greenjeans
Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2007
- Messages
- 87
This place is beginning to sound like GT.
Illinois Gun Shows Outrageous Prices
- Thread starter Nighthawk0083
- Start date
- Status
Hawk
Member
There is a proverbial "line in the sand" beyond which even the most rabid of free market evangelists won't go in defense of sellers. I'm just not at all certain where that line is.
A bunch of sumdoods buying up Wal-Mart ammo and selling it for triple at gun shows - this is roughly analogous to a time honored tradition known as "scalping". Don't want to pay the prices? Walk away. Some retailers (as well as some sports franchises) have taken measures to limit scalping as they feel it's in their own best interest to do so. Slapping limits on purchases is every bit a free market maneuver provided the retailer / sports franchisee did it based on self-interest rather than legislative fiat.
Selling a product for triple MSRP? Generally ascribed to buyer impatience in the case of limited quantities or buyer ignorance in the case of easily obtained stuff. There may or may not be a subtle difference in someone simply listing a Hi-Point C9 for sale at 599.00 and listing the exact same deal with the statement that MSRP is 799.00 but it's "on sale" for 599.00. In the first case it's being optimistic but in the second case it's fraudulent. I expect only a minority of FMEs believe it's OK to lie about MSRPs but some will insist it's up to the buyer to educate himself.
In extreme cases, FMEs will claim that it's the buyer's responsibility to perform due diligence on a Colt Python with 3" barrel with letter and matching box even if the barrel was from Numrich selling Colt surplus and the letter and box end label were forged. "Buyer should have gotten his own letter", yadda yadda.
What strikes me as something of a double standard is that some folks (not on this particular forum thankfully) will cheerfully claim that the counterfeit Colt is fair game and a case of caveat emptor but will get their panties all in a twist if I admit to paying for that Colt with counterfeit bank notes.
Oddly enough, the FMEs will be all warm and fuzzy with the seller invoking the full force of law with respect to counterfeit paper or hot checks even if the seller failed to exercise due diligence in checking for counterfeit currency or phoning in checks but get all weak about the knees if the guy hosed by the counterfeit Colt wants similar legal recourse.
and
that
just
isn't
right.
But, like I said, thankfully no one here. Of those that are here, where exactly is the line drawn?
How much deceit on the part of the seller is hunky-dorey?
If someone tells me a a P-38 was Hitler's own and worth 15,000.00 where they actually got it from SOG the week prior, why can't I pay for it with counterfeit bank notes? Apart from the obvious visit from the fine folks in treasury it seems to me counterfeit is counterfeit - no distinction seller to buyer, right?
Scalping? Fine. But I'm seeing stuff that's crossing the line into fraudulent. Where that line is seems to be a personal thing.
A bunch of sumdoods buying up Wal-Mart ammo and selling it for triple at gun shows - this is roughly analogous to a time honored tradition known as "scalping". Don't want to pay the prices? Walk away. Some retailers (as well as some sports franchises) have taken measures to limit scalping as they feel it's in their own best interest to do so. Slapping limits on purchases is every bit a free market maneuver provided the retailer / sports franchisee did it based on self-interest rather than legislative fiat.
Selling a product for triple MSRP? Generally ascribed to buyer impatience in the case of limited quantities or buyer ignorance in the case of easily obtained stuff. There may or may not be a subtle difference in someone simply listing a Hi-Point C9 for sale at 599.00 and listing the exact same deal with the statement that MSRP is 799.00 but it's "on sale" for 599.00. In the first case it's being optimistic but in the second case it's fraudulent. I expect only a minority of FMEs believe it's OK to lie about MSRPs but some will insist it's up to the buyer to educate himself.
In extreme cases, FMEs will claim that it's the buyer's responsibility to perform due diligence on a Colt Python with 3" barrel with letter and matching box even if the barrel was from Numrich selling Colt surplus and the letter and box end label were forged. "Buyer should have gotten his own letter", yadda yadda.
What strikes me as something of a double standard is that some folks (not on this particular forum thankfully) will cheerfully claim that the counterfeit Colt is fair game and a case of caveat emptor but will get their panties all in a twist if I admit to paying for that Colt with counterfeit bank notes.
Oddly enough, the FMEs will be all warm and fuzzy with the seller invoking the full force of law with respect to counterfeit paper or hot checks even if the seller failed to exercise due diligence in checking for counterfeit currency or phoning in checks but get all weak about the knees if the guy hosed by the counterfeit Colt wants similar legal recourse.
and
that
just
isn't
right.
