Optics Planet no longer selling >10rd mags

Status
Not open for further replies.
Steve S. said:
I have been limited to a 10 round magazine (+1 in the chamber) by the Missouri Conservation Commission for hunting deer for many years now (semi-auto rifles). I do not know what logic was used for that legal conclusion. MO is very pro-gun but the MDC has seen fit to limit capacity. My AR came with a 15 round mag but I could not use it so I purchased a 10 round mag to be legal. What seems ironic (to me) is a government agency limited the mag capacity for deer hunting but the state government did not restrict capacity for the anti’s perceived people safety. Another irony, we pro-gunners did not seem to say a word about the capacity limitation for hunting deer - it was just OK to do that. It seems like upside down world around here to me - crazy, illogical and inconsistent legislation. Good shooting.
Click to expand...

Because shooting a deer shouldn't take 5 rounds- let alone 10 or 15. I shudder thinking about some yahoo shooting 10 or more rounds at a deer in rapid succession. That's just terrible sportsmanship. Limiting rounds in firearms for hunting compels people to actually aim at what they're shooting. And it has little to do with ARs- I had to plug my Browning A500 (5 round capacity) to limit my capacity to 3 rounds for duck hunting when I was a teenager.
 
I don't like OpticsPlanet and after I tried to buy a red dot through them, I swore to never bother with them again. This just makes me know I'm right even more. Natchez Shooters Supply is better anyway, just as well priced too.
 
Always feels a bit weird swearing to never buy from a company you'd probably not bother with in the first place but Optics Planet, you're on my no buy list!
 
I am also “restricted” to three rounds in my shotgun when hunting migratory birds and I also never found that to be a problem - I think that CLP Is onto something - the mag capacity for deer and migratory birds is a “government” magazine capacity “restriction” that was instituted so that hunters (as CLP states and he is probably right) “don’t bang away” at game while hunting - in other words, for safety/ accuracy reasons. That is exactly the argument the anti’s would use for not wanting a gunman to “bang away” at school kids - why do you need 30 rounds in a magazine - they want their children to have (at least) preceived safety when they go to school. That is why I say I live in “crazy world” - the government will readily restrict magazine capacity to limit “banging away” by hunters (and we gun owners take a “no problem” stance - take that right away, i’m OK with that logic) but we go crazy when a group (or possibly the government) wants to restrict capacity for the safety of their children - CRAZY WORLD! - we are not consistent with our thought process or our argument. We support limitations for the fauna but not people - they would have a field day with that one - I think that is one if the reasons why they look at gun owners and scratch their heads.
 
And on that note....

So many here scream States Rights... it's the businesses choice to not make a cake for Same Sex cpls... etc... then when something actually affects themselves, take a vastly different tone.


IM more concerned with that the lying part than thier choice of which they have the right to make.
 
Sounds like they no longer wish to be in the firearms marketplace, lets help them out by doing all we can to help them get out.

We saw this same stuff after Sandy Hook. Remember how many places quit selling ARs? This whole thing shows the futility of gun laws that don't work.
 
Steve S. said:
I am also “restricted” to three rounds in my shotgun when hunting migratory birds and I also never found that to be a problem - I think that CLP Is onto something - the mag capacity for deer and migratory birds is a “government” magazine capacity “restriction” that was instituted so that hunters (as CLP states and he is probably right) “don’t bang away” at game while hunting - in other words, for safety/ accuracy reasons. That is exactly the argument the anti’s would use for not wanting a gunman to “bang away” at school kids - why do you need 30 rounds in a magazine - they want their children to have (at least) preceived safety when they go to school. That is why I say I live in “crazy world” - the government will readily restrict magazine capacity to limit “banging away” by hunters (and we gun owners take a “no problem” stance - take that right away, i’m OK with that logic) but we go crazy when a group (or possibly the government) wants to restrict capacity for the safety of their children - CRAZY WORLD! - we are not consistent with our thought process or our argument. We support limitations for the fauna but not people - they would have a field day with that one - I think that is one if the reasons why they look at gun owners and scratch their heads.
Click to expand...



Last time I checked, there sure as hell was limitations on how many rounds one could legally fire at people. What are you talking about?
 
While I believe the explanation sounds plausible, I would like to know why it took so long for them to come into compliance? Did they think it didn't apply to them if they were shipping out of state? Did some local anti blow the whistle on them? Have they been charged with a violation under the law?

I want to believe they are just victims of Illinois politics, but the timing is suspicious. I've bought a lot of stuff from OpticsPlanet. I have also had very good service from them to date. But without a clearer explanation of what's happening--including why now--they may recede in my rear view mirror.
 
