What if (another thought on the 86 ban)...

[Thernlund]

The 86 ban isn't going away any time soon, and Heller (if won) will be only a small part of it if it does. But I was just thinking, what would happen if at any point for whatever reason the 86 ban was repealed in regards to those who already own $15k MGs? If the price dropped by 85% over night, they'd be out a ton of money on an investment. I'd be severely p'd off.

Hell, I own (but don't yet possess) a $500 suppressor. If they were suddenly valued at only $90, I wouldn't be real happy. I might even feel that the gov't owes me for having devalued my investment. Someone who just lost $100k could have much stronger opinions.

Comments?


-T.


EDIT: Please see post #34 before replying. I erred.

 

[fletcher]

Personally, the happiness that everyone could own those items again would exceed the disappointment of the loss in investment.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

If your investment strategy is centered around NFA items, you may wish to consult a financial advisor. Those same item could be banned from transfer at the stroke of a pen and you'd never realize the value of your "investment".

If you're worried about buying something today that will be worth less later, avoid all consumer electronics.

If the suppressor isn't worth $500 now, don't buy it. Even if it does drop in value, you still had it and in theory got some enjoyment out of it for however many years before the price dropped.

 

[Geronimo45]

Someone who just lost $100k could have much stronger opinions.

Someone who had that much spare change to spend on the things in the first place probably wouldn't be out much, IMO. It seems to me that buying Pre-86 MGs is probably a rich man's game.

 

[jefnvk]

A $500 suppressor is going to be worth $500 tomorrow. They aren't banned, they aren't gonna lose value if new MG's are once again allowed.

And as much as I would like to think otherwise, I'm sure quite a few owners/dealers would protest the ban being lifted, regardless of how stupid an investment a MG is.

 

[Gunnerpalace]

I would gladly lose 100000.00 (If I had it) if they opened the registry for everyone.

 

[Officers'Wife]

Hi Thernlund,

Your investment is based on an artificial valuation which makes it pure speculation. In short, you are betting the law does not change. If it does change to your sorrow the only person you should be PO'd at would be yourself. Them that's got it has to lose it.

Just a bit of advice, sell your $500 supressor and buy silver or some other instrument of true wealth.

Selena

 

[Gord]

I would gladly lose 100000.00 (If I had it) if they opened the registry for everyone.

Unfortunately, when the chips are actually down people tend to think differently. Idle talk is nice but isn't worth much.

Who buys NFA weapons as investments anyway? It's not as if they're appreciating in value. You'd do a hell of a lot better putting $25k into traditional investment venues than into an M16.

 

[Regolith]

Unfortunately, when the chips are actually down people tend to think differently. Idle talk is nice but isn't worth much.

I've heard some NFA owners say the same thing, right on this forum.

Personally, I wouldn't mind losing the money either, but then I'm not an NFA owners, so take it for what it's worth.

 

[Gunnerpalace]

There are two types of NFA owners,

The Fun-lovers who go to Knob Creek, educate others, and have fun.

And the tight-wads (no offense) who stick them in a safe for "collector's value"

Guess who will get ticked off when it (86' ban) gets knocked out?

 

[Feanaro]

A $500 suppressor is going to be worth $500 tomorrow.

If the NFA were repealed, I doubt that. Demand and, thus, supply are artificially low due to government regulation. I suspect that if suppressors were not controlled at all, they would be quite a bit more popular.

 

[10-Ring]

In CA, as stuff gets banned, their values go up. For example, since Colt 1911s in 38 super are not approved for sale new, the pre-owned market has exploded. I recently met someone who paid $1400 for a nickel plated one I would think, that as long as the used market stays in place, values will go up, not down

 

[rugerdude]

Oh man would it be great to see all of those old registered MG's suddenly become to the machinegun market what mosin nagants are to the rifle market.

Seriously though, if you buy something you need only ask yourself one question: "Is this worth it to me at this price?"

If yes, buy. If no, don't.

Those who plunked down the cash for an MG did so for one of two reasons:
1. Because the percieved benefit outweighed the cost, or
2. Because they wanted to make money and the assumed that the values would stay the same or increase. We all know what assuming does .

So the 500 dollar supressor is just as nice as it ever was, even when people are buying them with spare change. Sure, maybe you COULD have gotten a better deal, but if the purchase was wrth the money spent, then it doesn't matter what it costs.

 

[Thernlund]

Mmmm... good points all.

For the record, I didn't get a suppressor for investment value. I got it because I wanted it. The form says "investment/collector" though. The collector part is true I suppose in some sense, but investment... meh. Just got me thinking.

So, what of the guy who saved up because he really wanted it. Not for investment, but just one good one for enjoyment. Gotta have one at least once in his life. He buys it with the idea that he can enjoy it and then one day he can sell it and at least get some of his money back. But instead of getting $12k back on his $15k, he gets $1k. Maybe even less because it's used.

