TexasCHLforum.com

Couldn't find it so....

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/break ... n=ttagfeed

... Free trade...

jmorris wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 11:31 am Couldn't find it so....

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/break ... n=ttagfeed

So...when I find Cheaper than Dirt has high prices, I just don't buy from them.

Would a Dem being elected qualify as an emergency?

Or defunding police an emergency?

Or Dem Judges releasing killers an emergency?

Or BLM antifa rioting an emergency?

Maybe he is right about price gouging.

ELB wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 12:36 pm So...when I find Cheaper than Dirt has high prices, I just don't buy from them.

I think the kicker here might fall under Chapter 17 of the Business and Commerce Code, dealing with trade practices during a declared disaster...which declared state we were under when the AG got a boatload of complaints about CTD earlier this year.

I'm with ya. I simply stopped even considering them as a vendor back around 2006 or so. I'll just shop elsewhere. But if their bizarro pricing practices ran afoul of the Business and Commerce Code, then I'm all for the AG going after them. They're an embarrassment to Texas anyway.

Rafe wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 12:50 pm
I think the kicker here might fall under Chapter 17 of the Business and Commerce Code, dealing with trade practices during a declared disaster...which declared state we were under when the AG got a boatload of complaints about CTD earlier this year.

I'm with ya. I simply stopped even considering them as a vendor back around 2006 or so. I'll just shop elsewhere. But if their bizarro pricing practices ran afoul of the Business and Commerce Code, then I'm all for the AG going after them. They're an embarrassment to Texas anyway.

If they've violated laws or regulations...get 'em!

I'm not a fan of "price gouging laws". They only serve to limit the quantity of a good that is supplied (available to people who need it) at the exact moment that people need that good the most.

Consider a hurricane that hits an area of the U.S. An out of work guy is sitting at his house in another state where water, generators, and other things are plentiful. He is incented by a profit motive to get some cash together and drive a truckload of these essential items to the impacted area. Take away that incentive and fewer of these goods shows up in the devastated area. Sure there will be good Samaritans who will take some items there and sell them at cost, or even give them away. But they would do so regardless since they are not motivated by profit. The only impact that "gouging" laws have is to provide fewer generators to the people who need them the most.

That said, a temporary spike in demand for guns and ammo due to political fears is not quite the same as a natural disaster. And I really, really, dislike CTD on general principles, so I'm a bit torn about my feelings in this particular case, lol.

I quit buying from CTD in 2014 after they closed their Ft. Worth store. actually I hadn't really bought anything of value long before then.

IANAL nor am I a fan of CTD, but I don’t see how anyone can claim that they are price gouging. Soccerdad1995 referenced supplies needed after a natural disaster, bottled water, building supplies etc, that those affected would need to survive. While CTD may have priced items ridiculously high, no one was forced to pay those prices, and the AG will be hard pressed to show that those items were necessary for survival, to those affected by a pandemic.
Now if people ordered things at one price and were charged higher prices when billed, that is a horse of a different color.
CTD is not the only place where guns and ammo can be purchased, and all prices have gone up drastically, due to high demand and low supply. I have never purchased anything from CTD, and don’t plan on doing so, but I don’t believe they have committed a crime, from what I have read. JMHO

Jusme wrote: ↑Thu Dec 17, 2020 9:36 pm Now if people ordered things at one price and were charged higher prices when billed, that is a horse of a different color.

There's the rub. I've read several stories of people who ordered something only to have their order cancelled. Then, a day or two later, the same item is offered for sale (in stock) for a much higher price than the cancelled order.

I am no fan of CTD. Never purchased anything from them. I always laughed at their prices. I figured it was their right to sell their products for what ever price they felt they could get for them. I actually feel anyone who would cry to the AG about their pricing is a worm who probably should not be buying or owning a firearm in the first place. We all worry about the government getting all up in our lives and then we invite them in when it is to our benefit. If a person does not like the prices, don't buy from them. End of story.

Yep, I just dodge CTD these days. I too am not a fan when government steps in to regulate / investigate a non-essential entity (sorry, as much as I’m a gun dude, guns and ammo are not the same as groceries, food or fuel)...
In short, I favor AG stepping in to investigate food/fuel price gouging. Guns and ammo, not so much. Free market (those of us in here) will be a whole lot more efficient and effective in punitively punishing CTD for their shenanigans. My $.00000002....

I may be wrong here, but I believe some previous AG opinions have flagged ammunition and firearms as necessities in declared disasters. This would be consistent with GC Chapter 433 "State of Emergency," Section 433.0045, that Charles and others fought hard to get added during the 2007 session. "A directive issued under this chapter may not authorize the seizure or confiscation of any firearm or ammunition from an individual who is lawfully carrying or possessing the firearm or ammunition."

In a quick search, I can find a couple of opinions subsequent to 2007 that seem to support an interpretation that firearms and ammunition are just as essential as "building materials, construction tools, or another necessity." Which stance I very much personally support.

One AG opinion that may be germane, KP-0296, is from March 2020 to the House Ways and Means Committee, spawned specifically by the pandemic. It points in large part to Section 229.001 of the Local Government Code, and notes that it limits local officials' powers to address disaster situations; in this instance specifically that "a municipality may not adopt regulations relating to commerce in firearms, air guns, knives, ammunition, or firearm or air gun supplies or accessories."

I can't even spell the word "lawyer" so don't trust me, but I'm thinking that State of Texas's stance is that, in a declared disaster, firearms and ammunition are included under the Business and Commerce Code, Title 2, Chapter 17 "Deceptive Trade Practices," Section 17.46 (27):

27) subject to Section 17.4625, taking advantage of a disaster declared by the governor under Chapter 418, Government Code, or by the president of the United States by:

(A) selling or leasing fuel, food, medicine, lodging, building materials, construction tools, or another necessity at an exorbitant or excessive price; or

(B) demanding an exorbitant or excessive price in connection with the sale or lease of fuel, food, medicine, lodging, building materials, construction tools, or another necessity;

I know I, for one, sure consider firearms and ammunition as necessities in almost any disaster certainly on par with construction tools. I can't find the actual text of the court documents filed against Cheaper Than Dirt, but if the AG has over 4,000 sales cited, it ain't like a motel raising room rates 10% or something. I support laissez-faire capitalism, and that's why the huge supply and demand price increases we see right now are simply the marketplace. The prices are what they are. I've paid some recently, and mostly chosen not to. My prerogative.

But if Texas's legal opinion is that firearms and ammo are necessities as indicated under BCC Title 2, doing what CTD did and tripling the price of ammo just hours after the Governor declares Texas in a state of disaster shouldn't be allowed to stand.

Also, I can't fact-check this, but one source quotes the AG as saying in the filing: "Making the manual real-time price changes caused confusion for consumers because the prices consumers saw on the website pages when selecting items for purchase were different than the prices that appeared in the final check-out cart." Evidently CTD was making on-the-fly price increases right after the disaster declaration with the result that consumers were seeing something like a bait-and-switch: place a box of 9mm in your shopping cart from a details page that said it was $20, and when you got to the shopping cart it showed up as being $60. And I'm sure people didn't notice and just clicked "Okay."

I don't think we'll know the actual details unless/until we can find the court documents. Bottom line, though, I don't think this is only about stupidly exorbitant prices. The state doesn't care a whit if I can get $2,000 for my used, basic Ruger 10/22. But in order for Paxton to file with over 4,000 cited sales instances, it sure seems likely that CTD was doing much more than the simple price spiking after Sandy Hook.