< Back to the Main Site

Author Topic: Here it is:  (Read 11883 times)

Offline wallace11bravo

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Apr 2010
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 1056
  • Don't rush to failure.
    • Midwest Tactical Solutions
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #40 on: December 21, 2012, 12:43:04 AM »
Another market report:

Almost everything is sold out. Everything online and brick and mortar stores.

What is left, based from armslist, gunbroker, ebay, a few others:

Pmags: $95-120  ~800% inflation
USGI mags: $40-80 ~%500 inflation
Stripped lowers: $600-$1000  ~600% inflation
Complete Rifles: Prices vary wildly, nothing cheap lasts long, Id guess average of about 400% inflation

Lower parts kits, uppers, etc can be found, but not easily.

And yes, items are selling at the prices listed above.



« Last Edit: December 21, 2012, 12:46:41 AM by wallace11bravo »

Offline wallace11bravo

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Apr 2010
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 1056
  • Don't rush to failure.
    • Midwest Tactical Solutions
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #41 on: December 21, 2012, 01:21:44 AM »
In other news, NRA membership grows by record setting pace:

http://www.inquisitr.com/447898/nra-membership-increasing-8000-a-day-after-sandy-hook-shooting/

Leaks of NRAs intentions:

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/12/nra-newtown-shooting-response/60124/

Also, unconfirmed report of a guy in TN selling his personal stockpile of 100 pmags, at gouge prices... but wait for it... wait..... ALL PROCEEDS GO TO THE NRA... supposedly. What do you guys think? Moral behavior or not?
« Last Edit: December 21, 2012, 01:24:01 AM by wallace11bravo »

Offline Chris Z

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2007
  • Location: Lincoln NE
  • Posts: 2496
    • Nebraska Concealed Carry Training
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #42 on: December 21, 2012, 05:54:34 AM »
A customer of mine that sells lots of mags at gun shows (in another state) called me the other day and asked if he should double his prices on this mags..........

I told him that is surely not what I would do, but he can do whatever he wants.... But remember, when you start f'ing people, when this all settles down, those people that you f'd are going to remember that and likely won't be your customers any more.


Offline NENick

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 661
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #43 on: December 21, 2012, 06:58:01 AM »
A customer of mine that sells lots of mags at gun shows (in another state) called me the other day and asked if he should double his prices on this mags..........

I told him that is surely not what I would do, but he can do whatever he wants.... But remember, when you start f'ing people, when this all settles down, those people that you f'd are going to remember that and likely won't be your customers any more.


we do have to remember that someone will buy his whole supply at the normal price, walk across the room and start selling the for a profit. I just don't want your friend to get shafted either

Offline Mudinyeri

  • God, save us!
  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 3965
  • Run for the Hills
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #44 on: December 21, 2012, 08:59:36 AM »
Where are you seeing stripped lowers at $600 - $1000, John?

Edit: Never mind.  Just went to Gun Broker and did a completed item search.  PSA lower sold for $355 yesterday - buy it now.  Others are going higher at auction.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2012, 09:04:13 AM by Mudinyeri »

Offline FarmerRick

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2008
  • Location: Valley, NE
  • Posts: 3250
  • Antagonist of liberals, anti-hunters & hoplophobes
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #45 on: December 21, 2012, 09:59:36 AM »
A customer of mine that sells lots of mags at gun shows (in another state) called me the other day and asked if he should double his prices on this mags..........

I told him that is surely not what I would do, but he can do whatever he wants.... But remember, when you start f'ing people, when this all settles down, those people that you f'd are going to remember that and likely won't be your customers any more.

Got any of those $18 Glock mags left?   I would take a few...  ;D
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Offline GreyGeek

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1687
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #46 on: December 21, 2012, 10:12:16 AM »
I am pretty sure that Ms Fienstien introduces that bill every session

She has, since before 1995, when she was outed as a concealed weapon carrier.  The poor dear was walking each day to the hospital  to see her sick husband and she was walking through a "bad" part of town, so that qualified her, in her eyes and for her only, to carry a gun.   Too bad for the rest of us.

