Profiteering Off Personal Protection

[Walt_Jabsco]

There is nothing wrong with capitalism.However there is a problem with GREED! Whatever happened to loving your neighbor as you love yourself.I own more firearms than I can carry because I am an enthusiast. However I have friends and family with similar interests but less resources. Most ,like myself with past military experience. In times of trouble they know they can receive help from me in whatever form necessary.

Sorry, friend, but you seem to be making a distinction between greed and capitalism. A capitalist economy is an economy run on greed.

Mind you, I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but you're a bit deluded if you think otherwise.

 

[Liberty1911]

Sorry, friend, but you seem to be making a distinction between greed and capitalism. A capitalist economy is an economy run on greed.

Mind you, I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but you're a bit deluded if you think otherwise.

I disagree. Capitalism is predicated on self interest. That isn't the same thing as greed. Not everything done in self interest is greed.

 

[wtfd661]

Couldn't agree more with the OP.

 

[printcraft]

Couldn't agree more with the OP.

 

[Miller Tyme]

I am sorry, but I disagree.

First of all, the whole "community" angle your pushing is purely socialist BS. It is not my responsibility to worry about those who are unprepared. Nor, is it my problem to concern myself with those who have finally seen the light and have just started their "collection".

Now, before you get on your high horse and make some incorrect assumptions about me, I am more than happy to educate folks and give advice on firearms subjects that I know well, for free I might add. But if some slack jawed, booger eatin' moron, wants to jump into the fray without educating themselves, well, I offer zero remorse.

The fact is, in the real world, life is not fair and can be cruel, dangerous and expensive to the stupid and uninformed. I suggest asking a lot of questions, do some serious research and wear a helmet.

Very well put, remember everyone the market is being driven by us, the gun owners of America, wether it's your 1st gun or your 1000th gun, if you are paying these silly prices you are part of the problem.

As for prices returning to normal, what ever that may be, forget about it, they may drop but we will always be one wack job away from this happening again.

My suggestion if you want a gun to own & shoot cheaply, go buy a Mosin Nagant, $2000.00 will get you a real sniper(R-Guns) and about 5000 rounds of ammo.

 

[chizzle]

There have been a talk about price gouging going on, but I think the better word is profiteering. And there's been a whole lot of profiteering off of personal protection.

The things I have seen in the wake of this hysteria is sickening. ARs and Pmags going at ridiculous prices. While I agree that these "tactics" are perfectly legal, and the right of the seller in a supply/demand society, it saddens me to see how much of a community we AREN'T.

Ask yourself why are people buying these items at such crazy prices? They believe that if a gun ban does take place, they will lack the ability to obtain the tools they'll need to adequately protect themselves and their family. A $50 Pmag certainly places a serious hurdle in completing that goal.

Personal protection, that's why I think these people are paying these prices. And if not, then it implies that the things the govt wants to ban, we don't actually need at all. Think about that for a second. If we're so willing to part with our precious firearms and accessories, to turn a profit, why did we buy them in the first place, and why are we so eager to screw those within our community be it with $80 pmag or a $400 lower? Is it ethically wrong to handicap a person financially who wants the means to defend themselves? IMO, and although 100% legal, yes. A seller can turn a profit without scheming their way to a 300% markup "because they can."

If a person was starving or dying of thirst, and you had a food and water you could spare, what would be the going rate on that stuff? A person doesn't have a right to be fed, or provided with water, but they do have the right to defend themselves. Based on all I've seen, I imagine that $100 for a case of water, and $30 for a box of Cheerios wouldn't be too far of leap, for some... and this is for items you don't need.

Ever complained about the Sheiks in the middle east jacking us on oil? Did you guys agree with that? Well someone tell me the difference?

Further, how are we supposed to hold the moral ground when we condone such practices? If the government taxed a $10 pmag to $40, or a $70 lower to $300, we'd be screaming blood murder. Sure the Constitution should prevent such govt actions, but how is the effect any different when the same policy is enacted community-wide by your neighbors and friends. Seems to me, your pocket would be equally punished.

This hysteria has showed me that we're not a community. We are a bunch of people that have no cohesiveness and fail to see the "big picture."

The free market will eventually put this nonsense back in check, but it's too late, we've already been exposed as the frauds we are. I used to actually think that if the govt really did overstep it's authority, we'd have the likeness of mind to hold them in check. Now, I wouldn't trust us, as a group, to walk in a straight line, let alone anything that would actually need our attention.

(Not a Disclaimer)
If you're jacking people in the classifieds here or someplace else, I'm talking directly to you. It's your legal right, I will not deny, but you are doing harm to the community.

...and I love the 51-59 post vultures that have popped up recently.

(Kut ain't happy)

If we don't use the current supply and demand equilibrium point to determine the current value of a good or service, what method should we use?

Do you think it is more moral to hold prices below the current supply and demand equilibrium, only to create a black / gray secondary market that reflects the current market conditions? If you don't like the secondary markets that more rapidly react to market conditions, what should be done about them?

How is it detrimental to either the buyer or the seller for me to purchase a good at the current market price of my own free will?

