Several factors appear to be driving the ammunition shortage, among them:

• Re-election of Democratic president. Some people believe his second and final term in hand, President Barack Obama feels free to pursue an anti-gun agenda.

• The December slaying of 20 children at Newtown, Conn., and political fallout at the state and national levels.

• Large bids during the last 10 months by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, totaling 1.6 billon rounds or more. All of that ammunition might not be purchased and delivered during the next five years, but news of it reverberates, increasing levels of anxiety that ammunition will be hard to obtain.

• In Illinois, a widespread belief that anti-gun Chicago Democrats will drive firearm and ammunition taxation laws.

• Also in Illinois, the possibility that a court-ordered civilian carry law might come to pass. There is a perceived need for ammunition for antici-pated classes, practice and carry.

Results

• Panic buying and hoarding: The national shortage might, to a degree, be self-perpetuating in that people are scooping up all the ammunition they can find and holding onto it for fear of not being able to obtain it in the future.

• Speculation: Some people are grabbing what they can or reaching into their stocks to re-sell at inflated prices. A bulk canister of 1,400 Remington .22LR rounds that was locally available at about $60 before the crunch is advertised at up to $200 on online auction sites. A bulk pack of 550 Federal .22LR rounds that had been selling locally for about $22 is advertised at $80. Magazines for common .22 rifles are moving at two to four times their manufacturer-suggested prices when they can be found.

• A civilian armory: Some segments of American society, easily researchable on the Internet, appear fearful of an extra-constitutional government that might direct troops or police against lawful citizens. Some analysts believe that whether openly or quietly, America is arming itself.

(13) comments

WTF

Welcome commenter! Sorry it took so long for me to respond. I hadn't realized anyone was commenting on this topic until I accidently clicked on it and noticed your reply.

I'm sorry you feel my opinion is solely based on propaganda; to help dispel that I’ll provide a few facts. To begin with I spoke about Obama’s record regarding guns. The only legislation the President has signed since he took office in 2008 has expanded gun laws, allowing loaded guns in national parks and unloaded weapons stored in luggage on Amtrak trains. In many of his public addresses he speaks of finding common ground between gun owners and those that want more restrictions.

As to my assertion that government confiscation of guns defies common sense; that is my opinion based on logic. There are an estimated 310 million guns and 276 million gun owners in this country. The logistics of determining who owns what is daunting to say the least. Not to mention determining how the confiscation process would work. I suspect there would be few if any one willing to take the job of gun confiscator. I know of no serious proposal (an actual plan not rhetoric) to confiscate guns. If you are aware of one please share I would be interested to read the details.

As far as your statement regarding the gun industry being a small business that has no political influence I would simply point out gun manufacturing is a multi-billion dollar industry with close ties to the NRA. Over the past few years the gun industry has funneled millions of dollars to the NRA via that organizations corporate partnership program. An NRA promotional brochure about the corporate partnership program, states “this program is geared towards your company’s corporate interests.”

When it comes to the NRA I admit to having mixed feelings. I like a lot of the safety and education programs they provide, but I feel the leadership, namely Wayne La Pierre, has a self-serving agenda. Mr. La Pierre is simply a Washington politician whose primary concern is money and power. He is paid almost $1 million per year in salary and who knows how much he makes under the table by using his power to influence public opinion in a way that is financially beneficial to the gun manufacturers. It’s easy to see the financial windfall the gun manufactures reap every time Mr. La Pierre declares the government wants to ban or confiscate guns.

Like most Washington politicians Mr. La Pierre is failing to represent his constituents’ interests. Most NRA members, 75%, favor a universal background check, yet Mr. La Pierre declares a no compromise, status quo, position. The majority of Americans, 90%, also favor universal background checks as well as many of the other ideas proposed by the President. My fear is the public will see the NRA as the voice of all gun owners, which it isn’t, and there will be a backlash against all of us resulting in more restrictions than necessary.

JItterBug

Those who are buying all those extra guns and are throwing their money away. No soldier is coming to your door.

Waste of money

commenter

Wow, I had to sign up just to reply to WTF. You seriously must be with the Obama Administration. Point by point: Who has to gain? Every time there is a firearms tragedy the usual liberal suspects show up on every camera available and call for gun control. They seek to gain. Talk about beating a loud drum? Again, check out the usual suspects on Capital Hill. And you seek to portray defensive responses as gaining. It is such a cliche'd propaganda tactic it would be comical if not Goebbels in it's attempt.

Next, please, PLEASE check out Obama's long held beliefs on gun control. He is not a dumb politician. But yes, please check out his firmly held beliefs on gun control.

The government wanting to confiscate gun defies common sense? Diane Feinstein, "Yes, if I could, ban them all. Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them in." What ambiguity do you see there?

Funny thing, you are almost right on with your last paragraph. You just inserted the Goebbels thing. Accuse the other side of that which you are the worst offender. But let's look at who you accuse.

The NRA derives it's power solely from it's membership. The NRA is an organization that represents 4 million members. If ever there was a lobby representing the people, the NRA is it. It is truly the first and oldest civil rights organization.

