# The cost of ammo is about to go WAY WAY up - overnight.



## walkswithwhispers (Sep 18, 2007)

The Dept. of Defense last week issued a directive stating that all military spent cartridge casings must be destroyed. You know those "cheap" rounds you get for your AR's? Guess where they come from. Not to mention the fact that the commercial remanufturers sell most of their reloaded ammo back to the military. The military is now going to spend twice as much taxpayer money on ammo, easily. This is going to virtually eliminate affordable supplies of civilian ammo for .223 and .308. People kept saying, "they won't come after your guns, they'll come after your ammo" and now they have. God help us.

This info came from a very reliable source:

http://www.shootingwire.com/


----------



## NDTerminator (Aug 20, 2003)

This became effective 03-13-09. Places like Black Hills, Ultramax, etc, just got cut off from their supply of brass for making remanufactured ammo. Military will get first priority, LE second, private citizens last. And you can bet what little is available to LE and civilians will be much more costly than ever before...

*ALL* us ND guys need to write Pomeroy, Dorgan, and Conrad, ASAP!....


----------



## TANATA (Oct 31, 2003)

I'm afraid it's a little too little a little too late. Once they sneak stuff in like this it is extremely hard to get anything done around it. I can just about imagine all the other decisions being made right now while the public is distracted with the economy.


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

This is scrap brass that is auctioned off as scrap but before this order did not have to be demilled. This is not the brass people were using to reload ammo, this is stuff intended for the junk yard. This is how freaking panic starts and hoarding begins.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

HARRY SACZ said:


> This is scrap brass that is auctioned off as scrap but before this order did not have to be demilled. This is not the brass people were using to reload ammo, this is stuff intended for the junk yard. This is how freaking panic starts and hoarding begins.


How do you know that? First you missed out on the primers, now your telling everyone to follow your lead and miss out on brass? I don't mean to sound unkind, but maybe this time you need to get some while you still have the chance.

You know just a month or so ago we had one of our own on this site advocate controlling ammo. We better get our act together. If you recall they have called for up to a 1000% tax in the past. That was Kennedy, and Obama has in the past advocated 500% tax. I can just see him issuing an order to dispose of brass. I worked for the government and when three wheelers went away I know of a dozen in near new condition that were cut in half because the government was afraid of liability. Now think about brass or components of any kind.


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

I was wrong i did not know that some places like Black Hills and others used this scrap brass. I had looked at some of these auctions in the past and it looked like junk to me. Jesus Christ, these guys are not going to take our guns, they are going to make them nothing but usless sticks. What will this do to the LC brass that Federal loads? Will this ammo no longer be avalible?
\
Plainsman, i was not alive when JFK was president. I have never heard of the ammo tax before. Did things get this bad when Clinton was elected?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Not this bad. Kennedy did call for the 1000% tax when Clinton was in, but this stuff gets worse every year. Now with radicals like Obama, and fools like Pelosi, Reid, Chucky Schummer at their ilk in congress things could get very bad.

Before president Kennedy was killed guns were half the price. Until 1968 you could order guns yourself through catalogues. My brother purchased a 22 pistol in 1960 for $20. Before the 1968 law that was passed because of president Kennedy's assassination things were much cheaper. The darn sport shops licked their chops over that law. They were very happy.

In 1965 my dad bought a 6.5 X 55 Swedish in near new condition for $30. I don't remember the factory rifles, but I think a model 70 Winchester was under $100.

We sure have gone the wrong way fast, and liberals were behind every restrictive firearms law. Every one, and now the liberals tell us they can't understand why we blame liberals. You only need two functioning brain cells to figure it out.

Harry, I see your from Jamestown. Pm me and I'll give you my phone number. Stop by my house and I will show you how to get into casting your own. Good lead 45/70 bullets run me $44/100 now, but I cast better for $6. I need to buy a flintlock. I can make my own powder. Screw the suckers. They outlaw that no one will ever hear my bow go off.


