Number of companies refusing to sell to government entities in anti-gun states continues to grow
by Jim Shepherd
The number of companies announcing a formal policy of not selling to law enforcement, individual officers, states or municipalities that have passed anti-gun ordinances or laws since the tragic December shooting in Connecticut is growing - daily- and there's no sign that the trend toward "new laws mean no new products" is slowing. If anything, more companies are getting behind the idea that punishing law-abiding citizens for the acts of crazies isn't acceptable conduct.
As of this writing, there hasn't been a single government response to those notices, but sooner or later, someone in those governments will realize the trend is not going to reverse. If anything, the tone has gotten progressively more harsh toward politicians who believe passing a law will prevent tragedies from happening.
Colorado seems to be the battleground state at this point. Magpul Industries has led the anti-legislation fight, promising to move out of Colorado if four anti-gun bills are passed and signed into law by Governor John Hickenlooper. Magpul's major suppliers have also promised to join the relocation, but the governor seems intent on passing the measures, regardless of the outcome.
In the interim, however, Magpul has decided to work to get their magazines into the hands of as many Colorado residents as possible. The company has established a program that allows state residents to purchase specific magazines directly from the company.
If you're thinking about getting into that program, you need to know that both the billing and shipping addresses must be in Colorado. And, no, the company's not going to sell 30-round magazines to Denver residents. There's already a ban in place there.
With companies stepping up their actions, it seems time for individual gun owners to get involved as well...suggestions include boycotts of products and promises not to visit those areas. As one angry gun owner posted "when the hotels are empty, the restaurants closed, their products have rotted in the fields and they see we're serious, maybe they'll reconsider their ill-conceived actions."
In Alabama, Guntersville Mayor Leigh Dollar may have realized her proposed ordinance to authorize that community's police officers to disarm potentially "unruly" citizens in an emergency isn't quite so acceptable as she'd imagined.
The ink she's bringing her community isn't positive. ...[G]un owners say they're going to be out in force for the city council meeting.
The Second Amendment Foundation has notified Mayor Dollar's that legal action is ahead- quickly- if she proceeds. As SAF's letter to Guntersville City Attorney Dan Warnes reads "The city of Guntersville has to authority to adopt or enforce such an ordinance."
That's not all...the SAF also put the city attorney on notice that the existing tax on firearms dealers and a prohibition on carrying firearms at farmers' markets are also violations of Alabama state law.
Admittedly, there's a growing backlash against those states and politicians who feel the urge to "do something" after Sandy Hook, but a single big question remains unanswered: can individuals overcome the nearly limitless war chest New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has pledged to fight against gun ownership?
With an estimated net worth of twenty five billion dollars, Bloomberg has pledged to spend "whatever it takes" to crackdown on guns and gun ownership. A more immediate return on his investment might be reopening the mental institutions New York closed, resulting in the release of hundreds of mentally disturbed people onto the streets.
As crazy it seems to pro-gun people, no one opposing gun ownership seems to believe helping the mentally disturbed would do anything to keep guns from forcing them to do bad things.
Personally, that's crazy thinking to me.
Republished from The Outdoor Wire.