Here is an article about her latest attempt to introduce an "assault weapon" ban following Obama's re-election but before Sandy Hook.   Notice in the picture heading up the article  that she isn't watching her muzzle sweep and she has her finger on the trigger. 
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/11/foghorn/details-of-dianne-feinsteins-upcoming-assault-weapons-ban-proposal-begin-leaking/

Quote
"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here."

The good news is that this has exactly 0% chance of passing right now. None. At all.

But, since Sandy Hook, Repub Congressmen are showing the strength  or absence of their backbone and principals.   A complete ban on weapons would be impossible to get  through the SCOTUS  until the Left can stuff the SCOTUS a majority of Leftists.   In the end,  probably a "feel good" measure will be passed, but will have absolutely no effect on the ability of thugs or the mentally  defective to get  guns, it will just put more hurdles in  the path of those law abiding citizens wanting to protect themselves, and raise  the height of  the existing hurdles, like adding waiting periods  at  each step of the process, and increasing fees, so that it would take a year and several hundred more dollars to obtain a CHP,  and taxes on weapons and ammo that would triple or quadruple their  costs, putting them out of reach of all except the weathly and, or course, the thugs.

I had to laugh at one claim Pres. Obama made in yesterday's announcement:  "... more regulations to keep the criminals from getting guns...".   Here's a clue, Mr. President:  Criminals are called such because they don't care about the laws.   The most restrictive guns laws are in  the areas  with the highest gun crimes, showing those laws are worthless.   Besides, when the Federal government is feeding guns to thugs using programs like "Fast and Furious" what good are gun laws anyway?

Offline Ronvandyn

  • Pollywog
  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2009
  • Location: Bellevue NE
  • Posts: 561
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #47 on: December 21, 2012, 06:49:41 PM »
I lived in the Bay Area in the 1970's and very distinctly remember then Mayor Feinstein ordering all San Francisco residents to turn in their handguns.  She started with her own (a meaningless gesture, the SFPD had her guarded 24x7 in part because her predecessor had been murdered).  It was BIG news at the time, but after spending some time searching for a news story on her handgun ban I have been unable to find one. 

If anyone has access to LexisNexis and can find an article about her gun ban in the 70’s I’d appreciate getting a look at that.

Ron
NE-CHP Holder, USAF Veteran, NRA Member,  ENGC Member
KC0MXX

Offline kozball

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Papillion
  • Posts: 524
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #48 on: December 24, 2012, 11:55:32 PM »
\"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn\'t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.\"

Ronald Reagan

Offline GreyGeek

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1687
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #49 on: December 26, 2012, 03:39:34 PM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Dianne_Feinstein#Gun_politics

Quote
Feinstein said on CBS-TV's 60 Minutes, February 5, 1995, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."[24]

In July 2006, Feinstein voted against the Vitter Amendment to prohibit Federal funds being used for the confiscation of lawfully owned firearms during a disaster.[25] [26]

Feinstein possessed a concealed handgun permit in the early 70's "And, I know the sense of helplessness that people feel. I know the urge to arm yourself because that's what I did. I was trained in firearms. I'd walk to the hospital when my husband was sick. I carried a concealed weapon. I made the determination that if somebody was going to try to take me out, I was going to take them with me." -- 27 April 1995

Offline GreyGeek

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1687
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #50 on: December 26, 2012, 03:46:31 PM »
I found this interesting.
.....

Indeed!

Quote
Most of the gun violence in our city is drug addicts raiding the homes of other drug addicts. The statistics might appear to show a lot of armed robberies and shootings, but it's really just a small subset of homes or apartments getting raided over and over again by the same people, the drug dealers." When I asked what the real drug problem was, he answered without hesitation. "Meth." Not pot, not marijuana, not even heroin. Meth is the drug that drives violent crime in America's cities.

Offline Burnsy87

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Location: Omaha, NE
  • Posts: 176
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #51 on: December 26, 2012, 08:14:17 PM »
Without a doubt meth is the major issue.  I'd assume a large percentage of police calls are directly or indirectly related to meth.

Offline JimP

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2007
  • Posts: 1310
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #52 on: December 27, 2012, 10:40:51 AM »
Koz, I would like to take some comfort in that link, but the folks polled were "contacts" of the author ..... probably a self selecting group.

