Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Brad from Tennessee

But will they stop selling to LEO in California? Stop servicing LEO guns as well?


4 posted on 01/24/2014 1:37:16 PM PST by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: DBrow

“...But will they stop selling to LEO in California? Stop servicing LEO guns as well?...”

The article I read on Fox said that LEO organizations are exempt from having to have the microtechnology. However, EVERY gun manufacturer needs to quit selling in CA to EVERYONE; LEOs included and quit providing parts and service.
Just isolate the miserable communist POS completely.


8 posted on 01/24/2014 1:41:24 PM PST by lgjhn23 (It's easy to be liberal when you're dumber than a box of rocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: DBrow

LEO’s are exempt from the legislation.


13 posted on 01/24/2014 2:02:25 PM PST by dirtymac (Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: DBrow

“But will they stop selling to LEO in California? Stop servicing LEO guns as well?”

The answer, I hope, is YES!!


16 posted on 01/24/2014 2:06:32 PM PST by 2harddrive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: DBrow

“..But will they stop selling to LEO in California? Stop servicing LEO guns as well?..”

Barrett Firearms did. They outright flat refused to do business - sales, parts, repairs - with CA because of the .50 ban.


22 posted on 01/24/2014 2:23:41 PM PST by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: DBrow

The law has the potential to disarm California LEOs

No manufacturer is going to comply, because it affects their entire operations.


25 posted on 01/24/2014 2:37:54 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: DBrow

It’s not simple as Smith deciding not to sell to LE. Smith sells to distributors, who in turn sell to stores and any LE agency.
So while Smith could request none of their distributors sell to CA LE agencies, it would be up to them to decide if they wanted to comply.
And if somehow each one of these distributors did decide to turn down a lucrative LE purchase, it would be easy for someone in the CA gov to set up an out of state shell corp to make the purchase (for a nice little fee paid for by the taxpayers of course) and then transfer them to whatever CA LE agency wanted a new Smith.

So there’s really not a lot Smith or Ruger can do here, but hopefully Kimber won’t be making any new SIS models now.


43 posted on 01/24/2014 6:50:30 PM PST by Gen4ten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: DBrow
But will they stop selling to LEO in California? Stop servicing LEO guns as well?

Exactly. Not just S&W, either. ALL the gun companies should immediately stop selling to government and LEO agencies in Kalifornia.

When the contracts with the Feds expire, either re-word them to reflect a more favorable treatment or cancel and stop selling to the Feds until after the 2014 or possibly 2016 election cycle.

70 posted on 01/27/2014 9:00:31 AM PST by ExSoldier (Stand up and be counted... OR LINE UP AND BE NUMBERED...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson