Why do gun owners do this to each other?

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lone_Gunman

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
8,054
Location
United Socialist States of Obama
Check out this thread on another site. A guy is trying to sell a Ruger LCP for $600. So far, there have been no takers. I picked mine up for $329, delivered.

I think this goes beyond what is acceptable behaviour. Capitalism is great, but we have laws against usury. I would feel bad to sell something to someone that I know is not worth what I am selling it for.

http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=335209
 
Though it's been said 1000 times, capitalism at work.

If he gets $600 for it, the average market price shifts ever so slightly towards $600. If he doesn't get $600 for it, then he's proved to himself that the market price spread does not include his price point.

He's only "doing it" to other shooters if one of them offers to have it "done to" them. There's no law at all that says someone has to buy it.

This is still "consensual", not "forceful", um, commerce.

-Sam
 
GREED pure and simple.

I suppose that tea tax all those years ago was just capitalism at work too.

I mean no one was holding a gun to their head to buy that tea right? :rolleyes:


It really gets to a point where the line has been crossed.


:fire: FLAME SUIT ON :fire:
 
There is a new one available in a local shop for $299.
 
The guy has the right to charge what he wants. We have the right to shop elsewhere. Most of us will. Someone may come along and pay the price. That's what makes a horse race. What I don't get is how why we'd get excited about this here. If you don't like what's on TV, change the channel.

If he'd priced the gun at $350, would we still want to flame him? What about $375? Or $400? At what point do the claws come out? At what point do we get excited enough to add a thread to The High Road?

And apparently the answer is $600.
 
So we should....institute a system where the fair market isn't allowed to determine the price of goods?

Let him charge whatever he wants. Let the listing stay there for months if it isn't reasonable. OR, let someone who really wants it that bad pay for it. Nothing unfair here at all. P.T. Barnum said, "There is a sucker born every minute." This was elaborated upon in the film "Rounders"; "It's immoral to let a sucker keep his money."
 
So when someone ignorant of a gun's value sells it for well below its worth, and someone buys it, fully knowing the seller is ripping him or herself off by doing so, then posts about it here, that's worthy of our praise and congratulations.

However, if someone sells an item for well above its actual worth, hoping that someone ignorant of the actual value will purchase it, then we should all curse and blacklist this person?
 
GREED pure and simple.
Click to expand...

Buy low, sell high: make money = :).

Buy low, try to sell too high: don't make money because no one buys = :(.

This is either smart business or a self-correcting problem.

I suppose that tea tax all those years ago was just capitalism at work too. I mean no one was holding a gun to their head to buy that tea right?
Click to expand...

That's just silly. The Tea Act of 1773 had nothing to do with capitalism. The protesters at the time were upset that the government was taxing them when they did not feel adequately represented. It didn't have anything (really) to do with how much the tax was or on what. And it certainly did not hinge on who was selling what for how much.

Now, do you feel that this seller's choice of a price point reflects your government's predilection to inadequately represent you?

It really gets to a point where the line has been crossed.
Click to expand...
That point would be where somehow one was FORCED to give up their money for an item. Or, perhaps, from an ethical standpoint, if exorbitant money was charged for a life necessity. Someone just asking 30% too much for a consumer item (when there are millions of similar, roughly equivalent options available for far lower prices) -- is no where near "crossing the line."

-Sam
 
If someone will pay, what business is it of Yours? Even if nobody pays that much, how are you harmed?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the internet is chock full of self-appointed, busy-body virtue cops. One of my pet peeves is the amount of crapping in people's "for sale posts" that goes on here and on other sites. All the "crappers" seem to think they have a duty (higher calling?) to add their $.02 and protect the rest of us from what they perceive to be high prices, illegal behavior, etc. Nothing much worse than a self righteous mall cop/crossing guard on a mission to save the world.

To the "crappers" - Opinions are like anuses. God gave you both. It's up to you to use then wisely;).
 
Yea I realize that no one has to pay.

That is not the point.

The point is that it takes a lot of audacity to ask that much above fair market value for anything. This is not the kind of person I would ever want to buy anything from. I think it says a lot about his character.

Basically he is asking almost 100% over what he likely paid for it (at least, I hope he isnt stupid enough to pay anywhere $600 for it).

I think I will PM him and ask him if he will sell it to me for $25. That would be no less audacious.
 
Demand differs from city to city, state to state. If I lived in a place where supply was gone?Maybe in the face of a little social unrest? I might pay a grand for a Raven under the right set of circumstances. Let's be careful with the "greed" label; plays right in to the social agenda of our grabber & chief.
 
If the free market system does not get to set the price and availablity of goods and services, who does ? The government? That's been tried before. Remember Communism? In case anybody missed it, it didn't work.:rolleyes:
 
Honestly, who cares about this? It's the free market at work. If someone is willing to pay him $600 then he's the clever one. If not, well, lesson learned.
 
I think everyone is missing the point. NO one is going to buy that for $600, unless they have no ability to buy one anywhere else. So maybe he will sell it to a prohibited person who can't pass a background check. That would be the only person who MIGHT buy it.

I think this is an indication that the seller may be of poor character to price something that far above fair market value.
 
And if he choses not to put it on the market.........

What is the difference. I just look at those & laugh, but If I really wanted & had the money I would buy it.
 
A rip off is a rip off,calling it capitalism is just away for cheats,thieves, to try and justify ripping someone off,cheats need to be called out!
 
The seller (probably non-seller, to be technical :D) isn't removing any options that you had before... he's just offering you another option.

It's an option to buy high and sell low, but you didn't complain when your broker and IRA gave you the same options a year ago... in fact if you watched Cramer, you were happy to take those options :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Colt Combat Python, 3" barrel
Replies
4
Views
735
dfariswheel
D
H
  • Locked
Why are gun owners such pessimists????
2 3
Replies
61
Views
2K
Mark Tyson
M
Speedo66
  • Locked
Turn in Illegal Guns for $200 each in NYC
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
Speedo66
Speedo66
K
  • Locked
Why do people ask more for used guns then they cost new?
2 3 4 5
Replies
105
Views
7K
WinThePennant
W
I
  • Locked
Volunteer to help new gun owners?
Replies
7
Views
524
ErikO
E
Back
Top