Is Magpul playing both sides?

[goon]

So we have all noticed Magpul's efforts to oppose anti-gun legislation in Colorado and their latest announcement to he effect that they are planning to expedite direct orders to CO residents if need be.

Into this discussion, I would like to interject a report I read about on TTAG noting that Magpul is still comfortable selling their products to LEO's in states with restrictive gun laws.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...nues-sales-to-ban-state-leos/?fb_source=pubv1

Personally, I do appreciate what they have done in this fight so far for the Second Amendment.
I also think that if a sheriff in upstate NY needs magazines, even though he is in NY, he may still support the RKBA but have no power to do anything about it. That doesn't mean I want him less able to secure the community he is responsible for.
Also, I have no idea how much Magpul relies on LEO business or contracts. Sure, "we" are buying every magazine we can get now, but half those orders would evaporate if it was announced that the AW ban efforts were officially dead tomorrow. It could be that LEO business is essential in the long run.
And money from LEO or their agencies in NYC or LA is still green and can still go toward efforts to promote the Second Amendment.

But I'd still have been happier if they'd have told everyone opposing the RKBA to shove it.

Thoughts?

 

[NickEllis]

blasphemy!

 

[BigBore44]

Brother is an officer in Fayettevile Arkansas. They are issued AR's but are required to purchase their own aftermarket mags. They all choose Magpul. Magpul is a business first and foremost. And the officers in NY, CA, CO still need mags. And I personally want them to have the best. I have no idea the percentage of sales for LE but I don't know a single officer that carries an AR (and I know a LOT) that doesn't carry Pmags. I wouldn't judge Magpul to harshly on this one. They never pulled any CTD crap.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Yes, they are playing both sides. Most gun companies involved in any sort of protest restrictive selling are playing both sides to some extent as well. A lot just don't sell to New York government agencies, but will sell to California or Colorado, for example. A bunch claim to be boycotting government agencies of bad states, but in reality have virtually no market share in those areas.

Understand that like gun owners, gun and gun accessory manufacturers and dealers are not ever going to be able to engage in 100% boycotts of anti-gun anything. They pick and choose. In the case of the gun businesses, some also pick and choose in a manner that garners positive publicity. That is just shrewd business.

 

[akv3g4n]

That doesn't mean I want him less able to secure the community he is responsible for.

While I agree with this statement, the legislators in these states have basically said that these weapons and magazines of a certain capacity are built for war and mass killings. By that logic, LEO guarding the streets of America should have no more need for them than the civilians of these states.

While we know that this is untrue, the hope is that when the LEO of these states have to abide by the same laws as the civilians, more pressure would be put on the representatives of that state to change the laws.

 

[Robert]

They also put in an express lane for residents of Colorado. I can call them up, order 10 mags and have them shipped to my door in very short order. Would I rather they didn't deal with folks in NY or CA or IL, sure. But no one is perfect, and they are still a top notch company.

 

[Ryanxia]

While I agree with this statement, the legislators in these states have basically said that these weapons and magazines of a certain capacity are built for war and mass killings. By that logic, LEO guarding the streets of America should have no more need for them than the civilians of these states.

While we know that this is untrue, the hope is that when the LEO of these states have to abide by the same laws as the civilians, more pressure would be put on the representatives of that state to change the laws.

This. If they "don't belong on the streets of America" then cops are included. Why would a peace officer need a weapon of war anyways? Or a magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds?

 

[ny32182]

While I love and applaud the gesture that several smaller companies out there have made by stating they will not sell to antigun states, it is symbolic in nature only and will not have any real impact on what the cops in those areas can get.

I would be SHOCKED if any major manufacturer like FN, SIG, HK, S&W, etc adopted this policy. They are businesses first, some of which answer to shareholders ultimately, and they will simply not cut police sales in major markets.

If you are only going to buy from companies that do, you're going to be buying from a mighty short list of companies.

 

[CoRoMo]

Does Magpul even sell directly to anyone other than a retail/wholesale distributor?

I think they only sale to places like MidwayUSA, and we know that Midway doesn't sell to government agencies in 'infringement states'.

 

[mdauben]

Does Magpul even sell directly to anyone other than a retail/wholesale distributor?
.

Not sure about right now but they did in the past. I ordered some directly from them when I first got my own AR.

 

[mister_murphy]

While I see both sides of the issue, some of the companies who are restricting or banning sales to some LE are still selling to other LE. So end of the day, the paper statement is worth what any other piece of paper that's in the recycle bin is worth.

