99.99% of the time I would agree but this time we are a fairly small group of people some of who are taking of advantage of others based on the fear of losing our rights.
Sorry in advance for length and rambling, but I felt the need to get in on this one.
OK, so it seems we want just a little socialism, but not too much, yes?
Price is merely a signaling mechanism in a free market economy that tends to direct allocation of scarce goods & services.
When available units of product X are scarce, higher price means that somebody buys only four of the six remaining, leaving two for somebody else. The higher price also is a signal to somebody that making more of X would be a good idea, unless there's a distortion (e.g. legal change) in the market that prevents this. Actually one could assert that the fear of pending changes in law might be the distortion, but I digress.
If somebody bought a stock (say, Microsoft) at a low price then sold it when it was high we'd cheer their business acumen, or at least their good fortune (although some would they should have a punative capital gains tax as well). I fail to see the distinction here between the stock and the AR mags (but maybe that's just me).
The same rule holds when the LGS wants $150 more for a given item than an online source. The rejection of the ask price (i.e. the non-purchase) is a signal that the seller should rethink the price he/she wants the item to be sold. Should one find utility in supporting the LGS at that level of personal cost (i.e. paying a higher price for items to support the store), this is his/her choice and that's cool (as an aside, my personal limit in such choices is a $50 difference, at least on larger items - or sometimes the extra $5 on a brick of 22lr, or in that case maybe I've evaluated the cost of driving around more as higher than $5 - but again I digress).
All of the above stated, it seems that tossing about pejorative terms like "gouging" or "profiteering" just because somebody has realized (and acted on) the market price for their property doesn't seem to advance the discussion.
Actually, such an argument is actually not dissimilar than arguing that somebody doesn't "need" a 30-round mag for their AR and therefore shouldn't have one. I don't want/have any; that's cool for me. I'm not going to say that because I don't want such a thing that others are wrong for wanting one (or more).
I've rambled enough. Everybody have a blessed and happy Christmas.