Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:27:52 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:34:25 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

snip
Fascinating indeed. So if they are not buying all that ammo and
stock piling it...where the hell is it?
snip

Good question.

I think that Gunner is asking about where all the ammo is *now*.

First, the ammo that DHS is contracting for hasn't been manufactured
yet.

Sceond, the ammo that's not on the shelves is being hoarded by
paranoid gun nutz from sea to shining sea.

I spoke with one of the plant managers at Remington's Arkansas plant
about two weeks ago. She said they're running three shifts, making
ammo like never before. And, as far as she's heard, the wholesalers
are not sitting on it. It's all going to retail, where gun nutz are
buying it up as fast as it hits the shelves. Some retailers aren't
getting any of it. That appears to be a matter of how the wholesale
distributors are rationing it to certain retailers.

Actually, pretty much all of the current shortage is due to new first
time gun owners who have been pushed off the fence by the attacks from
the rabid anti-gun minority and are now joining the ranks of the pro-gun
majority. No long time gun owners I know have been buying anything
recently and indeed some have been selling some surplus for a profit.

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:13:02 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:27:52 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:34:25 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

snip
Fascinating indeed. So if they are not buying all that ammo and
stock piling it...where the hell is it?
snip

Good question.

I think that Gunner is asking about where all the ammo is *now*.

First, the ammo that DHS is contracting for hasn't been manufactured
yet.

Sceond, the ammo that's not on the shelves is being hoarded by
paranoid gun nutz from sea to shining sea.

I spoke with one of the plant managers at Remington's Arkansas plant
about two weeks ago. She said they're running three shifts, making
ammo like never before. And, as far as she's heard, the wholesalers
are not sitting on it. It's all going to retail, where gun nutz are
buying it up as fast as it hits the shelves. Some retailers aren't
getting any of it. That appears to be a matter of how the wholesale
distributors are rationing it to certain retailers.

Actually, pretty much all of the current shortage is due to new first
time gun owners who have been pushed off the fence by the attacks from
the rabid anti-gun minority and are now joining the ranks of the pro-gun
majority.

This seems very unlikely:

http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/...-demographics/

Do you have some data that supports these ideas, or is it anecdotes?

--
Ed Huntress




No long time gun owners I know have been buying anything
recently and indeed some have been selling some surplus for a profit.

Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:13:02 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:27:52 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:34:25 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

snip
Fascinating indeed. So if they are not buying all that ammo and
stock piling it...where the hell is it?
snip

Good question.

I think that Gunner is asking about where all the ammo is *now*.

First, the ammo that DHS is contracting for hasn't been manufactured
yet.

Sceond, the ammo that's not on the shelves is being hoarded by
paranoid gun nutz from sea to shining sea.

I spoke with one of the plant managers at Remington's Arkansas plant
about two weeks ago. She said they're running three shifts, making
ammo like never before. And, as far as she's heard, the wholesalers
are not sitting on it. It's all going to retail, where gun nutz are
buying it up as fast as it hits the shelves. Some retailers aren't
getting any of it. That appears to be a matter of how the wholesale
distributors are rationing it to certain retailers.

Actually, pretty much all of the current shortage is due to new first
time gun owners who have been pushed off the fence by the attacks from
the rabid anti-gun minority and are now joining the ranks of the pro-gun
majority.

This seems very unlikely:

http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/...-demographics/

Do you have some data that supports these ideas, or is it anecdotes?

I have more data than they have to support that bogus propaganda claim.
I have the various former non gun owners who have asked me for advice on
what to buy. I have the reports from other gun owners I know who have
received the same questions from former non gun owners. There are also
reports from gun shop owners indicating the same.

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:13:02 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:27:52 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:34:25 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

snip
Fascinating indeed. So if they are not buying all that ammo and
stock piling it...where the hell is it?
snip

Good question.

I think that Gunner is asking about where all the ammo is *now*.

First, the ammo that DHS is contracting for hasn't been manufactured
yet.

Sceond, the ammo that's not on the shelves is being hoarded by
paranoid gun nutz from sea to shining sea.

I spoke with one of the plant managers at Remington's Arkansas plant
about two weeks ago. She said they're running three shifts, making
ammo like never before. And, as far as she's heard, the wholesalers
are not sitting on it. It's all going to retail, where gun nutz are
buying it up as fast as it hits the shelves. Some retailers aren't
getting any of it. That appears to be a matter of how the wholesale
distributors are rationing it to certain retailers.

Actually, pretty much all of the current shortage is due to new first
time gun owners who have been pushed off the fence by the attacks from
the rabid anti-gun minority and are now joining the ranks of the pro-gun
majority. No long time gun owners I know have been buying anything
recently and indeed some have been selling some surplus for a profit.


A friend of mine recently sold some of his ammo and paid off his house
with the proceeds.

Fascinating that one could get $100 a box..or $2 a round for 9mm JHPs
from the 90s. That was in the LA area.

Im certainly glad Ive got sufficient quanties of reloading components
and a "fair amount" of surplus ammo laid in.

Its rather fascinating to watch the Canadian Gun Registry being
attempted here in the US...and knowing full well its going to fail
like the Canadian registry did...and knowing that Americans are going
to finally say **** it...and take out those who pushed that attempt.

We do live in interesting times, dont we?

VBG

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 16:31:31 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:13:02 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:27:52 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:34:25 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

snip
Fascinating indeed. So if they are not buying all that ammo and
stock piling it...where the hell is it?
snip

Good question.

I think that Gunner is asking about where all the ammo is *now*.

First, the ammo that DHS is contracting for hasn't been manufactured
yet.

Sceond, the ammo that's not on the shelves is being hoarded by
paranoid gun nutz from sea to shining sea.

