questionsdid you hear gun companies are refusing to sell…

vote-for55vote-against
vote-for25vote-against

The web page title ends with "NO GUNS FOR YOU!"

Ah, the Soup Nazi . . . such a versatile pop culture reference.

vote-for12vote-against

I would like to vote this question up 100 times. Maybe even 1000 times.

Nice to see someone drawing a line in the sand (whether or not you agree with them, it's still nice to see it).

vote-for16vote-against

Good for them for putting their beliefs in front of profits! But, I wonder, will this have any impact? I'm guessing there are plenty of other manufacturers more focused on profits than politics.

vote-for-26vote-against

@benyust2: I think you mean profits over the lives of their victims, but that's pretty typical for companies who have no ethics at all.

vote-for18vote-against

Great start. According to the article, the major players have yet to join in. Come on Glock, Sig, Smith and Wesson, Winchester, Savage, Les Bauer, join the party. Ultimately, such action may just save your company. Come to think of it, shareholders of these publicly traded companies should insist such policies be implemented for the good of the company. After all, the goal of these restrictive states is to put these companies out of business.

vote-for-14vote-against

@publiclurker: I know, right! Those governments should really stop killing so many people!

vote-for0vote-against

It seems foolish for any gun company to deny law enforcement anything they need.

vote-for15vote-against

I'm curious just how much business any of these companies did with state governments prior to their announcements.

Meanwhile, there is already a pro-gun effort to boycott one gun-sales website because of price-gouging complaints: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojc7mrm-BHs.

On a side note, breitbart.com has about as much credibility as TASS did back in the days of the USSR.

vote-for10vote-against

A right-wing news source publishes that a few small companies, who probably don't do a whole lot of business with those governments anyway, are "standing up" against state governments. No big deal. Thats like me saying I will not purchase any newspapers or watch programmimg from Newscorp.
Anyway, I never thought arms companies even knew how to spell ethics, so this just proves that they will cut off their noses rather than agree to stop the sale of products governments (and police) find superfluous.

vote-for8vote-against

@olperfesser: I was going to say much the same, though I expected that if I said so in this discussion my comment would be voted down. I'm sorry to see I was right about that one. Of course, when someone cites breitbart.com as a news source they are seldom looking for a discussion as much as they are looking for people to parrot back their own beliefs to them.

And yes, I know I will likely be voted down for saying that as well.

vote-for-6vote-against

@mistamoose: I doubt these gun companies actually make anything worth being purchased by legitimate gun owners. It makes good publicity when pandering to the paranoid gun nuts who need to pack a replacement for their manhood though.

vote-for7vote-against

@mistamoose: The State could make LEO's purchase their own guns at the now gouging prices we pay and refund them instead teh super low LEO price they pay now. They are not refusing them they are just making it hard. I don't agree with LEO's not having what they need to protect themselves and us but I also don't agree being able to have what i think i need to adaquetly protect my self and family.

In discussions like this their never seems to be middle ground people. It either seems like every one iseither a "gun nut" or a "2nd ammendment" hater

vote-for4vote-against

@benyust2: Silly kid, the gun companies are banning arms, states kill people with lethal injection and electric chairs.

Does this mean that soda companies will stop selling soda to NY too?

I personally do not get it. What do we want, for everyone armed with fully automatic assault rifles? Will that make you feel safe? If everyone is armed, what about my kids, I assume because they are under age they will not be armed, or do we arm them? I am not sure I want a 16 running around armed. I have seen what 16 year old kids do when they loose there temper behind the wheel of a car. My brother's friend's girlfriend dumped him and he sat outside her house at night with his dad's gun for a few weeks after the breakup. I really do not want that to be the norm. (The dad was a cop)
Come to think about it I do not think my last neighbors were mature enough to handle guns either.

vote-for0vote-against

@caffeine_dude: Since 1934 civilians cant legally buy fully automatic rifles(machine guns).

vote-for13vote-against

But @caffeine_dude: that is illegal.
@caffeine_dude: so is shooting people.

vote-for5vote-against

http://go.emaildir2.com/l/a/dhi/4d/xfjf/_/ushf/trouble.htm

@publiclurker: Yeah those little Ma' and Pa' shops like LaRue Tactical and Olympic Arms just manufacture garbage no legitimate gun owner would be interested in.. And "Cheaper Than Dirt?" Who the heck are those guys? And what's with that STUPID name? With a name like that there's no WAY they're going to make it through the first fiscal year.

@wootyug: That's completely untrue.. Don't take that the wrong way; I'm not the kind of guy who goes around starting arguments (and that's not my goal), but this is one thing I try to keep people on track about because for some reason inaccurate info seems to pass from one person to another as "fact." You could go buy an M16 right now if you wanted if you had $30k, no criminal record and a lot of patients (and don't mind old guns) :)
TL;DR - If you're rich you can buy a machine-gun :)
[ed] I've edited this post like 20 times.

vote-for2vote-against

I think this is great, and I hope more and more sellers do this. It's actually the "right" thing to do.

vote-for10vote-against

@philosopherott: Gun shops are simply behaving as any free-market enterprise should behave: adjusting their prices on the basis of supply and demand. Don't you think the owners should have the right to charge what they want to? After all, no one is forced to buy a gun or ammo from them if their prices seem too high.

