If you ever need it more proof that gun control is not about Public Safety

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com...overnor-bans-sale-of-insurance-to-gun-owners/


    This right here proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that gun control has absolutely nothing to do with Public Safety. That's why 2nd Amendment advocacy groups and 2A supporters need to stop trying to argue for their rights by using public safety statistics. They do not care.
     

    davsco

    Ultimate Member
    Oct 21, 2010
    8,607
    Loudoun, VA
    It would be nice to see gun manufacturers refuse to sell to certain states.

    yeah it certainly isn't cheap or easy in ANY way to up and move, but it would be nice to see gun manufacturers refuse to sell to any state or local govt's that have any sort of restrictive gun rights, and move to free states.

    though, seeing the crap spewing in AZ, that last year was voted the best 2a state, they may be moving around a lot.
     

    TheOriginalMexicanBob

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 2, 2017
    32,179
    Sun City West, AZ
    The problem in with not selling to certain states is that some other gunmaker will step in to do fill the gap...plus many if not most LE agencies buy through distributors or even local gun stores and not direct from the manufacturer. Plus...if the gun company is publicly owned, the board of directors and management has a fiduciary duty to do what's best for its stockholders. A privately held gun company can do what it wants in that regard...and at its own financial risk.

    This would be virtue signaling of another kind. It makes some sense...and doesn't.
     

    Fredcohunter

    Active Member
    Nov 30, 2008
    431
    A little west of Frederick
    If this gun control craziness continues to spread the manufacturers will not have anyone to sell to other than the state. It would be in the gun manufacturers' best interest to take a stand here/now because at this rate in another decade or so they may not have a customer base.
     

    Abuck

    Ultimate Member
    Refuse to sell to all LE orgs in state. No new guns to police department, no new service contracts, no new armour training, no ammo sales.

    It’s being done. Olympic Arms and others.
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/1931283

    HORNADY REFUSES TO SELL AMMO TO NY AGENCIES AFTER CUOMO GUN INITIATIVE
    https://www.guns.com/news/2018/04/3...mmo-to-ny-agencies-after-cuomo-gun-initiative

    Also, I’ve seen articles about Barrett being outspoken about this, and refusing sales and service to Hawaii, California, and New York. I would imagine that NJ qualifies as anti enough as well.
     

    BeoBill

    Crank in the Third Row
    MDS Supporter
    Oct 3, 2013
    27,064
    南馬里蘭州鮑伊
    It would be nice to see gun manufacturers refuse to sell to certain states.

    Why? That seems counter productive.

    Refuse to sell to all LE orgs in state. No new guns to police department, no new service contracts, no new armour training, no ammo sales.

    No more body Armour sales

    Why would you think that a move like that would make any impression at all on the tyrants running places like NJ? As long as THEIR bodyguards have guns of any kind, all is well for them. After all, ALL gunz are evil...
     

    fred55

    Senior
    Aug 24, 2016
    1,772
    Spotsylvania Co. VA
    I would suggest that any discounts being afforded LE procurement in states that violate the 2A be removed. Let them buy but at full price. Firearm manufacturers must be aware they make more sales to citizens than LEO (I'm not including the military in this.) fred55
     
    Last edited:

    1time

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    2,258
    Baltimore, Md
    Uscca strikes me as funny. They are pulling out to not “do battle” with the states attorney office. Aren’t they selling insurance to do battle with the states attorney on their members behalf? Makes me wonder???

    NJ doesn’t surprise me.
     
    Since it appears that Maryland's gun grabbing liberals are too stupid to do their own thinking they get all of their infringement ideas from other states...this will probably be on next year's list...along with a bunch of pure sh*t that Virginia is going to have to deal with...Range closures, shooting on private property, allowing your own children to hunt...It's all coming...Those sternly worded letters and rallies in Assapolis are working real well....

    Yes that's sarcasm..
     

    regulator

    Active Member
    As a LEO I've never received a discount for a firearm purchase,. I fact I really prefer folks don't know what I do for a living.

    Having said that, as I have said before, I stand with the every day man and it's a shame that after 27 years in law enforcement I will become a felon over night as I WILL NOT COMPLY with these proposed "public safety" laws!
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,931
    Messages
    7,259,491
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom