marshaul
Campaign Veteran
No, you listen, son!
...7000 rounds of .22 LR isn't really a hoard. But I still want some.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
This ammo shortage is getting to be outrageous!
- Thread starter MarksmanCentral
- Start date
No, you listen, son!
...7000 rounds of .22 LR isn't really a hoard. But I still want some.
No, you listen, son!
...7000 rounds of .22 LR isn't really a hoard. But I still want some.
sorry boy, since you gave me the finger twice you can kiss my ass
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
sorry boy, since you gave me the finger twice you can kiss my ass
Hah! You got me there. :lol:
Firearms Iinstuctor
Regular Member
Modren body armor can stop lots of rounds most of all pistol rounds and rifle rated armor stops a lot of rifle rounds also. does that make them useless all so. I wore armor every day for over 33 years. Shot a bit of in testing of it with various rounds also .
Armor helps but dosen't make you bullet proof. We just a solider killed with a knife attack to his unarmored neck slip a bullet where its counts your dead.
22 rf is not ideal but sure in the heck beats nothing or a sharp stick.
Well you talk about running out, if one is just useing ammo for hunting or selfdefense not traning or target shooting a 1000 rounds of 22 will last you for years. Lets say 200 rounds a year for serious work a 1000 rounds is good for 5 years 7000 rounds equals 35 years worth even if you double to 400 rounds per year is 17.5 years.
Thats is one never ever gets any type for resupply even in hard core anti gun place 22 is still available. Yea you need a lic and meet other requirements same with shot gun and some hunting ammo.
10000 rounds only two cases well last a long long time if one only uses as needed.
Armor helps but dosen't make you bullet proof. We just a solider killed with a knife attack to his unarmored neck slip a bullet where its counts your dead.
22 rf is not ideal but sure in the heck beats nothing or a sharp stick.
Well you talk about running out, if one is just useing ammo for hunting or selfdefense not traning or target shooting a 1000 rounds of 22 will last you for years. Lets say 200 rounds a year for serious work a 1000 rounds is good for 5 years 7000 rounds equals 35 years worth even if you double to 400 rounds per year is 17.5 years.
Thats is one never ever gets any type for resupply even in hard core anti gun place 22 is still available. Yea you need a lic and meet other requirements same with shot gun and some hunting ammo.
10000 rounds only two cases well last a long long time if one only uses as needed.
ADobbs1989
Regular Member
Unless you are in an unknown location and able to take your time getting neck shots, good luck with that. In most cases your aim isn't going to be exactly perfect and there isn't a modern piece of body armor that wont make .22's feel like bb's. Sure I'll agree with you that it's better than nothing, but if your one of the people stocking up on ammo for some unknown scenario, shouldn't you be focused on ammo that would have a better chance at being useful? If all your going to be using it for is small game hunting there's no good reason to be hoarding so much of it. Hoarder is applied as my previous definition of what I consider a hoarder.
nonameisgood
Regular Member
I'm not sure what the funniest part of this is, that people think they will have a need for 10,000 rounds of ammo for the coming zombies, or that they will live long enough in a survival situation to shoot that much.
Some of us want ammo to shoot, because that is what it is made to do. I'd also like to have had enough to weather the ammo-recession, but I shot down my supply and haven't been able to buy bullets or loaded rounds. I even have primers and power, just no lead. I could cast my own, but would rather not. I'll probably have buy a 45 so I can cast and not vaporize quite as much lead while shooting.
Some of us want ammo to shoot, because that is what it is made to do. I'd also like to have had enough to weather the ammo-recession, but I shot down my supply and haven't been able to buy bullets or loaded rounds. I even have primers and power, just no lead. I could cast my own, but would rather not. I'll probably have buy a 45 so I can cast and not vaporize quite as much lead while shooting.
id rather die fighting for my freedom and have ammo left over than die from running out of ammo.
Last edited:
Firearms Iinstuctor
Regular Member
Some of us have ammo to shoot and ammo for other reason.
When ammo prices started to climb with the price of metals started to go up I broke out the molds and started casting again. It still costing me only about 3 to 5 cents a round. Lead bullets work well in al most all pistol calibers no need for a 45 to shoot lead. 8 lbs of reddot with the avg of 5grs per round 11200 rounds. With light 38spl loads and 2.5 grs thats 22400 rounds.
It one shoots a lot buying primers by the 50000 lot, powder by the kegs always got one the best prices.
For those of you who think 10000 rounds is a lot need to to more shooting for some of us shooting over 10000 rounds a year isn't hard. 200 rounds a week is 10400.
For us who own are own ranges don't have to travel to one or pay to use one and can just step out the door to shoot 200 rounds a week isn't hard. Buying 22 by the case of 5000 rounds got us the best price.
I even considered buying 100000 at a time to get the best price when 22 was 8 dollars for 500 that would have been only 1600 dollars worth. I should have it would have been a great investment.
When ammo prices started to climb with the price of metals started to go up I broke out the molds and started casting again. It still costing me only about 3 to 5 cents a round. Lead bullets work well in al most all pistol calibers no need for a 45 to shoot lead. 8 lbs of reddot with the avg of 5grs per round 11200 rounds. With light 38spl loads and 2.5 grs thats 22400 rounds.
