Gun retailers stop selling guns and ammo to police - Polidicks

[img]http://puu.sh/27n1Z[/img] [quote]On Feb. 15, gun retailer Cheaper Than Dirt became the sixth gun and ammunition retailer to announce they will no longer sell their products and inventory to police and other government agencies in states that have instituted 2nd Amendment restrictions on their citizens. In a new case of unintended consequence, gun and ammo sellers are choosing to follow the letter of the law, and holding law enforcement to the same standards that the law now holds the public.[/quote] [url]http://www.examiner.com/article/unintended-consequence-gun-retailers-stop-selling-guns-and-ammo-to-police[/url] [url]http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/20/have-any-more-gun-makers-stopped-selling-to-anti-2nd-amendment-states-oh-yeah-lots-more/[/url] [Letter from Barrett firearms to LAPD] [url]http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/836082/posts[/url] [list of all gun makers that joined] Olympic Arms, Inc La Rue Tactical EFI, LLC – Extreme Firepower York Arms Templar Custom Cheaper Than Dirt Bullwater Enterprises Westfork Armory Smith Enterprise Alex Arms Spike’s Tactical Quality Arms Liberty Suppressors Doublestar Corp American Spirit Arms Trident Armory Head Down Products J&G Sales

Nice.

I'm ok with this, an interesting way to protest.

Wouldn't it make more sense to not sell to politicians? The police don't make the laws, they just have to enforce them.

[QUOTE=squids_eye;39695673]Wouldn't it make more sense to not sell to politicians? The police don't make the laws, they just have to enforce them.[/QUOTE] There's more effect to hit the people actually enforcing it, the politicians aren't the ones who need any of it. [editline]23rd February 2013[/editline] Plus the politicians are sure to notice if the police complain.

[QUOTE=squids_eye;39695673]Wouldn't it make more sense to not sell to politicians? The police don't make the laws, they just have to enforce them.[/QUOTE] It wouldn't be an issue if they only refused to tell to politicians. What they're doing does make it an issue. Fuck ninja'd.

Fine by me. The police are subject to the law just the same as we are, and if we aren't allowed to buy 30 round magazines because "we don't need them" they shouldn't either. Watch the restrictions disappear overnight.

Well, considering the restrictions are probably already putting pressure on them financially, it seems really risky to ignore your biggest customers

Why do we try to ban guns like a .50cal rifle? Glocks kill way more people every day than a barrett probably does in six months. When we look at gun control from the perspective of "what can a madman use to hurt people?" we look only at anecdotal situations to spark a gun control debate, when what we need to look at are the 11,000 people killed every year from gun violence that ARENT killed by Dylan Klebolds and Eric Harrises and ARENT killed with .50cal rifles or street sweepers; they're killed by common thugs and criminals with Glocks, Mac 10s, chinese knockoffs, and Tec 9s

[QUOTE=prooboo;39695751]Why do we try to ban guns like a .50cal rifle? Glocks kill way more people every day than a barrett probably does in six months. When we look at gun control from the perspective of "what can a madman use to hurt people?" we look only at anecdotal situations to spark a gun control debate, when what we need to look at are the 11,000 people killed every year from gun violence that ARENT killed by Dylan Klebolds and Eric Harrises and ARENT killed with .50cal rifles or street sweepers; they're killed by common thugs and criminals with Glocks, Mac 10s, chinese knockoffs, and Tec 9s[/QUOTE] I'd be willing to put money on nobody being killed in the US by a barrett or an automatic weapon in the past 10 years [editline]23rd February 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=prooboo;39695751]Why do we try to ban guns like a .50cal rifle? Glocks kill way more people every day than a barrett probably does in six months. When we look at gun control from the perspective of "what can a madman use to hurt people?" we look only at anecdotal situations to spark a gun control debate, when what we need to look at are the 11,000 people killed every year from gun violence that ARENT killed by Dylan Klebolds and Eric Harrises and ARENT killed with .50cal rifles or street sweepers; they're killed by common thugs and criminals with Glocks, Mac 10s, chinese knockoffs, and Tec 9s[/QUOTE] kebold and harris had an awb compliant hi-point 995 and an illegal SBS. [editline]23rd February 2013[/editline] and mac 10s and tec 9s simply don't exist on the street, chinese knockoffs were banned for import common street thugs use .38 or .32 caliber revolvers, .25 ACP and .380 ACP handguns

[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;39695776]I'd be willing to put money on nobody being killed in the US by a barrett or an automatic weapon in the past 10 years [editline]23rd February 2013[/editline] kebold and harris had an awb compliant hi-point 995 and an illegal SBS.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't say nobody's been killed with [I]any[/I] automatic weapon, but serious, honest to God machine guns probably haven't killed anyone in at least 20. I'd bet nobody who's gone through the trouble of actually acquiring a true machine gun would ever consider killing anyone with it.