----------



## catfisherman2 (Apr 17, 2008)




----------



## walkswithwhispers (Sep 18, 2007)

> Lots of unanswered questions that nobody will really have an answer to until things happen. Anyways, just some points to ponder.


Exactly. We just don't know. One of the central themes that I study as a business student is the difference between uncertainty and ambiguity. Uncertainty provides paramiters within which we try to forecast what is coming next. Ambiguity means we don't even know what the parameters are. It's better to face a mountain if you know it's a mountain than to face a molehill and not know whether it's a mountain or a molehill.

Unfortunately one of the things that the Brady bill and the DC v. Heller decision did is provide more certain guidelines for anti-gunners to operate in. THey now know exactly what the rules are and exactly what mistakes they've made in the past. Their strategy is going to be much more deliberate from here on out. They're going to anticipate counter reactions much better than before. In more simple terms, they've been battle hardened.

That being said, I've heard that this has already been overturned. I'm guessing someone in the DoD pulled rank. I'll wait to hear from other credible sources.


----------



## walkswithwhispers (Sep 18, 2007)

I emailed the NRA and they responded within 5 hours (  ) saying that they're aware of the situation and they're working with the DoD to resolve it. :beer:


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

> They will limit us on how many bullets our mags can hold but that is it. So we go back to 10 rounds with our hand guns, so we go back to 5 round mags in our AR's...15-30 rounds is fun granted, do we really need that to kill an animal? Do we really need 15 rounds to protect ourselves? Anyways, I believe people think they will take away our guns but are they just going to limit how many bullets we put in those mags?


Isn't that kinda how the sneaky SOBs work things? "don't worry, we are only taking away 30rd mags", then it is 10rd mags, pretty soon we have no guns.

They want us to be "OK" with taking some thing away, so next time they will say "you were ok with that, so you should be ok with this."

We may really only "need" one round to kill an animal, or protect ourselves in most cases, so should we then consent to losing all but our single shot rifles and pistols? I think not!!


----------



## NDTerminator (Aug 20, 2003)

Never said military having priority was wrong, Catfish, just said that's the way it is. My son (career Army) is on his second tour in Dirka-Dirkastan, and believe me I want him & his brother soldiers to have way more ammo than they need. I don't want the Primate to get killed for lack of practice or being able to shoot back...

Bear in mind this is one of those policy type decisions that The Dear Leader and his minions can make w/o having to go through Congress. In effect, they just go around them...

Following their clear "back door gun control" policy to it's next logical step, I anticipate the next move will be to ban all imported brass & ammo. That will cut off affordable ammo like Wolf but will also include high quality sporting stuff like Lapua.

The last & biggie I expect will be at least a strong attempt to ban most all sporting/hunting ammo & bullets as "armor piercing".

I expect them to try all this before the mid term elections next year.

I can tell you from my position as an LE administrator responsible for my agency's budget expenditures & training needs, this is going to adversely impact us much like $4.00 a gallon gas did. There's simply no anticipating the kind of operating cost jump we will see, and no surplus funding to cover it.

I would not be surprised to see reman 223 ammo at $75-$100 a box by mid-Summer...


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Do we really need 15 rounds to protect ourselves?


catfisher2, who are you to decide how many rounds I should have to protect myself. Ever thought of joining the Brady bunch?

I would also remind you that the parameters that the anti gun crowd works within can change overnight. It will only take one Supreme Court Judge, and one will be replaced within the year. Will next year replace a judge that upheld the second amendment? We are at the point with an elderly Supreme Court and three could be appointed by Obama. Good bye guns.

Your whistling in the dark, but that will not keep them from your guns if they want them with this president and congress.


----------



## NDTerminator (Aug 20, 2003)

Only slightly off topic but related, I saw that the National Parks Service has banned lead ammunition for all hunting on NPS land. Now much more expensive stuff like Barnes solid composition bullets are required.