I spoke with one of the plant managers at Remington's Arkansas plant
about two weeks ago. She said they're running three shifts, making
ammo like never before. And, as far as she's heard, the wholesalers
are not sitting on it. It's all going to retail, where gun nutz are
buying it up as fast as it hits the shelves. Some retailers aren't
getting any of it. That appears to be a matter of how the wholesale
distributors are rationing it to certain retailers.

Actually, pretty much all of the current shortage is due to new first
time gun owners who have been pushed off the fence by the attacks from
the rabid anti-gun minority and are now joining the ranks of the pro-gun
majority. No long time gun owners I know have been buying anything
recently and indeed some have been selling some surplus for a profit.


A friend of mine recently sold some of his ammo and paid off his house
with the proceeds.

Fascinating that one could get $100 a box..or $2 a round for 9mm JHPs
from the 90s. That was in the LA area.

Im certainly glad Ive got sufficient quanties of reloading components
and a "fair amount" of surplus ammo laid in.

Its rather fascinating to watch the Canadian Gun Registry being
attempted here in the US...and knowing full well its going to fail
like the Canadian registry did...and knowing that Americans are going
to finally say **** it...and take out those who pushed that attempt.

We do live in interesting times, dont we?

VBG


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/...s-numbers.html

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 16:07:43 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:13:02 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:27:52 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:34:25 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

snip
Fascinating indeed. So if they are not buying all that ammo and
stock piling it...where the hell is it?
snip

Good question.

I think that Gunner is asking about where all the ammo is *now*.

First, the ammo that DHS is contracting for hasn't been manufactured
yet.

Sceond, the ammo that's not on the shelves is being hoarded by
paranoid gun nutz from sea to shining sea.

I spoke with one of the plant managers at Remington's Arkansas plant
about two weeks ago. She said they're running three shifts, making
ammo like never before. And, as far as she's heard, the wholesalers
are not sitting on it. It's all going to retail, where gun nutz are
buying it up as fast as it hits the shelves. Some retailers aren't
getting any of it. That appears to be a matter of how the wholesale
distributors are rationing it to certain retailers.

Actually, pretty much all of the current shortage is due to new first
time gun owners who have been pushed off the fence by the attacks from
the rabid anti-gun minority and are now joining the ranks of the pro-gun
majority.

This seems very unlikely:

http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/...-demographics/

Do you have some data that supports these ideas, or is it anecdotes?

I have more data than they have to support that bogus propaganda claim.
I have the various former non gun owners who have asked me for advice on
what to buy. I have the reports from other gun owners I know who have
received the same questions from former non gun owners. There are also
reports from gun shop owners indicating the same.

Oh, that's impressive, Pete. Pew Research Center is generally
considered the least-biased, and one of the best, research
organizations in the world. For you to have more data than they do,
and to have the skills to project from your buddies and the people who
ask you for advice to the entire country is quite a skill.

Not.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 16:07:43 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:13:02 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:27:52 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:34:25 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

snip
Fascinating indeed. So if they are not buying all that ammo and
stock piling it...where the hell is it?
snip

Good question.

I think that Gunner is asking about where all the ammo is *now*.

First, the ammo that DHS is contracting for hasn't been manufactured
yet.

Sceond, the ammo that's not on the shelves is being hoarded by
paranoid gun nutz from sea to shining sea.

I spoke with one of the plant managers at Remington's Arkansas plant
about two weeks ago. She said they're running three shifts, making
ammo like never before. And, as far as she's heard, the wholesalers
are not sitting on it. It's all going to retail, where gun nutz are
buying it up as fast as it hits the shelves. Some retailers aren't
getting any of it. That appears to be a matter of how the wholesale
distributors are rationing it to certain retailers.

Actually, pretty much all of the current shortage is due to new first
time gun owners who have been pushed off the fence by the attacks from
the rabid anti-gun minority and are now joining the ranks of the pro-gun
majority.

This seems very unlikely:

http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/...-demographics/

Do you have some data that supports these ideas, or is it anecdotes?

I have more data than they have to support that bogus propaganda claim.
I have the various former non gun owners who have asked me for advice on
what to buy. I have the reports from other gun owners I know who have
received the same questions from former non gun owners. There are also
reports from gun shop owners indicating the same.

Oh, that's impressive, Pete. Pew Research Center is generally
considered the least-biased, and one of the best, research
organizations in the world. For you to have more data than they do,
and to have the skills to project from your buddies and the people who
ask you for advice to the entire country is quite a skill.

Not.

--
Ed Huntress

The data is crap. When the data is crap the bias or lack thereof of the
researchers is irrelevant.

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 20:02:12 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 16:07:43 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:13:02 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:27:52 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:34:25 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

snip
Fascinating indeed. So if they are not buying all that ammo and
stock piling it...where the hell is it?
snip

Good question.

I think that Gunner is asking about where all the ammo is *now*.

First, the ammo that DHS is contracting for hasn't been manufactured
yet.

Sceond, the ammo that's not on the shelves is being hoarded by
paranoid gun nutz from sea to shining sea.

I spoke with one of the plant managers at Remington's Arkansas plant
about two weeks ago. She said they're running three shifts, making
ammo like never before. And, as far as she's heard, the wholesalers
are not sitting on it. It's all going to retail, where gun nutz are
buying it up as fast as it hits the shelves. Some retailers aren't
getting any of it. That appears to be a matter of how the wholesale
distributors are rationing it to certain retailers.

Actually, pretty much all of the current shortage is due to new first
time gun owners who have been pushed off the fence by the attacks from
the rabid anti-gun minority and are now joining the ranks of the pro-gun
majority.

This seems very unlikely:

http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/...-demographics/

Do you have some data that supports these ideas, or is it anecdotes?

I have more data than they have to support that bogus propaganda claim.
I have the various former non gun owners who have asked me for advice on
what to buy. I have the reports from other gun owners I know who have
received the same questions from former non gun owners. There are also
reports from gun shop owners indicating the same.

