Ruger and S&W quit California over micro stamping requirement

[Trooper]

Gun flight: Smith & Wesson, Ruger quit California over stamping requirement | Fox News

How long before law enforcement in California can not buy guns as no one will sell there?

 

[Bunnykid68]

Little slow today aren't ya? This one has been covered too.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Smith & Wesson said it expects sales of its California-compliant revolvers, which aren't required to have microstamping, will offset the impact to the company. Company President and CEO James Debney vowed to continue to work with industry groups to oppose the law, while providing California customers with products that do comply with it.

The title of the article is a little misleading.

 

[SERparacord]

Politics forum------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

 

[GIJEW]

Gun flight: Smith & Wesson, Ruger quit California over stamping requirement | Fox News

How long before law enforcement in California can not buy guns as no one will sell there?

Barrett already "banned CA" by refusing to sell any rifles to govt agencies that are banned for sale to the public

 

[Miles42]

I just do not understand how some states can usurp the Constitution. California, New Jersey, Il. MD, just to name a few communist States. How do the legally defy the Constitution and Bill of rights.

 

[jwh20]

I just do not understand how some states can usurp the Constitution. California, New Jersey, Il. MD, just to name a few communist States. How do the legally defy the Constitution and Bill of rights.

First of all, there is no provision in the California State Constitution as there is in the Indiana Constitution that echoes the US 2A. So that's "strike 1" against the citizens there.
Secondly, rights are VERY fragile and subject to "chipping away" a little at a time. This has been the case in California for many years as the anti-gun crowd in power have targeted one type of firearm at a time, added one little provision or prohibition after another, until what they now have is a bizarre maze of firearms regulations that make buying, owning, and bearing a firearm extraordinarily difficult for the lawful citizen there. This, of course, is EXACTLY the desired result!

No, it's not easy to change because the CA legislature is controlled not just by Democrats but by ultra-liberal Democrats and the California courts are stacked with ultra-liberal judges. California is a prototype for what the "progressives" view the way the entire nation should be run.

You see other insights into this way of thinking with some of NY Gov. Cuomo's comments recently:

Gov. Andrew Cuomo's Comments on Pro-Lifers Spark Backlash

I find it interesting that Cuomo here identifies what he sees as an UNDESIRABLE element in the State of NY. Criminals? Terrorists? Insurgents? Nope. Those who oppose abortion, those who support or exercise a constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, or those who take the Bible seriously and hold that homosexual practice is sinful are undesirable elements and have NO PLACE in "civil" NY society.

This, sadly, is what "progressive" tolerance and diversity looks like. They welcome all viewpoints except for those that disagree with their own! No matter what you label it, that's INTOLERANCE!

I only hope that there are still freedom-loving people in NY and elsewhere who will stop voting for these people and send them packing.

 

[45fan]

Gun flight: Smith & Wesson, Ruger quit California over stamping requirement | Fox News

How long before law enforcement in California can not buy guns as no one will sell there?

Historically, LEO agency purchased firearms have been outside the laws of what civilians can own without jumping through major hoops. If this proves to become an issue with supplying California law enforcement with equipment, I am sure that there will be a waiver for them on this as well.

 

[cobber]

California is a prototype for what the "progressives" view the way the entire nation should be run.

Bankrupt, balkanized and under the jackboot?

(can't rep you yet...)

 

[in625shooter]

Gun flight: Smith & Wesson, Ruger quit California over stamping requirement | Fox News

How long before law enforcement in California can not buy guns as no one will sell there?

Law Enforcement is exempt however there could be stipulations to come that only agency purchased firearms could be exempt and no longer allow the individual Officer to purchase their own duty firearm.

Total BS. Revolver sales will be up since it appears revolvers are exempt from this foolishness.

 

[Trooper]

Historically, LEO agency purchased firearms have been outside the laws of what civilians can own without jumping through major hoops. If this proves to become an issue with supplying California law enforcement with equipment, I am sure that there will be a waiver for them on this as well.