But, like I said, thankfully no one here. Of those that are here, where exactly is the line drawn?
How much deceit on the part of the seller is hunky-dorey?
If someone tells me a a P-38 was Hitler's own and worth 15,000.00 where they actually got it from SOG the week prior, why can't I pay for it with counterfeit bank notes? Apart from the obvious visit from the fine folks in treasury it seems to me counterfeit is counterfeit - no distinction seller to buyer, right?
Scalping? Fine. But I'm seeing stuff that's crossing the line into fraudulent. Where that line is seems to be a personal thing.
MR_A
Member
It not just the gun shows try buying ammo at gander mountain 9mm $39.00 PER BOX and $19.99 for a box of remington express 16 ga . the liberals are winning the retailers and ammo maker are making big money. If everyone would stop paying these high prices and the large outdoor retailers would be one the band wagon to get prices down let them lose tens of thousands a week in ammo sales and see if prices don't come down. Everyone is making money so they don't care.......stop buying for a whlie.....this is the way the liberals will win the gun war.....price us out, what good is a gun if you can't afford ammo.....stop buying now...Remington - winchester - cci - and the prices will come down...just remember vote (R) you can't trust anyone who is a (D)....THE AMERICAN SOCIALIST PARTY IS THE (D) PARTY.......
oneounceload
member
I don't believe that anyone here who is a fan of free markets said anything about fraud being OK - if I'm wrong, please point out those threads/posts.
Scalping is not the same as fraud - it is charging more than a printed price and a buyer willingly paying it - no different than when you walk inside that stadium and pay $9.00 for a beer that sells in the 7-11 for 1.69. Fraud is lying, charging what the market will bear is free enterprise.
Scalping is not the same as fraud - it is charging more than a printed price and a buyer willingly paying it - no different than when you walk inside that stadium and pay $9.00 for a beer that sells in the 7-11 for 1.69. Fraud is lying, charging what the market will bear is free enterprise.
oneounceload
member
And you can PROVE this based on what? Makers are running 24/7 - that's a lot of OT....oh yeah, forget that taxes have increased due to a bad economy, raw materials are up, utilities are up, shipping costs are up
please.......
MR_A
Member
I dont have a need to prove anything....I was just stating what I see ...have been a hunter and sportsman for over 45 years and I know what I see and I know what has taken place in the past.
oneounceload
member
So 45 years means that prices should be the same as then? Or what exactly are you trying to say here? If you are going to post something as fact, then please provide the link to the data that substantiates it
Hawk
Member
Do you consider a seller verbally lying about MSRP to be fraudulent?
That's what I said - you'll not find an argument there.
Scalping and lying are two entirely different things.
gyvel
Member
It's a bit harsh to label a buyer as "dumb" when, in fact, they just aren't privy to the information that the "insiders" are privy to.
The driving philosophy of dealers at gun shows is to troll for the uninformed and unwary buyer and sell at an obscene markup on that which can be had for less elsewhere.
In a nutshell, it's called "greed."
MR_A
Member
I was just stating what I see in the stores, but I will leave all futher posting to you since you only you know all the facts and no one else can have an opinion...have a good night.
oneounceload
member
Yes I do - that is not free markets, that is fraud
And that is different from a car dealer, jeweler at holiday time, or anyone else in retail how? Is it morally or ethically proper? Depends on your own POV. Is it illegal to sell something for whatever you can get someone WILLINGLY to pay for it? Absolutely not - the pet rock is a perfect example
Hawk
Member
I find that gratifying.
Anyone else? If someone at a gun show tells me the MSRP on a Jimenez .25 is 599.00, it's not a case of caveat emptor and I can and should bring fraud charges?
This could be the best gun show whinging thread ever.
John Wayne
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2007
- Messages
- 1,133
Well, if I ever need:
a giant dragon sword or Airsoft guns
tazers from the 800 lb. "disabled" man in the electric scooter
beef jerky
genuine Native American dream catchers made by people whiter than me
or a sweatshirt with a howling wolf against a purple background,
I know where to go. If I want decent prices on gun-related stuff however, I'd stay away from shows.
a giant dragon sword or Airsoft guns
tazers from the 800 lb. "disabled" man in the electric scooter
beef jerky
genuine Native American dream catchers made by people whiter than me
or a sweatshirt with a howling wolf against a purple background,
I know where to go. If I want decent prices on gun-related stuff however, I'd stay away from shows.
oneounceload
member
However, someone selling said firearm for that price, and getting someone to pay it, is different - no different than when the Ruger LCP came out and everyone was initially selling it for more than MSRP, or Toyota dealers when gas hit $4 plus a gallon selling the Prius for over MSRP
MSRP is SUGGESTED, not a legal number by any definition. If demand warrants, then you'll pay it if you want it right then, won't you?