Anyone doubt this originates on the Dear Leader's desk?... :eyeroll:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

NDTerminator said:


> Only slightly off topic but related, I saw that the National Parks Service has banned lead ammunition for all hunting on NPS land. Now much more expensive stuff like Barnes solid composition bullets are required.
> 
> Anyone doubt this originates on the Dear Leader's desk?... :eyeroll:


I remember a few years ago when they tried to ban all lead bullets and fishing sinkers. If they go for just bullets now they could very well get it. We need to be calling our representation in Washington about things that could come up in the future. If we call even a week before a bill is voted on they have likely already committed to someone.

Here you go, fight back: https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/sign ... D=XR020963


----------



## walkswithwhispers (Sep 18, 2007)

Good news. A friend on another site that shall remain nameless got to the bottom of this with a few phone calls to ammo manufacterers. In short, the DoD has now ammended their directive to exclude anything smaller than .50 BMG. There should be no interruption in supply for .223, .308, .45, 9mm, etc. However, .50 is getting cut off so the price of that is still going to go up. It actually had to do with the fact that scrap dealers in US buy this stuff and resell it to China and the DoD doesn't want China figuring out our munitions loads for the real big guns.

I'd rather be a paranoid ******* than have my paranoia confirmed.


----------



## NDTerminator (Aug 20, 2003)

walkswithwhispers said:


> Good news. A friend on another site that shall remain nameless got to the bottom of this with a few phone calls to ammo manufacterers. In short, the DoD has now ammended their directive to exclude anything smaller than .50 BMG. There should be no interruption in supply for .223, .308, .45, 9mm, etc. However, .50 is getting cut off so the price of that is still going to go up. It actually had to do with the fact that scrap dealers in US buy this stuff and resell it to China and the DoD doesn't want China figuring out our munitions loads for the real big guns.
> 
> I'd rather be a paranoid ******* than have my paranoia confirmed.


Haven't been able to confirm this but if so, it's a testament to all the folks who raised holy hell in the last 48 hours. To all those who got ahold of their Senators/Congressmen, great job!!! :beer:

Do you think the Dear Leader and his cronies got the mesage we aren't going to roll over & play dead? I think we law abiding gun owners should adopt Twisted Sister's "We're Not Going To Take It" as our anthem... :sniper:


----------



## dosch (May 20, 2003)




----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

dosch, I could have gone five lifetimes without seeing that.


----------



## bearhunter (Jan 30, 2009)

dosch said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-jsgousZcA


 :rock: :thumb:


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

That was a close one.


----------



## NDTerminator (Aug 20, 2003)

HARRY SACZ said:


> That was a close one.


And we aren't outs of the woods by a long shot, young Jedi. We can expect more little surprises like this from our Dear Leader & his minions, most likely before the 2010 mid term elections. If the Dems ( and I use that term to the distinct exclusion of the gun owner supporting, common sense moderate Dems in Congress who helped save the day on this deal) manage to hold onto Congress after the mid-terms, heaven help us for the next three years...

Look for a ban on imported ammo & brass which will take stuff like Wolf, Norma, and Lapua off the American gun owner's table.

I fully expect a big push for reinstatement of the Clinton Assault Rifle Ban on the strength of the mexican drug war on the border and the recent run of nutballs shooting up their friends & family.

This will be expanded to include many repeating sporting/hunting type shotguns & rifles, and to ban many types of hunting ammo as "armor piercing"...

I highly recommend everyone put your congressmen & senators' websites on their favorites list and email them immediately when these things come up...


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

NDTerminator said:


> HARRY SACZ said:
> 
> 
> > That was a close one.
> ...


Look at this link, i think you are right about the ammo though.

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM116_mike_ross.html


----------



## catfisherman2 (Apr 17, 2008)




----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> You ask me who am I do decide how many rounds to protect yourself? I have thought about this one long and hard because it seemed like a direct attack upon me stating you can't have what you need or want...isn't everyone about that now a days?


Nope, it was not meant as an attack it was a question, and I consider it a serious question to anyone who starts talking about how many rounds I should be allowed to carry in my rifle. Who is Obama to tell me how many rounds I can have? It's not an attack on your person, it's questioning why you attack my current rights.