 

[Rocket]

This is crazy. "Community" he says. Gouging he says. Need for self defense he says. I am putting on my hip waders. I once purchased a firearm for a great deal. My brother AND my best friend tried to get me to sell it to them. I said " if you actually NEEDED it I would hand it to you!! But I won't sell it to you. " does that make me bad? None of the three of us needed it. As to a community. If you want to play catch up and TAKE from my family we are going to have issues. If you were not willing to be prepared to do your duty and provide and protect your family that is not my problem. I am!! Do I have more than I need maybe. So am I required to sell just because someone didn't listen to those of us who kept saying get prepared? Because if your gouging logic is correct I am worse than all of the price gougers because I will not even make a rifle available, thus I make mine priceless. Think about that when you would force others to sell low when you will not sell at all! Gold has been $100 or less an ounce in my lifetime. So you must sell it to me for that. Gas has been .79 when I started driving where is my cheep gas? Milk something my family actually NEEDS used to cost .99 a gal. And the big one. My house was worth 210,000 is now worth 160,000. Get over it. As long as we are in a sellers market they are worth what ever will be paid. But if you NEEDED one to stay alive and I had an extra I would hand it to you so you could watch my back. But if I were to sell one I would get every penny I could!

 

[jbombelli]

I don't see anybody crying about gold and silver being exorbitantly high, and people selling their precious metals for 4-5x what they paid. Why is nobody crying about THAT?

This is pure supply/demand/pricing forces at work. Demand has risen dramatically, supply hasn't.

Welcome to Econ 101.

 

[churchmouse]

This is not gold and silver or stocks and bonds.
I have absolutely no issue with any of you pulling something from your safe and selling at whatever the market will bear at the time. It is yours and you can do with it as you will.
My issue is with the carpet bagging profiteers. Those who run out and buy up everything in site and post it up for profit. Some are members here on ingo or have roots in the community but a lot are in no way shooters or do they intend to be. So many people sharing incidents of folks grabbing all the ammo and stating they intend to sell it and no, they have no guns. I have seen some of this first hand in these last 2 weeks. Know several LGS owners and employees and they say the same things. Profiteers...period.

Yes, as the OP stated, you are legally allowed to make a profit in this society but some of this is just wrong at some level.

I sold one of my AR's at a price that reflected pre-insanity to a friend that was wanting one for a long time. Got what I had in it and gave him Mags and ammo on top of it. Had no intention of selling it but I hate to see a grown man cry.

This ain't gold and silver. If it is to you then I guess that is your perception.

OP.....+1

 

[dross]

Since we're all about "community" let's do this. Let's start a thread where everyone pools their ARs and AKs, and their ammo, and their magazines. Everyone in INGO should do this. Then, we'll distribute all of these items equally, and the people who have more than the allotted amount should be compensated at the value of the items prior to the upspike in profits.

After all, what's the difference between a business owner who has mags and will sell them for a greater price and an individual who has a bunch of mags and won't sell them at all? That seems stingier than the guy who'll sell them at a higher price. At least he's willing to part with them.

It doesn't take much to see the socialism start leaking out of people. As soon as it affects their retirement, or their benefits or their desire to have magazines, it's all about community and collectivism.

 

[Miller Tyme]

This is not gold and silver or stocks and bonds.
I have absolutely no issue with any of you pulling something from your safe and selling at whatever the market will bear at the time. It is yours and you can do with it as you will.
My issue is with the carpet bagging profiteers. Those who run out and buy up everything in site and post it up for profit. Some are members here on ingo or have roots in the community but a lot are in no way shooters or do they intend to be. So many people sharing incidents of folks grabbing all the ammo and stating they intend to sell it and no, they have no guns. I have seen some of this first hand in these last 2 weeks. Know several LGS owners and employees and they say the same things. Profiteers...period.

Yes, as the OP stated, you are legally allowed to make a profit in this society but some of this is just wrong at some level.

I sold one of my AR's at a price that reflected pre-insanity to a friend that was wanting one for a long time. Got what I had in it and gave him Mags and ammo on top of it. Had no intention of selling it but I hate to see a grown man cry.

This ain't gold and silver. If it is to you then I guess that is your perception.

OP.....+1

And yet you don't blame the gun stores for limiting what they can buy knowing they are "profiteers" that are just price gouging??? Intresting.

Now I am not one to advocate any limits on what you can buy with your money but my LGS has had a limit of 100 rds of 5.56 per day per customer since last Saturday, and yet he is still out.

 

[printcraft]

This is not gold and silver or stocks and bonds.
I have absolutely no issue with any of you pulling something from your safe and selling at whatever the market will bear at the time. It is yours and you can do with it as you will.
My issue is with the carpet bagging profiteers. Those who run out and buy up everything in site and post it up for profit. Some are members here on ingo or have roots in the community but a lot are in no way shooters or do they intend to be. So many people sharing incidents of folks grabbing all the ammo and stating they intend to sell it and no, they have no guns. I have seen some of this first hand in these last 2 weeks. Know several LGS owners and employees and they say the same things. Profiteers...period.

Yes, as the OP stated, you are legally allowed to make a profit in this society but some of this is just wrong at some level.