I haven't heard or read of any run on the sort of handgun that most people would purchase for self protection. What kind of weapon is it that you think is so vital for your family's protection that you're no longer able to obtain?

vote-for3vote-against

@publiclurker: Yeah? research Barrett who will no longer sell to California.

vote-for3vote-against

@magic cave: They're still waiting for Andy to rise because none of them can count to three.

vote-for2vote-against

@drchops: I wanted to be a doctor but didn't have the patience.

vote-for1vote-against

These guys (LaRue, et al.) are all punky little resellers. They make nothing and so do not sell to governments which deal with manufacturers from whom they buy quantities of pristine weapons and receive huge discounts. Manufacturers assiduously court governments, not vice-versa' and most gun makers are foreign any way.

vote-for0vote-against

@cdmsr: These guys (LaRue, et al.) are all punky little resellers. They make nothing and so do not sell to governments which deal with manufacturers from whom they buy quantities of pristine weapons and receive huge discounts. Manufacturers assiduously court governments, not vice-versa, and most gun makers are foreign anyway

This is just another attempt by right-wing/Teabagger leaders to demonstrate just how stupid and pliable are the sheep that compose their rank-and-file. Read the comments of those who support this idiocy in this very forum and you will, I believe, be forced to conclude the proper modifier must be -- at minimum -- 'incredibly' as in "... 'incredibly stupid."

vote-for9vote-against

@cdmsr: Do you always quote yourself to yourself? Or did you forget who you were logged in as?

vote-for4vote-against

@cdmsr: sorry but I can't ignore misinformation. You stated that "most gun makers are foreign anyway". That is so not true, Glock, Smith and Wesson, Colt, Winchester, LMT, Bushmaster, Les Bauer, Stag Arms, Savage Arms, Barrett- these are all USA companies, just to name a few. These companies provide jobs for Americans, in America. I respect anyone's right to a differing opinion, I just hope that opinion isn't based on inaccurate info.

vote-for3vote-against

Isn't one of the big arguments against gun control that anyone who wants a gun can get it anyway? So if that's true then refusing to sell to anyone is pretty moot.

vote-for0vote-against

I really hope others follow suit, Barrett has been refusing sale of its .50 cal to California service members since 2005. The part that gets me about the ban on the .50 cal is, not once was it used to commit a crime in California or the United States for that matter, yet its illegal for citizens to own one in California? Double standard much?

vote-for4vote-against

@andrewhallze: There are lots of weapons that have never been used to commit a crime in the US that I do not want my next door neighbor to own.

vote-for1vote-against

@moondrake: that sounds a lot like jealousy to me. If a gun is used safely and responsibly and is stored in such a way (lock and key / seperate from its ammunition) then its no more dangerous than a really heavy shovel.

vote-for4vote-against

@cdmsr: Haha, that was one of the things I actually went back and edited, didn't think anybody would catch it.

As for your sentiments on firearms and manufacturing, I'm going to go out on a limb and say you - like most of your anti-gun brethren - have absolutely (in bold!) no idea what you're talking about.. But if there's one thing I've learned, it's that your kind don't let the facts get in the way.

LaRue Tactical:

http://www.laruetactical.com/machining-operation-tour

Or maybe they're just reealllly into collecting high-end manufacturing machines and tooling?

vote-for0vote-against

@caffeine_dude: lol really? bans have proved time and time again they are nothing more that some bureaucrats failed attempt at stopping or managing something that's out of their control. I mean look at prohibition, that failed miserably, what about the war on drugs? they banned drugs and now we have some of the most powerful cartels operating within our borders fueled by the very thing we tried to ban.
All I'm saying is I feel the message of the manufactures not selling to municipalities who impose sanctions against its citizens is a positive one, and more manufactures should follow suit.

vote-for4vote-against

@andrewhallze: Huh? Your reply doesn't appear to relate to my response. Jealousy has nothing to do with it. I live in Texas and have no criminal record, but I have in the past had unfortunate occasion to file a report with the police of a mentally ill homeless convicted felon stalking me. I could get a carry permit with great ease. I live in a very close-set neighborhood, my neighbors' driveway adjoins my house, it sits a foot from my living room and dining room windows. They like to have screaming fights in the driveway at 3am. Am I a strong supporter of their right to carry firearms? Nope. I would much prefer they settle their arguments with a shovel. It's a lot less likely to come through my living room window, thanks.

vote-for3vote-against

@moondrake: I could throw a shovel through your living room window pretty easily =D

vote-for2vote-against

@moondrake: yeesh that sucks hopefully the crazed bum stalking you stopped. In the case of your neighbors, I too agree some people just should not own firearms. I do however feel that a responsible and law abiding citizen should be able to have access to such firearms (within reason of course.)

vote-for1vote-against

@drchops: I sent you a PM about this forum.

vote-for7vote-against

@nikeprestos: I appreciate the point you are trying to make, but all of your information is not accurate either. Glock and Winchester are not "USA companies", Glock was founded and is based in Austria (though some production does happen in the US) and Winchester is now just a brand owned by a Belgian company that does the majority of its production overseas.

vote-for0vote-against

@magic cave: I guess you haven't been to a store that sells firearms recently.
Plus why are you making the assumption that people only use hand guns for protection? Shotguns and rifles are very effective firearms for self defense especially if you are defending your home, not just you’re self inside your home.

vote-for3vote-against

@philosopherott: (1) Not in the last two weeks, no. (2) I'm making no such assumption at all; I'm speaking from experience. My house has both handguns and long guns. The handguns are much easier to keep close at hand than are the rifle or the shotgun, especially in my very small home.

The shotgun did come in handy a few years back, though, when a still-drunk New Year's Eve partier punched his way through the screens on our front porch and began yelling and pounding on the front door. This was at 6:30am; must have been a doozy of a party. I'd have preferred just to call the police and did so, but my spouse took the shotgun in hand, opened the door, and suggested the man leave. (For what it's worth, this was a stupid and foolish response, since the guy was still outside.) Fortunately for all, he was neither armed himself nor so drunk as to mistake the shotgun for a toy, and he left.

And I'll ask you again, just what kind of weapon do you think you need that you're unable to buy?

vote-for1vote-against

@drchops: I especially liked the shot of the giant guard-catfish they keep around the place.