Oh, that's impressive, Pete. Pew Research Center is generally
considered the least-biased, and one of the best, research
organizations in the world. For you to have more data than they do,
and to have the skills to project from your buddies and the people who
ask you for advice to the entire country is quite a skill.

Not.

--
Ed Huntress

The data is crap. When the data is crap the bias or lack thereof of the
researchers is irrelevant.

And your anecdotes are the anti-crap, I suppose.

It's likely that more guns have been sold to first-time buyers lately,
but the number, in relation to the number of gun owners already out
there, probably is a lot smaller than you seem to think.

But what's really wacky is the idea that they're buying up all the
ammo. It's probably all gun owners. One interesting comment from a gun
store, published somewhere over the last few weeks, is that ammo
buyers are asking for one caliber; when they can't get it, they ask
for another caliber; some move on to a third or fourth, and when they
can't get that, they start asking for shotgun shells.

How many first-time buyers do you think go out and buy three or four
guns right off the bat? Those are established gun owners, who have at
least several guns.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 20:02:12 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 16:07:43 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:13:02 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:27:52 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:34:25 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

snip
Fascinating indeed. So if they are not buying all that ammo and
stock piling it...where the hell is it?
snip

Good question.

I think that Gunner is asking about where all the ammo is *now*.

First, the ammo that DHS is contracting for hasn't been manufactured
yet.

Sceond, the ammo that's not on the shelves is being hoarded by
paranoid gun nutz from sea to shining sea.

I spoke with one of the plant managers at Remington's Arkansas plant
about two weeks ago. She said they're running three shifts, making
ammo like never before. And, as far as she's heard, the wholesalers
are not sitting on it. It's all going to retail, where gun nutz are
buying it up as fast as it hits the shelves. Some retailers aren't
getting any of it. That appears to be a matter of how the wholesale
distributors are rationing it to certain retailers.

Actually, pretty much all of the current shortage is due to new first
time gun owners who have been pushed off the fence by the attacks from
the rabid anti-gun minority and are now joining the ranks of the pro-gun
majority.

This seems very unlikely:

http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/...-demographics/

Do you have some data that supports these ideas, or is it anecdotes?

I have more data than they have to support that bogus propaganda claim.
I have the various former non gun owners who have asked me for advice on
what to buy. I have the reports from other gun owners I know who have
received the same questions from former non gun owners. There are also
reports from gun shop owners indicating the same.

Oh, that's impressive, Pete. Pew Research Center is generally
considered the least-biased, and one of the best, research
organizations in the world. For you to have more data than they do,
and to have the skills to project from your buddies and the people who
ask you for advice to the entire country is quite a skill.

Not.

--
Ed Huntress

The data is crap. When the data is crap the bias or lack thereof of the
researchers is irrelevant.

And your anecdotes are the anti-crap, I suppose.

It's likely that more guns have been sold to first-time buyers lately,
but the number, in relation to the number of gun owners already out
there, probably is a lot smaller than you seem to think.

It probably isn't since it's causing an extreme shortage in the
marketplace despite the manufacturers operating three shifts. The forums
I follow have plenty of people from around the country and all are
reporting the same thing.

I'll also note that the flawed data for the analysis you linked did not
originate from Pew, it came from other less reputable sources and is
also stale. The key problem that data doesn't address is the fact that a
very large percentage of the population does not participate in polls at
all and those that do don't provide accurate information.


But what's really wacky is the idea that they're buying up all the
ammo. It's probably all gun owners.

Of course it's gun owners, the millions of new gun owners who need ammo
for their first time gun purchases.

One interesting comment from a gun
store, published somewhere over the last few weeks, is that ammo
buyers are asking for one caliber; when they can't get it, they ask
for another caliber; some move on to a third or fourth, and when they
can't get that, they start asking for shotgun shells.

This seems to be the work of some "scalpers" trying to speculate on the
market, waiting in line at stores to buy ammo in hopes of reselling it
for a profit. They are soon going to find themselves with ammo they have
to unload at a loss since the market seems to be starting to normalize
again.


How many first-time buyers do you think go out and buy three or four
guns right off the bat? Those are established gun owners, who have at
least several guns.

Nope, those are the scalpers again. There aren't many of them since most
of these scalpers don't have real employment if they can wait in line
every morning at the stores and thus most scalpers have been limited to
less expensive ammunition rather than actual firearms.

It has also been noted that the scalpers who have been buying $900 ARs
at Wal-Mart to try to resell for $1,500 are likely committing felonies
since they are not FFLs and they are purchasing for the express purpose
of reselling rather than for personal use.

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 06:48:24 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 20:02:12 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 16:07:43 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 14:13:02 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 07:27:52 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:34:25 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

snip
Fascinating indeed. So if they are not buying all that ammo and
stock piling it...where the hell is it?
snip

Good question.

I think that Gunner is asking about where all the ammo is *now*.

First, the ammo that DHS is contracting for hasn't been manufactured
yet.

Sceond, the ammo that's not on the shelves is being hoarded by
paranoid gun nutz from sea to shining sea.

I spoke with one of the plant managers at Remington's Arkansas plant
about two weeks ago. She said they're running three shifts, making
ammo like never before. And, as far as she's heard, the wholesalers
are not sitting on it. It's all going to retail, where gun nutz are
buying it up as fast as it hits the shelves. Some retailers aren't
getting any of it. That appears to be a matter of how the wholesale
distributors are rationing it to certain retailers.

Actually, pretty much all of the current shortage is due to new first
time gun owners who have been pushed off the fence by the attacks from
the rabid anti-gun minority and are now joining the ranks of the pro-gun
majority.

This seems very unlikely:

http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/...-demographics/

Do you have some data that supports these ideas, or is it anecdotes?

I have more data than they have to support that bogus propaganda claim.
I have the various former non gun owners who have asked me for advice on
what to buy. I have the reports from other gun owners I know who have
received the same questions from former non gun owners. There are also
reports from gun shop owners indicating the same.

