You guys see this yet?  Thought it was interesting.  Full of win, too.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/15/group-of-second-amendment-supporting-gun-makers-now-refusing-to-sell-arms-to-law-enforcement-in-new-york-and-other-gun-restricting-states/

last update i saw was 6 companies including barrett and la rule.  wouldnt it be great if all firearm manufactures did this.  other big names like glock, sig and S&W, who most police usually use.  that would be crippling.

Also worth mentioning in this thread, gun accessories are also threatening to pull out of states that want to pass further gun legislation, like magpul in CO

That was going on at the Shot Show. One of the vendors was on the phone telling NYPD he cancelling their contract. And others were doing the same.

 

Perhaps we need to start pressuring the big name companies like S&W, Glock, Colt, Remington, etc. to join in.

if citizens cant have guns, then law enforcement dont need it because gun bans work dont they?!  take guns out of the hands of citizens and the cops can walk around with friggen billy clubs!!!

As long as one gun maker doesn't follow suit, law enforcement will still be able to get guns.
Guns last for a long time, so ammo makers also need to follow suit to prevent law enforcement from using their currently owned guns.
How does a gun maker/seller know the difference between a regular citizen and an LE?

As long as one gun maker doesn't follow suit, law enforcement will still be able to get guns.
Guns last for a long time, so ammo makers also need to follow suit to prevent law enforcement from using their currently owned guns.
How does a gun maker/seller know the difference between a regular citizen and an LE?

That's not entirely true.  They have to use guns that meet certain guidelines (design specs) etc.  I.e. safeties, double action trigger pulls, specific weights on trigger pulls.  Their officers will also demand reliability and functional use. If you saw glock / sw / sig go out.... yeah LEO would be fucked.  They are also *required* to have the guns serviced, and fixed etc. Parts could be made unavailable.  They could also place shrink wrap licensing on the outside of the packages and make it a copyright violation to sell to LEO.

Man, this is good to know.... I wonder if the companies that cancelled got paid or threatened...

Maybe they just have contracts with LE and Military.......(MONEY)........

but existing contracts must be fulfilled
including parts and service availability
otherwise the company would be in breach of contract

i agree that the companies could try and squeeze LE/mil, but it would have to be all of them otherwise one would prosper at the expense of the others

That's not entirely true.  They have to use guns that meet certain guidelines (design specs) etc.  I.e. safeties, double action trigger pulls, specific weights on trigger pulls.  Their officers will also demand reliability and functional use. If you saw glock / sw / sig go out.... yeah LEO would be fucked.  They are also *required* to have the guns serviced, and fixed etc. Parts could be made unavailable.  They could also place shrink wrap licensing on the outside of the packages and make it a copyright violation to sell to LEO.

I don't think this will work. LE and .gov are big customers. On the retail side, I'd like to see how local shops such as Security Equipment respond to such legislation. My guess is that they won't. I've bought from SEC before but their priority is LE, their pricing and service reflects it.

I really don't see how penalizing LE would help. It's the politicians that make laws not LE. If anything this type of logic actually supports the gun ban. 

I really don't see how penalizing LE would help. It's the politicians that make laws not LE. If anything this type of logic actually supports the gun ban. 

It's true that politicians make the laws, but it's the LE that enforce them. Decreasing the ability for LE to get guns decreases their ability to forcefully enforce laws that people don't agree with, meaning the 2nd amendment is more secure.

im happy for those companies standing up for their rights, but im pretty sure even if 80% of the popular manufacturers stopped supporting le/mil, there would unfortunately be a scab company that will step in and fulfill those contracts.

I believe Barrett is also one of the firearm manufacturers taking that stance. 

Of the ones listed in the linked article, I doubt any of them are major players for supplying LE with firearms or other gear.  Even Barrett I believe is somewhat limited in what they provide for LE. 

The companies that do supply LE probably have large contracts with the major departments for multiple years, so that would likely be a limiting factor in them following suit, if they even wanted to. 

It's true that politicians make the laws, but it's the LE that enforce them. Decreasing the ability for LE to get guns decreases their ability to forcefully enforce laws that people don't agree with, meaning the 2nd amendment is more secure.

