Smith & Wesson can explain this to all the other makers. Civilian sales are the profit centers, not LEO.
Printable View
Smith & Wesson can explain this to all the other makers. Civilian sales are the profit centers, not LEO.
This smells of Bloomberg.
Remember late last summer when I posted a blurb on Northglenns "Gun Safe Rebate Program"?
The program was started upon recommendation of the "Urban Mayors League" or whatever they call it.
Bloomy has a hand in it.
It is still a free market. If gun companies are complicit in the effort, and get exposed, they will go under. That is their choice to make. If gun companies refuse to be complicit and the regulations are in effect, those cities won't have guns and ammo, or will have to pay higher prices. I say let the cowards do what they want...it will only serve to damage those who would do harm to the 2nd Amendment anyway. There are a lot of slimy jerks in the gun industry who will do anything for a buck...maybe a good way for us to rid ourselves of some of them who care only abut the greenbacks and their own skins. The general consumer demand for guns and ammo is on a rise still, so I don't really see their backdoor efforts as gaining them any benefit.
Random thought occurred to me while reading the article:
If the government is allowed to force bakers and photographers to provide goods and services to people they would otherwise prefer not to do business with due to personal, ideological differences, does this lay the groundwork to force a firearms manufacturer to provide products to law enforcement agencies? In other words, if you don't have the right to refuse service on religious grounds, are you eventually going to lose the right to refuse service based on political grounds?
Valid point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelhund
It really does cause one to ask the question: "Do we really have a free market system?"
I'm just all teary-eyed about that... [Neene1] much like I'd be completely comfortable with CO police/sheriff's being unable to buy new magazines over 15rds. Good for goose/good for gander.Quote:
"These politicians are politicizing the purchase of firearms for law enforcement, when law enforcement should be able to buy whatever best suits their needs," said Andrew Arulanandam, managing director of public affairs for the National Rifle Association.
The problem with that idea is that the lawless won't abide by the arbitrary 15 round limit anyway.
I like making a point about the stupidity of passing laws to stop those that break them, but sacrificing police officers lives to make that point sickens me.
Sent from my electronic leash.
If the cops don't want guns.... All the more for us. I just dislike that this really boils down to the cop on the street... Who may need the gun, suffers for a management decision that is politically motivated.
Exactly. This is a policy decision, made for the purpose of political posturing, by douchebags that face exactly zero consequences for their actions, that are surrounded by security that is armed to the teeth with the very guns they want to remove from us. Assholes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hound