Law enforcement is exempted under this law. The question is whether any gun manufacturer will sell to them.

 

[Classic]

There is no reason for LE to be exempt or have any more rights than any other citizen. I hope Ruger, SW and all other firearms manufacturers follow the Barrett example. No weapons and no parts to any state that pulls a boneheaded move like this one.

OP - this is worth a second thread anyway, thanks for posting.

 

[Trooper]

There is no reason for LE to be exempt or have any more rights than any other citizen. I hope Ruger, SW and all other firearms manufacturers follow the Barrett example. No weapons and no parts to any state that pulls a boneheaded move like this one.

OP - this is worth a second thread anyway, thanks for posting.

Actually LEOs do not have more rights. More like controlled robots who, if they step out of line, can be sacrificed to buy off various groups. The left wants everyone to have to answer to someone. The old, the disabled and the poor will have Obamacare as a means to hold them in check. They hold the cops' jobs as a way to keep them from thinking for themselves.

 

[in625shooter]

There is no reason for LE to be exempt or have any more rights than any other citizen. I hope Ruger, SW and all other firearms manufacturers follow the Barrett example. No weapons and no parts to any state that pulls a boneheaded move like this one.

OP - this is worth a second thread anyway, thanks for posting.

There is no easy answer, at least one that helps folks trapped residing in those states that can not move. While many of us feel frustration with silly laws some fail to think about one thing when they say Screw NY or Calf etc. That sounds great but to encourage a firearms company to quit selling to a state full of folks that don't have a choice or can't move you are not only screwing them over the state that doesn't care you are giving anti's more ammunition. Now all the antis have to do is throw up some silly restrictions/limits and they have effectively limited that population from owning/using whatever because it could become practice to just quit serving thos private citizens. I understand the frarm companies have a lot of issues with increased costs etc but see how this could be looked at..

Actually LEOs do not have more rights. More like controlled robots who, if they step out of line, can be sacrificed to buy off various groups. The left wants everyone to have to answer to someone. The old, the disabled and the poor will have Obamacare as a means to hold them in check. They hold the cops' jobs as a way to keep them from thinking for themselves.

^^SPOT ON^^

 

[Classic]

Actually, there are some serious engineering/technical problems that have not yet been overcome in addition to the obvious ripple effect compliance might cause in other pro-gun control states. Weighing the costs of R&D vs. the profits from selling the guns in Cali. probably make a poor business proposition. I feel sorry for the firearms enthusiasts in that state but given the choices I think it is the only choice they have, really.

Not sure how anyone is held captive in any state except by their own decisions anyway.

Finally, LE have national gun carrying privileges in addition to exemptions for most prohibitions in schools and private businesses. For many on this forum that have been challenged for carrying in businesses and other places get the initial question "are you in law enforcement?" To me this constitutes more rights than I have granted either by governments or private entities. This is NOT meant as a slam on LE, I appreciate all they do and have to put up with and tell them so when I have the opportunity. Most of them have a ****ty job the rest of us wouldn't want to do. I just think I should have the same rights and privileges, That's all.

 

[Trooper]

Actually, there are some serious engineering/technical problems that have not yet been overcome in addition to the obvious ripple effect compliance might cause in other pro-gun control states. Weighing the costs of R&D vs. the profits from selling the guns in Cali. probably make a poor business proposition. I feel sorry for the firearms enthusiasts in that state but given the choices I think it is the only choice they have, really.

Not sure how anyone is held captive in any state except by their own decisions anyway.

Finally, LE have national gun carrying privileges in addition to exemptions for most prohibitions in schools and private businesses. For many on this forum that have been challenged for carrying in businesses and other places get the initial question "are you in law enforcement?" To me this constitutes more rights than I have granted either by governments or private entities. This is NOT meant as a slam on LE, I appreciate all they do and have to put up with and tell them so when I have the opportunity. Most of them have a ****ty job the rest of us wouldn't want to do. I just think I should have the same rights and privileges, That's all.