Really... So, decreasing LE ability to enforce the law benefits the 2a movement? Has the consensus digressed to the point that they are idiots? You do know that it is LE that keeps your family safe? Do you think crime is going to stop is you decrease the ability of LE? In fact decreasing the ability of LE is the sure way to get guns banned because you now back the government into a corner where the have to choose the rights of the people versus the safety of the people. History shows that government will always choose safety. I guess it stands true that common sense isn't always common.

Really... So, decreasing LE ability to enforce the law benefits the 2a movement? Has the consensus digressed to the point that they are idiots? You do know that it is LE that keeps your family safe? Do you think crime is going to stop is you decrease the ability of LE? In fact decreasing the ability of LE is the sure way to get guns banned because you now back the government into a corner where the have to choose the rights of the people versus the safety of the people. History shows that government will always choose safety. I guess it stands true that common sense isn't always common.

Decreasing LE ability to enforce the law (which laws are we talking about here?) both benefits and limits the 2a movement; it all depends on who you ask  LE keeps my family safe, at least to a certain extent, but they also defend people with money/power, as history shows.

Really... So, decreasing LE ability to enforce the law benefits the 2a movement? Has the consensus digressed to the point that they are idiots? You do know that it is LE that keeps your family safe? Do you think crime is going to stop is you decrease the ability of LE? In fact decreasing the ability of LE is the sure way to get guns banned because you now back the government into a corner where the have to choose the rights of the people versus the safety of the people. History shows that government will always choose safety. I guess it stands true that common sense isn't always common.

this is the same LE that rounded up asian americans and put them into camps for "national security"

the very same ones that allowed chinatown to burn to the ground.

the same LE that beat and shot at protesters asking for their natural born rights to equality.

LE that does no knock warrants on the wrong homes and ends up killing innocent families.

LE that went house to house after katrina confiscating guns and forcing people into govt camps.

LE that decides it's okay to burn down a house with a suspect in it with no due process of the law.

LE that left thousands to fend for themselves during the LA riots.

The LE does not protect the individuals or our families as their mission. They do not carry guns for our defense and they are not a preventive force when it comes to crime. They are a government endorsed monopoly on force and the less force the government has the safer we are all likely to be. Just following orders makes you as guilty as those giving the orders.

this is the same LE that rounded up asian americans and put them into camps for "national security"

the very same ones that allowed chinatown to burn to the ground.

the same LE that beat and shot at protesters asking for their natural born rights to equality.

LE that does no knock warrants on the wrong homes and ends up killing innocent families.

LE that went house to house after katrina confiscating guns and forcing people into govt camps.

LE that decides it's okay to burn down a house with a suspect in it with no due process of the law.

LE that left thousands to fend for themselves during the LA riots.

The LE does not protect the individuals or our families as their mission. They do not carry guns for our defense and they are not a preventive force when it comes to crime. They are a government endorsed monopoly on force and the less force the government has the safer we are all likely to be. Just following orders makes you as guilty as those giving the orders.

+1   

Really... So, decreasing LE ability to enforce the law benefits the 2a movement? Has the consensus digressed to the point that they are idiots? You do know that it is LE that keeps your family safe? Do you think crime is going to stop is you decrease the ability of LE? In fact decreasing the ability of LE is the sure way to get guns banned because you now back the government into a corner where the have to choose the rights of the people versus the safety of the people. History shows that government will always choose safety. I guess it stands true that common sense isn't always common.

1) In the big scheme of things with the current firearm ban/restrictions push, I would say yes it does benefit the 2a movement, and I'm not talking about the enforcement of laws, which of course is important to public safety. I'm talking about the government infringing on citizens 2nd Amendment rights. I posted this video on another thread but the guy narrating the video (after the idiot police chief) makes a lot of sense with his views regarding law enforcement vs citizens when it comes to firearms and the 2a.

2) IMO the government will never decrease LE firepower and if firearms industries impact their ability to procure their weapons of choice, so be it. However, firearm industries refusing to sell to LE agencies, will send a clear message to politicians and potentially play into their thought process. The firearm industries in general are huge 2a supporters and are taking a huge financial gamble in order to support citizens 2a rights. That says a lot; 2a rights are at stake and everyone has skin in the game.