The issue is deeply complex. With people in states that have firearms freedom acts wanting to keep things local (or why would they have wanted the firearm freedom act?), to people already in ban states who would prefer to restrict the locals but support the feds to ease state restrictions.

I saw a person on another forum mention something along the lines of (paraphrasing)"so, they cant sell LE an AR-15, they will just sell them a M-16 or M-4 instead, after all no one is fussing about that difference between the public sales and LE" and it can go on and on...

 

[Killian]

Ultimately, if they continue to provide accessories to law enforcement and more restrictive laws continue to pop up either in a state-by-state or national level (particularly at the national level) then their business is done. By taking law enforcement agencies off the market, you raise another group of voices saying "This is not working." The voices of law enforcement are more likely to be listened to in state houses and mayor's offices. If law enforcement become the only people who can purchase Magpul's products, Magpul will either become a much poorer, financially, company...or it will have to go out of business. I think it makes good financial sense, in the long run, not to exempt withholding sales to any resident of any state with restrictive laws. The more people who can't get mags--especially law enforcement and their relationship to legislators--the more voices that will be against these types of laws.

 

[itsa pain]

I do not understand how many mags do leos need?? after getting a few that is it.all total there are 800,000 leos including feds, there are 90-100 million gun owners. are people telling me the market for leos is more lucrative?? are they using the same math the govt uses for inflation and unemployment rate?

 

[goon]

Killian - I agree with the sentiment, but Magpul isn't the only producer of AR magazines. If they don't sell to police agencies in anti gun states, those agencies will just use USGI aluminum magazines or some other alternative. The flow will never be shut off entirely.

I'd still have preferred they close the police loophole, but I'm also trying to see it from a pragmatic point of view.
And they DID tell CO that they will leave the state if the magazine capacity restrictions become law, which is more than I have heard from Colt, Ruger, or DSA in Illinois.

 

[Killian]

Goon...but they wouldn't be using the preferred Magpul mags. They'd be using what they consider to be second best..and they'd know it.

 

[Fishbed77]

And the officers in NY, CA, CO still need mags.

They need mags, but of no higher capacity than citizens in those states can legally purchase.

 

[Creature]

Magpul just chose a side. And it is not ours.

 

[hso]

I do not think they're playing both sides.

They're working their angle in CO and working it very very deftly. They don't need to play the other angles being worked by other companies. The got their own "game" to win for the people of CO (and if the Antis are beaten in CO they're hurt everywhere).

 

[HorseSoldier]

Does Magpul even sell directly to anyone other than a retail/wholesale distributor?

Yeah, you can purchase direct from them. It's usually a bit cheaper to order their stuff through places like Brownells or Midway, in my experience, but I've ordered from them before on stuff that is back ordered or new stuff that isn't stocked by places like that yet. The ones I was issued in the .mil when working for the secret squirrels were a direct order we placed with op funds to Magpul as well.

(That said, ordering stuff from them now that I live in Alaska is a PITA, since unless they've changed practices, they only ship by FedEx which would probably double the cost of any order I placed. Brownells and Midway will send the same stuff Priority Mail for way less money.)

 

[CoRoMo]

I do not think they're playing both sides.

They're working their angle in CO and working it very very deftly. They don't need to play the other angles being worked by other companies. The got their own "game" to win for the people of CO (and if the Antis are beaten in CO they're hurt everywhere).

Exactly. If you saw the posts here by Justin about how Fields and Morse told him that he should be locked up for accidental possession of illegal "high cap" mags, you realize that the ruling party isn't listening to the voters.

However, they are obviously listening to Magpul due to their efforts to amend the legislation as a bone tossed to the company so that they won't leave the state. The governor is ultimately responsible for all the jobs lost if Magpul leaves Colorado because even if the legislature passes the law, he can end it or sign it, all by himself.

So Magpul is front and center standing toe to toe with the anti-2A machine and Magpul is not bluffing.

If this legislation goes down, it is HUGE for the RKBA community and not just Coloradoans. Not only do the antis have to contend with the gun owning voters, but industry has now stepped into the ring in a big enough way that can't be ignored. If the legislation is enacted, Magpul will be able to strike a punitive blow to the government for doing so. The anti's will feel the effects of their actions either way.

New York's SAFE Act is what happens when the government strikes against the gun owners without much repercussions to speak of. In Colorado's fight, the gun grabbers will be hit no matter if they win the fight or lose it. Just for picking the fight, they will be struck here.

Magpul could have stayed out of the fight here. They could have kept their head down and tried not to make waves. They could have negotiated behind the scenes with the legislature to allow them to continue their production without entering the RKBA dispute.

But they didn't do that.

