Kimber throws gun owners under the bus?

[JohnBT]

"the association does not object to many of the federal laws against violent criminal behavior committed with firearms"

Heck, I'm also in favor of laws against violent criminal behavior, whether that behavior involves a firearm or not.

John

 

[TexasSkyhawk]

First off, Taprackbang, check your windows--the black helicopters are just over the horizon. It's flat here in DFW, you should be able to see them coming for a ways.

Unlike you, and many others I suspect, I've actually spent a decent amount of time working with various ATF personnel. So long as they confine their activities to criminal investigations and enforcement (rather than cherry picking "regulatory" opportunities), they have a vast array of abilities and sources that are useful in prosecuting and locking up the very criminals who end up costing the rest of us a little bit more in rights each day.

Secondly, if the NRA starts publicly wailing about "destroy BATFE" and "disbanding" other gov't agencies, they will lose a lot of support on the Hill. Politics 101. Besides, as I just said, I've worked with ATF agents before. Their resources for investigating arson and explosives are superb. Hell, when we'd find stacks of weapons in with drug stashes, ATF could backtrace the serial numbers all the way to the manufacturer, and then we'd found out where these weapons came from.

Quite a few illegal dealers out there who are in business to sell to criminals and criminal organization. I'm sure you've heard of money laundering. There's also "gun cleaners" out there who try and do the same with firearms.

Local authorities simply do not have the resources to trace these kinds of guns.

So, I'd respectfully suggest looking into and for some objective facts before you go maligning the NRA fo ra stance in which who only have a modicum of actual knowledge about. It'll give your opinions far more credence.

Those who hate Kimber seem to be the ones who can't afford to buy one. A pretty petty excuse.

Maybe so. Maybe not. I can afford to buy a kimber for every room in our house if I wanted, but quite honestly, the gun has just never appealed to me.

I do think the JPFO is, once again, way off the mark in calling for a boycott of Kimber for simply designing and offering a firearm for a particular group of law enforcement officers, for whom the weapon will be beneficial.

If it is California politics that JPFO has a problem with, why not call for a complete boycott of any and all things California?

Jeff

 

[The Wiry Irishman]

Actually, (and before we get too far off topic) I'd be really interested in why the SIS's aren't on the list. Most Kimbers that I'm familier with have a FP safety, and indeed there are plenty of Kinbers for sale in CA. If Kimber made this special edition at the behest of the SIS and then didn't care to spend the extra money to get it tested for CA (I.E. it's functionally the same weapon, just with ugly slide cuts) I'd be much more tempted to shrug and move on. (This is my bet on what happened)

The SIS is essentially a Series 1 - doesn't have that safety. I think that's one of the reasons its so popular in spit of the fugly slide serrations.

 

[bdickens]

I'm gonna boycott GM because they sell cars in CA. I'm gonna boycott Ford too, and Toyota, and Honda, and Mercedes, and Jaguar. Hell, I guess I'll have to walk everywhere. But Nike sells shoes in CA, so I'll have to boycott them too. And Reebok, and Florsheim, and Justin....

 

[JoeSlomo]

I am boycotting Kimber due to the dismal quality control they have, as displayed by the performance, or lack thereof, of my NIB Kimber.

 

[siglite]

How many are gonna boycott Colt for it's production of machineguns for the military.

*raises hand*

I haven't bought a colt in so long, I've almost forgot they were a gun company.

 

[Hk91-762mm]

I beleave the guy who owns Kimber used to own NATION WIDE SPORTS in Pa.
They were not a good co. to do bussines with.
Thats the reason I wont own kimber .

 

[RoadkingLarry]

So when did GOA start writing press releases for JPFO?

I'll consider a boycott of Kimber when EVERY other gun or ammo manufacturer pulls out of the CA market.

And for what it is worth my Kimber Custom II has worked flawlessly since day one and I am now well passed the 3000 round point in one year.

 

[32winspl]

Hey folks, slow down a little and think.

