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

Selling guns in California

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Superlite27, Jan 17, 2009.

?

Should gun manufacturers sell their products in California?

  1. Yes, we need to give all firearms owners a chance to buy new products.

    23 vote(s)
    39.0%
  2. No. If California requires unreasonable concessions, manufacturers shouldn't be obligated.

    36 vote(s)
    61.0%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Superlite27

    Superlite27 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2007
    Messages:
    711
    Many gun owners are polarized on this topic. In another thread, someone selling a firarm was castigated for stating "No sales to CA residents".

    How do you feel about sellers that refuse to sell to California residents?

    I personally believe that "people deserve the government they live under" (I think this is a quote). If you live where legislators are democratically elected, you DO have a choice. Either elect legislators who pass the laws you like, or go somewhere else representative of your beliefs.

    So, like Barrett, and STI, I see no problem with refusal to compromise your company's or your individual beliefs. If California requires all guns sold in their state to have radar detectors, a four foot length of 3/4 inch chain, and an air horn to be permanently attached, more power to you for refusing to compromise and add these to your firearm in search of the almighty dollar. How can you be faulted for not caving in to these unreasonable requirements? As a matter of fact, I think ALL firearm sales to California should be halted. You might believe this isn't "brotherly" to my fellow firearms enthusiasts, but this way, maybe the gun owners will unite to change the government, or move somewhere representative of their lifestyle.

    Yet, I'm sure there's a few here who will spit and sputter and $&*$! ^%$#! CURSE! CURSE! all you who won't sell your &%&^$&! guns in California. Well, elect new officials.
     
  2. Duke of Doubt

    Duke of Doubt member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,863
    To some extent it's distasteful to give the anti-gun politicos in Cantaffordya exactly what they want to achieve. However, I would support any dealer who refused to sell into that environment.

    As a professional I reserve the right to refuse to deal with anyone. I "fire" clients from time to time, and frequently refuse to take on various work even if I could use the extra money. Maybe I just don't want to do it. Maybe the work is annoying and unrewarding, or boring, and unduly burdensome. Or maybe the client is a jerk. Either way, for whatever reason, or even for no reason, that's my right. Coming into my office is not like entering a McDonald's which may not refuse service. Likewise with firearms dealers.

    I would never live in California, Illinois, New Jersey or any of a number of states, even though I could make a lot of money by returning to one of those states. I have no respect for those who sacrifice their principles, their hobbies, and their happiness just to increase their salaries for awhile.
     
  3. TAB

    TAB Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,475
    1st STI pulled a bull **** move... They pulled out of CA twice, the 2nd time they were only selling to LEOs, but they played it up like they were selling to every one.

    CA has more gun owners then some states have in population.

    Lets turn things around, lets just say that congress and obama come toeghter and completly ban guns... its ok right, since after all the people of this country elected them. they deserved it.
     
  4. ChronoCube

    ChronoCube Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2008
    Messages:
    403
    Location:
    **********
    I'm not sure the comparison to Barrett is a valid comparison. IIRC, Barrett refused to sell to CA law enforcement after CA law banned civilian ownership of .50 caliber rifles.
     
  5. CoRoMo

    CoRoMo Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Messages:
    8,926
    Location:
    Californicated Colorado
    The fascists trying to disarm every last Californian probably prefer that all manufacturers cease selling to their state. Some of the most extreme types might even want law enforcement disarmed, but that's not probable. Eventually their crime rates would reflect this misstep, but they won't connect those dots. It would be blamed on Nevada, Arizona, or some other fantasy cause.
    Just my $0.02
     
  6. RonE

    RonE Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    696
    Location:
    Rockport, Texas
    When a manufacturer or an individual for that matter refuses to sell a gun to a California dealer or any other buyer, they are doing exactly what the liberals want them to do. Barrett (sp?) started this when California banned .50 Cal rifles. Many people applauded his stand but now it seems to have bitten us in the butt! Many people on the auction sites refuse to sell perfectly legal (in California) guns and more and more people are getting on the band wagon every day. In my opinion we should sell anything and everything we legally can to residents and dealers in California.
     
  7. expvideo

    expvideo Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,720
    Location:
    Everett, WA
    No. If you care about your rights, vote like it.
     
  8. RonE

    RonE Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    696
    Location:
    Rockport, Texas
    I'm not sure the comparison to Barrett is a valid comparison. IIRC, Barrett refused to sell to CA law enforcement after CA law banned civilian ownership of .50 caliber rifles.