If you sold rifles 50 years it would give you no more insight into political maneuvering than a surgeon, or a policeman. The political arena is something we should all be familiar with, but our professions unless directly linked to politics don't give any of us special insight. That's not an attack either, it's simply an explanation of how things are.

You think we are over reacting while I think many are sleeping while the thieves are in the house. That's not an attack either, it's my perception. My hopes are that you will understand that because someone simply doesn't agree with you it doesn't mean they are attacking you. Upset with you perhaps. Is there really anything wrong with asking "who are you to tell my how many rounds I need"? That's what the anti gun crowd wants to do.

It's like this statement that I also have problems with:


> Lots of unanswered questions that nobody will really have an answer to until things happen.


Isn't that saying we can't be sure until after they have taken our guns? That's a little late to become concerned I think. That's not an attack either, it's trying to get you to understand my perspective. Do I make a point or not?


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

> I stated that this will more than likely happen that they will limit us on our mag capacities. I won't go so far as laite319 with the over zealous theme that they will limit first and then take away the guns...that statement was a little crazy.


So what will you do when they go beyond our mag caps???? Can you see what has happened in other places in our world? The theme is definately not "over zealous", that is, if you can actually think for yourself and realize it is the logical progression of things. It seems while you may not be crazy, you almost certainly are in denial. It will not happen in 4 short years, but it has been and will continue to grow worse. Those that hate guns will not stop trying to take them away. We have to keep fighting against it and not bury our heads in the sand like you seem to be doing.



> This will be my last post...Take care guys!


That is really too bad. You gave us such good info as to why our ideas and thoughts are so crazy and your ideas are correct.


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

> you seem too touchy and very outspoken with little regard to whom you speak to based upon what is on "your" mind at that current time.





> By the way, you remind me of a woman I once knew, very dramatic...


Seems to me that the shoe is on the other foot now. Catfish, you seem to be a little sensitive and have a flair for the dramatic yourself. Oh, and isn't that a personal attack I see in your words too? I do believe it is!!

You may have to sit back, sip a latte, and collect yourself.

Why does it matter whom he is addressing? I noticed you mentioned that twice in your post. Do you think you are special?


----------



## catfisherman2 (Apr 17, 2008)

I guess I haven't posted my last as I may have to explain a few things to laite319 and Plainsman. I will surely give it my best. :lol:



> Seems to me that the shoe is on the other foot now. Catfish, you seem to be a little sensitive and have a flair for the dramatic yourself. Oh, and isn't that a personal attack I see in your words too? I do believe it is!!


Sensitive really? You want to talk about sensitive really? Dramatic always, sensitive never, isn't this why we can have HOT TOPICS?



> Why does it matter whom he is addressing? I noticed you mentioned that twice in your post. Do you think you are special?


Special?...doesn't everyone on here think that sort of thing of themselves? I believe everyone should have that amount of respect for themselves.



> Those that hate guns will not stop trying to take them away.


True.



> We have to keep fighting against it and not bury our heads in the sand like you seem to be doing.


I would agree and not quite positive I ever stated that I wouldn't be proactive towards this situation of losing our guns. Never said that I wouldn't!



> That is really too bad. You gave us such good info as to why our ideas and thoughts are so crazy and your ideas are correct.


Do I sense a little sarcasim here? My idea was stating a fact, correct? The mags were limited prior? The military has first priority on ammo? It will more than likely go back to the way it was a few years ago?



> Who is Obama to tell me how many rounds I can have?


Obama is the President and what have you. Unfortunately enough people didn't vote the way many gun owners see fit. Question, would you still rather have Bush and him sending our troops oversees for a fight that is not ours anymore to preserve our own agendas to keep our guns? We live in a democracy of which we have numerous freedoms and our troops enforce that aspect. I am not saying our troops trump our guns by any means so don't take that one out of context.