MSRP is SUGGESTED, not a legal number by any definition. If demand warrants, then you'll pay it if you want it right then, won't you?
Hawk
Member
No argument there either - I'm reminded of the first Mazda RX7s and, more recently, Shelby Mustangs, Rohrbaughs and Seecamps.
The dealer says "MSRP is 399.00 but I'm getting 800.00 - take it or leave it".
Cool. OK. Fine. Supply & Demand. Most excellent.
The dealer says "MSRP is 1,399.00 and I'm getting 1,000.00" when the published MSRP is actually 599.00 and we cross over into fraud, right?
The dealer says "MSRP is 399.00 but I'm getting 800.00 - take it or leave it".
Cool. OK. Fine. Supply & Demand. Most excellent.
The dealer says "MSRP is 1,399.00 and I'm getting 1,000.00" when the published MSRP is actually 599.00 and we cross over into fraud, right?
oneounceload
member
Personally, I would agree with that.....but if you go to a gun show or ANYTHING similar not knowing what you're looking at or getting into, you are going to get taken - doesn't make it right, legal or moral, it just is what it is........a gun show is no different than a flea market, IMO.....they've gone WAY down hill in the last few years.
IMO, we will be our own worst enemy in closing them down - but then I didn't think GM or Chrysler should have been helped either - the markets will take care of things - when they become too full of junk and overpriced crap, and no one sells anything to cover their expenses there and stops coming back, maybe the show promoters will do something to correct it. If not, no big deal - there is the internet and very good brick and mortar establishments
IMO, we will be our own worst enemy in closing them down - but then I didn't think GM or Chrysler should have been helped either - the markets will take care of things - when they become too full of junk and overpriced crap, and no one sells anything to cover their expenses there and stops coming back, maybe the show promoters will do something to correct it. If not, no big deal - there is the internet and very good brick and mortar establishments
Hawk
Member
Again agreed. I see no point in shutting them down and I'm morally opposed to legislative fiat.
But I would like to see a little fair play in internet gun board economics class 101 - that being that there is no difference between someone lying about his product's worth vs. my lying about my product's (currency's) worth.
The difference is that legal remedy awaits the seller if he fails due diligence in checking for counterfeit currency or hot checks but if I fail to take measures to protect myself from his bogus claims of worth, it's my fault for being taken.
That is the stuff I expect to see from the south end of a northbound bull. I just want a little even handed treatment from the gun board folks. If I pass bogus currency, it's the seller's fault for failing to research the matter and not even taking the most rudimentary steps to protect himself from fraud.
I could stand the gun board denizens on my side - the entire department of the treasury / secret service is on the seller's side for cryin' out loud - he sure doesn't need moral support from folks explaining that the buyer is responsible for everything.
And it's getting late so I probably shouldn't make anything of it but you notice that exactly no one has jumped on your bandwagon to agree that lying is fraud? Perhaps tomorrow the rest will chime in. Sure would be nice to know that fraud isn't condoned and that we have a relatively common notion of what fraud is.
But I would like to see a little fair play in internet gun board economics class 101 - that being that there is no difference between someone lying about his product's worth vs. my lying about my product's (currency's) worth.
The difference is that legal remedy awaits the seller if he fails due diligence in checking for counterfeit currency or hot checks but if I fail to take measures to protect myself from his bogus claims of worth, it's my fault for being taken.
That is the stuff I expect to see from the south end of a northbound bull. I just want a little even handed treatment from the gun board folks. If I pass bogus currency, it's the seller's fault for failing to research the matter and not even taking the most rudimentary steps to protect himself from fraud.
I could stand the gun board denizens on my side - the entire department of the treasury / secret service is on the seller's side for cryin' out loud - he sure doesn't need moral support from folks explaining that the buyer is responsible for everything.