First, there are a number of errors in this article. Among them is regarding Barrett "no longer selling to California". While partially true in that Barrett will no longer sell or service 50BMG rifles to California State Agencies, it isn't true in that Barrett will gladly sell and service rifles in their new and proprietary 416 Barrett caliber.
Then, the article suggests that by Kimber producing their SIS pistols for both Law Enforcement and civillian sales, that they're knuckling under to some "under the bus" policy. I'll admit that I (not being a California resident) don't understand all the hoops that all handgun manufacturers must jump through to sell their wares in that state, but look around. Go to the Kimber, Les Baer, Ed Brown, Wilson, etc; Hell, go to every manufacturer of 1911s websites.... they all either offer "California-approved" models, or they don't sell in California. And to get "California-approval", they have to pay X many thousands of dollars for EVERY model they want to sell there. If they offer 3 different finishes of the exact same model, well, that's 3 times the same many thousands of dollars.... even though there's not a single part difference between the 3 models.
So before you damn Kimber, who offers more 1911 variations and finishes than God, look at the bigger picture. Any Manufacturer intending to sell their pistols in that assinine state has to do the same; and in a truly balanced article, would also be "singled out".

Try it. Go to Colt's website, S&W's, Kimber's, Baer's, etc., and count the number of California-approved models. None of the manufacturers offer ALL their models there.... it would break them financially, especially the smaller, semi-custom houses. But they WILL offer their best selling models there, if they can afford to.

 

[MAKster]

All of these "the sky is falling" pitches are soley intended to scare people and generate donations. Should we boycott Glock because of the New York trigger? Or Sig Sauer because of DAK? These were also designed to appeal to law enforcement.

 

[dogmush]

The SIS is essentially a Series 1 - doesn't have that safety. I think that's one of the reasons its so popular in spit of the fugly slide serrations.

Then I would at this point ask two questions if one were serious about a boycott. 1. Why is the LAPD allowed a "dangerous" handgun. Do they consider themselves less likely to drop it then civilians? and 2. Why is Kimber supporting the [implied] superiority of the LAPD over civilians. And Yes, I think, given the variety in the 1911 market, that would keep me from purchasing a Kimber, if I was shopping for one. Similarly, had Kimber publicly said to the SIS "You can have a custom Series II, but we won't sell you a model of gun not legal in your state." I would have a warm fuzzy for them and maybe look closer. In an industry as polorizing as firearms is, a company had better think about it's actions politicly.

Should we boycott Glock because of the New York trigger?

Absolutly!! Those things are an abomonation, and a scourge on the name of handguns everywhere.

 

[Defensory]

I like JPFO, but I think they're off base on this one.

LAPD SIS doesn't deal with "Average Joe Citizen" types when they perform raids and make arrests. They only deal with the hardcore criminal element. So I don't believe the SIS is "destroying individual liberty" in America.

Comparing the SIS to the Nazi SS is ridiculous and completely over-the-top. And contrary to what Smith said, you should ALWAYS remain "polite, professional and firm" when dealing with legislators, companies, news media and the public.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I thought we'd already established that all gun companies were anti-gun. Also all makers of gun accessories, all gun writers, all West coast gun owners, all East coast gun owners, and pretty much everyone else except for you and me -- and I'm not too sure about you

.

While {hopefully} sarcastic, I think this quote post sums up the silliness of 4th party proxy extortion. The notion that we will try to get the California government to change its ways by doing financial harm (boycotting) to Kimber who sells to some depts in the state is STUPID.

We can harm Kimber and those few depts may no longer get Kimber guns from Kimber, but they will find another source and for all of our efforts, the decision-making government of California won't feel a thing. I can't believe any of you think it will work. Yep, you are more than willing to hop on the band wagon and harm another company that is helping to support our 2nd amendment rights by making firearms we use.

STUPID STUPID STUPID

 

[siglite]

The idea is to convince all sources (kimber, and the next company that sells out) to support freedom over the bottom line. And the only way to do that, is to move the bottom line around for them.

 

[feedthehogs]

The idea is to convince all sources (kimber, and the next company that sells out) to support freedom over the bottom line.

That is the most ridiculous thing I've read in a long time.

I suppose every company that does business with China should go out of business then.
Or because of the Uk's anti gun stance every company that does business wtih Europe should fold up and die?

Think man think!

 

[siglite]

Did you ever think that maybe if no one bought Chinese crap they wouldn't be able to sell it here, or that we as a nation wouldn't be so deeply in debt to them?

I mean, clearly it's impractical and idealist. But hey, I do my part when/where I can, as minuscule and irrelevant as that part may be.

And if you don't think boycotts, or the threat of boycotts can't affect the way a corporation does business, you should probably study Al Sharpton a bit.

 

[FCFC]

Much ado about little.

Agreed.

Seldom have so many argued so much about so little...or so little so much...