Lake City Ammo plant

[sevt_chevelle]

UuUu3 is putting a very inconsiderate damper on our attempts to prepare for SeeUu2.

The English version.

 

[.45Coltguy]

When big events happen, be they another battle in the land of never-ending conflict or some loser blows his cork and shoots up a bowling alley, there will be folks running to the gun store and spending next months rent money on ammo.

Happens. Every. Time.

Hopefully things settle again soon and the hoopla quiets down.

Stay safe.

Agree!^^^, 100%. This is why I buy components and handload. F shortages.

 

[armoredman]

I ordered 5.56mm M855 from MidwayUSA yesterday, no shortage observed.
I also went into my local CAL Ranch store and bought, powder, primers and bullets, no problem, as well as 22lr Stingers for Da Boy. The ammo shelves in the horse and a half town were pretty darn full as well.

 

[Will Munny]

You can leave contracts in place (not cancelled) and boot deliveries into the next decade due to gubmint demands coming first.

This. People are far too quick to believe whatever the "debunkers" or "fact checkers" spew out to obfuscate what is really going on. Very possible to claim they are still selling to the US market in theory while making it effectively non-existent. Much like how in the US people can "own machine guns" in theory but practically speaking they cannot.

 

[dogtown tom]

This. People are far too quick to believe whatever the "debunkers" or "fact checkers" spew out to obfuscate what is really going on. Very possible to claim they are still selling to the US market in theory while making it effectively non-existent. Much like how in the US people can "own machine guns" in theory but practically speaking they cannot.

Huh?
If you got the $$$$, you can buy a machine gun.
If you got the $$$$, you can buy a Lexus.

Sure, you have a wait for the Form 4 approval, but "practically speaking" you sure as heck can buy a machine gun.

 

[armoredman]

This. People are far too quick to believe whatever the "debunkers" or "fact checkers" spew out to obfuscate what is really going on. Very possible to claim they are still selling to the US market in theory while making it effectively non-existent. Much like how in the US people can "own machine guns" in theory but practically speaking they cannot.

So, a report FROM lake City is a "fact checker"? They ARE the source, amigo. And yes, I can own a machinegun in my state if I want to save up the scratch to get one. In fact, I could carry my legally owned machinegun concealed without a permit...

 

[Will Munny]

Huh?
If you got the $$$$, you can buy a machine gun.
If you got the $$$$, you can buy a Lexus.

Sure, you have a wait for the Form 4 approval, but "practically speaking" you sure as heck can buy a machine gun.

False analogy. New Lexus cars can be entered into the market, no new Machine Guns can.
Its not about the $, merely being expensive is not a reason something is not practicably available.
Its the fact that government regulations prohibit the manufacture of new goods which creates artificial scarcity.

 

[dogtown tom]

False analogy. New Lexus cars can be entered into the market, no new Machine Guns can.
Its not about the $, merely being expensive is not a reason something is not practicably available.
Its the fact that government regulations prohibit the manufacture of new goods which creates artificial scarcity.

I disagree. How about instead of a Lexus, it's a Delorean?

You claimed "Much like how in the US people can "own machine guns" in theory but practically speaking they cannot."
That's factually incorrect. Americans CAN own machine guns. Period.
That no new fully transferables are being made doesn't affect the transferability of existing machine guns.

 

[Mk-211]

DeLorean is still in business.

DeLorean

DeLorean is a legacy mobility company focused on redefining human connections through creative technologies.

delorean.com

 

[Balrog]

I disagree. How about instead of a Lexus, it's a Delorean?

You claimed "Much like how in the US people can "own machine guns" in theory but practically speaking they cannot."
That's factually incorrect. Americans CAN own machine guns. Period.
That no new fully transferables are being made doesn't affect the transferability of existing machine guns.

While what you say is factually correct, from a practical standpoint, how would someone making $20/hr ever afford a machine gun? The limited supply has of course driven price to a point that an average person simply will never to be able to own one.

 

[dogtown tom]

While what you say is factually correct, from a practical standpoint, how would someone making $20/hr ever afford a machine gun? The limited supply has of course driven price to a point that an average person simply will never to be able to own one.

How would someone making $20 an hour afford anything?
If you want a bigger income to afford toys......get a second job. I did.

$20 an hour X 20 hours per week x 50 weeks is $20K.

