You can't force the shortage to go away

[tommy610]

Sometimes I hear people talk about making this ammo shortage go away, if only people would calm down, stop stock-piling, buy less, etc.

I really think that is impossible. The only thing that will make this go away is more supply and/or less demand. If the supply stays the same, but some of us "leave a little on the shelf for the next guy", the demand is still so strong that what's left on the shelf still disappears within the day - just to some other buyer. And, the guy who left a little on the shelf, now has pent-up demand. He really wanted more, but didn't buy it. He'll go out shopping for it more often than he would have, in the coming weeks - looking for more.

You cannot blame the average citizen. The reaction to go out and buy more ammo is there for a reason... because the demand overall (Federal Govt) has greatly increased, and there is concern there won't be any when he needs it. It's a natural and sane reaction, and I hope everyone keeps doing it.

My real hope is that, first, those responsible at the DHS are held accountable for this ridiculous waste of tax dollars, those responsible in the Federal govt overall are held responsible for attempting to enforce gun control using our tax dollars to buy up ammo, and ammo manufacturers scale up to the point where the govt would not be able to have this kind of effect.

[OakRidgeStars]

While we're all waiting for more ammo to appear on the shelves, here's a video of a happy bunny.



Tell the truth, don't you feel better now?

[ShotgunBlast]

Since the ammo manufacturers are already running at full capacity and therefore cannot increase the supply, the only thing that will slow down this shortage is a price increase. Oh wait, government regulations say that retailers can't do that, even though we see in the secondary markets what the prices really should be.

Guess we're all scrounging for ammo for awhile.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Chasbo00]

My neighbor and I were going to the range for some practice tonight. However, after checking our respective low ammo stocks, we have decided to go drinking instead - not the first time either. My shooting is suffering but I'm getting better at drinking.

[Tweaker]

Since the ammo manufacturers are already running at full capacity and therefore cannot increase the supply, the only thing that will slow down this shortage is a price increase. Oh wait, government regulations say that retailers can't do that, even though we see in the secondary markets what the prices really should be.

Guess we're all scrounging for ammo for awhile.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

What does that mean?

What regulations are you referring to?

[ShotgunBlast]

Laws against "price gouging".

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Swampman]

My neighbor and I were going to the range for some practice tonight. However, after checking our respective low ammo stocks, we have decided to go drinking instead - not the first time either. My shooting is suffering but I'm getting better at drinking.

Now yer talkin'!

[WBlacklidge]

As a Libertarian it pains me to say this but the gov. law enforcement needs their ammunition. Law Enforcement is one of the few government services I love and think is necessary. I also want my (yes my, I pay them) law enforcement officers to practice frequently in their marksmanship. Look at what happened to that college girl who was shot and killed on accident. I don't know and I am not saying that officer did anything wrong, and I really feel for the officer to have to live with that... but if it came to light that he hadn't had range time in a couple months because the department didn't have budget I would be very upset.

I have a pal who is a fresh Baltimore police officer and he hasn't had range time for different reasons. There was a training accident that has resulted in a death... but either way he isn't getting his range time in and if I was an MD resident I would question why they aren't finding an alternative range to get their officers in.

As far as fixing the problem... I think the answer is time. Demand is going to subside and production is increasing. Just recently read an article about Remington increasing their production. Things will level out eventually.

Also, just to continue this rant... the government telling private business what price they can or can not sell their product for is complete BS. Good Republicans and Libertarians should really be pushing to remove our government's ability to muddle in the economy. Pure hands off Capitalism would have kept this from ever becoming a problem. If Republicans would get back to their roots and stop heading down the path of big government this wouldn't be a problem.

[jmicheals1984]

As a Libertarian it pains me to say this but the gov. law enforcement needs their ammunition. Law Enforcement is one of the few government services I love and think is necessary. I also want my (yes my, I pay them) law enforcement officers to practice frequently in their marksmanship. Look at what happened to that college girl who was shot and killed on accident. I don't know and I am not saying that officer did anything wrong, and I really feel for the officer to have to live with that... but if it came to light that he hadn't had range time in a couple months because the department didn't have budget I would be very upset.

I have a pal who is a fresh Baltimore police officer and he hasn't had range time for different reasons. There was a training accident that has resulted in a death... but either way he isn't getting his range time in and if I was an MD resident I would question why they aren't finding an alternative range to get their officers in.

As far as fixing the problem... I think the answer is time. Demand is going to subside and production is increasing. Just recently read an article about Remington increasing their production. Things will level out eventually.

Also, just to continue this rant... the government telling private business what price they can or can not sell their product for is complete BS. Good Republicans and Libertarians should really be pushing to remove our government's ability to muddle in the economy. Pure hands off Capitalism would have kept this from ever becoming a problem. If Republicans would get back to their roots and stop heading down the path of big government this wouldn't be a problem.

We are not talking about your local PD here, we are talking about the DHS which did a Purchase Order for 2.5 BILLION rounds of ammo to take place over the next 10 years. Thats WAY more ammo per officers than even the ARMY issues their personnel. Unless we stop the DHS, its only going to get worse, and even local PDs are having a hard time getting ammo because the Feds are buying it all.

[AppleaDay]

Buy lots of ammo between panics. You end up with a stockpile during the rough times and it keeps production up so it's already high before the crazy times.
Actually, the best way to relieve the panic is for the dot gov to remove restrictions on importing ammo. We won't see that happen, though.

[Snakester]

Buy lots of ammo between panics. You end up with a stockpile during the rough times and it keeps production up so it's already high before the crazy times.
Actually, the best way to relieve the panic is for the dot gov to remove restrictions on importing ammo. We won't see that happen, though.

I remember in 2009 when there was very little ammo on the shelves anywhere ! I had plenty then because I buy ammo on a regular basis. After that I told all of my shooting friends when they see the shelves full again is when you should start stock up ! Now they wished they had.

[FiremanBob]

@WBlacklidge, I wish the situation were so simple. But there are a few inconvenient, ugly facts:

1. DHS is not a law enforcement agency. If it were, the Tsarnaev brothers would have been stopped before the Boston bombing. It is the armed "civilian defense force"; i.e., politicized stormtroopers, that Obama promised he would give himself in 2008.

2. If budget constraints are preventing your PD from purchasing enough ammo for training and duty, it is because the socialists who run the state of MD would rather spend your money on welfare and subsidized housing for the indolent and illegal aliens. After all, there are more of them, and they vote more reliably Democrat, than the cops.

[WBlacklidge]

I am not saying you are doing this on purpose jmichaels1984 but you are buying into the BS media. They throw out big numbers like that because it sounds shocking and drives headlines. You need to take that information and think for yourself and be logical:

2,500,000,000 / 10 = 250,000,000 a year used by DHS
200,000 = The number of employees in the DHS
250,000,000 (bullets per year) / 200,000 (number of employees)
_____
1250 rounds per year per employee.
1250(rounds per year)/365 (number of days in the year)
3.4 rounds per employee per day of year.

The DHS plans to have their employees shoot 3.4 bullets on average per day in training or in the field.

You can also look at it as the DHS plans for 10 range days shooting 125/rds per trip.

That is processing the raw numbers, even at a rate of 6 rounds per day on average for training use or 200/rds per range training day is reasonable to me so I feel whatever the variation of non-carrying DHS employees, days not in the office, etc is accounted for with that rate.

Think for yourselves. If you are going to be passionate about something you need to make sure you understand what it is you are being passionate about. Take what you hear in the media, what your politicians tell you and apply it to reality.

FiremanBob:

I am no fan of the DHS or welfare. I am no fan of our strict immigration laws either. I love immigrants. If we get rid of a lot of the social programs, get the government off our economy it makes sense to allow as many immigrants that want to take an easy legal path to citizenship. Alas, that is my Utopia and not a likely future with big government republicans and democrats.

I do consider the DHS a law enforcement agency and do not buy into the 'politicized stormtroopers'.

[WBlacklidge]

I can't believe I posted a justification to government spending. I also want to clarify my math used the 2.5 billion/10 years figure and that number is incorrect. I have read 750 million over 5 years. I would venture to guess it is somewhere in the middle.

Hey, believe me I would get rid of the DHS in a heartbeat. I just don't buy into BS ammo hording conspiracy, or that the Dems are concocting some plan to keep demand up.

Some of us could probably use a deep breath, a little independent thinking and a break from Fox News.

[ShotgunBlast]

I can't believe I posted a justification to government spending.

You're new here. That'll change.

Hey, believe me I would get rid of the DHS in a heartbeat. I just don't buy into BS ammo hording conspiracy, or that the Dems are concocting some plan to keep demand up.

Especially when Hornady says only 5% of their sales are going to government agencies.

Some of us could probably use a deep breath, a little independent thinking and a break from Fox News.

[dorminWS]

A few points on the DHS ammo analysis:

(1) All DHS employees are not officers who carry guns. If other government agencies (even the law-enforcement ones) are any guide, for every agent who needs range time, there must at least 10 who drive a desk. So that 3.5 rounds per day number doesn't fly.

(2) Even the ones that do carry a gun and need range time don't go to the range every day. I'd be very surprised if most of them go any more often than once a month. Another reason that 3.5 rounds per day number doesn't fly.

(3) All that other stuff aside, the same analysis you applied to DHS, when applied to the US Army reveals that DHS is acquiring 1000 more rounds per person per period of time than the Army. Unless DHS expects its mission to involve several times more armed confrontation AND training therefore than an Army currently involved in two armed conflicts, this just doesn't seem to make a damned bit of sense.

No matter how much eau de cologne you slather on the DHS ammo purchases, it still stinks exactly like crap.

[WBlacklidge]

1) I stated clearly in my post that I didn't believe that every single employee would have a firearm and once I did the raw math with the numbers I corrected it for a more realistic number of employees carrying a firearm. I guess you are going to continue to pick out only the parts that support your argument (very Fox News/CNN of you).

2) I clearly didn't suggest that they are shooting 3.5 (or actually 6 rounds per day) every single day in trips to the range. Are you just trolling? I think 10 range days a year for a job that requires you to carry a firearm is very reasonable.

3) Where are these raw numbers for the Army comparison? All I find is an interview where some guy just stated that. What I do find is the official explanation for the inflated numbers, what the actual anticipated usage is and how it is being used. All of that with a 5 minute google search.

[dorminWS]

@WBlacklidge:

I didn't intend, and did not expect you to interpret, my comment as some sort of personal attack on you. I was merely airing the other side of the issue. That's what this forum is for, you know. I assure you that any disdain you perceived was intended for the DHS and not you. So please try not to get your bowels all in an uproar over nothing, OK?

[LarsonEWhipsnade]

Just keep in mind that DHS encompasses Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, US Secret Service, Federal Air Marshals, US Coast Guard, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center components. It's certainly in our best interest that most of these folks know how to shoot.

That being said, while it may have seemed like a good idea at the time (post-911) to create an agency that could coordinate information flow from a bunch of competing government agencies, it has become yet another monsterous, ineffective govenment bureaucratic bloat.

[FiremanBob]

Dormin points out the correct fact that most DHS supporters get wrong: only a fraction of DHS employees are actually field agents of any type.