I emailed them- this is their reply:

"Thank you for reaching out to us, and giving us a chance to respond. We're aware of a recent rumor suggesting that we made decisions to restrict the sale of magazines with capacities greater than 10 rounds due to recent events.

We want to assure you this is not the case. Insufficient internal communication led to a misread message. We are not offering magazines with capacities greater than 10 rounds to the general public due to our location in Northbrook, Illinois, and local laws that limit our ability to sell these. Being an internet retailer serving fifty states can be complex at times, and frankly, our location in Illinois only adds to this complexity. We may not always like the law, but we need to follow it.

You can see the ordinance in question here:

https://library.municode.com/il/cook_county/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTIGEOR_CH54LIPEMIBURE_ARTIIIDEWEDE_DIV4BLHOASWEBA_S54-212ASWELAPAMASAPREX

At OpticsPlanet, we have never used the inflamed tensions and emotions of current events to drive decision making. Our support of the 2nd Amendment is made undeniably clear by the products we offer. We are one of the few online retailers who never stopped offering completely legal products based on public or political pressure. We do not raise prices during frenzies. We do, however, follow the laws and make adjustments when legally required.

While we wish we could be your provider of these magazines, our hands are tied in this matter. We sincerely apologize for our role in creating any confusion, and hope you'll continue to support us as many loyal customers have over the past 18 years."

However, the law they cite apparently went into effect 7-17-2013- but they're only now observing it.
Doesn't smell right.
 
CLP said:
Because shooting a deer shouldn't take 5 rounds- let alone 10 or 15. I shudder thinking about some yahoo shooting 10 or more rounds at a deer in rapid succession. That's just terrible sportsmanship. Limiting rounds in firearms for hunting compels people to actually aim at what they're shooting. And it has little to do with ARs- I had to plug my Browning A500 (5 round capacity) to limit my capacity to 3 rounds for duck hunting when I was a teenager.
Click to expand...

While I agree in principal I have stood post on group drives and had deer filter out in pairs and triples faster than I could reload my single mag in my .30-06. Had I had my AR we would have had more deer down.

In my state group hunting is quite legal, anf it is often difficult to fill all the tags folks want for meat in the freezer, it sucks passing up good meat when the guys and gals missing out are the ones crawling through brambles and traversing steep slopes and gullies.

I know, Im usually that guy who doesn't get the tag after all the work.
 
Optics Planet has been on my no shopping list for years. This is just another reason for me. I ordered a light/laser from them because it was on sale. I waited, rather patiently for 3 months for it to ship. Couldn't get anyone on the phone or email. AND they charged my card after the first month. I sent them one final email stating to cancel the order and wanted a refund. My bank returned the money once I proved I never got what I paid for. Much hassle to deal with a bad retailer.
 
I have placed a few orders with Optics Planet, even used their THR 5% discount. Never had a problem with them.
If they are just now complying with the local law (heavy anti-2A zone), that has been on the books a little while now. They could be taking leagal advice and watching how they word their responses. In their area, you know any prosecutor would love to gleen something/anything off the internet that they could used against a pro 2A company.
I'll give them the benifit of doubt and see how this pans out. Hopefully Optics Planet will move out of that area for their sake.
 
CLP said:
However, the law they cite apparently went into effect 7-17-2013- but they're only now observing it.
Doesn't smell right.
Click to expand...
Wish I'd read that before I looked it up and that law has been around since 2013. Whitewash! They don't need anyone's business but LE, no more business from me.
 
A good while back I was shopping for Hornady 45ACP dies with the taper crimp die. Found it on Optics Planet in stock, so it said. Ordered it and next thing you know I get an e-mail from them saying it is on backorder. To make a long story short got my dies from them about 4 months later, by then you could get them just about anywhere ,but they still had the best price so I let my order stand. I haven't even looked at their web site since then. They are off my shopping list.
 
What an embarrassment for Optics Planet. They deserve every piece of business they lose for their failure to effectively communicate, having a HQ in a location that bans some of their products, and finally just for being really difficult to deal with - my poor experience echos some others here.
 
I don't have a dog in this fight but I find the situation interesting. Cook County law states;

"Sec. 54-212. - Assault weapons, and large-capacity magazines; sale prohibited; exceptions.

(a)

It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, sell, offer or display for sale, give, lend, transfer ownership of, acquire, carry or possess any assault weapon or large capacity magazine in Cook County..."


Optics Planet is discontinuing INTERNET sales based on this law. So apparently Cook County is regulating any business conducted over the Internet solely because the physical location of the company is based in Cook County, not on where the purchaser lives.

