It wouldn't happen because even at that price there is no profit to be had, If a private citizen did what you proposed they would have to pay retail + transportation + distribution.
If a corporation did this they may be able to turn a hefty profit and it could be considered gouging. But you're still stuck in the situation that these people do not have access to money, that coupled with government regulations and public outcry at the companies taking advantage of the situation would be a PR nightmare. Which in the long run would hurt their profits.
You never answered the hypothetical question. The point of the question was not "can someone do this for $7 " it was "is it ok for someone to do this."
Furthermore, public outcry is hardly a good indicator of morality or of measuring an effective economic system. the "public" as a rule is stupid and even greedier than the greedy corporations.
Gasoline is not a basic need. In all but the most desperate situations, basic needs can be filled with effort and obtaining them is not insurmountable for an able bodied person/family. Anything else is a luxury. Just ask the third world. Americans as a rule are so spoiled they think they think TV, cigarettes, child care, schooling, etc etc etc are rights and needs. They expect to be able to buy everything they "need" with minimal effort.
Capitalism is the principle that if you want something, you have to earn it. While I agree that the govt needs to prevent or punish issues of fraud, theft, and slavery, pretty much everything else should be left to the market.
Regulation causes more disparity than it helps, often at the expense of the producers or overall economy. Corruption runs rampant in the govt and many regulations are made to help buddies and hurt the others. In the case of our current administration; hurt the producers to gain support of the looters. As with the "law" in general, regulations are selectively applied. how is that "fair?"