Gun & Ammo Makers Should Follow Barrett's Lead...


PDA






Bubbles
June 2, 2005, 02:14 PM
Currently Barrett's backorders are running one year or more for rifles.

I wonder if this is why?

http://img266.echo.cx/img266/6812/barrett2vo.jpg

If you enjoyed reading about "Gun & Ammo Makers Should Follow Barrett's Lead..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Erich
June 2, 2005, 02:58 PM
Oh, yeah - the guy is great! When people laud Bill Ruger, I just roll my eyes and think of Barrett. :)

foghornl
June 2, 2005, 03:10 PM
I would certainly hope that Win/Rem/Fed/Speer etc would follow Mr. Barrett's example, and tell Kali "NO ammo Sales to ANY agency or person in your Socialist Armpit of a state." ***

***No offense intended to the Good Guys 'n' Gals of California...you just are really hard to find.

P.S. Stock up before this foolishness becomes law.

Mugsy90/10
June 2, 2005, 03:16 PM
Anybody see him (Ronnie Barrett) on 60 Minutes last Sunday?

sumpnz
June 2, 2005, 05:08 PM
P.S. Stock up before this foolishness becomes law. Except that possesion of a non-serialized box (or part thereof) of ammo after a particular date is at least a misdemenor.

El Rojo
June 2, 2005, 05:28 PM
I would deal with it if gun makers and ammo manufactures started to cut us off wholesale. The only thing is how do you stop your ammo and guns from going to a wholesaler and then going to the PRK? Cutting off service is the only way to go and be efficient about it.

SnWnMe
June 2, 2005, 05:32 PM
I live in Kali and I will wholeheartedly support an arms and ammo embargo in Kali. We have passed so many gun laws that crime is just a memory. Our cops should feel perfectly safe with BP revolvers.

No ammo or arms sales to any Kali state or local agencies.

TMM
June 2, 2005, 07:04 PM
w00t! that would be great if all firearms manufacturers refused to deal with kali...

then they'd need to use antique muzzle loaders and BP revos.

*giggles*
~TMM

The Grand Inquisitor
June 2, 2005, 07:20 PM
I'm sorry, I still can't think of one situation that a cop would need a .50 BMG, ever.

But besides that, Right On Mr. Barrett, to hell with California.

dasmi
June 2, 2005, 07:23 PM
then they'd need to use antique muzzle loaders and BP revos.
No, then they'd start suing, until a judge ordered a manufacturer to provide weapons and ammo to California agencies.

Mulliga
June 2, 2005, 07:34 PM
I'm sorry, I still can't think of one situation that a cop would need a .50 BMG, ever.

The average officer might not, but I could see the utility of having one or two .50 BMG rifles for snipers - better to be prepared for the worst than to be caught off guard. It's improbable, but someone could use an armored car as a getaway vehicle, or they could be holding hostages in a very remote location. You just never know.

And, as always, "need" is never a criterion for whether someone should have a firearm.

El Rojo
June 2, 2005, 07:40 PM
It's improbable, but someone could use an armored car as a getaway vehicleWhy would officers need a .50BMG for an armored car unless the vehicle is stopped and the occupants are shooting out of the gun ports? Plus, remember the guy in the bulldozer in Colorado, they tried a .50 BMG on him and it didn't work. How thick is an armored car?

Randy in Arizona
June 2, 2005, 10:29 PM
El Rojo - How thick is an armored car?

The ones I used to bounce around in had 1/8" of high carbon, sorta hardened steel, 2" of fiberglass insulation, and a sheet of 18 gauge steel to cover the insulation. The laminated glass was more of a barrier to projectiles than the 'armored' walls of the truck. I said bounce because the maker would spring them for the heaviest possible load, not the average load. Each box of coin weighs from about 40 to 50 pounds.

The alertness of the crew is the main factor protecting the contents, not the truck. More and more I see vans & mini-vans being used. I can't blame them, the small trucks would get about 5 MPG, the bigger ones about 3 MPG back in the 70's.

Standing Wolf
June 2, 2005, 11:11 PM
Once upon a time, Barrett's kind of guns was the norm, not the exception.

buzz_knox
June 3, 2005, 08:53 AM
No, then they'd start suing, until a judge ordered a manufacturer to provide weapons and ammo to California agencies.

Can't be done. But what they could do would be to seize a factory via eminent domain and have the state manufacture the items. It's the socialist way, after all.

dolanp
June 3, 2005, 09:11 AM
Yup they'll drive the private industry out and take over the factory, then raise taxes to pay for the expensive ammunition. Oh the irony.

Hey maybe then people will start suing the state of California when people die since after all they manufactured the evil bullets.

Elmer
June 3, 2005, 12:01 PM
An arms embargo to California is a nice dream, but it's never going to happen. Ronnie Barrett owns his own company, and can do as he pleases. None of the CEO's of the major companies have that luxury, they have stockholders to answer to.

Barrett's statement is mainly political feel good stuff. As other's have pointed out, he's not giving up much in the way of sales. You might notice he didn't stop selling to the US Government when the AWB was enacted. In fact, he increased his sales.

Stop pipe dreaming, and start writing letters and checks.



And, as far as Barrett's sales going up because of his position on sales to California agencies? No. The ban itself is fueling his sales to the other states, just as the 1989 California AWB increased sales in other states.

Vernal45
June 3, 2005, 12:05 PM
better to be prepared for the worst than to be caught off guard.

Yep, thats why the citizens of California need them to. If the people cant have them, LEO's should not be allowed them either.

If you enjoyed reading about "Gun & Ammo Makers Should Follow Barrett's Lead..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!