This. That's why I feel Glock giving in sets a dangerous precedent. They have the deep pockets for a lawsuit and the political power. Refer to all my above of what they should do and other gun companies.
Yep - totally agree with all you’ve said & especially
“I often use the example if all gun makers, accessories said "we wont sell to any LEO agency unless their voters can buy it", then there won't be as many gun laws as there are today. Because the LEO agencies would tell politicians to not ban things.”
Time to go to war with them. These states (especially CA) bank on their market share insulating them from repercussions, however, at this point the industry looks like it stands to loose much more by acquiescing than by striking back. In the end, they may only be able to sell to the LE departments of these states (of course their enforcers must be fed), not their citizens.
The key is that it has to be the industry as a whole - matching this block of treasonous states - that takes this on. Refuse sales & service like Barrett, etc.
This is clearly the new front in their war against us.