quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: lovmuffin


If it wasn't for the NRA, the only thing that would be legal are muzzle loaders.


You might want to check with the batf on that.
There was an article in the a.r. about that very thing. According to the batf any weapon that can be made to fire full auto is illegal even if that was not the original purpose. Browning showed that he could make a lever action and a bolt action fire full auto. He also sketched out a design to make a trap door springfield fire full auto.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Here is a s&w blog site. Note the dates of mid 2016 indicating prices as low as .05 cents a round up to .10 cents a round. It looks like you have been pedeling shit again.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/483181-price-22-ammo.html

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

A picture of an ammo box is not a citation, it is a picture of an ammo box.
Marine corps times is not a marine corps publication. It says that right on the cite you posted

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

The cite I posted shows that the inflation rate was
4.1 for 2007
0.1 for 2008
2.7 for 2009
1.5 for 2010
3.0 for 2011
1.7 for 2012
Each years rate multiplies the previous year.
How much does this add to a .05 cent bullet?
What percentage of the total increase does that equal?
That was the question I asked you.
Now can you do the math or will you need to find a grown up to help you?
As the comments in the s&w blog indicate the price of .22 ammo in mid 2016 when obama was still president and it looked like bills wife was ahead in the polls, .22 ammo was readily available at .10 cents a round (not .12 as you claimed) and as cheap as .05 cents a round if one looked carefully.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Now you are a mind reader...isn't that special?
The question is: out of a .07 cent increase how much was inflation. The figures I have posted indicate about .02 cents of the .07 was due to inflation.

(in reply to thompsonx)

quote:

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Here is a s&w blog site. Note the dates of mid 2016 indicating prices as low as .05 cents a round up to .10 cents a round. It looks like you have been pedeling shit again.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/483181-price-22-ammo.html

That is not a Citable Source...
That is a Web Forum who's data cannot be researched or proven, instead it is a series of anecdotal evidence.

This however IS a citable source:
https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/08/31/the-22-ammo-shortage-mystery-solved.aspx
And it cites the price ranges as provided via data aggregated through Wal-Mart sales data analytics.

Trying to use anecdote and hearsay as evidence is the literal definition of 'peddling shit'

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

A picture of an ammo box is not a citation, it is a picture of an ammo box.
Marine corps times is not a marine corps publication. It says that right on the cite you posted

That's cute - you don't know what a citation is.

Yes - a the writing on a Container is a citable source if the writing on the container denotes the contents of the container. This is similar to citing the ingredient list or nutritional facts on a Box of Cereal. Don't get upset because it proves you wrong.

Did i say it was a Marine Corps Publication?
No - i used it as a Citation because it directly quotes a Spokesperson from MARSOC.
What is the New York Times not a credible source when it quotes the President because the New York Times is Not the executive branch?

But i forgot how stupid you where...
Here let me simplify it for you:
http://www.marsoc.marines.mil/Portals/31/Documents/MMAC%20Individual%20Equipment%20List.pdf

This is the Individual Equipment List denoting the authorized and issued equipment for a MARSOF soldier during a training exercise.
This citation is provided by the United States Marine Corps, and is on their official military website.

note - it lacks a 'colt 1911' entry in it's list or .45 ammunition and magazines.
Meaning that the soldier is not Issued either of those items.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

The cite I posted shows that the inflation rate was
4.1 for 2007
0.1 for 2008
2.7 for 2009
1.5 for 2010
3.0 for 2011
1.7 for 2012
Each years rate multiplies the previous year.
How much does this add to a .05 cent bullet?
What percentage of the total increase does that equal?
That was the question I asked you.
Now can you do the math or will you need to find a grown up to help you?
As the comments in the s&w blog indicate the price of .22 ammo in mid 2016 when obama was still president and it looked like bills wife was ahead in the polls, .22 ammo was readily available at .10 cents a round (not .12 as you claimed) and as cheap as .05 cents a round if one looked carefully.

You're a short bus kinda special arn't you?
First off - you didn't post that. I did.

Second off - when doing math which is calculating Year on Year growth - you do not calculate the 0 year... it's growth is already taken into consideration as the starting value is based in that year.

So inflation per year:
0.1 for 2008
2.7 for 2009
1.5 for 2010
3.0 for 2011
1.7 for 2012

Calculating with ONLY inflation and no other outside influence forces with a starting price of 5 cents in 2007.

0.1 for 2008 - .05
2.7 for 2009 - .05005
1.5 for 2010 - .05140
3.0 for 2011 - .05217
1.7 for 2012 - .05305

so it starts at .05 cents in 2007 and sees an increase of .003 cents over the 5 year period.
Okay... so what if we take into account a simple growth gradient... where something else influences the price...
a 1 cent increase each year, so in 2007 it is 5 cents, in 2008, 6; 2009, 7; and so on.

0.1 for 2008 .05 + .01: .06
2.7 for 2009 .06006 + 1: .07006
1.5 for 2010 .07111 + 1: .08111
3.0 for 2011 .08354 + 1: .09354
1.7 for 2012 .09513 + 1: .10513

So the inflation even in that condition accounts for .005 cents over the course of the time measured.


So i have to ask In what universe does your math in any way seem correct?
a less then 2% year on year growth average of inflation accounting for 30% of it's price growth as you've claimed in post 153

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Now you are a mind reader...isn't that special?
The question is: out of a .07 cent increase how much was inflation. The figures I have posted indicate about .02 cents of the .07 was due to inflation.

The peak price of .22s was not in 2016, in 2014 it hit something like $ .20 per round here.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to InfoMan)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

http://smith-wessonforum.com/ammo/483181-price-22-ammo.html

Perhaps you might get a grown up to read what I posted. It starts off with "here is a s&w blog site" Most of us know that blogs are opinions of the poster.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

quote:

This however IS a citable source:
https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/08/31/the-22-ammo-shortage-mystery-solved.aspx
And it cites the price ranges as provided via data aggregated through Wal-Mart sales data analytics.

Yet when we read it we find that it says exactly what the blogers anectdotal evidence shows.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

quote:


No it does not. It shows what is in the box. It does not show that is the only box of ammo used by the military.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

~~FR~~

So, now that the gun defenders have descended to swarm around their circled wagons against a thread that isn't attacking them....have gun sales magicallly gone up again?

Because that's the topic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

~~FR~~

So, now that the gun defenders have descended to swarm around their circled wagons against a thread that isn't attacking them....have gun sales magicallly gone up again?

Because that's the topic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

~~FR~~

So, now that the gun defenders have descended to swarm around their circled wagons against a thread that isn't attacking them....have gun sales magicallly gone up again?

Because that's the topic.

In some places it has, for example CA.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

~~FR~~

So, now that the gun defenders have descended to swarm around their circled wagons against a thread that isn't attacking them....have gun sales magicallly gone up again?

Because that's the topic.

In some places it has, for example CA.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

~~FR~~

So, now that the gun defenders have descended to swarm around their circled wagons against a thread that isn't attacking them....have gun sales magicallly gone up again?

Because that's the topic.

In some places it has, for example CA.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

~~FR~~

So, now that the gun defenders have descended to swarm around their circled wagons against a thread that isn't attacking them....have gun sales magicallly gone up again?

Because that's the topic.

In some places it has, for example CA.

You may not be aware that the US is 50 states, of which California is just one.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

In a thread about a national economic trend, in some places is irrelevant.

Meanwhile, back at the actual point...