 

[Girodin]

And the officers in NY, CA, CO still need mags

According to all the arguments of their politicians they really do not. IMHO what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

On consideration is magpul may have existing contracts that they must fulfill or be in breach of. Who knows.

Cutting off sales to government entities in ban states is something I would like to see them do. It is something I would like to see lots of major companies do. The more the better.

That said i see them making a much more serious commitment in their leaving CO than some companies who probably have very little skin in the game when they cut off sales because they sale very little.

Who knows, magpul may have helped inspiring the grumblings by Beretta in MD. I hope they leave MD as well if they push through more laws there.

In Colorado's fight, the gun grabbers will be hit no matter if they win the fight or lose it. Just for picking the fight, they will be struck here.

Time will tell. CO voters need to get some of these folks voted out of office. If that happens it will send a more meaningful message than anything else. If all or even a very good portion of the gun grabbers keep their jobs next election a powerful message will be sent the other way and CO will keep on its slow decent into becoming CA. Good luck.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Time will tell. CO voters need to get some of these folks voted out of office. If that happens it will send a more meaningful message than anything else. If all or even a very good portion of the gun grabbers keep their jobs next election a powerful message will be sent the other way and CO will keep on its slow decent into becoming CA. Good luck.

Yeah, but nothing we can do right this minute WRT voting. I'm pretty confident that this is going to cost a number of Democrats their jobs in 2014, but they don't seem to care. Magpul's part in this fight is huge; They've made it FACT that this legislation will cost jobs and hurt the CO economy. It's not just speculation about what might happen. The conjecture comes into play when we consider just how deep the reverberations will be; Will it only be the ~200 Magpul jobs and their millions in tax $$, or will it cripple other companies that were tied to them? If so, to what extent?

The governor is not ignorant to this; He's been wavering on some of these bills. The Universal BGC one, though, is pretty much a forgone conclusion.

 

[Hacker15E]

Magpul just chose a side. And it is not ours.

I find this whole line of thought ridiculous.

How many years have firearms companies sold to LE orgs in states with AWBs and there was never this line drawn in the sand previously?

Only now in 2013, post-NY SAFE act is this concept now part of the "us" vs "them" mentality.

Firearms owners and companies that make firearms and accessories are up against enough problems in this country currently; the very last thing we need to be doing is cutting and subdividing ourselves based on ideas like this. Now is the time to STICK TOGETHER, not the time to start inventing new ways to drive wedges between ourselves. The only group that benefits is those who would choose to further restrict firearms rights.

 

[Coop45]

I find this whole line of thought ridiculous.

How many years have firearms companies sold to LE orgs in states with AWBs and there was never this line drawn in the sand previously?

Only now in 2013, post-NY SAFE act is this concept now part of the "us" vs "them" mentality.

Firearms owners and companies that make firearms and accessories are up against enough problems in this country currently; the very last thing we need to be doing is cutting and subdividing ourselves based on ideas like this. Now is the time to STICK TOGETHER, not the time to start inventing new ways to drive wedges between ourselves. The only group that benefits is those who would choose to further restrict firearms rights.

Thanks Hacker!! I thought for a minute that there were only going to be a couple of guys considered correct enough to be on our side. Oh sorry, on their side. You guys might consider being a little less judgmental and a little more appreciative before you po every possible ally. In other words, act like mature adults and if you can't say something nice please keep your pie hole closed.

 

[BearGriz]

I've been reading and considering this thread all day, and I think the best solution for them would be to take the "political" route (leave options open) and make a statement akin to this:

In light of the increased demand for our products from civilian customers and the alarming attack by some states against these same citizens' second amendment rights, we have decided to temporarily suspend sales of our products to any government agencies within those states that have banned our magazines. This will allow us to better serve those civilian customers who anxiously desire to purchase our products before their rights may also be infringed upon.

Once our production has caught up with the demand created by law-abiding citizens and government agencies in free states, we will re-evaluate our position on selling to government agencies in states that have infringed on second amendment rights.

I know they already released a statement to give Coloradans priority, but I don't think they've said this. This would extend that priority to essentially anyone in free states (and drop government agencies that reside in restrictive states to a "we'll see" status). They can alway choose to continue to do what is best for their business (open back up a market and sell to restrictive agencies once the demand dies down), but in the mean time they don't lose out at all (the overall demand is just too great to care, for now).

They send a message, reward the free states, don't lose any chances to sell as many mags as they can produce for the foreseeable future, and if they re-evaluate it and decide to sell to those loser states in the future, they can do that. I'm sure agencies in those states will be happy to get pmags again if and when that decision would be made, so Magpul is fine.