The "gun manufacturers" are truly small businesses. If you combined all the manufacturers in to one large company, and then added every other component of gun business operations down to the local retailer, you would have a business that still would not rank in the Fortune 500. So do not ever claim that industry, much less any component of it, has any political power. That is just propaganda.

WTF

This is just like anything else. If you want to find the reson for it jus follow ther money. Who has the most to gain from the current hysteria regarding gun rights? The primary benificaries are the gun manufacturers and the NRA. Who has been beating the drum the loudest to keep the hysteria going; again the NRA supported by the gun manufacturers.

These two entities are playing the American people.They wrap themselves in the flag and purport to be defenders of our righta all the while reaping the financial benefits of the firestorm they have created.

To be certain 2nd ammendment right are a legitimate issue, however the idea that Obama has an anti-gun agenda doesn't align with his record. Also the idea that some how the government is going to confiscate guns defies common sense.

It's a shame the American people are so easily mislead. An honest debate on guns will never take place as long as the NRA and gun manaufacturers continue to control the issue for their own benefit. I guess in the end this issue is no different than any other. Those with money and power will manipulate it for their own selfish ends and society be damned.

commenter

Wow, I had to sign up just to reply to WTF. You seriously must be with the Obama Administration. Point by point: Who has to gain? Every time there is a firearms tragedy the usual liberal suspects show up on every camera available and call for gun control. They seek to gain. Talk about beating a loud drum? Again, check out the usual suspects on Capital Hill. And you seek to portray defensive responses as gaining. It is such a cliche'd propaganda tactic it would be comical if not Goebbels in it's attempt.

Next, please, PLEASE check out Obama's long held beliefs on gun control. He is not a dumb politician. But yes, please check out his firmly held beliefs on gun control.

The government wanting to confiscate gun defies common sense? Diane Feinstein, "Yes, if I could, ban them all. Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them in." What ambiguity do you see there?

Funny thing, you are almost right on with your last paragraph. You just inserted the Goebbels thing. Accuse the other side of that which you are the worst offender. But let's look at who you accuse.

The NRA derives it's power solely from it's membership. The NRA is an organization that represents 4 million members. If ever there was a lobby representing the people, the NRA is it. It is truly the first and oldest civil rights organization.

The "gun manufacturers" are truly small businesses. If you combined all the manufacturers in to one large company, and then added every other component of gun business operations down to the local retailer, you would have a business that still would not rank in the Fortune 500. So do not ever claim that industry, much less any component of it, has any political power. That is just propaganda.

MickeeD
MickeeD

Why do you call it Obama's record on gun control? What is your definition of the term?

Diana Feinstein was expressing her opinion.

What is the Goebbels thing?

The NRA management and board of directors does not represent the NRA. Several polls have indicated NRA members for example favor universal background checks.

Yeah. The gun manufacturers are small potatoes compared to Lockheed Martin. General Dynamics, Boeing and General Electric. What's your point?

StraightTalk

Or, Solendra.

useurnoggin

Also, the NRA probably doesn't have close to as many members as it claims to have. [http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/01/nra-membership-numbers] And, its membership doesn't necessarily support its political stance, or any stance at all. When you incentivize membership the way the NRA does, people will join for all kinds of reasons. That doesn't mean they are even particularly passionate about guns. And even the ones who are passionate about guns don't necessarily support the stances taken by the NRA leadership. Data suggests that the majority of NRA members do support certain measures of gun control, which the NRA fiercely opposes.

And, the gun industry is absolutely making a lot of money off this hysteria. Obama's "gun grab" is the best thing to happen to their industry in decades! Every time a Democrat mentions guns, they make money, because paranoid people freak out and go spend hundreds more dollars on another one. The NRA's membership is probably directly positively correlated to the same. And the industry absolutely gives the NRA financial motivation to keep up its political hollering. Comparing them to bigger companies is irrelevant and fallacious - it's still money, so the profit motive is still there. [http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-industry-funds-nra-2013-1]

jtrookielt

I don't have any doubt that Americans are arming themselves. There has never been sustained purchasing of firearms by the American population on this scale, not even during WWII, when it was widely believed that a Japanese invasion was possible, if not likely.
Unfortunately, this signifies the frightening amount of distrust in the government and the discontent and division within the country today. In my opinion, if the president doesn't miraculously become the uniter he billed himself to be, and quickly, the distinct possibility of civil unrest, if not all out rebellion, is quite likely.

useurnoggin

Perhaps during WWII, people were more rational and realized that attempting to defend themselves against an actual national military with small arms was lunacy, and therefore didn't bother hysterically buying guns.

Midge

The only way he'll unite the country is by turning white and changing his name to Bob Smith or Bill Jones

Community Organizer

This is the type of ignorance that enables hate to flourish today. It's his policies. It's who he is in his ideology that causes people to fear. With a reprobate mind, or judicial blindness, you may strain at learning the truth but may be forever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of truth.

Community Organizer

This is the first time in the history of the nation where citizens fear their own government. WWII we were mostly united (some east coast liberals still had pipe dreams about Hitler and Stalin) even though some feared Japan might invade. Today we see chaos and anarchy as society crumbles as a result of the assault on American institutions by an individual that does not have the shared love and history of the American Experiment.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.