I wonder if this also be part of a larger attempt by Cook County to regulate Internet sales? Internet sales are a hot button issue over State and Local Governments not being able to collect sales tax.

Optics Planet is a interesting 2A case. However do they have the big bucks to fight this case against the very deep pockets of the Democrat machine? I would suspect not and they will need significant financial and legal support if they are to fight this.

And by boycotting Optics Planet you have enable Cook County Democrats to score a significant anti-gun victory.
 
I just sent them an email and got an auto reply that my message will be reviewed in 24 to 48 hours.
I was on hold and they have some of the worst hold music that sounds like an out of tune squawky middle school band. As I type this someone finally answered after holding 8 minutes.

When I got someone I then asked why I couldn't order one of the magazines online that was larger than 10 rounds. She said I was incorrect and that they didn't have any magazines larger than 10 rounds for sale. When I said that they were on the website she got rude. She then said to hold on and I'm now on hold again.

I finally was transferred to a voice mail box, I didn't get the name as it was fast but it sounded like Alan. I left a message saying that I was having problems ordering an item online and that when I called the woman was rude to me. I left my name and phone number and now we will see if they call me back.

So, right now, it seems that not only are they lying on their website, they're having their CSRs lie, and then transferring complaint calls to a supervisor's voice mail.
 
I don't get why it would be against the law to sell out of state. There are still many gunmakers in states where some of their products are not allowed to be purchased; that doesn't make it illegal for them to ship to state where their products are legal. There's something fishy here, and it ain't my tuna sandwich...
 
George P said:
I don't get why it would be against the law to sell out of state. There are still many gunmakers in states where some of their products are not allowed to be purchased; that doesn't make it illegal for them to ship to state where their products are legal. There's something fishy here, and it ain't my tuna sandwich...
Click to expand...

When their CSR says they don’t sell magazines larger than 10 rounds and they are on the website something is going on.

To me it looks like a rush job to appease those calling for gun control. My guess is that someone made a quick decision and then they didn’t discuss it with everyone. The put up a message to justify the policy change probably hoping that we wouldn’t get offended. Instead people like me are even more offended. Cowering to the left and mobs calling for action is bad enough. Getting caught in multiple lies is worse.

Now I’m going to wait to make a final decision but, right now, the burden of proof is on them to convince me I’m mistaken.

So I’m waiting on a response to my phone call and email. I don’t expect a call back but we’ll see.
 
danez71 said:
And on that note....

So many here scream States Rights... it's the businesses choice to not make a cake for Same Sex cpls... etc... then when something actually affects themselves, take a vastly different tone.

IM more concerned with that the lying part than thier choice of which they have the right to make.
Click to expand...

As a business owner. I agree with you. I don't care what their policy is. If I agree with it and they have good prices and service, I may do business with them. If I don't agree with them I can choose not to do business with them. But poor service and/or lying and claiming some "government policy" that doesn't exist means not only will I not do business with them, but I'll make sure to spread the word as fast as possible.

As I posted before, I'm waiting on a reply. But based on what we've seen so far, I don't expect anything. I hope they prove me wrong, and also hope that they have a real good explanation.
 
They don't need to move out of state. They can move a few miles from their current location to another county that doesn't have this restriction. I'm in DuPage County, a few minutes west of Cook County and am not subject to this restriction. Why they don't move and avoid this situation is what I don't understand.
 
Hokie_PhD said:
As a business owner. I agree with you. I don't care what their policy is. If I agree with it and they have good prices and service, I may do business with them. If I don't agree with them I can choose not to do business with them. But poor service and/or lying and claiming some "government policy" that doesn't exist means not only will I not do business with them, but I'll make sure to spread the word as fast as possible.

As I posted before, I'm waiting on a reply. But based on what we've seen so far, I don't expect anything. I hope they prove me wrong, and also hope that they have a real good explanation.
Click to expand...

Right!

I don't like the policy and it doesn't even affect me. But its their choice and it would be up to me to decide from there if I wanted to boycott if I thought it might help a greater cause or not (greater cause of not caving to antis)

Lying though? That's a whole other issue that for which I default to 'avoid' status.


I
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Scope Recommendations for Marlin 983S .22 Mag
Replies
10
Views
2K
Sock Puppet
S
2
  • Locked
Life on Planet Bizarro
Replies
2
Views
702
MrAcheson
M
H
  • Locked
Idea regarding "Gun-Control".
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
160
Views
8K
gossamer
G
G
  • Locked
My review of a new optic
Replies
17
Views
3K
Greywolf
G
G
  • Locked
Paypal no longer allowing firearms-related transactions
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
DDGator
D
Back
Top