Magpul announces the Boulder airlift

[clublights]

So now Magpul comes out and says they won't be joining the companies boycotting LEO sales in ban states. Very disappointing. Their statement on ARFCOM shows they don't get the big picture in my opinion.

Link please?

[wARmachine15]

Start here, has links in the article - http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...an-state-leos/

[mtnrider]

So now Magpul comes out and says they won't be joining the companies boycotting LEO sales in ban states. Very disappointing. Their statement on ARFCOM shows they don't get the big picture in my opinion.

With all due respect to the companies that are boycotting LEO most of the ones I have seen are pretty small potato's in the big picture. It is not going to be a big impact to them to lose LEO sales. I have yet to see a Big company stand up and say no LEO sales. It would hurt business too much.
My guess is Magpul has a lot of ties with LEO for products and training etc. Could be very detrimental to business for them to take a non LEO stance.

[wARmachine15]

Oh I'm sure that's exactly it, but that also means their principles just took a backseat to revenue. Everyone has their price.

They might as well stay in CO now and save the cost of moving. What's the point of saying you're leaving on principle now?

[kidicarus13]

Oh I'm sure that's exactly it, but that also means their principles just took a backseat to revenue. Everyone has their price.

They might as well stay in CO now and save the cost of moving. What's the point of saying you're leaving on principle now?

Just because Magpul's views do not match your views does not mean they are a bad company. Maybe they donate a million dollars to the NRA from their profits next year ...for the greater good.

[wARmachine15]

I didn't say it made them a bad company just stating an opinion about a conflicting message about principles. And that they don't get the big picture of what 2A is about, which is to put civilians on a level playing field with the government. Their stance does not promote that.

I knew my post questioning a sacred cow wouldn't be well received. I still own about 50 of their awesome products. We can agree to disagree.

[mtnrider]

Just because Magpul's views do not match your views does not mean they are a bad company. Maybe they donate a million dollars to the NRA from their profits next year ...for the greater good.

I agree. I am not sure I am 100% on board with the whole boycott LEO thing myself. There are lots of good Sheriffs out there that support us so I say keep doing business with them.. Now the ones that don't support us I say don't give them a damn thing.

.

[The Rat]

I can understand why people would be mad about it, that being "But I haven't gotten MY Pmags yet!" But just half a year ago, the cool thing to do for gun companies was an LE/mil discount, like Larue used to do and how Brownells still does.

I dunno. It's gonna generate bad PR with bad timing, even if the people with the bad reactions don't have the best reasoning behind it.

[johngraves2]

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...city-magazines

A guy in boulder is trying to do the same thing.

[HBARleatherneck]

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...city-magazines
from the above link,
"While he strongly opposes the magazine ban, and a concealed weapons ban for college campuses, Suykerbuyk said he supports a fee on gun buyers to pay for background checks, so long as it is reasonable, and universal background checks on gun sales, provided a national gun-owner registry is not established."

he is quoted as saying he was OK with charging American Citizens a fee to exercise their Constitutional rights. and ok with universal background checks. He may be a Marine, but he is wrong. We shouldnt have to pay for the background check. The government is infringing on our rights and we should pay for it? I dont think so.


moral of the story, if you are a dumbass dont talk to the media.