I sold one of my AR's at a price that reflected pre-insanity to a friend that was wanting one for a long time. Got what I had in it and gave him Mags and ammo on top of it. Had no intention of selling it but I hate to see a grown man cry.

This ain't gold and silver. If it is to you then I guess that is your perception.

OP.....+1

Yep, and I hope this bubble bursts on them.

 

[Miller Tyme]

Since we're all about "community" let's do this. Let's start a thread where everyone pools their ARs and AKs, and their ammo, and their magazines. Everyone in INGO should do this. Then, we'll distribute all of these items equally, and the people who have more than the allotted amount should be compensated at the value of the items prior to the upspike in profits.

After all, what's the difference between a business owner who has mags and will sell them for a greater price and an individual who has a bunch of mags and won't sell them at all? That seems stingier than the guy who'll sell them at a higher price. At least he's willing to part with them.

It doesn't take much to see the socialism start leaking out of people. As soon as it affects their retirement, or their benefits or their desire to have magazines, it's all about community and collectivism.

+1

 

[hornadylnl]

Since we're all about "community" let's do this. Let's start a thread where everyone pools their ARs and AKs, and their ammo, and their magazines. Everyone in INGO should do this. Then, we'll distribute all of these items equally, and the people who have more than the allotted amount should be compensated at the value of the items prior to the upspike in profits.

After all, what's the difference between a business owner who has mags and will sell them for a greater price and an individual who has a bunch of mags and won't sell them at all? That seems stingier than the guy who'll sell them at a higher price. At least he's willing to part with them.

It doesn't take much to see the socialism start leaking out of people. As soon as it affects their retirement, or their benefits or their desire to have magazines, it's all about community and collectivism.

This.

My brother and cousin used to make fun of me for being a gun nut and having what I do. Throughout all the panics, they were never interested in buying guns until this one. They don't want to pay the inflated prices so they've put stuff on back order hoping they'll get it someday. If they don't, it's not my problem. I'm not their charity case.

I still don't know which is worse. Putting some of my stuff up for sale at a nice profit at least adding to the supply so others have a chance to buy in or sitting on all my stuff complaining about those who are actually increasing the supply. One option makes me look good and the other evil?

 

[Rocket]

This ain't gold and silver. If it is to you then I guess that is your perception.

OP.....+1[/QUOTE]
Actually it is. They are an asset and a hobby. You can not hunt in Indiana with them so they do not provide food. But you can sell them to buy food. If it is the only firearm you have then it is a need. However plenty of other options cheeper.

 

[churchmouse]

And yet you don't blame the gun stores for limiting what they can buy knowing they are "profiteers" that are just price gouging??? Intresting.

Now I am not one to advocate any limits on what you can buy with your money but my LGS has had a limit of 100 rds of 5.56 per day per customer since last Saturday, and yet he is still out.

You missed my point. LGS that I frequent are all out as well but never imposed a limit. The store owners I know did not jack anyone. They sold until it was gone.

No socialism or limits imposed in my comment. None.

Interesting.

 

[SERparacord]

There are no profiteers, there are just suckers buying.

 

[Miller Tyme]

You missed my point. LGS that I frequent are all out as well but never imposed a limit. The store owners I know did not jack anyone. They sold until it was gone.

No socialism or limits imposed in my comment. None.

Interesting.

No you said "Know several LGS owners and employees and they say the same things. Profiteers...period." now this is either a statement of fact or a convient excuse ( scape goat) from your LGS to explain why they are sold out.

Either way you and everyone else can get your reveng by not buying what the "profiteers" are selling and making them take a loss to unload it, its called the power of the pocketbook.

 

[Miller Tyme]

There are no profiteers, there are just suckers buying.

+1

 

[LP1]

Ever complained about the Sheiks in the middle east jacking us on oil? Did you guys agree with that? Well someone tell me the difference?

...

This hysteria has showed me that we're not a community. We are a bunch of people that have no cohesiveness and fail to see the "big picture."

Generally agree with you, and wanted to expand on a couple of items that are quoted above.

Re the price of middle eastern oil - Our gov't has yielded to big oil's money, while taking minimal steps toward energy independence, so that's where the finger should be pointed. The finger should also be pointed at those who complain about subsidies for renewable energy. It's apparently OK to subsidize big oil with tax breaks, but when solar (for example) is subsidized, the gov't is "picking winners and losers".

Re the comment about being a community - you're right, we aren't a community. A community acts collectively in it's own best interest, but any suggestion of "collective" action is met with cries of "socialism" by many of us. We are further weakened when we allow those powerful organizations and individuals that profit the most to divide us on things like social issues and "right to work" (really it's right to work for less, and being set free to fight a huge organization alone; but that's another rant). My impression is that the general opinion on this board is that collective action is bad. Your statement that we miss the big picture is dead on.

It confuses (and amuses) me when people resist acting as a community when it comes to guaranteeing basic human rights like adequate food, housing, and health care for everyone (no, they aren't in the constitution - they are HUMAN rights), but when it comes to the right to self defense they scream bloody murder. Perhaps if we acted more like an inclusive community, there would be less of a need to defend ourselves.