SACR said:
I don't think you understand the purpose of the government regulating commerce here.
Let's use food as an example.
If our supply chain gets screwed up and there is a food shortage, people will be willing to pay more for the scarce food that remains. So are the people who can't afford the new higher price going to simply sit by and starve? No, they're going to begin robbing and attacking anyone who has food, and society will break down into lawlessness.
You think this is unfettered government intervention, this is protection to ensure we don't see the break down of civilization.
It's not like they're out there regulating the price of Gucci sunglasses, we're only talking about necessities. And yes, guns and ammo are necessities.
If you have to resort to hyperbole about people starving then you've already lost this argument.
Thanks to the free market, there are literally thousands, if not tens of thousands of commercial and individual sellers willing to sell that same ammo to you at a competitive price. If you get your way and we institute price ceilings, it is a FACT that supply will dry up/some or all people stop legally selling/no new manufacturers will enter the market. If what you want is more supply so that you don't "starve", then this is the worst possible policy.
It is a fact that price ceilings create black markets. People are still going to try to illegally sell and buy ammo for the market rate if the government outlaws it, whether it be by word of mouth, websites, dark web, etc.
It's almost like people haven't paid attention to empty shelves in Venezuela, or have forgotten the utter misery and failing of Gosplan price setting in the USSR. Who is the all-wise expert who will tell you and me the "fair" price for this ammo?
If you think the government should be creating price ceilings for food and ammo now, why not all the time? They are necessities after all. Why not price ceilings for rent and houses? Clothing, toiletries, internet service, medicine, bottled water, electricity and cars?