Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Ronnie Barrett retaliates against California's AB 50

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Taurus 66, Aug 8, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Taurus 66

    Taurus 66 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,485
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    Did you all read this already? Am I days late or weeks late? or is this something new to the THR club?

    http://www.barrettrifles.com/news/ca_outcome.htm

    I especially love this part:

    "Barrett cannot legally sell any of its products to lawbreakers. Therefore, since California’s passing of AB 50, the state is not in compliance with the US Constitution’s 2nd and 14th Amendments, and we will not sell nor service any of our products to any Government agency of the State of California."

    More companies should do the same with any state that wishes to unlawfully disarm their citizens little by little or with the ban of any particular series of semiautos.
     
  2. Polishrifleman

    Polishrifleman Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    848
    Location:
    Puget Sound, Washington
    Yep... different thread a while back. I think the thread title was in regards to a marketing ploy or something like that. If I find it I will edit with link.
     
  3. Cesiumsponge

    Cesiumsponge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,266
    Location:
    Washington
    I recall hearing a similar position from Barrett, but in slightly different words.

    I applaud and respect the man for standing up for what he believes. Now if all other manufactuers would follow his lead, we might be able to talk some sense into an irrationally gunphobic society and resume supply for the demand out there.
     
  4. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Yep. Barrett's integrity used to be the norm.
     
  5. jefnvk

    jefnvk Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,938
    Location:
    The Copper Country, Michigan
    It'll be interesting to see what happens if a nationwide ban ever takes place, if he will close up shop.
     
  6. Cesiumsponge

    Cesiumsponge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,266
    Location:
    Washington
    He'll probably come out with a .499 IYF (in your face) caliber or something similar. I recall there are several .50 BMG alternatives out there already.
     
  7. Joejojoba111

    Joejojoba111 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,056
    I'd also buy the .499 GFY. go...
     
  8. Taurus 66

    Taurus 66 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,485
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    What's to say Barrett cannot produce a larger caliber than the .50 for the law abiding Californians? ... like a .55 or .60?
     
  9. Marnoot

    Marnoot Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2004
    Messages:
    260
    Location:
    SLC, UT
    I believe anything (excluding shotguns) bigger than .50 in bore diameter is considered a destructive device under NFA or some such, and thus is prohibited under federal law.
     
  10. Taurus 66

    Taurus 66 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,485
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    There are black powder rifles of .62 caliber. And besides, all the gun manufacturers have to do is just what Barrett did with California - stop selling to the federal agencies so long as the government wants to infringe upon the 2nd Amendment rights of its "law abiding citizens". Or is this where the feds can force the companies to service and sell guns to them?

    The law's an ass!
     
  11. Marnoot

    Marnoot Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2004
    Messages:
    260
    Location:
    SLC, UT
    Blackpowder weapons are not considered firearms under relevent statutes. But I agree with your sentiment.
     
  12. Taurus 66

    Taurus 66 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,485
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    And why wouldn't it be? Does it not produce fire? Every time I've ever ignited black powder it produced a fire. Archery equipment is not a firearm. Air guns are not firearms. A flame thrower is a class of firearm. Black powder? Hmmm. :scrutiny:
     
  13. Marnoot

    Marnoot Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2004
    Messages:
    260
    Location:
    SLC, UT
    I never said the laws made sense! :D But I won't argue with .gov about being able to buy a blackpowder rifle throught the mail without any background checks and other nonsense. :) I don't know if they specifically say that it's not a "firearm." I just know that weapons that fire with blackpowder are not regulated at all compared to cartridge-fired weapons.
     
  14. El Rojo

    El Rojo Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,541
    Location:
    The People's Republik of **********
  15. Taurus 66

    Taurus 66 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,485
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    Yeah but my version is better. :neener:
     
  16. R.H. Lee

    R.H. Lee Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,377
    Location:
    CA
    How many CA law enforcement agencie use the .50, anyway? How much will this hurt them?
     
  17. jefnvk

    jefnvk Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,938
    Location:
    The Copper Country, Michigan
    THere are some 'sporting' exemptions to the NFA restrictions on greater thean .50 weapons. .600 & .700 NE for example. And, as mentioned, blackpowder wesapons are not considered firearms.
     
  18. mack69

    mack69 Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    364
    Location:
    Just passin through!
    Ronnie Barrett for President!!
     
  19. Elmer

    Elmer Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    998
    So he doesn't sell NY, MA, ATF, FBI, etc?

    Yes, Barrett's phony, feel good, PR move has been covered here in depth.

    And many took the hook, bait, line, and sinker.......

    But doing phony feel good stuff, pretending that it will have an impact, has got a lot of politicians elected, so maybe the presidential idea might work.....
     
  20. Taurus 66

    Taurus 66 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,485
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    Yeah, according to the idiots in DC and some states.

    G.W. Bush also believes the minutemen are vigilantes.

    He also uses "gooder" in a sentence.

    Former president Clinton smoked pot but never inhaled, then never had sexual relations with that woman, then did.

    What politician thought potato ended with an "e"? Probably all of them.

    Politicians in California wouldn't know the business end from the butt end of a gun even if they shot themselves with it.

    It's no surprise the morons running America's show would not look at black powder rifles as firearms. Is there anyone in government with a triple digit IQ?
     
  21. Justin

    Justin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,271
    Location:
    THE CHAIR IS AGAINST THE WALL
    Have NY or MA actually passed a ban on .50 BMG yet? Does the ATF or FBI enforce bans on .50's?

    And most importantly, who wizzed in your Wheaties this morning? :scrutiny:
     
  22. MudPuppy

    MudPuppy Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,529
    Location:
    UK and Texas
    Exactly.

    You can argue what he'd do "if this" or "if that"--but in the real world situation of what ACTUALLY happened, he took a stand. Good for him, it was the right thing to do. Was it good for business? Man, I hope so.

    Didn't some people rail on Ruger for rolling over? Now we're going to rail on Barret for taking a stand?
     
  23. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Actually, now that you mention it...
     
  24. Gewehr98

    Gewehr98 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    5,988
    Taurus66, be careful what you're asking for...

    Perhaps you would like the Guvmint to categorize your cap-and-ball revolver, or flintlock .50 caliber Hawken rifle, as a modern firearm? Y'know, fill out a 4473, background check, and all? :scrutiny:

    Elmer, what's so phony about not selling .50 caliber Barrett rifles to agencies in **********'s state government? Sounds pretty danged real to me. What are you doing to keep those ********** legislators at bay, hmmm? :rolleyes:
     
  25. Taurus 66

    Taurus 66 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,485
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    Number 1, I don't own black powder rifles (AKA airguns in your estimation) and have no desire to. It's just if I have to go through a background check on my long gun, why not those who buy black powder? They spessal?? Number 2, I don't want any varmint guvmint double digit IQ politician or agent man telling me I, as a hard working, law abiding, tax paying citizen, "have no right" to possess a .50 caliber Barrett rifle. I don't need their snot-nosed politics infringing on my rights man! We didn't elect them so that they may oppress us, but that's what's going on!

    Senators, those in Congress, the US Supreme Court, know so long as they chew off a little at a time instead of one big bite all at once, we will eventually lose all our Bill of Rights. Eminent Domain, and now California's AB 50? I'm counting the weeks until Albany bans these rifles.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page