Oh, that's impressive, Pete. Pew Research Center is generally
considered the least-biased, and one of the best, research
organizations in the world. For you to have more data than they do,
and to have the skills to project from your buddies and the people who
ask you for advice to the entire country is quite a skill.

Not.

--
Ed Huntress

The data is crap. When the data is crap the bias or lack thereof of the
researchers is irrelevant.

And your anecdotes are the anti-crap, I suppose.

It's likely that more guns have been sold to first-time buyers lately,
but the number, in relation to the number of gun owners already out
there, probably is a lot smaller than you seem to think.

It probably isn't since it's causing an extreme shortage in the
marketplace despite the manufacturers operating three shifts. The forums
I follow have plenty of people from around the country and all are
reporting the same thing.

I'll also note that the flawed data for the analysis you linked did not
originate from Pew, it came from other less reputable sources and is
also stale. The key problem that data doesn't address is the fact that a
very large percentage of the population does not participate in polls at
all and those that do don't provide accurate information.


But what's really wacky is the idea that they're buying up all the
ammo. It's probably all gun owners.

Of course it's gun owners, the millions of new gun owners who need ammo
for their first time gun purchases.

One interesting comment from a gun
store, published somewhere over the last few weeks, is that ammo
buyers are asking for one caliber; when they can't get it, they ask
for another caliber; some move on to a third or fourth, and when they
can't get that, they start asking for shotgun shells.

This seems to be the work of some "scalpers" trying to speculate on the
market, waiting in line at stores to buy ammo in hopes of reselling it
for a profit. They are soon going to find themselves with ammo they have
to unload at a loss since the market seems to be starting to normalize
again.


How many first-time buyers do you think go out and buy three or four
guns right off the bat? Those are established gun owners, who have at
least several guns.

Nope, those are the scalpers again. There aren't many of them since most
of these scalpers don't have real employment if they can wait in line
every morning at the stores and thus most scalpers have been limited to
less expensive ammunition rather than actual firearms.

It has also been noted that the scalpers who have been buying $900 ARs
at Wal-Mart to try to resell for $1,500 are likely committing felonies
since they are not FFLs and they are purchasing for the express purpose
of reselling rather than for personal use.

All of these anecdotes are interesting, but you're engaging in a lot
of speculation about who is buying the ammo. That's typical of these
discussions. Everybody has a theory, but few have any data to back it
up.

So we'll wait and see how it shakes out. From some investment reports,
big players are selling gun stocks because they think they're near a
peak and it can't be sustained much longer. But they had a nice run.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:


But what's really wacky is the idea that they're buying up all the
ammo. It's probably all gun owners.

Of course it's gun owners, the millions of new gun owners who need ammo
for their first time gun purchases.

One interesting comment from a gun
store, published somewhere over the last few weeks, is that ammo
buyers are asking for one caliber; when they can't get it, they ask
for another caliber; some move on to a third or fourth, and when they
can't get that, they start asking for shotgun shells.

This seems to be the work of some "scalpers" trying to speculate on the
market, waiting in line at stores to buy ammo in hopes of reselling it
for a profit. They are soon going to find themselves with ammo they have
to unload at a loss since the market seems to be starting to normalize
again.


How many first-time buyers do you think go out and buy three or four
guns right off the bat? Those are established gun owners, who have at
least several guns.

Nope, those are the scalpers again. There aren't many of them since most
of these scalpers don't have real employment if they can wait in line
every morning at the stores and thus most scalpers have been limited to
less expensive ammunition rather than actual firearms.

It has also been noted that the scalpers who have been buying $900 ARs
at Wal-Mart to try to resell for $1,500 are likely committing felonies
since they are not FFLs and they are purchasing for the express purpose
of reselling rather than for personal use.

All of these anecdotes are interesting, but you're engaging in a lot
of speculation about who is buying the ammo. That's typical of these
discussions. Everybody has a theory, but few have any data to back it
up.

Ultimately nobody has any solid data, and those polls have the least
valid data of them all. Most people don't participate in polls to begin
with, and those that are security conscious and thus more likely to own
firearms are less likely still. The minority gun ownership is
underrepresented since many in those communities get their guns through
illegal sales simply because they don't know how to buy one
legitimately, much like many in those communities have no experience
with fine dining (a subject noted on NPR recently due to a project that
was educating urban youth so they wouldn't be out of their element at a
business lunch).


So we'll wait and see how it shakes out. From some investment reports,
big players are selling gun stocks because they think they're near a
peak and it can't be sustained much longer. But they had a nice run.

I peaked with the first Obummer election and then subsided, peaked again
with Obummer2 and then subsided, now it peaked again with the renewed
attacks by the anti-gun minority and it's showing signs of subsiding
again. Each one of those events has significantly expanded gun
ownership, making the rabid anti-gunners an even smaller minority.

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 09:41:24 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:


But what's really wacky is the idea that they're buying up all the
ammo. It's probably all gun owners.

Of course it's gun owners, the millions of new gun owners who need ammo
for their first time gun purchases.

One interesting comment from a gun
store, published somewhere over the last few weeks, is that ammo
buyers are asking for one caliber; when they can't get it, they ask
for another caliber; some move on to a third or fourth, and when they
can't get that, they start asking for shotgun shells.

This seems to be the work of some "scalpers" trying to speculate on the
market, waiting in line at stores to buy ammo in hopes of reselling it
for a profit. They are soon going to find themselves with ammo they have
to unload at a loss since the market seems to be starting to normalize
again.


How many first-time buyers do you think go out and buy three or four
guns right off the bat? Those are established gun owners, who have at
least several guns.

Nope, those are the scalpers again. There aren't many of them since most
of these scalpers don't have real employment if they can wait in line
every morning at the stores and thus most scalpers have been limited to
less expensive ammunition rather than actual firearms.