    I believe you are right and his actions were so well thought of by the firearms community at the time that many people shot themselves in the foot over the issue.
     
  9. kermit315

    kermit315 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    454
    Location:
    Pensacola, FL
    ask yourselves this question and answer it honestly: if/when a nationwide awb, bullet serialization, microstamping, LCI, mag disconnect, etc law is passed, will it be your fault, or will it still be Californias fault?
     
  10. Starcheck55

    Starcheck55 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    Messages:
    164
    I don't think that gun manufacturers should feel obligated to design or alter a gun to make it Kali or Mass compliant.

    If the gun owners in those states are so dissatisfied with their rights being trampled, they can move to another state. It is simply a matter of priorities.
     
  11. Darthbauer

    Darthbauer Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2007
    Messages:
    677
    I live in CA and I think it's pretty stupid when someone has something for sale that is legal here and won't sell it because it's a bit of a hassle.
     
  12. kermit315

    kermit315 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    454
    Location:
    Pensacola, FL
    what about perfectly legal guns that there are hundreds, if not thousands of? Are you of the opinion that no guns should be sold to California?
     
  13. Duke of Doubt

    Duke of Doubt member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,863
    Kermit, I think it's up to the seller. If it's worth his while and it's legal, he may do it. Or he may choose not to bother. Plenty of buyers elsewhere these days.
     
  14. Darthbauer

    Darthbauer Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2007
    Messages:
    677

    If you think someone is going to pick up everything and just move to a whole other state for the gun laws then it is you who's priorities are out of wack. I love guns but I could never justify moving my wife and child out of the state just so I could get a suppressed SBR with a 100 round beta mag in it.
     
  15. Duke of Doubt

    Duke of Doubt member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,863
    Darth, it's not always that stark a choice, or for so esoteric a preference.

    I could take a job in IL, CA, NJ or in other anti-gun states, but choose not to. I make less money as a result, though my expenses are much lower, too. And I get to shoot my side-folder AK at a local range and carry it concealed beneath my overcoat. I carry my Beretta concealed practically every day. I cannot do those things in IL, CA or NJ.
     
  16. TAB

    TAB Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,475
    thats entirely not true... in CA it depends on which county you live in rather or not you get your CCW... its split almost 50/50. I've lived in both.
     
  17. kermit315

    kermit315 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    454
    Location:
    Pensacola, FL
    I wish it was Florida being told no, or Idaho, or Texas, or any other state, because then maybe you guys would see the problem. Its never a problem for gun owners until it affects them personally.

    And, dont think if it happens in California, it wont spread to the rest of the country, because it will.
     
  18. expvideo

    expvideo Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,720
    Location:
    Everett, WA
    "it" doesn't happen with magic and bad luck. "it" happens with people not prioritizing their gun rights high enough when they vote. "It" happens when you say "well I preffer candidate X's policy against global warming, even though they are not as good on gun rights".

    If you don't vote for pro-gun candidates, you are to blame. In Idaho, they vote for pro-gun candidates. That is why "it" doesn't happen to Idaho.
     
  19. kermit315

    kermit315 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    454
    Location:
    Pensacola, FL
    so, no answser to my question: if/when a nationwide awb, bullet serialization, microstamping, LCI, mag disconnect, etc law is passed, will it be your fault, or will it still be Californias fault?


    Did you vote for Obama?
     
  20. expvideo

    expvideo Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,720
    Location:
    Everett, WA
    It will be California's fault. And of course I didn't vote for Obama. I'm not a communist.

    Stupidity is not Herpes.
     
  21. Darthbauer

    Darthbauer Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2007
    Messages:
    677
    The whole reason I voted was because of people's stance on gun rights. We know how that one ended.
     
  22. Bozo

    Bozo Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    172
    The right of an individual or a company to decide where it wants to sell its' product is still permissible in this country. Isn't this one of the things that make this country great?

    I have no problem with someone who does not want to sell in California.
     
  23. Duke of Doubt

    Duke of Doubt member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,863
    expvideo: "Stupidity is not Herpes."

    I don't know; the other night an awful lot of people were watching "reality TV" (f/k/a "game shows").
     
  24. kermit315

    kermit315 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    454
    Location:
    Pensacola, FL
    so, when the documented gun grabber (Obama) starts signing gun laws, it will be your fault, because you didnt stand up for your rights.
     
  25. expvideo

    expvideo Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,720
    Location:
    Everett, WA
    Excuse you! I've been standing up for my rights, and I vote accordingly.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page