The shenanigans during and after Hurricane Katrina in NOLA tell me that if the .gov sez it is an emergency of some sort, the .mil and LE WILL go out and pick up the guns.

They usually need some kind of cover to stomp on citizens' rights ...... if they don't have an emergency, they'll use the compliant press to manufacture one ...... watch ......

They'll demonize the target (you go talking about "Natural Laws" and they'll tag you as a "domestic terrorist"!), and the dumb masses will eat it up..........

The only things that gives me hope are the thousands of previously apathetic people signing up for the NRA every day now, and the guns and ammo flying off the shelves.

The Right to Keep and BEAR Arms is enshrined explicitly in both our State and Federal Constitutions, yet most of us are afraid to actually excercise that Right, for very good reason: there is a good chance of being arrested........ and  THAT is a damned shame.  III.

Offline Dan W

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2007
  • Location: Lincoln NE
  • Posts: 8143
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #53 on: December 27, 2012, 11:38:09 AM »
Drudge report today links to this with a headline: Senate to go for handguns


http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve/?File_id=10993387-5d4d-4680-a872-ac8ca4359119

Quote
Summary of 2013 Feinstein Assault Weapons Legislation

Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
*120 specifically-named firearms

*Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a
detachable magazine and have one military characteristic

* Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept
more than 10 rounds

Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:

* Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test

* Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from
the characteristics test

* Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address
attempts to “work around” prior bans

*Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than
10 rounds.

Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:

* Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment

* Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or
sporting purposes and exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons

Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National FirearmsAct, to include:

o Background check of owner and any transferee;

o Type and serial number of the firearm;

o Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;

o Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that
possession would not violate State or local law; and

o Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration
Dan W    NFOA Co Founder
Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom.   J. F. K.

Offline gsd

  • 2013 NFOA Firearm Rights Champion award winner
  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Oct 2010
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 1831
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #54 on: December 27, 2012, 12:46:30 PM »
When I read this I get the following...

We can't afford to run our own government, but we can afford to dedicate funding to the ATF in order to make sure our guns are legally registered?

Some old saying about a fart in church comes to mind...
It is highly likely the above post may offend you. I'm fine with that.

Offline Ronvandyn

  • Pollywog
  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2009
  • Location: Bellevue NE
  • Posts: 561
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #55 on: December 27, 2012, 03:30:47 PM »
I dont really see much difference between this proposal and the one in 1994.  What is a "Military Characteristic"?  Anything she chooses it to be?  All guns have "Military Characteristic"s dont they?  And are there not more than 900 different types of firearms already sold in this country?  Is she actually wanting to list the one's that are "Government Approved"? 

Does she realize that smoking crack is illegal?  Maybe she should lay off the stuff.

Ron
NE-CHP Holder, USAF Veteran, NRA Member,  ENGC Member
KC0MXX

Offline instag8tr

  • Forum Member
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 44
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #56 on: December 27, 2012, 04:19:31 PM »
I dont know about the rest of you but i am not registering ****

Offline Dan W

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2007
  • Location: Lincoln NE
  • Posts: 8143
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #57 on: December 27, 2012, 06:09:01 PM »
I dont really see much difference between this proposal and the one in 1994.


Are you F'in joking?? NFA registration of all semi auto firearms capable of holding more than 10 rounds is absolute tyranny, not to mention the total ban on millions of existing magazines over 10 rounds
Dan W    NFOA Co Founder
Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom.   J. F. K.

Offline skydve76

  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 314
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #58 on: December 27, 2012, 07:29:16 PM »
Wow Dan you sure feel strongly about this one!  Good for you.      When you say total ban of the mags, does that also ban existing mags?

Can someone tell me, during the last ban, was transfer also banned or is that a new thing in the new proposed ban?  Transfer I assume means you cannot even sell a banned gun, but if I remember you could sell banned before just could not manufacter them.

Sorry the ban was before my time in guns so I dont fully understand what I am looking at.

One thing I can tell you that banning something I own is equivalent to forcefully siezing property which is against the very grain, and original purpose, of the constitution. 


Offline instag8tr

  • Forum Member
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 44
Re: Here it is:
« Reply #59 on: December 27, 2012, 07:46:53 PM »
no the last one was just feel good cosmetic b.s.  and yes they are talking about all current mags. F*c* you Feinstien