It has also been noted that the scalpers who have been buying $900 ARs
at Wal-Mart to try to resell for $1,500 are likely committing felonies
since they are not FFLs and they are purchasing for the express purpose
of reselling rather than for personal use.

All of these anecdotes are interesting, but you're engaging in a lot
of speculation about who is buying the ammo. That's typical of these
discussions. Everybody has a theory, but few have any data to back it
up.

Ultimately nobody has any solid data, and those polls have the least
valid data of them all. Most people don't participate in polls to begin
with, and those that are security conscious and thus more likely to own
firearms are less likely still. The minority gun ownership is
underrepresented since many in those communities get their guns through
illegal sales simply because they don't know how to buy one
legitimately, much like many in those communities have no experience
with fine dining (a subject noted on NPR recently due to a project that
was educating urban youth so they wouldn't be out of their element at a
business lunch).


So we'll wait and see how it shakes out. From some investment reports,
big players are selling gun stocks because they think they're near a
peak and it can't be sustained much longer. But they had a nice run.

I peaked with the first Obummer election and then subsided, peaked again
with Obummer2 and then subsided, now it peaked again with the renewed
attacks by the anti-gun minority and it's showing signs of subsiding
again. Each one of those events has significantly expanded gun
ownership, making the rabid anti-gunners an even smaller minority.

It's clear you've decided what information is convincing to you, Pete,
so there's no point in discussing it further. Once someone dismisses
Pew Research as "crap," or swallows the anecdotes and wishful thinking
of people with an interest in propagandizing about trends in gun
ownership even though it flies in the face of one of the largest, most
thorough, and most respected surveys ever done (the General Social
Survey), there's no point.

I've been involved in survey research since the '70s, first with TV
license-renewal studies, and then for years with marketing research,
and I know it's fruitless to talk to people who have their minds made
up about top-level poll and survey companies producing "crap."

So carry on.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 09:41:24 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:


But what's really wacky is the idea that they're buying up all the
ammo. It's probably all gun owners.

Of course it's gun owners, the millions of new gun owners who need ammo
for their first time gun purchases.

One interesting comment from a gun
store, published somewhere over the last few weeks, is that ammo
buyers are asking for one caliber; when they can't get it, they ask
for another caliber; some move on to a third or fourth, and when they
can't get that, they start asking for shotgun shells.

This seems to be the work of some "scalpers" trying to speculate on the
market, waiting in line at stores to buy ammo in hopes of reselling it
for a profit. They are soon going to find themselves with ammo they have
to unload at a loss since the market seems to be starting to normalize
again.


How many first-time buyers do you think go out and buy three or four
guns right off the bat? Those are established gun owners, who have at
least several guns.

Nope, those are the scalpers again. There aren't many of them since most
of these scalpers don't have real employment if they can wait in line
every morning at the stores and thus most scalpers have been limited to
less expensive ammunition rather than actual firearms.

It has also been noted that the scalpers who have been buying $900 ARs
at Wal-Mart to try to resell for $1,500 are likely committing felonies
since they are not FFLs and they are purchasing for the express purpose
of reselling rather than for personal use.

All of these anecdotes are interesting, but you're engaging in a lot
of speculation about who is buying the ammo. That's typical of these
discussions. Everybody has a theory, but few have any data to back it
up.

Ultimately nobody has any solid data, and those polls have the least
valid data of them all. Most people don't participate in polls to begin
with, and those that are security conscious and thus more likely to own
firearms are less likely still. The minority gun ownership is
underrepresented since many in those communities get their guns through
illegal sales simply because they don't know how to buy one
legitimately, much like many in those communities have no experience
with fine dining (a subject noted on NPR recently due to a project that
was educating urban youth so they wouldn't be out of their element at a
business lunch).


So we'll wait and see how it shakes out. From some investment reports,
big players are selling gun stocks because they think they're near a
peak and it can't be sustained much longer. But they had a nice run.

I peaked with the first Obummer election and then subsided, peaked again
with Obummer2 and then subsided, now it peaked again with the renewed
attacks by the anti-gun minority and it's showing signs of subsiding
again. Each one of those events has significantly expanded gun
ownership, making the rabid anti-gunners an even smaller minority.

It's clear you've decided what information is convincing to you, Pete,
so there's no point in discussing it further. Once someone dismisses
Pew Research as "crap,"

There has been no Pew research presented, only Pew analysis of the
flawed polls conducted by others.

or swallows the anecdotes and wishful thinking
of people with an interest in propagandizing about trends in gun
ownership even though it flies in the face of one of the largest, most
thorough, and most respected surveys ever done (the General Social
Survey), there's no point.

Sorry bud, that GSS survey is simply flawed, which is one reason it
doesn't square with other polls.


I've been involved in survey research since the '70s, first with TV
license-renewal studies, and then for years with marketing research,
and I know it's fruitless to talk to people who have their minds made
up about top-level poll and survey companies producing "crap."

I'm afraid you're stuck in the mentality that these "social" surveys
follow the same rules as those of product / market research, and this
assumption is deeply flawed. With product / market research those being
polled have no interest in protecting anything private, there are no
personal security implications to whether you use dish detergent X or
watch TV show Y, and those being polled are often compensated for their
time. When you get into "social" research personal security and privacy
come into play and the quality of the data you receive declines
drastically. Many people simply won't participate at all, especially
since "social" research polls usually don't provide compensation, and
for those that do participate they will typically provide less than
truthful information on anything that should be private.

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 10:34:53 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:

On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 09:41:24 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:


Ed Huntress wrote:


But what's really wacky is the idea that they're buying up all the
ammo. It's probably all gun owners.

Of course it's gun owners, the millions of new gun owners who need ammo
for their first time gun purchases.

One interesting comment from a gun
store, published somewhere over the last few weeks, is that ammo
buyers are asking for one caliber; when they can't get it, they ask
for another caliber; some move on to a third or fourth, and when they
can't get that, they start asking for shotgun shells.