There are several fully transferrables on GunBroker with "Buy Now" for under $20K

Practical enough?

 

[Balrog]

How would someone making $20 an hour afford anything?
If you want a bigger income to afford toys......get a second job. I did.

$20 an hour X 20 hours per week x 50 weeks is $20K.

There are several fully transferrables on GunBroker with "Buy Now" for under $20K

Practical enough?

I think you are missing the point. Some things are expensive and out of the reach of the average person. Machine guns were not one of those things. Price was driven up by government interference with the market. It’s not a ban, but it’s definitely government manipulation to keep those firearms out of the hands of common people.

 

[dogtown tom]

I think you are missing the point. Some things are expensive and out of the reach of the average person. Machine guns were not one of those things. Price was driven up by government interference with the market. It’s not a ban, but it’s definitely government manipulation to keep those firearms out of the hands of common people.

No, I think you are missing the point.
The claim was "Much like how in the US people can "own machine guns" in theory but practically speaking they cannot."
Practically speaking......they sure as heck can and do buy expensive firearms. While their income may impact their ability to afford a $15,000 toy it is legal for them to purchase.
Whether they are out of reach of the average person has nothing to do with anything. In theory and practically, any American that can legally possess a firearm can also posses a machine gun.

Whether it's government manipulation, interference, "artificial scarcity" or supply and demand causing the high price......it doesn't matter. They are for sale. If the statement was " Much like how in the US people can own an Accuracy International ASR rifle kit" in theory but practically speaking they cannot" is just as dumb. It's an $18000 rifle. "Can own" is not the same as "can afford to own".

 

[Balrog]

No, I think you are missing the point.
The claim was "Much like how in the US people can "own machine guns" in theory but practically speaking they cannot."
Practically speaking......they sure as heck can and do buy expensive firearms. While their income may impact their ability to afford a $15,000 toy it is legal for them to purchase.
Whether they are out of reach of the average person has nothing to do with anything. In theory and practically, any American that can legally possess a firearm can also posses a machine gun.

Whether it's government manipulation, interference, "artificial scarcity" or supply and demand causing the high price......it doesn't matter. They are for sale. If the statement was " Much like how in the US people can own an Accuracy International ASR rifle kit" in theory but practically speaking they cannot" is just as dumb. It's an $18000 rifle. "Can own" is not the same as "can afford to own".

Ok. I see what you are saying now. Our difference of opinion here is that you think it doesn't matter if the government manipulates the market of an item protected under the Second Amendment.

 

[Hartkopf]

What would a machine cost without government manipulation and scarcity? Something close to an average semi auto firearm? Say $1000 vs $$18,000? Serious question.

 

[brewer12345]

What would a machine cost without government manipulation and scarcity? Something close to an average semi auto firearm? Say $1000 vs $$18,000? Serious question.

Considering the difference on an ar is relatively few firing group parts, I'd guess the price difference would be small.

 

[dogtown tom]

Ok. I see what you are saying now. Our difference of opinion here is that you think it doesn't matter if the government manipulates the market of an item protected under the Second Amendment.

No, you got that wrong too.
You know darn well that's not how I think. This isn't a Second Amendment discussion, it's one of what words mean.

Again, "Can own" is not the same as "can afford to own".
"Can own" refers to the legality.
"Can afford to own" refers to ones ability to afford the purchase.

Again, whether it's government manipulation, interference, "artificial scarcity" or supply and demand causing the high price......it doesn't matter. They are for sale.
The government "manipulates the market" via taxes, regulation, price supports and production quotas in many areas of commerce, not just machine guns. It does affect the price to the consumer.

What it doesn't affect is the legality.....so "practically speaking" it is legal to own a machine gun.

 

[dogtown tom]

What would a machine cost without government manipulation and scarcity? Something close to an average semi auto firearm? Say $1000 vs $$18,000? Serious question.

Virtually no difference.

 

[jmorris]

If there is a reason to panic, I have faith in those that don’t shoot to have closets full of ammo to talk about…

 

[plainsdrifter]

Well about 5 days ago I was looking for .308 and lots of the offerings were sold out across the internet. I grabbed 500 rnds at Lucky Gunner which also had limited selection. It got here in 4 days.

 

[Balrog]

No, you got that wrong too.
You know darn well that's not how I think. This isn't a Second Amendment discussion, it's one of what words mean.