Just remember that those "rights" can be taken from LEOs very easily. Cops walk a line, having privileges yes but also constantly under supervision that limits their freedom of speech, political activities, and other rights.

 

[Trooper]

There is no easy answer, at least one that helps folks trapped residing in those states that can not move. While many of us feel frustration with silly laws some fail to think about one thing when they say Screw NY or Calf etc. That sounds great but to encourage a firearms company to quit selling to a state full of folks that don't have a choice or can't move you are not only screwing them over the state that doesn't care you are giving anti's more ammunition. Now all the antis have to do is throw up some silly restrictions/limits and they have effectively limited that population from owning/using whatever because it could become practice to just quit serving thos private citizens. I understand the frarm companies have a lot of issues with increased costs etc but see how this could be looked at..





^^SPOT ON^^

There are two states in California. One is the rich who live on the coasts. Places like San Diego or San Francisco or Silicone Valley. Then there are the poor, often migrant workers, who live in the interior. Both are part of the problem with respect to how California democrats keep power. And the democrats play both groups against each other.

 

[drillsgt]

Actually, there are some serious engineering/technical problems that have not yet been overcome in addition to the obvious ripple effect compliance might cause in other pro-gun control states. Weighing the costs of R&D vs. the profits from selling the guns in Cali. probably make a poor business proposition. I feel sorry for the firearms enthusiasts in that state but given the choices I think it is the only choice they have, really.

Not sure how anyone is held captive in any state except by their own decisions anyway.

Finally, LE have national gun carrying privileges in addition to exemptions for most prohibitions in schools and private businesses. For many on this forum that have been challenged for carrying in businesses and other places get the initial question "are you in law enforcement?" To me this constitutes more rights than I have granted either by governments or private entities. This is NOT meant as a slam on LE, I appreciate all they do and have to put up with and tell them so when I have the opportunity. Most of them have a ****ty job the rest of us wouldn't want to do. I just think I should have the same rights and privileges, That's all.

It can't be that ****ty of a job or nobody would do it, or stay doing it. When agencies post job openings they usually don't have to go begging for applicants.

 

[drillsgt]

Just remember that those "rights" can be taken from LEOs very easily. Cops walk a line, having privileges yes but also constantly under supervision that limits their freedom of speech, political activities, and other rights.

I don't know about that, whenever Obama or some other clown politician is rallying for this or that gun control law there's plenty of LEO's standing behind him engaging in unfettered political activity.

 

[Trooper]

It can't be that ****ty of a job or nobody would do it, or stay doing it. When agencies post job openings they usually don't have to go begging for applicants.

Big problem with recruits. More that they have recruited college grads, the less the quality. Most kids use LE as a resume enhancement. They move on in five years. Are not tough enough to take the abuse from the streets or from superiors. Show up at interviews with their "agents" (helicopter moms).

SHOT Show: Police Officers Explain Why Millennials Make Terrible Cops

Police departments across the country are struggling with staffing shortages as a result of a weak economy, hiring freezes, furloughs, layoffs, and cutbacks to salaries, benefits, and retirement incentives.

According to Police Chief Magazine, “Such difficulties spurred 7,272 applications to the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Hiring Program, requesting $8.3 billion to support more than 39,000 sworn-officer positions. Altogether, both the supply of and demand for qualified officers are changing in a time of increasing attrition, expanding law enforcement responsibilities, and decreasing resources.” The problem is not new, either. The Anniston Star reported in December 2013:

Since the late 1990s the nation has seen a decrease in the number of people interested in becoming police officers. A 2006 article on police officer recruitment published in Police Chief Magazine said an estimated 80 percent of the nation's 17,000 law enforcement agencies had positions they could not fill. A separate report, Hiring and Keeping Police Officers, published in 2004 by the National Institute of Justice said 20 percent of agencies experienced officer weakness as a result of recruitment and fiscal problems.
​

You will have to read the rest at the link I provided.