This seems to be the work of some "scalpers" trying to speculate on the
market, waiting in line at stores to buy ammo in hopes of reselling it
for a profit. They are soon going to find themselves with ammo they have
to unload at a loss since the market seems to be starting to normalize
again.


How many first-time buyers do you think go out and buy three or four
guns right off the bat? Those are established gun owners, who have at
least several guns.

Nope, those are the scalpers again. There aren't many of them since most
of these scalpers don't have real employment if they can wait in line
every morning at the stores and thus most scalpers have been limited to
less expensive ammunition rather than actual firearms.

It has also been noted that the scalpers who have been buying $900 ARs
at Wal-Mart to try to resell for $1,500 are likely committing felonies
since they are not FFLs and they are purchasing for the express purpose
of reselling rather than for personal use.

All of these anecdotes are interesting, but you're engaging in a lot
of speculation about who is buying the ammo. That's typical of these
discussions. Everybody has a theory, but few have any data to back it
up.

Ultimately nobody has any solid data, and those polls have the least
valid data of them all. Most people don't participate in polls to begin
with, and those that are security conscious and thus more likely to own
firearms are less likely still. The minority gun ownership is
underrepresented since many in those communities get their guns through
illegal sales simply because they don't know how to buy one
legitimately, much like many in those communities have no experience
with fine dining (a subject noted on NPR recently due to a project that
was educating urban youth so they wouldn't be out of their element at a
business lunch).


So we'll wait and see how it shakes out. From some investment reports,
big players are selling gun stocks because they think they're near a
peak and it can't be sustained much longer. But they had a nice run.

I peaked with the first Obummer election and then subsided, peaked again
with Obummer2 and then subsided, now it peaked again with the renewed
attacks by the anti-gun minority and it's showing signs of subsiding
again. Each one of those events has significantly expanded gun
ownership, making the rabid anti-gunners an even smaller minority.

It's clear you've decided what information is convincing to you, Pete,
so there's no point in discussing it further. Once someone dismisses
Pew Research as "crap,"

There has been no Pew research presented, only Pew analysis of the
flawed polls conducted by others.

"The Pew Research Center has tracked gun ownership since 1993, and our
surveys largely confirm the General Social Survey trend. In our
December 1993 survey, 45% reported having a gun in their household; in
early 1994, the GSS found 44% saying they had a gun in their home. A
January 2013 Pew Research Center survey found 33% saying they had a
gun, rifle or pistol in their home, as did 34% in the 2012 wave of the
General Social Survey."

Next time, read it before expounding your conclusions, Ok?


or swallows the anecdotes and wishful thinking
of people with an interest in propagandizing about trends in gun
ownership even though it flies in the face of one of the largest, most
thorough, and most respected surveys ever done (the General Social
Survey), there's no point.

Sorry bud, that GSS survey is simply flawed, which is one reason it
doesn't square with other polls.

See above. It squares quite nicely with Pew's studies. And if you know
how the GSS is seriously "flawed," you can become famous.



I've been involved in survey research since the '70s, first with TV
license-renewal studies, and then for years with marketing research,
and I know it's fruitless to talk to people who have their minds made
up about top-level poll and survey companies producing "crap."

I'm afraid you're stuck in the mentality that these "social" surveys
follow the same rules as those of product / market research, and this
assumption is deeply flawed. With product / market research those being
polled have no interest in protecting anything private, there are no
personal security implications to whether you use dish detergent X or
watch TV show Y, and those being polled are often compensated for their
time. When you get into "social" research personal security and privacy
come into play and the quality of the data you receive declines
drastically. Many people simply won't participate at all, especially
since "social" research polls usually don't provide compensation, and
for those that do participate they will typically provide less than
truthful information on anything that should be private.

Bad guesswork on your part. Studies like the GSS pre-test and
post-test six ways to Sunday. They've thought of, and tested and
corrected for, potential biases that you haven't even considered.

And you run into situations like this: Pro-gun people who talk before
thinking, or who talk before studying, constantly cite the Kleck study
on defensive uses of a gun. For God's sake, that's a self-reported
survey with no pre-test checks, and Kleck estimates up to 2.5 million
defensive uses. It's interesting that his estimates for burglary
defenses work out to more than 100% of the burglaries committed with a
homeowner in the house g, but aside from that, what better evidence
do you need that people are MORE than willing to brag about having a
gun at home? Some of them claimed they've used their guns in defense
of their home dozens of times...

So your comment about my "assumptions" being "deeply flawed" are taken
with a large grain of salt. I'm not making assumptions. I've actually
done the work, both academically and in actual field studies, for
marketing clients and for others who were satisfying government (FCC)
requirements.

How many surveys have you done?

--
Ed Huntress

On Monday, April 15, 2013 10:55:55 AM UTC-5, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 10:34:53 -0500, "Pete C."

wrote:





Ed Huntress wrote:



On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 09:41:24 -0500, "Pete C."

wrote:





Ed Huntress wrote:





But what's really wacky is the idea that they're buying up all the

ammo. It's probably all gun owners.



Of course it's gun owners, the millions of new gun owners who need ammo

for their first time gun purchases.



One interesting comment from a gun

store, published somewhere over the last few weeks, is that ammo

buyers are asking for one caliber; when they can't get it, they ask

for another caliber; some move on to a third or fourth, and when they

can't get that, they start asking for shotgun shells.



This seems to be the work of some "scalpers" trying to speculate on the

market, waiting in line at stores to buy ammo in hopes of reselling it

for a profit. They are soon going to find themselves with ammo they have

to unload at a loss since the market seems to be starting to normalize

again.





How many first-time buyers do you think go out and buy three or four

guns right off the bat? Those are established gun owners, who have at

least several guns.



Nope, those are the scalpers again. There aren't many of them since most

of these scalpers don't have real employment if they can wait in line

every morning at the stores and thus most scalpers have been limited to

less expensive ammunition rather than actual firearms.



