gun control - and the Ds were calling hard for it - was due to enough Rs in the Congress to keep it from gaining momentum.

Of course, the control freak all-blue gun-control laden states who keep voting blue are getting more gun control. I never said or implied that specific crappy states won't get crappy laws.

 

[leadcounsel]

Of course, the control freak all-blue gun-control laden states who keep voting blue are getting more gun control. I never said or implied that specific crappy states won't get crappy laws.

It's naive to think it can't happy to Georgia too... the ONLY reason it hasn't occurred nationally is, as I've said, mostly the pro-gun Rs in Congress to block it (barely). Had the Ds focused on guns and not healthcare, they could have passed anything gun control related they wanted. Thankfully they did not.

"Crappy states." Just 10 or 20 years ago, Colorado was an awesome Red state. But that has changed overnight. Heck, talk to Californians. Just 50 years ago, it was a Red state. Now, it's a strong Blue anti-gun state with 50 million people. Things can change overnight.

And just because YOU'RE not suffering, doesn't mean folks like me and others are victimized when our states become anti-gun or more harsh.

We all need to stand together.

As for the bubble burst, I'm hopeful that prices will collapse. Maybe after the next POTUS election some of these importation laws can be repealed and ease up some imports.

 

[Warp]

And you are patently, demonstrably wrong.

As I've said, those bills didn't even make it out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Let alone voted on in the Senate, let alone passed in the senate, let alone moved to the House to be "blocked" by anybody.

 

[JohnKSa]

And you are patently, demonstrably wrong.

As I've said, those bills didn't even make it out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Let alone voted on in the Senate, let alone passed in the senate, let alone moved to the House to be "blocked" by anybody.

So what are you saying? Are you claiming that Federal gun control can never pass regardless of the makeup of the administration and Congress? That it only passes in "crappy states"?

 

[lxd55]

Sad, it will only take one dummy lone wolf nut job in a shooting incident to set the leftist panic crowd to raise the prices again.

the leftist panic crowd does not buy bullets, shooters do. there is your panic buyers.

 

[reddog81]

And you are patently, demonstrably wrong.

As I've said, those bills didn't even make it out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Let alone voted on in the Senate, let alone passed in the senate, let alone moved to the House to be "blocked" by anybody.

^^^ that, and there's basically 0% chance anything is going to happen in the next 2 years. High ammo prices and unavailability over the last 2 years was caused by excess demand and panic buying.

 

[DocUSMCRetired]

I would like to add, please don't make the mistake of thinking that just because someone is an Independent or a Democrat that they are Anti-gun. Some are pro-gun. Also do not mistake a Republican for being pro-gun. John McCain for one, voted FOR more strict gun control.

 

[leadcounsel]

Senate Judiciary members include:

Feinstein, Leahy, Schumer, Durbin and Franklin. All obviously very anti-gun. Quite certain that if it wasn't for the Rs they'd have pushed through whatever they want. National bans on guns, magazines, wait periods, no FTF, you name it. And Obama would sign anything to ban guns and parts. Naive to think otherwise. Now, give a reason why these aren't getting out to Congress/POTUS, if it isn't for the pro-gun Rs in the Senate Judiciary. They also advise to the DOJ, for instance. Let's not get started on the F&F scandal...

Here's just some the 2013 hearings.
1. Assault weapon bans http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/continuation-executive-business-meeting

2. More gun control to curb gun violence. http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/mee...unities-while-respecting-the-second-amendment

3. Yet MORE meetings about curbing gun violence. http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/what-should-america-do-about-gun-violence

This includes ammo bans. It's all part of the plan. Guns, mags, ammo - a multi prong war.

We gun owners NARROWLY dodged more gun control for 6 years, and luckily will have a pro-gun Congress for two more. But I fully expect Executive Actions galore for the next couple years, and pray for no more reasons to pass gun control by either party. And this could include ammo.

 

[oneounceload]

You're not going to play "What If" imaginary scenarios in THIS thread too are you? You have got to stop believing there is a great conspiracy to throw you in jail for recordless FTF sales and a maelstrom of onerous regs just about to happen

 

[lionking]

When a box of 30-30 is $20.00 at Walmart it can stay on the shelf as far as I'm concerned. I haven't shot or bought ammo in two years because of the Sandy Hook incident and post panic

Went to Walmart yesterday, saw a lot of rollback price stickers, hope it continues. Maybe then I'll buy again.

Iv'e seen so many excuse why ammo went jacked, because of gas prices, because of wars we were in, government buying...ect. Well gas is half again, wars are mostly over but the real reason I see it was mass panic after Sandy Hook

 

[kwguy]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist or whatever, but there are those in leadership positions, congress, what have you, that range from local all the way to the federal level, that would love to see our 2a rights taken away. Thats a fact. We know this. After SH, it's true, those bills never made it out of committee. But I'm pretty sure if there were less R's in the House, with a D majority, a lot of that stuff would have made to out of committee, and the D controlled Senate would have jumped on it, and we'd be singing a different tune right now.

Not saying that R's havent passed anti stuff in the past, but the politics this last go-round just played out like that.

We need to stay vigilant. Never say never.

 

[mboylan]

They went up and I don't know about you guys, but I haven't seen prices on ammo ever really go down. It seems like they only ever go up. Aside from anything else, people are still buying the stuff.

Hmmm. I have seen ammo prices crash hard in the late 80s early 90s. I have also seen 5.56 prices crash in the last year or so. There have been opportunities to buy new production 223 at $300/1000 in the last 6 months.

The void in 22 is due to the fact that start up costs are well into 8 figures and margins are razor thin. It's just not worth it right now.

 

[mboylan]

I remember when the last lead smelter was closed, some people swore it was a plot by the EPA to raise ammo prices and eventually end lead bullets, others disagreed saying that lead bullets were already using recycled lead. They overlooked the fact that recycled lead comes from lead that was not recycled.

While lead can be imported from other Nations, the supply of original lead is declining, and will be ever more expensive.

Even with the end of "active" operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, I don't expect a sudden increase in the availability of brass, lead, powder or other components.

Expect the "lame duck" President to use his executive power to take any legal and even extra legal action to limit availability of ammunition and weapons. The current occupant of the Whitehouse has proven to be a bitter foe of the Second Amendment, and he is now unencumbered by the fear of election results.

So no, I don't expect ammunition prices to fall anytime soon.

Lead has come down in price quite a bit over the last 3 years. It is much much cheaper to mine and smelt new lead in third world countries and then ship it over here. The last smelter of new lead in the US was killed by economics as much as it was killed by the EPA.

 

[Warp]

After SH, it's true, those bills never made it out of committee. But I'm pretty sure if there were less R's in the House, with a D majority, a lot of that stuff would have made to out of committee

Those bills didn't make it out of committee in the Senate which was a D majority. Not even out of committee.

 

[Field Tester]

Warp,

While I'm in agreement with almost everything you said in this thread, you sure did confuse the heck out of me when you edited your post on the first page, which included quotes from posts that followed after that edited post. I had to go back and reread several times to see what I missed. I figured something was deleted or you were quoting from another thread.
In the future, in order to avoid confusion for anyone reading any thread from the beginning, can you include any rebuttals and quotes in a fresh post instead of a previous post?