Again, "Can own" is not the same as "can afford to own".
"Can own" refers to the legality.
"Can afford to own" refers to ones ability to afford the purchase.

Again, whether it's government manipulation, interference, "artificial scarcity" or supply and demand causing the high price......it doesn't matter. They are for sale.
The government "manipulates the market" via taxes, regulation, price supports and production quotas in many areas of commerce, not just machine guns. It does affect the price to the consumer.

What it doesn't affect is the legality.....so "practically speaking" it is legal to own a machine gun.

Yes you are right. They are for sale. But with closure of the machine gun registry by federal law, prices skyrocketed. The number of people who want to own one far exceeds the supply. While the government did not ban machine guns, the market manipulation amounts to a de facto ban from a practical standpoint because supply is now so limited. I get what you are saying. There is no law against owning a machine gun, as long as it is registered. Hard to believe you don't see mandatory registration and market manipulation as a 2nd amendment issue. But ok...

 

[dogtown tom]

Yes you are right. They are for sale.

Which was the point of my replies to "Much like how in the US people can "own machine guns" in theory but practically speaking they cannot."

But with closure of the machine gun registry by federal law, prices skyrocketed. The number of people who want to own one far exceeds the supply.

Which doesn't have anything to do with the legality of owning a machine gun.

While the government did not ban machine guns, the market manipulation amounts to a de facto ban from a practical standpoint because supply is now so limited.

Nonsense.
A "ban" (or prohibition on the purchase and possession) means the same whether there is one or a billion transferables on the market. If there truly a ban of any sort the availability at any price would not matter because a ban means......a ban. No one could own a machine gun.

You call it a "defacto ban" purely based on the expense. If that's what "too damn expensive for me to afford" is, then there is a de facto ban on Wagu steaks, Rolex watches, Beretta shotguns and giant SUV's.
That's ludicrous.

I get what you are saying. There is no law against owning a machine gun, as long as it is registered.

So practically speaking, you actually agree?

Hard to believe you don't see mandatory registration and market manipulation as a 2nd amendment issue. But ok...

Oh please. You know that's not my belief nor is it the point of this discussion. As a life long Second Amendment advocate I believe all gun laws are unconstitutional. But those laws until ruled unconstitutional I must abide by.

Would you agree that plain 'ol capitalism and the law of supply & demand is equally responsible for the price of transferrable machine guns?
Would you accuse the seller of a transferrable machine gun of manipulating the market or taking advantage of mandatory registration in pricing his MG's?
Are those MG owners anti Second Amendment because they are profiting off the market value of their machine guns?
Profiting off the "government manipulation"?
Profiting off "artificial scarcity" whatever that's supposed to mean?

No one forces you to buy anything.
No one demands that a MG owner sell his MG for the price he paid in 1980.
Government regulations have affected the cost of consumer goods since the first excise taxes.

My response to this isn't a Second Amendment discussion, it's one of what words mean.

"Can own" is not the same as "can afford to own". Just because you can't afford a particular firearm, doesn't mean you have a right to set the price. In America the seller gets to choose what price he charges for goods and services. If you can't afford a machine gun, its because you can't afford a machine gun. It is perfectly legal and thousands of Americans do.

 

[wayneinFL]

You call it a "defacto ban" purely based on the expense. If that's what "too damn expensive for me to afford" is, then there is a de facto ban on Wagu steaks, Rolex watches, Beretta shotguns and giant SUV's.
That's ludicrous.

Are Rolexes too expensive for the average person to afford because they're more desirable than other watches because of quality? Or because of a ban on the supply and a tax?

Come to me with that argument when a Timex costs $1000, because of a tax and a ban on new watches

 

[dogtown tom]

Are Rolexes too expensive for the average person to afford because they're more desirable than other watches because of quality? Or because of a ban on the supply and a tax?

Come to me with that argument when a Timex costs $1000, because of a tax and a ban on new watches

It matters not one bit why the price is the price.
Machine guns may be legally bought, legally possessed.

Come to me when that isn't true.

 

[wayneinFL]

It matters not one bit why the price is the price.
Machine guns may be legally bought, legally possessed.

Come to me when that isn't true.

So the 1994 assault weapons ban wasn't a ban? Even the gun banners said it was a ban.