It has also been noted that the scalpers who have been buying $900 ARs

at Wal-Mart to try to resell for $1,500 are likely committing felonies

since they are not FFLs and they are purchasing for the express purpose

of reselling rather than for personal use.



All of these anecdotes are interesting, but you're engaging in a lot

of speculation about who is buying the ammo. That's typical of these

discussions. Everybody has a theory, but few have any data to back it

up.



Ultimately nobody has any solid data, and those polls have the least

valid data of them all. Most people don't participate in polls to begin

with, and those that are security conscious and thus more likely to own

firearms are less likely still. The minority gun ownership is

underrepresented since many in those communities get their guns through

illegal sales simply because they don't know how to buy one

legitimately, much like many in those communities have no experience

with fine dining (a subject noted on NPR recently due to a project that

was educating urban youth so they wouldn't be out of their element at a

business lunch).





So we'll wait and see how it shakes out. From some investment reports,

big players are selling gun stocks because they think they're near a

peak and it can't be sustained much longer. But they had a nice run.



I peaked with the first Obummer election and then subsided, peaked again

with Obummer2 and then subsided, now it peaked again with the renewed

attacks by the anti-gun minority and it's showing signs of subsiding

again. Each one of those events has significantly expanded gun

ownership, making the rabid anti-gunners an even smaller minority.



It's clear you've decided what information is convincing to you, Pete,

so there's no point in discussing it further. Once someone dismisses

Pew Research as "crap,"



There has been no Pew research presented, only Pew analysis of the

flawed polls conducted by others.



"The Pew Research Center has tracked gun ownership since 1993, and our

surveys largely confirm the General Social Survey trend. In our

December 1993 survey, 45% reported having a gun in their household; in

early 1994, the GSS found 44% saying they had a gun in their home. A

January 2013 Pew Research Center survey found 33% saying they had a

gun, rifle or pistol in their home, as did 34% in the 2012 wave of the

General Social Survey."



Next time, read it before expounding your conclusions, Ok?





or swallows the anecdotes and wishful thinking

of people with an interest in propagandizing about trends in gun

ownership even though it flies in the face of one of the largest, most

thorough, and most respected surveys ever done (the General Social

Survey), there's no point.



Sorry bud, that GSS survey is simply flawed, which is one reason it

doesn't square with other polls.



See above. It squares quite nicely with Pew's studies. And if you know

how the GSS is seriously "flawed," you can become famous.







I've been involved in survey research since the '70s, first with TV

license-renewal studies, and then for years with marketing research,

and I know it's fruitless to talk to people who have their minds made

up about top-level poll and survey companies producing "crap."



I'm afraid you're stuck in the mentality that these "social" surveys

follow the same rules as those of product / market research, and this

assumption is deeply flawed. With product / market research those being

polled have no interest in protecting anything private, there are no

personal security implications to whether you use dish detergent X or

watch TV show Y, and those being polled are often compensated for their

time. When you get into "social" research personal security and privacy

come into play and the quality of the data you receive declines

drastically. Many people simply won't participate at all, especially

since "social" research polls usually don't provide compensation, and

for those that do participate they will typically provide less than

truthful information on anything that should be private.



Bad guesswork on your part. Studies like the GSS pre-test and

post-test six ways to Sunday. They've thought of, and tested and

corrected for, potential biases that you haven't even considered.



And you run into situations like this: Pro-gun people who talk before

thinking, or who talk before studying, constantly cite the Kleck study

on defensive uses of a gun. For God's sake, that's a self-reported

survey with no pre-test checks, and Kleck estimates up to 2.5 million

defensive uses. It's interesting that his estimates for burglary

defenses work out to more than 100% of the burglaries committed with a

homeowner in the house g, but aside from that, what better evidence

do you need that people are MORE than willing to brag about having a

gun at home? Some of them claimed they've used their guns in defense

of their home dozens of times...



So your comment about my "assumptions" being "deeply flawed" are taken

with a large grain of salt. I'm not making assumptions. I've actually

done the work, both academically and in actual field studies, for

marketing clients and for others who were satisfying government (FCC)

requirements.



How many surveys have you done?



--

Ed Huntress

Ed,
How you be so very SURE of these surveys... If oyu haven't physically went to a local sportng store, gun store, etc.. And actually asked them, if THEY are getting in all this ammo?

You seem convinced that ALL of it is getting snatched up by hoarders.
No outlet that I can find is getting in ANY significant amount.

They cannot get it!
Go, ask, find out first person.

Your sacred research report is pointless, if it doesn't reflect physical realty, but only represents the party line point of view.

Most sectors of the country, the shops are NOT getting it in.
No one can be hoarding it if it is NOT available.

Tell us what YOU find out locally, not what your researchers tell you to believe.

On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 11:40:46 -0700 (PDT), Cross-Slide
wrote:

On Monday, April 15, 2013 10:55:55 AM UTC-5, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 10:34:53 -0500, "Pete C."

wrote:





Ed Huntress wrote:



On Mon, 15 Apr 2013 09:41:24 -0500, "Pete C."

wrote:





Ed Huntress wrote:





But what's really wacky is the idea that they're buying up all the

ammo. It's probably all gun owners.



Of course it's gun owners, the millions of new gun owners who need ammo

for their first time gun purchases.



One interesting comment from a gun

store, published somewhere over the last few weeks, is that ammo

buyers are asking for one caliber; when they can't get it, they ask

for another caliber; some move on to a third or fourth, and when they

can't get that, they start asking for shotgun shells.



This seems to be the work of some "scalpers" trying to speculate on the

market, waiting in line at stores to buy ammo in hopes of reselling it

for a profit. They are soon going to find themselves with ammo they have

to unload at a loss since the market seems to be starting to normalize

again.





How many first-time buyers do you think go out and buy three or four

guns right off the bat? Those are established gun owners, who have at

least several guns.