> You think we are over reacting while I think many are sleeping while the thieves are in the house. That's not an attack either, it's my perception. My hopes are that you will understand that because someone simply doesn't agree with you it doesn't mean they are attacking you. Upset with you perhaps. Is there really anything wrong with asking "who are you to tell my how many rounds I need"? That's what the anti gun crowd wants to do.


I sometimes think over reacting is a very subtle theme at this point in our world. I am quite positive that I respect you Plainsman for all of your prior posts and how you perceive things in general...very level headed most of the time. I will tell you that something is wrong with me telling you how many rounds you can have in your mag. I can tell you that because I have never told you that I feel you should only be allowed so many rounds...the Brady Bunch was a great rebuttle. :lol: I simply stated what will more than likely happen with the ammo shortage and gun control issue currently.



> Lots of unanswered questions that nobody will really have an answer to until things happen.


This has always been a fact of life that I don't believe has been solved yet. It is sort of like the when will I die question...like I said in my above quote. I think that it is true that there are numerous unanswered questions about this cost of ammo, shortage of ammo, and if guns will be taken away that no person will know up until it happens...if it happens. Thats what I meant.

Laite319 and Plainsman...I have never, nor will I be anti-gun. I do not wish this upon any person that loves the outdoors and the definate right to hunt or protect themselves. I think you two may have not understood my sarcasim from the beginning and for that I do not apologize. 


> Can you see what has happened in other places in our world?


 I will only ask about those other worlds and where are they now compared to the United States, Iraq, Canada, Mexico, and so forth. If you want a good comparison, compare to a country that is a democracy. Then you should ask yourself about those countries that had have their guns taken away. Where are they, how many people, what kind of "world status", what type of Government, and what is the crime rate? Those are some thoughts to think about and some statistics to go through.

Like I said, I don't mean to offend, just being sarcastic like the rest of us and value everyones [email protected]#$*&%^ opinion like the rest of us, doesn't make me better nor do I have great insight into certain lamented aspects of politics like some of us may protray. I guess I couldn't let this one go. Laite319 and Plainsman...I would like to invite both of you to discuss over coffee...just give me a shout sometime. Take care guys! :beer: Hopefully I was clear enough!


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

> Sensitive really? You want to talk about sensitive really? Dramatic always, sensitive never, isn't this why we can have HOT TOPICS?


Absolutely, I would love to talk about sensitive, really. You seemed be able to tell others they were sensitive, so I am telling you the same thing. When the shoe fits, you must wear it.



> Special?...doesn't everyone on here think that sort of thing of themselves? I believe everyone should have that amount of respect for themselves.


What people tend to think and what is right and/or good can be miles apart. Respecting yourself and the way you came off in your post are two different and completely unrelated entities.



> I would agree and not quite positive I ever stated that I wouldn't be proactive towards this situation of losing our guns. Never said that I wouldn't!


You definately gave a few of us the impression that you were not concerned in the least. I would say that if you are being PROACTIVE, you are doing a very good job at keeping it under the radar!



> Do I sense a little sarcasim here? My idea was stating a fact, correct? The mags were limited prior? The military has first priority on ammo? It will more than likely go back to the way it was a few years ago?


Very perceptive of you!! No, your idea was not stating any facts at all. You stated what MAY HAPPEN. That is not a fact. I may become the next Mozart, but I highly doubt it.



> Question, would you still rather have Bush and him sending our troops oversees for a fight that is not ours anymore to preserve our own agendas to keep our guns?


There is absolutely no logic in this statement. Obama is still sending troops over there for a fight that is most definately OURS. When U.S. troops are getting killed it is OUR FIGHT!!!



> I simply stated what will more than likely happen with the ammo shortage and gun control issue currently


And in telling us this, you basically have said you are OK with it. You don't seem to be concerned in the least.



> I will only ask about those other worlds and where are they now compared to the United States, Iraq, Canada, Mexico, and so forth. If you want a good comparison, compare to a country that is a democracy. Then you should ask yourself about those countries that had have their guns taken away. Where are they, how many people, what kind of "world status", what type of Government, and what is the crime rate? Those are some thoughts to think about and some statistics to go through


First off, ENGLAND and AUSTRALIA, which are right up there with the U.S.A. are some of these countries. Canada is up there also. iraq and mexico are not even close to being rated with these countries. If you don't know where they are, and what kind of "world status" they have, you need to do some serious research. Crime rate has seen an increase with more strict gun control, so what does that tell you???



> Laite319 and Plainsman...I would like to invite both of you to discuss over coffee...just give me a shout sometime. Take care guys! Hopefully I was clear enough!


Not sure when I will be in your area, but sure, why not? As far as being clear, I guess if mud is clear, then yes, you were. I didn't see any clarifying statements in any of that. Very obscure to say the least. You didn't back your statements up with any facts or even info that may sound like a fact.

Catfish, I do respect your insight and your opinion, even if I think you are dead wrong in some places, and don't make any sense in others. If I didn't get your sarcasm I apologize, but I am not sure that is the case. I have noticed that the overall tone of your last post has lightened up quite a bit!

I had a very strong feeling that wouldn't be your last post!!


----------



## catfisherman2 (Apr 17, 2008)




----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

Get the f#$k over it really. The cost of ammo is the same and it did not go to a million dollars a box. Acctually it has drop as the amaxs i just bought where 2 dollars a box cheaper than a month ago. 22 bullets really what are they 10 cents more a box guess i just go in and buy it and right around a buck or 2 for one of those. So unless your last name is hornady or nosler i dont give a **** what you manage just speculation like everone else.


----------



## dpgunsmith (May 17, 2010)

Well...

My last name isn't Hornady, or Nosler, BUT

last week my sales rep from Big Rock Sports stopped in. (I have a gunsmithing and sporting goods store in New Rockford) While we were going over orders, he did let me know that I should order early for my fall ammunition. He stated that ATK (Federal) had sent out notification that as of May 1, 2011, their prices would be increasing 15% across the board, citing the increased cost of raw materials as the reason. It stands to reason that the other manufacturers will not be far behind. Some mat even be ahead. Call that speculation if you will, but you aren't going to see one manufacturer raise 15% without some movement by the others.

Granted this isn't "WAY WAY up" but it is a significant increase, what cost you $17 will now probably be $20.

From what I can tell on distributors, the mini-shortages that occurred last year are over. There was a period of months where I was not able to find a single source to order 22LR or large rifle primers from. Inventories are way up presently, and from what I have been able to gather in the business, they should remain stable. Unless people start panic buying again.

Take my info for what you think its worth.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

what you are saying is realistic with the flooding in australia i heard that lead was going up and see other raw metals are on the rise and 15 % is believeable. It is when people think that the price is going to double over night is rediculious.


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

I think that they are using scare tatics right now trying to move product that is sitting. The rush was on for everything gun, ammo and reloading related when Obama hit town, coupled with high lead prices due to low stock brought the big jump in ammo. Look at how many people bought cases upon cases of primers at 60-70 dollars a thousand. I just picked up 3,000 winchester large rifle primers for 23.99 a thousand last week. Between people stocking way up fearing the worst, stagnant wages and the sputtering economy, I think we are in store for a lull in buying and a drop in prices.

Lead is hovering right around where it has been for the past year and worldwide lead stocks are almost 300,000 tons, which puts it at over 4 times higher than when lead originally skyrocketed in price. Supply vs demand = lead is going to go lower.

The gov't has been trying to do everything they can to devalue the dollar to keep out deflation and are pretty much out of options as they are at the point where they really can't print more money because people are rallying to haul in the deficit. Deflation is coming.


----------



## jrp267 (Dec 17, 2007)

Wow way to bring an oldie back from the dead.


----------



## Mark_ferguson77 (Mar 5, 2011)

Basically it depends that what type of Ammo they are selling.
If it is of quality & is legal.
That is going to be cool.


----------

