Firearms Manufacturers Refuse to Sell Guns to Law Enforcement Agencies

Infidel Bloggers Alliance: Since New York State enacted its restrictive new gun laws, many manufacturers have sent that state (and others) a message: If local governments are going to severely restrict the ability of citizens to own guns, then these companies will not be selling to law enforcement in those areas.

I heard on the Marc Levin  show today that firearms manufacturers, in response to state and local infringements on citizens, are increasingly refusing to sell or service, or provide ammunition to, Law Enforcement departments in localities which curtail the rights of their CITIZENS to the same access to firearms and ammunition.

This is "not-quite-breaking-news"; apparently this is a trend which has being ongoing for several days,  and I only heard about it this afternoon.

It's also "not-quite-breaking-news" in that nearly seven years ago (april, 2005) we reported here that Ronnie Barrett had refused to service his .50 caliber rifles which he had previously sold to the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) because of that city and county policies.

Has it taken THAT long for the rest of the the firearms manufacturers to wake up and smell the coffee?

I won't even attempt to provide all the links to bloggers and "Main Stream Media" which are reporting this news.  You can do the search using such keywords as "police" and "Firearms Manufacturers" and "Refuse".  And I encourage you to do so.  I only cite The Infidel because he has a nice list of manufacturers who have jumped on the bandwagon (belatedly) ... and by this time, the list is outdated already.

Anti-gun people have been after Firearms Manufacturers for YEARS to force them (unfairly) to take responsibility for misuse by end-users of firearms which have been retailed by dealers under Federal restrictions.   And the gun makers have been quiet ... complacent, except in the courts .. in response.

It's about time that these manufacturers, wholesalers and even retailers (such as "Cheaper Than Dirt") took a stand.

I applaud them for their new-found assertiveness.  Too long have they played the meek mouse under continuing attacks.  I think they should have followed the lead of Barrett Arms years ago, but I won't criticize them because "Hey, it's a business, and you don't offend your customers!"

At last, their customers have offended THEM by the use of double-standards which have affected ... The Business.

Every year, the government has infringed upon the market by threats of federal 'standards' which are both unconstitutional and anti-business.  The gun and ammo makers tried to keep it going in the lean years, and when an anti-gun president is elected (or re-elected), the business fail to keep up with demands of new customers.  This negatively impacts their ability to serve the needs of their 'regular' customers, as we have seen for the past five years.  And this is the same situation which other businesses in America have experienced;  they don't have a legitimate 5-year plan, because they don't know which way the President will jump from one year to the next.

Hell, from one month to the next!

I think that ALL businesses in America might take heart by this example.   There needs to be an uprising against uncontrolled Federal infringement on business (and, to a lesser degree, at the state level) because of wildcat variances of governmental regulations.

I don't know about you, but I'm tired of paying $50 for a brick (1,000) of primers .. which sold for $85 for a five-brick "Sleeve" (5,000) of primers ten years ago at bulk rates.  And you can't even find them in stores at any price!  It was two years after Obama's first election before my local Bi-mart would sell me more than 200 primers at a single purchase; their supply simply could not accommodate the demand.

Is this grounds for impeachment?

Probably not.

But it ought to be.