Nope, those are the scalpers again. There aren't many of them since most

of these scalpers don't have real employment if they can wait in line

every morning at the stores and thus most scalpers have been limited to

less expensive ammunition rather than actual firearms.



It has also been noted that the scalpers who have been buying $900 ARs

at Wal-Mart to try to resell for $1,500 are likely committing felonies

since they are not FFLs and they are purchasing for the express purpose

of reselling rather than for personal use.



All of these anecdotes are interesting, but you're engaging in a lot

of speculation about who is buying the ammo. That's typical of these

discussions. Everybody has a theory, but few have any data to back it

up.



Ultimately nobody has any solid data, and those polls have the least

valid data of them all. Most people don't participate in polls to begin

with, and those that are security conscious and thus more likely to own

firearms are less likely still. The minority gun ownership is

underrepresented since many in those communities get their guns through

illegal sales simply because they don't know how to buy one

legitimately, much like many in those communities have no experience

with fine dining (a subject noted on NPR recently due to a project that

was educating urban youth so they wouldn't be out of their element at a

business lunch).





So we'll wait and see how it shakes out. From some investment reports,

big players are selling gun stocks because they think they're near a

peak and it can't be sustained much longer. But they had a nice run.



I peaked with the first Obummer election and then subsided, peaked again

with Obummer2 and then subsided, now it peaked again with the renewed

attacks by the anti-gun minority and it's showing signs of subsiding

again. Each one of those events has significantly expanded gun

ownership, making the rabid anti-gunners an even smaller minority.



It's clear you've decided what information is convincing to you, Pete,

so there's no point in discussing it further. Once someone dismisses

Pew Research as "crap,"



There has been no Pew research presented, only Pew analysis of the

flawed polls conducted by others.



"The Pew Research Center has tracked gun ownership since 1993, and our

surveys largely confirm the General Social Survey trend. In our

December 1993 survey, 45% reported having a gun in their household; in

early 1994, the GSS found 44% saying they had a gun in their home. A

January 2013 Pew Research Center survey found 33% saying they had a

gun, rifle or pistol in their home, as did 34% in the 2012 wave of the

General Social Survey."



Next time, read it before expounding your conclusions, Ok?





or swallows the anecdotes and wishful thinking

of people with an interest in propagandizing about trends in gun

ownership even though it flies in the face of one of the largest, most

thorough, and most respected surveys ever done (the General Social

Survey), there's no point.



Sorry bud, that GSS survey is simply flawed, which is one reason it

doesn't square with other polls.



See above. It squares quite nicely with Pew's studies. And if you know

how the GSS is seriously "flawed," you can become famous.







I've been involved in survey research since the '70s, first with TV

license-renewal studies, and then for years with marketing research,

and I know it's fruitless to talk to people who have their minds made

up about top-level poll and survey companies producing "crap."



I'm afraid you're stuck in the mentality that these "social" surveys

follow the same rules as those of product / market research, and this

assumption is deeply flawed. With product / market research those being

polled have no interest in protecting anything private, there are no

personal security implications to whether you use dish detergent X or

watch TV show Y, and those being polled are often compensated for their

time. When you get into "social" research personal security and privacy

come into play and the quality of the data you receive declines

drastically. Many people simply won't participate at all, especially

since "social" research polls usually don't provide compensation, and

for those that do participate they will typically provide less than

truthful information on anything that should be private.



Bad guesswork on your part. Studies like the GSS pre-test and

post-test six ways to Sunday. They've thought of, and tested and

corrected for, potential biases that you haven't even considered.



And you run into situations like this: Pro-gun people who talk before

thinking, or who talk before studying, constantly cite the Kleck study

on defensive uses of a gun. For God's sake, that's a self-reported

survey with no pre-test checks, and Kleck estimates up to 2.5 million

defensive uses. It's interesting that his estimates for burglary

defenses work out to more than 100% of the burglaries committed with a

homeowner in the house g, but aside from that, what better evidence

do you need that people are MORE than willing to brag about having a

gun at home? Some of them claimed they've used their guns in defense

of their home dozens of times...



So your comment about my "assumptions" being "deeply flawed" are taken

with a large grain of salt. I'm not making assumptions. I've actually

done the work, both academically and in actual field studies, for

marketing clients and for others who were satisfying government (FCC)

requirements.



How many surveys have you done?



--

Ed Huntress

Ed,
How you be so very SURE of these surveys... If oyu haven't physically went to a local sportng store, gun store, etc.. And actually asked them, if THEY are getting in all this ammo?

I've called every gun shop within about 40 miles, and they aren't
getting the ammo they usually get. But when they do, people are lined
up to buy it, they say. They are hoarding, as several gun shops who
know their customers personally have confirmed.

Now, THAT's anecdotal information, too. I haven't seen any studies
about it. And the production manager I talked to at Remington said she
doesn't know what's blocking any of it at retail. She says they're
shipping more to their wholesalers than ever before. She did speculate
that the wholesalers are rationing it to their retailers, but she
didn't know for sure.

I have talked to Dick's Sporting Goods since then, and all they can
tell me is that they get a shipment in on Friday morning and it's gone
before noon. They're the biggest gun and ammo dealer in my immediate
area and they should know, nationwide, what's happening. But I haven't
reached the right people. As a member of the press I've contacted
their press-relations people and I'm waiting to see if they'll get
back to me with an answer.

If I hear anything on-the-record, I'll let you know.

--
Ed Huntress



You seem convinced that ALL of it is getting snatched up by hoarders.
No outlet that I can find is getting in ANY significant amount.



They cannot get it!
Go, ask, find out first person.

Your sacred research report is pointless, if it doesn't reflect physical realty, but only represents the party line point of view.

Most sectors of the country, the shops are NOT getting it in.
No one can be hoarding it if it is NOT available.

Tell us what YOU find out locally, not what your researchers tell you to believe.