News from Smith & Wesson...Sorry California! Stopping gun sales due to California's new Microstamping Law! ???
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/22/smith-wesson-stop-selling-guns-california-due-micr/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/22/smith-wesson-stop-selling-guns-california-due-micr/)
I was thinking how we should take this even further. I was reading this on Facebook, and some of the comments suggested that S&W also refuse to sell to government agencies in CA. A great idea popped into my head as I read these comments.
We, as gun buyers, should boycott any gun manufacturer that sells guns to law enforcement agencies in any state that has gun laws stricter than federal law. If we tell Beretta, Glock, or Springfield, or H&K that we WILL NOT purchase their firearms if they sell to the cops of gun control states, they will have no choice but to comply.
Why should the citizens be left powerless as the cops and government get more guns?
I wonder if the NRA would support such a plan?
Grim Reaper, Sounds like a great plan...
Barrett, did the same thing a while back with the 50 Caliber rifles that California then outlawed. The LE of California had issues with their Barrett 50 cal rifle and sent it to Barrett for repair, they refused to do the work. To get around the stupid law they made the Barrett 416...
Ruger also refused to sell guns just like S&W because of the ridiculous microstamping laws! Praise to Ruger as well!
Citizens of those states should also be making noise that the legislatures should require these things for government agencies.
If they need microstamping on private guns, they definitely need it on guns issued to LE, where the scrutiny should be higher.
i was really hoping Connecticut based gun makers would move out of state.
I stated in the past, a manufacturer boycott would ultimately help the state. California has some strange people in charge. There's little to stop the constant attack on the Second Amendment there.
For example, I laughed at this prospective Los Angeles County Sherrif's answer about allowing CCW permits: "... current standards, plus stringent firearm manipulation and certification, constant qualification to maintain (quarterly), plus a mental health evaluation and submission of a DNA sample ..." How sick is that? >:D
Showing that its legislators are impacting commerce, might have the "safe gun" roster thrown out. Those that have been unconcerned in the past might take notice of a blanket boycott.
Glad I left that state. Even while having a California CCW permit for fifteen years, the acquisition process is un-American. Never felt comfortable having one when other law abiding residents were denied.
I have mixed feelings about this. If gun manufacturers quit selling to the citizens of Kali. the anti gunners win. If they quit selling to state and LE, that might get their attention. I personally think that gun owners in Kali should get of their ***** and get the laws changed. All in all these bills are passed as feel good laws that allow politicians to pass laws that show they are doing something. There are so many people in Kali that believe that the Government shall provide status quo and get government control to go with it. IMHO
One must accept the reality that specific firearm reform for California will not come from within that state. Reform will come from the federal level and/or from spill-over into non-gun related issues.
The current leaning within its legislature, executive and judicial branches is sustained by the state's demographics. The numbers are simply not there to vote in leaders with a different mindset. Not only will that not change, it will get worse.
Surveys on personal freedoms or business friendliness have California below more than ninety-percent of the rest of the U.S. So, people like me will continue to move their businesses elsewhere.
An interesting cultural study states Westerners are outliers among outliers. ( http://www.psmag.com/magazines/pacific-standard-cover-story/joe-henrich-weird-ultimatum-game-shaking-up-psychology-economics-53135/ ) Our Constitution and the Second Amendment is likely not something immigrants immediately think of. Such things may not be on their list of concerns.
And conservatives make things worse with a "Catch-22". Immigrants wanting to embrace American ideals are avoided because "they're not Americans".
So the growing California immigrant population probably won't vote in pro-Second Amendment leaders.
If one agrees voting won't change things, then one must consider using the legislators' rope to hang them. They've gone so far, issues Californian may care about are affected. A judge who has no motivation to uphold the Second Amendment may care about commerce. A population that probably is unaware of what is going on in Sacramento may notice their precious "police protection" being impacted.
Ultimately, law suits could lead the feds to declare onerous California gun laws unconstitutional. Newspapers across the country writing about a blanket boycott could make that happen sooner.
i think its just too much of a logistical nightmare for smith and ruger right now to deal with for one state. if the majority of states required it they would have too submit or sale revolvers only. besides why do all that work for one state. they still have most of the world to sell their product too.
S&W has their report in a PDF file
http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson2/upload/other/MSMicroSFinal.pdf (http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson2/upload/other/MSMicroSFinal.pdf)
Good clear statement from S&W. Ironically, the University of California at Davis released a report stating micro-stamping is not viable technology.