And it's getting late so I probably shouldn't make anything of it but you notice that exactly no one has jumped on your bandwagon to agree that lying is fraud? Perhaps tomorrow the rest will chime in. Sure would be nice to know that fraud isn't condoned and that we have a relatively common notion of what fraud is.
There is nothing in the Illinois Criminal Code that addresses a vendor lying about what a product is worth. Well there is theft by deception but it most likely wouldn't apply to a gunshow sale. There is however a federal law against you making your own currency and passing it off as US currency. However if you wish to make your own currency and convince the vendor that it is actually worth something, and it doesn't in any way, shape or form resemble US currency and you don't represent it as such you are totally legal. Print up some Hawk ducats or whatever you wish to call them and convince the vendor they are worth as much as the gun you want to buy. Totally legal.
Ah but that' where you are wrong. The law is on your side. Civil law that is. If you feel ripped off, hire an attorney and sue the vendor. Convince the jury that you were wronged and he misrepresented the worth of the gun and you win.
Hawk
Member
We should probably take it back a step and redefine "lying about worth". I'm not talking about simply overstating a market value but rather the specific case of misrepresenting a manufacturer's printed MSRP.
Or, in the more extreme example, passing off a counterfeit 3" Colt as the real (left the factory that way) thing.
It should also be noted that I'm not addressing the real world or any legal issue - I'm specifically addressing that nebulous thing of no real legal impact that one might call "gun board fair-sies" - in the vernacular of the playground.
There's an undercurrent in these threads that it's anti-american to suggest that "something be done" about gun show scammers. But no one suggests that the burden of research and due diligence should fall upon the seller in the case of counterfeit currency or hot checks - legislation to protect sellers is OK but legislation to protect buyers is socialism.
I'm prodding the board to see why that attitude exists. And I am talking real illegal counterfeit US currency - not Hawk ducats. Why does the burden of scam detection land totally on the buyer? Why is the use of legislation to control a buyer's deceit OK if you're a seller but distasteful to want the same as a buyer?
Why does the buyer have to hire a lawyer if he gets a counterfeit Colt but the seller doesn't have to hire a lawyer to recover a hot check? (In Texas it's "deceptive trade practices with treble damages" but treble damages on a 3" Colt is around 6,000.00 and lawyers don't come that cheap.
To summarize, this isn't about the real world - it's about an apparent inconsistent attitude on the part of the free market internet profs or possibly a genuine mis-communication where they just don't "get" that I'm talking about genuine deceptive trade practices and not harmless scalping.
Why is it OK to sell counterfeit merchandise but reprehensible to pay for it with counterfeit currency - or is it not really OK to sell counterfeit merchandise? Is the burden of due diligence applicable to both buyer and seller or buyer only?
Free form internet lectures on how a double standard isn't being imposed are welcome as well as whether or not criminal behavior on the part of gun show sellers is somehow excusable. If any internet free market guru wants to exhibit fair-mindedness about the distastefulness of legislation, proposing a fantasy whereby we repeal the legal protections a deceptive gun show seller enjoys against bogus currency and hot checks is totally acceptable - it's just an experiment in boardie attitudes, after all.
Wouldn't that be a hoot? An affirmative defense to criminal counterfeiting charges being provable deception on the part of the seller? Anarchy. Woohoo.
In the 21st century when almost every American and most folks around the world have access to the internet I would love to know where all this "insider" information is.
Hawk, fraud is fraud. And if the transaction meets the legal definition of fraud then the seller should be held legally responsible.
Um. Yes you do. If you are going to make a statement of "fact" then you also need to be able to provide citation for where you information comes from. Opinion is just that, and everyone is welcome to their own, and I for one welcome differing opinions. But fact must be supported by an outside source.
I do not see that. If a legitimate scam is uncovered either through a sale or an investigation I believe that everyone here would want to see that scammer prosecuted. Yesterday I stated that I did not have any dealer friends, I was wrong. I have a friend that works in an antique firearms store. He makes many, many sales at gun shows. He does all of his research in advance to ensure what he is telling the customer is correct. I do not know anyone else that has his knowledge of pre-1960's military firearms. He knows what he has and he knows what they are worth.
If that be the case and a seller is trying to take a buyer for everything he is worth by trying to pass off the Colt knock-off as a real Colt then by all means the seller should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. And you are correct lawyers are not cheap, but I speak from personal experience when I say they are worth every penny.
Who said that this was in any way, shape, or form ok?
To my mind yes. If I see a .45 Luger sitting on a sellers table and I know what he has but he does not and I get said Luger for $500 am I not just as bad as a seller trying to pass off a copy as the real thing. (I choose the .45 Luger because I know of only 2 in the world) If a seller does not know what he has and I take him for everything he's got is that not just as deceptive?
Last edited:
Hawk
Member
It is altogether possible, even probable, that this "undercurrent" I perceive is nothing more than a communication issue.
I'm talking about genuine deceptive trade practices as defined by sundry state laws.
If what is being defended is simply completely legal "scalping" and optimistic pricing structures then that's totally different than defending high prices via deception, which is pretty much the dictionary definition of "swindle".
If those pointing out the facts of a free market economy in fact don't condone deceptive trade practices than I sit corrected and feel all warm and fuzzy.
I can only speak for me, but there is a special place in hell for swindlers, card cheats, and cattle thieves.
Last edited:
bababooey32
Member
Hawk wrote:
With due respect Hawk, the whole "fraudulent tactics" part of this thread was introduced by you as a strawman in post #77. Prior to that, no one was discussing fraudulent sales and none of us "FME's" had ever tried to excuse illegal trade practices (such as fraud, deceptive advertising or counterfeiting). In fact, the very existence of a free market depends on those practices being monitored and squashed as soon as possible upon discovery.
The complaints we have heard have not been about deception (with the possible exception of the "Obama" mantra being used to scare up ammo sales) but simply about absolute price levels. As we "FMEs" described, it is impossible to fraudulently set prices to high, as a sale must be agreed upon by both parties (assuming the item is what it is purported to be).
The burden is on both parties. Both should make reasonable efforts to ensure the items they are trading (includiung currency, checks, credit cards) are legitimate. But at a certain point trust is involved in almost all transactions. An ex post discovery of counterfeit items or fraud is justification for criminal and civil redress.
This argument was never made. This is a strawman argument you have constructed.
With due respect Hawk, the whole "fraudulent tactics" part of this thread was introduced by you as a strawman in post #77. Prior to that, no one was discussing fraudulent sales and none of us "FME's" had ever tried to excuse illegal trade practices (such as fraud, deceptive advertising or counterfeiting). In fact, the very existence of a free market depends on those practices being monitored and squashed as soon as possible upon discovery.
The complaints we have heard have not been about deception (with the possible exception of the "Obama" mantra being used to scare up ammo sales) but simply about absolute price levels. As we "FMEs" described, it is impossible to fraudulently set prices to high, as a sale must be agreed upon by both parties (assuming the item is what it is purported to be).
The burden is on both parties. Both should make reasonable efforts to ensure the items they are trading (includiung currency, checks, credit cards) are legitimate. But at a certain point trust is involved in almost all transactions. An ex post discovery of counterfeit items or fraud is justification for criminal and civil redress.
This argument was never made. This is a strawman argument you have constructed.
It could be. I just don't know enough about MSRPs to know if it is fraud to misrepresent them. I'm quite sure, however, that the manufacturer would be quite displeased with such a misrepresentation. I do , however, have littel sympathy for a buyer so eager to part with his money that they do do not do any basic research on what they are buying. And ultimately if they agree to the final price (MSRP or not), it would be hard to claim fraud (again assuming the item sold is what the it waas purported to be). I don't think the seller has any legal responsibility to provide me with accurate price reference points for me to make a decision. That is the buyers responsibility.
Buyers can easily access price and other information these days on just about any product.
If they chose not to do so, that is not the seller's fault.
IMO, at least from a moral perspective, everyone, buyer and seller alike, have an obligation not to lie to each other.
If they chose not to do so, that is not the seller's fault.
IMO, at least from a moral perspective, everyone, buyer and seller alike, have an obligation not to lie to each other.
Hawk
Member
It is in perhaps poor taste but I was importing an anecdote from a different venue.
Specifically, a vendor mis-stating a published MSRP when specifically asked.
But since we're apparently all agreed that such a thing constitutes deceptive trade practices, there's little to argue about.
They can also ask the seller what the published MSRP is (assuming current production) and if the seller lies by inflating the figure by a factor of three while stating the number is a published factory MSRP, the buyer has been swindled. If he simply coughs up the funds without asking any questions, he's just paid the price for his ignorance. There's a big difference between the two.
Again, increasing a price through deception is called "swindling".
Increasing a price through simply asking for it is called market dynamics. One is illegal, the other isn't.
- Status