It one shoots a lot buying primers by the 50000 lot, powder by the kegs always got one the best prices.
For those of you who think 10000 rounds is a lot need to to more shooting for some of us shooting over 10000 rounds a year isn't hard. 200 rounds a week is 10400.
For us who own are own ranges don't have to travel to one or pay to use one and can just step out the door to shoot 200 rounds a week isn't hard. Buying 22 by the case of 5000 rounds got us the best price.
I even considered buying 100000 at a time to get the best price when 22 was 8 dollars for 500 that would have been only 1600 dollars worth. I should have it would have been a great investment.
OC for ME
Regular Member
The fact that the feds contracted to buy 1.6 billion+ rounds of ammo discredits your statement. How about more examples? Hmmm?
Planes, tanks, ships, rifles, pistols, uniforms, construction equipment, single wide trailers, need I continue?
I have a great deal of respect for your views, this particular view is uninformed or misstated, please clarify.
Government should not be regulating the free market. Being a classified "major player", or not, in the free market is requires qualifying. The government should not be buying all this stuff but they have, they do, and they will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. The merits of the government buying all the stuff they buy is a academic discussion.
Outside of the ammo shortage issue, all the other stuff the government buys using our money is OT in my view.
eye95
Well-known member
In a free market, government is a player. Government being too much of a player, trying to influence that market (it shouldn't, IMO), arguably makes that market less free. Making it NOT free by placing limits or regulating prices compounds interference with control and is the absolute wrong way to go. Even after government purchases interfere with a market, it will self-regulate, if allowed to do so without price-controls or rationing.
What is keeping this from shaking out faster is the inexplicable refusal by the ammo makers to significantly raise their prices, increasing their profit margins, and, in doing so, making expanded production the natural outcome, with prices falling after that happens. The only rational explanation I can come up with is that ammo makers think that this situation is so temporary that if they make the initial investment, they will not get sufficient return before supply and demand resolve themselves at the new price levels, only slightly higher than previously.
Still, the prices should rise to slow demand until it meets supply. We need the ammo manufacturers to be selflessly selfish* and raise their prices!
_______________________
* Yes, I see the irony. It is deliberate to get some thinking about the underlying morality of free markets.
What is keeping this from shaking out faster is the inexplicable refusal by the ammo makers to significantly raise their prices, increasing their profit margins, and, in doing so, making expanded production the natural outcome, with prices falling after that happens. The only rational explanation I can come up with is that ammo makers think that this situation is so temporary that if they make the initial investment, they will not get sufficient return before supply and demand resolve themselves at the new price levels, only slightly higher than previously.
Still, the prices should rise to slow demand until it meets supply. We need the ammo manufacturers to be selflessly selfish* and raise their prices!
_______________________
* Yes, I see the irony. It is deliberate to get some thinking about the underlying morality of free markets.
Last edited:
OC for ME
Regular Member
The Walmart syndrome.
sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
In a free market I wouldn't need government permission to start up my own manufacturing of the items they are buying, this too distorts the "free market", we don't have one.
eye95
Well-known member
No. We have an essentially free market that has flaws (major ones that need fixin'). That does not justify the calls of others to make it less free through price controls and rationing.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
Straw man of epic proportions.
If you do any of these things voluntarily, that is your freedom.
Nobody is demanding otherwise...
I remember a little birdie saying just the other day:
Hypocrisy is probably the most despicable form of dishonesty.
Last edited:
OC for ME
Regular Member
True statement if you are starting a bullet factory. If you are starting a teddy bear factory permission to start making teddy bears is not required. A business license is not a federal requirement.....yet. To remain in business is a different and far more complicated topic and this is where government, primarily federal and to a somewhat lesser extent state, has the greatest adverse impact on the free market.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
No it doesn't. How do you possibly imagine that?
See if you can follow a simple syllogism:
"If the government is a major buyer, a free market does not exist."
"Government is a major buyer."
"Therefore, a free market does not exist."
[size=+3]QED[/size]
OC for ME
Regular Member
I provided a hint, you missed it. So, here it is again, the "Walmart syndrome." Some call it the "Walmart effect", but I hold that Walmart has a more sinister intent.....as all free market players should. Our Founding documents permit the feds to "regulate" commerce and thus "protect" us from the Walmarts, Googles, and Microsofts of the world. The fact that the feds have abused this power is irrelevant.
I accept the fact that a "economic market operating by free competition" does not exist as I would like it to exist.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
I agree completely.
OC for ME
Regular Member
All depends on your perspective. As a general statement your assertion can not be refuted, generally speaking. Where the federal government goes misery is typically left behind in its wake.
The ammo manufactures see $$$ with such a large contract. Good for them. I would like to see private firms decline to do business with government in most cases. Good for the citizen and the preservation of individual liberty. But, Uncle Sam is compelled by law to deal with only "US firms" in most cases and private firms "know - wink wink nod nod" that Uncle Sam could make doing business very difficult. Note that the "big Wall St. banks" were "encouraged" to "play ball" prior to the "housing bubble" popping. The example of the federal government corrupting the free market.