View Full Version : PreBan Rifles, honestly a good investment?

November 13, 1998, 02:34 PM
Hi folks, This is my first post to firing line; although I've enjoyed reading everyone's comments for a couple of weeks now.

This question is one that my shooting buddy (who is also an accountant)have been kicking around. Are pre-ban military weapons a sound financial investment? Buying pre-ban rilfes certainly makes sense for those that enjoy them -- but do they stand on there own as strictly as an investment vehicle?

It may be that there are enough "pre" and "post" ban guns out there to keep enthusiasts happy and prices stable for years to come. Then again, the value of pre-ban guns may go up if the supply shrinks relative to demand?
Guns values have often kept up with inflation and we all like to think that our collections are increasing in value; but are they really? Are guns generally, and pre-ban rifles in particular, a fundamentally sound investment?

If a non-gun owning friend or relative turned to you for advice on buying a few pre-ban rifles, strictly as an investment; with no intention of ever firing them -- would you advise them to stock up on pre-ban HK's or suggest they put their money in municipal bonds?

In recent years: The bull market in stocks has returned as much as 29% annually, government bonds around 7%; real estate returns are mixed and gold has fallen in value. What, in your opinion, is the "investment outlook" for guns and in particular pre-ban rifles over the next five years?

My shooting accountant and I would welcome any opinions on the subject!

Best regards, Kurt

Rob Pincus
November 13, 1998, 03:15 PM
I have heard this discussed a few times. My opinion is that while the prices on these things does go up, thier value is artificially increased by market presure which is created by shifts in the political climate.
Unlike oil or gold, which also can shift due to political pressure, there is no consumption requirement or intrinsic value to an "assualt weapon."

IMHO, Buy firearms to protect yourself, your family and your property first. Then buy them becuase you like them.
Some people suggest buying property or gold that you can rely on if/when the stock market falls. I recommend buying a good rifle that you can rely on if/when the social contract falls.

Jeff White
November 13, 1998, 07:12 PM
We've got a couple of Congresses to go through before we find out if pre-bans are good investments.

The "Assault Weapon" ban sunsets in 2004. Who can say what the political climate will be then. (I know what I'm hoping, but that belongs in another forum) Congress will have to vote to make it permanent or extend it.

If it's allowed to sunset, there will be a lot of people with weapons they have $1000.00 or better in that are now worth $400-600. Also there is a limited market for military style semii automatic rifles. Current prices have moved a lot of people out of the market now.

And then there is the possibility of even more draconian laws. Imagine having to turn in that HK91 you paid $2500.00 for for token or no compensation.

So I would invest my investment income in other things and by weapons for self defense and personal enjoyment.


ranger dave
November 25, 2005, 11:01 PM
buy them to shoot not to look at

November 25, 2005, 11:08 PM
Um, wow. A full 7+ years old. Gentlemen I think we have a new record here.

Did ya think they were still waiting for more input?:D

November 25, 2005, 11:15 PM

Anyways...Now, in hindsight, would it have been a good idea?

And this I dont understand: Right now in 2005, what makes a AR-15 made in 93 better than one made in 2005? Why is "pre-ban" more desirable than post?

November 25, 2005, 11:15 PM
double. Sorry. "There seems to be a problem with The Firingline Database"

November 26, 2005, 08:38 AM
And this I dont understand: Right now in 2005, what makes a AR-15 made in 93 better than one made in 2005? Why is "pre-ban" more desirable than post?

IINM, nothing; it's not. You have pre-ban, during-ban, and post-end-of-ban rifles - 3 categories. None are really worth more than others NOW. At some point in the future, it's conceivable that the "during-ban" rifles that were during the ban NOT legal for citizens - those marked "law enforcement only" - will be worth more, strictly due to collector value (rarity), not features. But not the "during-ban" regular castrated rifles (ones without 2 or more evil features).

November 26, 2005, 08:50 AM
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm This was an interesting blast from the past!

November 26, 2005, 01:27 PM
So thats the only benefit to a pre-ban or during ban? Is the LEO/Mil markings?

I admit, its kinda neat, and I trust the AR15/M16 mags that say Military only on them more.

Cant a company just put that on thier product though and most people wouldnt know the difference?