More gun companies not selling to law enforcement in anti-2nd Amendment states

posted at 4:01 pm on February 23, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

When this first cropped up in the news, I thought it was just some sort of outlier. Here in the Empire State, where one of the nastiest gun grabbing laws in recent memory was passed last month, USA Today reported that some gun companies were refusing to do business with law enforcement agencies, claiming that they supported the citizens more than the government.

Some gun manufacturers say they will no longer sell their firearms to New York law enforcement agencies after the state passed a broad assault-weapons ban last month.

At least five companies have said they won’t sell to New York police since Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the Safe Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act in January. The bill, known as the NY SAFE Act, included a ban on any semi-automatic rifles or shotguns with “military-style” features, such as a pistol grip or a folding stock.

The companies included Olympic Arms, LaRue Tactical, York Arms, Templar Custom and EFI. I had immediate mixed emotions about the story. On the one hand, I was pleased to see the industry putting principle ahead of profit in standing up to such an odious law. But at the same time, I was sympathetic to our first responders, not wanting to see them in a situation where they might have less access to the tools for their job when it wasn’t the cops who crafted these laws, but the politicians. But, as I said, it seemed like an isolated thing, and they would surely find other resources for tactical weapons, so I didn’t pay it much mind.

Now, as reported at The Blaze, this seems to be turning into more of a trend, involving dozens of gun companies shutting off their business in multiple states.

The list of companies that have stopped selling firearms and ammunition to law enforcement agencies in states that are restricting the Second Amendment has more than doubled since Wednesday and is more than five times larger than just one week ago. There are 42 companies on our list, with more being added as we receive notification…

It’s worth a trip to their article, particularly since they include corporate statements released by a number of these companies explaining their actions. Here’s one sample from Citizen Arms:

”Due to legal, ethical and moral concerns, Citizen Arms offers only those custom firearms that are legal for all lawful citizens of a given state to possess, regardless of law enforcement status. LE personnel living in states where citizens must have restrictive features will only receive like product support from Citizen Arms. We’re very appreciative of the sacrifices made by the law enforcement community but we’re even more appreciative of the right guaranteed to all law-abiding US citizens by the Second Amendment to the US Constitution: A well regulated militia, necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.

Powerful stuff. We’ll have to drag some lawyers in here to figure out the details, but I don’t think there’s anything illegal about the companies refusing to sell to these law enforcement agencies. And it still seems likely that all of the agencies will still find somebody to sell to them. In the end this looks mostly like a morality statement – and a fine one at that – which won’t actually change anything directly. But if enough voters catch wind of it and recognize the serious nature of this debate, perhaps they’ll stop electing the sort of people who enact laws like this and the companies can return to business as normal.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Nothing like witnessing the end of statist control, and the statists not being fully aware of it.

The schemers and controllers want to monopolize their force, assault weapons and death. Only THEY can steal. Only THEY can kill.

No, no more. Done enough damage.

fatlibertarianinokc on May 7, 2013 at 6:20 PM

time to go after paper politicians.

john1schn on May 7, 2013 at 6:22 PM

PITCHFORK CONTROL next?

Tar and feathers to be banned?

All you can eat buffets are killing Americans, over eaters should pay extra.

32 ounce $1.00 drinks at McDonalds causes Parkinson’s or something, special tax needed.

Seniors using too much healthcare in final years. Make Hospice Care free and provide a $10,000 tax credit to those that sign up at age 60.

And yet we dummies keep electing this!!!!!

PappyD61 on May 7, 2013 at 6:40 PM

Suck it, Lizardface.

fossten on May 7, 2013 at 9:44 PM

All those who were surprised by this move?

*crickets*

Valid security concerns aside, the idea of anyone literally being able to print unregistered weapons (possibly their ammo blanks too in the future) is absolutely terrifying to liberals.

MelonCollie on May 7, 2013 at 10:11 PM

Two things to think about before worrying about printed guns:

1. There’s no need to print guns unless Chuck and friends make it illegal to otherwise acquire them.

2. If having guns does become illegal the cartels which can smuggle weed across the border by the ton will bring in the guns as soon as there is a market.

Nomas on May 7, 2013 at 11:05 PM

The issue is not whether something should be done but whether something can be done.

The genius of this technology is that it is unregulatable.

You can pass laws but they won’t accomplish anything.

Furthermore, I can put the aforementioned six ounce slug of iron in the handle to make it legal.

Worse though you see how the gun comes apart into bits and pieces.

Lets say I take it apart. Will you spot the pieces?

What if every piece has a duel use. Every piece screws into something else. What if every little bit screws into my luggage.

The ultimate movie that had a plastic gun was “in the line of fire”… it was a neat little thing. They hid the bullet in a lucky rabbit’s foot. Everything else just broke down into little plastic bits that were here or there.

Can’t stop it. You protect yourself in that environment by knowing who is coming through the door… not by search them.

Karmashock on May 8, 2013 at 7:28 AM

Schumer can go bugger himself.

claudius on May 8, 2013 at 3:37 PM

Gotta love Schumer’s descriptive language, “Our Republicans”.

That’ll leave a mark.

MTF on May 21, 2013 at 2:46 PM

Dang it

Dear leader to take credit

cmsinaz on May 21, 2013 at 2:50 PM

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If amnesty passes both houses, I will never vote republican again.

I know that sounds like the typical empty threat. But in this case, I honestly do not see what the point would be of any longer pretending the GOP cares about limited gov’t.

My one vote and my limited finanical contributions won’t hurt the GOP. but hopefully, others will join in.

I would rather the GOP completely die as a party and allow us a chance to build something new while the DNC runs rampant that continue pretending that the GOP actually opposes DNC policies. The alternative, to continue the pretense, simply means allowing the DNC to pass its entire agenda a little more slowly than otherwise without any real chance of stopping it. At least if the GOP is killed off, a new party may actually come about that supports the idea of limited gov’t.

I don’t understand how Lindsay Graham is not beaten in a primary. Is there really nobody that could beat him by running to his right? I would also love to see McCain gone. Rubio has blown whatever conservative cred he had with this nonsense.

Monkeytoe on May 21, 2013 at 2:52 PM

Comment pages: 1 2