Several Major Gun Manufacturers Refusing Business With Law Enforcement In New York

reply to post by newcovenant


Its not going to hurt anyone. Like you said, they'll just buy their guns else where. The point of it is to draw attention to the issue, and apparently it has worked.

Might be bs cause I was at the gun show in Middletown ny and half the guns (more like all the guns) were for law enforcements

They over priced guns on purpose to not sell to the public

Basically cops can buy big high powered rifles but is the people can't

It started with Olympic Arms (separate thread) which shows "the power of an idea whose time has come" (Voltaire). That idea being a basic equal protection under the law (civilians and law enforcement)....if you can call fully auto and select fire weapons vs semi-autos as "equal".

Originally posted by roadgravel
If people do not need certain weapons and capacity magazines for their own defense, neither do the police. Sell them the same firearms as the average person receives. These new control issues seem to be based on the point of unnecessary to possess.

At the current rate they're going at, if they did that police would be limited to carrying a pepper shaker and a feather duster.

Originally posted by ObjectZero

Originally posted by roadgravel
If people do not need certain weapons and capacity magazines for their own defense, neither do the police. Sell them the same firearms as the average person receives. These new control issues seem to be based on the point of unnecessary to possess.

At the current rate they're going at, if they did that police would be limited to carrying a pepper shaker and a feather duster.

edit on 20-2-2013 by ObjectZero because: grammer

I can see it now...Cops armed with cross bows and sling shots

most gun manufacturers will go out of business any way.

soon they only business left in america
will be the slaves...

reply to post by nighthawk1954


good.

ridiculous laws need this sort of solidarity in opposition.

Looks like money is not the driving force behind the second amendment advocates as insisted by the gun grabbers.

Looks like gun manufacturers are civic minded first and foremost....

reply to post by intrepid


Nope. The Budget for most LEA is bare bones enough without the added cost of purchasing a firearm twice the cost and then import fees on top of that.

Even with firearms manufactures like Glock and FH being sold here in the States, they don't come directly from the manufacture. They have to go through an Importer.

Here is to hoping that the Importers start the ban as well.



I say hell yes to those that are Banning these Moronic States.
I will be spending my money with those companies.

reply to post by Sly1one


There are typical Liberal/Progressive strongholds of the major Cities that the State Govt cites as their "Roaring support".

This is what those states want anyway, right?

How can a state run full force toward pseudo, defacto and real bans then cry and whine when a manufacturer gives them exactly what they want?

80 million shopping gun owners versus less than 1 million cops. I know where I'd be marketing my product.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere


How can a state run full force toward pseudo, defacto and real bans then cry and whine when a manufacturer gives them exactly what they want?

Macman"s number 1 rule...It is ALWAYS different for Liberals. ALWAYS.

Originally posted by intrepid
Gotta get them from somewhere. I guess "Made in America" doesn't mean much anymore. In this economy it should. No prob for them though. They can always buy off the Italians or Belgians. Silly issue.

Good buy them from Belgium.LOL

I really got to respect these gun makers for drawing a line in the sand, you on the other hand ???????
The only thing I see as silly is you.

Silly the sheep. How dear. I bet you wont think its all that silly when the only thing you'll be shooting off is your mouth. Wont be all that "silly"then will it?

Perhaps this will shake out.


They cant get them anymore in the USA because the manufactures told them to nick off.

So they order from a over seas supplier. Say Belgium.

Now an insider in a foreign country has access to the dies and forging presses etc.

They integrate a few "flaws" into the manufacturing. After say 200 rounds the barrels fly apart in in doing so, blind, cut, maim, disfigure and discombobulate the user.

Lets hope they order 10k of them in a pop, clean out the bugeted account at the same time as sell them junk.

Ding Ding

Baaaahhhhhhhh Bbbbbahhhhhh sheeepy

Makes me nutso when whan a group of real people who are trying to defend EVERYONE'S rights and takes a stand, at financial cost and someone strolls along and calls it silly. WTF? silly?

Who are you?

The manufactures could well be playing right into the hands of those that would take their business, probably connected to the politicians pushing the laws.

It was probably always a possibility that the manufacturers would retaliate in this way, so there will be someone waiting to profit from their move - there always is.

this is my official response to this that will appear on tacticsplus.com later today



Every day the anti gun / pro gun battle rages I see people taking increasingly extreme stances on these issues (like everything else in politics). However its the behavior of some in the pro gun community that is starting to look like cutting off their nose to spite their face.

Today as one instance of that I see a report that Olympic Arms will no longer sell to law enforcement in New York state. And that Cheaper than Dirt will not sell any products to law enforcement that can't be sold to civilians.

In both cases there is a question about what actual effect it would have on their current business with law enforcement. As well as the possibility of being a publicity stunt to both repair damages to their brands like CTD's price gouging of items like PMAG's or possibly in Olympics case trying to gain back some brand recognition. But aside from that possibility both statements are ludicrous.

Selling less firearms does nothing good for anyone in this instance, it just reduces a companies viability and negatively effects the supply side contractors jobs and revenue as well. For what?

Law enforcement doesn't make the rules, it enforces them. And for every Olympic there is 10 others like H&K that could case less. Cops will still get their guns. Just at a higher cost to tax payers. And Politicians could care less, they will just increase taxes to cover them if need be. Or the Defense Department through DHS will just buy it for them. And they certainly aren't shy about wasting spending large amounts of tax payer money on military grade weaponry for law enforcement.

And now today I am hearing about Comcast no longer allowing firearms related advertising on its new purchase of NBC properties. The first thing I see is endless remarks about people switching to some other random service or worse yet none at all. Obviously turning off ones access to local news stations reporting on these very issues is a genius move. Also reducing viewership of several key firearms related channels like Sportsman or Outdoors does what exactly?

It hurts the very companies and industry that you are trying to promote. Reducing their viability which reduces there advertising capability which reduces there sponsors viability which reduces the number of firearms centric companies, which reduces the resistance to new laws. Which when coupled to a less informed society makes it very easy to control the message. The most striking example of this is CNN's anti guns polls designed to legitimize opinions and programming as if it was an unbiased representation of the nation as a whole. History Channel alone has done more for the growth of firearms through Sons of Guns than most organizations. Despite the complaints from people who think they could have somehow built a better TV show mousetrap.

I will get some critics especially for that last statement. But chances are if you interact with enough people on both sides you can see it's effects on people who had no idea those types of weapons were legal and now wish to exercise the rights they weren't before even aware of. The NRA should make that show a center piece since the statistics show it's more engaging than they often are.

If people want to change their reality they can't ignore and bankrupt the message. It's too big and persistent for that. They have to change it.

If you are a company thinking about turning of your support to law enforcement you are just hurting your cause. Instead of losing that counter issue revenue, recycle it into pro message funding. You are not hurting or swaying the people that need to be swayed by doing anything less.

If you are reading this and you aren't an NRA member, membership.nrahq.org... . You will get 10 bux off and you can join the largest and most active organization for legal and actual change in this country. And for the critics of the NRA who think X organization does more for them because they are "truer" to the message. Don't get me started on what is the definition of perfection. I will instead simply remind everyone of a very simple and basic concept that I think embodies this current climate.

United we stand, divided we fall

To me anyhow, the above long winded post sounds like it came from the mouth of a government shill.

Here is how it works.

I sell a steaks for 50$ a piece.

I sell good steaks, they are some of the best, that is WHY people order them. If they were not good, no one would be ordering. Orders are brisk.

But gov said I cant sell to anyone with grey hair.

So I say ok, but I wont sell it to you the Gov now.

So They buy steaks now from another country, lets say Brazil.

Unfortunately, these steaks are of lesser quality, and at times filled with ECOLI.

Oh and by the way, by the time that the Gov has the steaks on the table back home,it cost 80$ a piece,and are not even close to the quality they originally wanted.

So now they pay almost double for a lesser product and have the stigma that goes along with not having what they originally wanted.

Word spreads fast, and back in good ole Brazil, someone with a bone on for the Gov does some special prep work on the meat before it is sent. They giggle like little excited school girls at the fact that all these Gov people back in AmeriKa are eating things like, feces, semen, juices from things you don't want to know about, needles, ex-lax, name 100 other things.

If I was selling steaks to 300+ million eaters, they would take precedence over the 5 or so million gov eaters.

If you cant see it, its sad. This is just basic business know how.

Nike sells more black leather shoes to people than fuscia leather shoes, so most of the line is black, not fuscia.
if Nike started changing all the shoes to fuscia, and only a few to black, they would be out of business very fast.

You only punch yourself in the face when you do nothing in the face of this type of hypocrisy.

~~~~ __/) ~~~~~~

IM SHOCKED!!!

A degenerate corporation threatening to dictate public policy???

Outragous!!

Ok that was sarcastic. Once again a major corp is simply to dumb to
Innovate so they resort to threats.

How is it the dumbest people alive are in charge of the biggest industries.

Oil - hasnt changed in a century and a half

Guns - using gunpowder for centuries

Banks - same scam invented hundreds of years ago

Auto - same internal cumbustion for over a century.

Between all those industries i would be suprised if they shared half a brain.

They must be the most boring people to hang out with.
Nothimg in their lives has changed in at least 100 years.... Yawn...

So maybe Jim's Meat emporium steps up to fill the void created by me not selling steaks to Gov.

Bright idea Jim, now I can go on a campaign targeting you. Once I get the message out your a turncoat and a non player in the rights of the normal man, I will bet that although your business may increase from gov procurements, the general public will stop buying your meat.

Once you sold even a floor scrap to them, I personally would never see the interior of Jim's Meat emporium again. I would do everything I could to turn people against your meat products, after all your a turncoat.

This is the ONLY thing that these types understand. Financial loss. Its always been #1, it always will.







~~~~ __/) ~~~~~~

reply to post by nighthawk1954


Hooray! Finally a good news story involving guns. These companies have some fairly large balls to do this.

I hope they stick to their guns lol! And that they don't eventually have to cave in for commercial or legal reasons.

Originally posted by FirstCasualty
IM SHOCKED!!!

A degenerate corporation threatening to dictate public policy???

Outragous!!

Ok that was sarcastic. Once again a major corp is simply to dumb to
Innovate so they resort to threats.

How is it the dumbest people alive are in charge of the biggest industries.

Oil - hasnt changed in a century and a half

Guns - using gunpowder for centuries

Banks - same scam invented hundreds of years ago

Auto - same internal cumbustion for over a century.

Between all those industries i would be suprised if they shared half a brain.

They must be the most boring people to hang out with.
Nothimg in their lives has changed in at least 100 years.... Yawn...

To dumb to innovate?

Huh?

OK, lets try.

Granny Jane,comes in for my nice beef, and I tell her I cant sell her beef, but I have innovated, and I can sell her pork. I have really innovated and can sell her chicken.

She does not want pork or chicken, she wants BEEF, that's why she came to me in the first place.

To dumb to innovate?

Some people are to dumb to know the difference between beef and pork. Wrap in a different package and people, maybe even people like you will buy into it, hook line sinker.

You better hope that don't start restricting pork and chicken up the road. Because at that rate, soon the only people eating meat will be your lovely government.

~~~~ __/) ~~~~~~