Kinda like buying a new BMW and expecting that you can drive it few years and get a bit more than half what you paid back. And given what you paid, you can likely buy another nice car outright. Then all of the sudden nobody will take it in trade for even a base-model Civic. Damn.

Dunno. Just a thought.


-T.

Oh, and as for willingly losing $100k to see the ban lifted, I'm not that altruistic.

 

[Prince Yamato]

If the ban were repealed, then just gold-plate your M60s

There will always be some expensive no-ban item to buy. Destructive devices are where the real money is anyway. $200 tax on every explosive thing that gets shot out of there.

 

[jlbraun]

If those that buy machineguns to shoot them suddenly have their collections devalued, I suspect they won't feel bad at all.

If those that buy machineguns to speculate on their future value (firearms by definition cannot be an investment) suddenly have their collections devalued, my sympathies will not be all that forthcoming.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

I'd be severely p'd off.

I would be very happy! Please, please decrease the value of my machineguns! Please! I'd gladly lose about $35,000 if they would let me buy a Glock 18 and FN P90...and 5 or 6 others on my list.

 

[Thernlund]

I'd gladly lose about $35,000 if they would let me buy a Glock 18 and FN P90...and 5 or 6 others on my list.

Hmmm... that is a good point.


-T.

 

[Soybomb]

How much did people pay for pre-94 stuff between 94-2004 and what is that stuff worth today? I'd feel bad for the guys who didn't think their nest egg plan though and lost out big but that was the gamble they took. I like to think most of them would be happy to see something great for americans and shooters.

Hell, I own (but don't yet possess) a $500 suppressor. If they were suddenly valued at only $90, I wouldn't be real happy.

See I'd be thrilled, you might have lost out on one but you had fun with it while you had it and now they're so cheap you could buy one for every caliber.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

Hell, I own (but don't yet possess) a $500 suppressor. If they were suddenly valued at only $90, I wouldn't be real happy.

Isn't that a bit like saying you once paid $4,000 for a computer and it really sucks you can get one a thousand times better now for under $500?

 

[Thernlund]

Isn't that a bit like saying you once paid $4,000 for a computer and it really sucks you can get one a thousand times better now for under $500?

I suppose it is. Will I be able to get a suppressor a thousand times quieter if they lift the ban?


-T.

 

[Outlaws]

I suppose it is. Will I be able to get a suppressor a thousand times quieter if they lift the ban?

Your thread is about the 86 amendment. If they lift that ban it won't affect your suppressor one bit. It had nothing to do with your suppressor.

 

[kenhtake]

I would love lifting the ban even if does mean my collection will lose 90% of its value. Heck, the insurance savings will make it worth it! Unfortunatly I don't think it will happen for many years.

 

[TexasRifleman]

But I was just thinking, what would happen if at any point for whatever reason the 86 ban was repealed in regards to those who already own $15k MGs? If the price dropped by 85% over night, they'd be out a ton of money on an investment. I'd be severely p'd off.

No you wouldn't be pissed off. I'd lose quite a lot of money, but I'd take that trade in a second if it meant opening the NFA registry again. There are only a few large collectors that would really get twisted and frankly they don't matter. They are not generally "gun people" anyway they just see this is a pure investment. For them I suppose it would hurt but I don't care much about people that don't really have a belief in the Second Amendment.

Those of us that are real shooters and pro gun would take the financial hit with pleasure.

Hell, I own (but don't yet possess) a $500 suppressor. If they were suddenly valued at only $90, I wouldn't be real happy.

Suppressors don't have anything to do with this since their number is not limited. Manufacturers can make all the suppressors they can sell. There is a fixed number of transferable MGs and that number cannot be changed at the moment.

 

[everallm]

Marginally off topic......

I have heard from time to time the usual

"Why are these things so expensive"
"It's Capitalism, and the law of Supply and Demand due to a constrained market."

Thing is, this isn't actually "Capitalism at it's best" it's a deliberately and artificially maintained shortage in the market with effective collusion between the holders and the government. In addition there are revenue streams to the restricting organisation that must be paid or draconian punishment will follow. Last I heard that seems not unlike the definitions of extortion and "protection".

Doesn't this fall under both anti-competion and RICO statutes?

There is obvious extortion and price manipulation going on and the fact that it's government hasn't stopped RICO charges being laid against organisations like the Key West PD for example.

I have to admit it would make me giggle like a little girl if, post a (hopeful) good Heller result, charges of price collusion, extortion and racketeering were laid against the ATF. Hell, use the Commerce clause the SC and ATF seem so fond off....

Oh well, we all have our little dreams.