Ok so these agencies will just buy from other countries causing more Americans to be put out of work Makes sense that the industry that profits off paranoia would be absolutely nuts itself

[QUOTE=prooboo;39695751]Why do we try to ban guns like a .50cal rifle? Glocks kill way more people every day than a barrett probably does in six months. When we look at gun control from the perspective of "what can a madman use to hurt people?" we look only at anecdotal situations to spark a gun control debate, when what we need to look at are the 11,000 people killed every year from gun violence that ARENT killed by Dylan Klebolds and Eric Harrises and ARENT killed with .50cal rifles or street sweepers; they're killed by common thugs and criminals with Glocks, Mac 10s, chinese knockoffs, and Tec 9s[/QUOTE] Nobody wants to pay 12 thousand dollars to buy a 50 caliber rifle and over a five dollars a shot to shoot it.

But the point of the police are to protect civilians. Should they not have a tactical advantaged over the average person?

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;39695860]Nobody wants to pay 12 thousand dollars to buy a 50 caliber rifle and over a five dollars a shot to shoot it.[/QUOTE] With .303 nearing $2 a round I might as well be shelling out for .50 cal for target shooting

[QUOTE=No_Excuses;39695865]But the point of the police are to protect civilians. Should they not have a tactical advantaged over the average person?[/QUOTE] "We do not halt sales to individual officers even in problematic states. I am a former Police Officer myself, and the staffer who stimulated the recent anger is a currently serving one. We are well familiar with the fact that most rifles serving Police Officers are purchased by the officers themselves, and that they shouldn’t be punished for the actions of their political elite. We consider sales to those sate subdivisions which are not engaged or potentially engaged with disarming its citizens. DNR and Forestry Departments, for instance, sometimes serve in remote areas that conceal drug farms and their officers deserve good hardware." emphasis added by Armalite

[QUOTE=No_Excuses;39695865]But the point of the police are to protect civilians. Should they not have a tactical advantaged over the average person?[/QUOTE] The point of police is to enforce policy. They have no duty to protect anyone unless special circumstances exist between them and another party. There's no point in enabling them to enforce a policy that they don't agree with.

-snip-

[QUOTE=teh pirate;39695825]I wouldn't say nobody's been killed with [I]any[/I] automatic weapon, but serious, honest to God machine guns probably haven't killed anyone in at least 20. I'd bet nobody who's gone through the trouble of actually acquiring a true machine gun would ever consider killing anyone with it.[/QUOTE] there have been 2 cases in the past 100 years where someone was murdered with a legally owned automatic weapon in the united states. both were by cops

[QUOTE=Zeke129;39695859]Ok so these agencies will just buy from other countries causing more Americans to be put out of work Makes sense that the industry that profits off paranoia would be absolutely nuts itself[/QUOTE]Don't cops have to buy their own guns? What countries are they going to buy from, the cheap ones?

Nobody is above the law.

Oh, yeah, good idea, stop selling them to the only people who actually need them.

I've read about this like a week ago. It definitely won't immediately change the politicians' minds, but at least it's one more piece of weight to reform these idiotic laws.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;39695859]Ok so these agencies will just buy from other countries causing more Americans to be put out of work Makes sense that the industry that profits off paranoia would be absolutely nuts itself[/QUOTE] It doesn't work like that. The firearms business is booming especially with the recent panic buying. Back orders are becoming commonplace. Honestly, I'd be surprised if this puts a significant dent in the company's profits. gj trying to portray the companies as crazy though. points for effort.

ohh, nice. government backfire. I don't think people are going to like the police being defenseless though.

[QUOTE=Rusty100;39695967]Oh, yeah, good idea, stop selling them to the only people who actually need them.[/QUOTE] hi rusty I'll just take that wonderful opinion of yours and put it in the garbage where it belongs [editline]23rd February 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Glaber;39696006]ohh, nice. government backfire. I don't think people are going to like the police being defenseless though.[/QUOTE] I don't think the people are going to like themselves being defenseless

[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;39696012]hi rusty I'll just take that wonderful opinion of yours and put it in the garbage where it belongs [/QUOTE] alrighty have fun living in a backwards gun zealot country while the rest of the world just laughs at you i guess?

[QUOTE=Valdor;39695700]There's more effect to hit the people actually enforcing it, the politicians aren't the ones who need any of it. [editline]23rd February 2013[/editline] Plus the politicians are sure to notice if the police complain.[/QUOTE] so the police should go out unarmed and probably get shot to death so that the firearms industry can pretend its forming a coherent protest? i mean granted the police will just buy from another seller the entire concept behind the protest is kneejerk and stupid as hell [editline]24th February 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=ButtsexV3;39696012]hi rusty I'll just take that wonderful opinion of yours and put it in the garbage where it belongs[/QUOTE] hey wow at first i agreed with rusty but after reading this really well thought out retort i think i'm on your side now!

What a fucking stupid way to protest.

[QUOTE=Rusty100;39695967]Oh, yeah, good idea, stop selling them to the only people who actually need them.[/QUOTE] It's not like there's a government that can give it to them or anything, being that we have the most put into defense spending twice over that of Russia and China (combined).