Jump to content

EdF

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    465

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

  • Feedback

    100%

Posts posted by EdF

  1. Posted

    If you want to understand why this is a problem make it personal . . . What do you do for a living?  Should the government be able to tell you how much money you are allowed to earn?  Should the government be able to force doctors or construction workers to help clean up after a storm?  Keep in mind, when the government forces you to do something or forces you to restrict your income, they do so standing behind a line of their own guns.  

    This is the root of the issue.

    When the government forces, at gun point, a privately owned business to adhere to a prescribed price structure, they are only one step away from forcing you to do the same thing.  Maybe even closer than that.

    https://fee.org/articles/price-gouging-during-disasters-is-actually-a-good-thing/

     

  2. Posted

    57 minutes ago, MartyZ said:

    Free market should make allowances for emergencies to make sure everyone can afford what they need. I didn't see anyone complaining when NJ hit stores for gauging water prices or gas stations for gauges gas prices during Sandy.

    The market DOES make allowances for emergencies and the government stocks up on things like water and food for when they are needed.  The government doesn't have a supply of bullets for the citizens to use in an emergency.  The bullets that they stockpile are for their own use.  

    There were plenty of people complaining about the stores and gas stations were beat up during Sandy and for the real estate bailouts for those how didn't have sufficient insurance.  The fact that you didn't hear it is irrelevant.  

    Again . . . I'm being consistent here . . . I want the government the hell out of the way . . . I don't make exceptions when their interference helps me.

  3. Posted

    27 minutes ago, MartyZ said:

    you should really take your own advice about reading what others are saying, and don't try to EXPLAIN anything to me. I didn't ask for your interpretation of what you think is right or wrong.

    I started this thread to show MY satisfaction with what is happening. You don't like it? Fine, that is your opinion and you have a right to it. But you trying to EXPLAIN anything to me is neither your place nor is it appreciated. You have no idea of my background, my knowledge, or my experience so please refrain from EXPLAINING anything to me!

    Ahhhh . . . So, now it's MY fault that I disagree with you . . . You didn't have to respond to me but you did . . . This forum is here for all of us and that includes this thread.  You're not the only one reading anything that I post and I'll "explain" anything that I want.  You don't have to pay any attention at all.

     

    13 minutes ago, Nu2gunz said:

    Dude, you can't be serious. I don't need to read it. My family lived it. Wow. Okay, I'm out. 

    I'm absolutely serious . . . but, I can come right back and tell you not to tell me how our country works.

    Get it?

  4. Posted

    7 minutes ago, Nu2gunz said:

    I'm sorry to say, but if you aren't in support of the Texas Law, it is you who are not for a free market. My family comes from a Communist country. You know what they did there? Inflated prices to the point where it was impossible for the average person to afford "essentials". Which is why there were lines for milk, bread, flour, and toilet paper. They would inflate prices, liquidate the market, and then drop prices again when there wasn't enough for everyone. So if you were at the end of the line, and they ran out, you didn't eat that day. And certain people starved because of it. That's how they controlled the economy. Where do you come from? Don't think that because you think you have an altruistic stance, it is actually altruistic. 

    No, no, no, no, no . . . First, you need to learn the difference between government action and the actions of citizens.  The problem wasn't the government inflating prices.  The problem causing shortages is government interference in the market.  It doesn't matter if the government sets the prices high or low, the result is shortages.  Read Hayek.  Read Friedman.  Read Thomas Sowell.  Read the recently deceased Walter Williams.

    Benevolent Socialism is still Socialism and that doesn't work.

  5. Posted

    1 minute ago, MartyZ said:

    Where would the 2A be without ammo? If ammo is not essential then what about the 2A?

    In my book the 2A is very essential and last I checked a gun without ammo is just a fancy club.

    Really . . . I suppose that the first amendment makes newspapers essential?

    Ammo isn't "essential" . . . The Second Amendment doesn't make guns "essential" . . . It doesn't require that every has or should be given a gun.  This is besides the fact that the Constitution prevents the government from infringing on your rights.  It doesn't require a private business to cater to your wants or needs.  It doesn't even require that arms that you have a right to are affordable.  While I will expect an argument that having the government TAX them into being unaffordable that's a different argument because that would be the government enacting the restriction.

    I can keep explaining it but I can't make you understand it.  What you need to do is slow down and read what people are saying.  

  6. Posted

    4 minutes ago, MartyZ said:

    I am so invested because I truly believe they got what they deserve. I am all for free market. However, when a company arbitrarily SIGNIFICANTLY raises prices on a product that is NOT a luxury item during a shortage, to a point where only the wealthy can afford it, that pisses me off, regardless the company or the product.

    CTD, along with other companies, have been on my blacklist for various reason. I'm sure others have their own blacklist. And it makes me very happy when a company that is on my blacklist got caught for the very reason that put them on my blacklist in the first place. I would be just as happy if DSG got into trouble for stabbing the 2A community in the back with their anti-2A lobbyists, but that is only a dream I guess.

    If you support the Texas law, you are not "all for free market" . . . Which, you might notice, is what I said in my very first post on this thread.  So . . . thanks for agreeing with me.  

  7. Posted

    It's reasonable to start with a 22 . . . Personally, I started with both.  I shoot with the 9mm in order to stay comfortable using it.  But, I put far, far, more rounds through my 22 because it's so cheap to shoot.

    At the same time, my daughter only puts a few rounds through the 9mm when we go shooting.  She is small framed and gets tired of it easily but she will shoot that 22 all day long.  So, I make sure that she puts enough rounds through the 9mm that she isn't afraid to use it if she needs it.

  8. Posted

    Just now, MartyZ said:

    Do you have stock in CTD? You are making excuses for them without knowing exactly what happened? The article SPECIFICALLY stated that they were manually increasing prices. Not a software issue.

    Where the hell do you think that they were changing price?  Paper tags on the boxes?  They were doing it in the god damned storefront software exactly like I was talking about in my post.

    No, I don't own software in the company.  I don't even give a shit about the company.  My complaint here from the very beginning has been about the Texas AG and freakin' Texas law.

    What the f got the bug up your ass about Cheaper Than Dirt?  Did some talk mean to you on the phone?  You haven't bought from them in 13 f'ing years.  Why are you so invested?

    • Haha 1

  9. Posted · Edited by EdF
    Addition information added

    8 minutes ago, MartyZ said:

    Oh, and you all seem have have glared over the part about CTD showing one price on their site but then increasing it at time of checkout. So those people that didn't pay close attention when checking out got screwed even more. Should CTD be allowed to do that also, is that how the market works? 

    Actually I didn't.  That's a software issue.  Storefront software either sets the price when the product is added to the cart or when the cart is processed.  Cheaper Than Dirt didn't write their own software and this "problem" would occur if the price change was 1% or 400%.  It also very likely did not have very many "victims" . . . Only those with items in their cart when the price change was made would be affected at all and I seriously doubt that CTD was even really aware that it would be happening.

    By the way . . . You didn't bother to mention it in your opener either.

  10. Posted

    2 minutes ago, Nu2gunz said:

    LOL, you just did what you asked me not to do. Take the example as it is and not slide into another topic. So let's keep on track!

    I am told this every time I complain about the gun laws in NJ out there in the non-internet world. 

    No . . . I'm still talking about the same transactions that started this thread.  You were moving over to a "if you don't like it, move" discussion.  

    I don't really care what other people tell you.  There are few people who actually understand what their rights are, what is being done to crush those rights or what may be required to retain or recover those rights.  The blissfully ignorant rarely provide good or sound advice.

     

  12. Posted

    Take the example as given and don't slide off into another subject.  It doesn't matter if the government SHOULD feed people.  They DO feed people . . . because food is a necessity.  If they give people food because it's a necessity and they consider ammo a necessity, they would be giving ammo to those who can't afford ammo.  They do not, therefore they don't really consider ammo a necessity.  

    They added ammo to the list to get votes.  They LOOK like they are supporting the Second Amendment but they are doing nothing of the sort.  They are supporting a larger, more intrusive government.  

    If it's illegal to CHARGE more during an "emergency" shouldn't it also be illegal to PAY more?  If the transaction is illegal . . . Shouldn't BOTH parties be libel?

  13. Posted

    "So the Government should give people food if they can't afford it? Who is going to pay to feed all these people? I'm not sure I follow your logic."

    Where have you been?  The government DOES give people food . . . Not just people who can't afford it in fact!  

    You live right here in Cherry Hill where there was a stink last year because the schools were going to give tuna fish sandwiches to the kids of parents who didn't pay their lunch bills.

    • Like 2

  16. Posted

    The article linked doesn't say anything about raising prices 400%.  You haven't bought anything there since 2007.  That's your choice.  It's everybody's choice.  But, it seems to taint your opinion.

    Here's how you tell if someone is charging too much:  Did the item sell?  If it didn't, they are clearly charging too much.  If it did, the argument can be made that they could have gotten more.  If they raised prices 200% and someone paid for the item there's nothing wrong with the transaction.  The buyer wanted the product more than they wanted the money and the seller wanted the money more than they wanted to sit on the product.  If it were really gouging, the buyers would go elsewhere and the product would sit on the shelf.

    If Wawa was selling mild for $20/gallon, the 7-11 down the street would sell it for $17, ShotRite would have it for $15 and so on.  Cheaper Then Dirt was NEVER the only choice for guns or ammo.  

    This is pretty basic economics.

    In a civilized society, the laws are not all created equally.  I said that the AG of Texas has no business setting the prices for ammo.  Or milk or bread or anything else.  This is exactly the same a saying that the AG of NJ has any business telling where I can and can't take my guns as long as I don't do anything illegal with those guns.  

    If you don't understand the need and the RIGHT to fight back against improper laws, you haven't spent enough time studying the founding of the country in which you live.

    Now . . . Cheaper Than Dirt was busted for raising prices in a crises.  The "needs" listed in the law are arbitrary.  The definition of crisis in the law is arbitrary. Did they get what they deserve?  Only if the law is proper.  If the law is improper, as in this case, what they deserve is to win on appeal and overturn the law.

     

  17. Posted

    Just now, Nu2gunz said:

    Except state law prohibits price gauging during a time of "emergency". I posted a link to the statute in another thread. 

    That's the point . . . I don't give a crap what the law says.  That's not the point.
    The law here in NJ says that we can't open carry and we can't get carry permits.  Are you going to post a link to story of someone getting busted on one of those charges and say, "They got what they deserved . . . "

    It's a matter of standing up for what's right.

    Let's say that CTD didn't raise their prices and a few fine Texas citizens swooped in and bought up all of the .223 ammo so that none was available for anyone else.  Is that OK?  By raising prices, CTD actually ensured that MORE customers would be able to get ammo rather than fewer.  

    So, the law doesn't make sense from any point of view.

    • FacePalm 1

  18. Posted

    So . . . Do we like regulation when is helps us and only condemn it when it hurts us?

    It's shouldn't be up to the Texas AG to interfere in private transactions between citizens and legal businesses.  It isn't "gouging" if the two parties agree on a price.  Prices are set by supply and demand and shouldn't be held in place by those in the state house, congress or the White House. 

    • Like 4
    • Agree 4

  19. Posted

    I am planning to visit my parents condo in Ocean City, MD between Christmas and New Years.  If it matters . . . I'm listed as a owner on the condo records.

    The trip goes south on Rt 295 and over the Del Mem Br, then down Delaware Route 1 past Dover AFB, on south through Delaware and into Maryland.

    If the weather is supposed to be nice, I would like to go shooting at a very informal range in MD.  An AR, maybe a shotgun and two or three handguns.

    Is is possible for me to be legal the whole way?

  20. Posted

    I haven't shot it but I have seen and heard that they are great weapons.

    The problem with asking if any shops have them is that they will likely be gone unless you get there within the hour!  There are no shops, in NJ or elsewhere, that guns are sitting on the shelves right now.  

    You just need to keep calling and keep checking online sources until one shows up.  When it does, snap it up.

    • Thanks 1

  21. Posted

    This reminds me of the computer software copy protection issue of the early and mid-1980's. 

    At the time, software was delivered on 5 1/4 inch floppy disks.  You needed to have the disk inserted in your computer in order to run it because few had enough (or any) internal disk space to "install" the software.  Installation came along much later.  

    Software companies produced these disks with "copy protection" to prevent users from buying one copy and then sharing it among several users.  Within weeks of any new copy protection method, pirates would break it and produce a version of the copy command that could copy the disks all day.  Eventually some company developed a method that used a laser to burn a hole at a specific point in the disk and these were supposed to be absolutely safe from being copied . . . It took about a month before there was a copy program available for them.

    The ATF and states are trying to control what types of weapons are legal or, more so, illegal.  But, the owners and the manufacturers are threading lines through the holes in the definitions.  Then the government tries to close those holes.  Then we find others.  Then they try to close those . . . ad infinitum . . . 

    I'm NOT supporting their efforts at all.  Just pointing to a similar situation.

×
×
  • Create New...