Sportsman's Guide...Whisky, Tango, Foxtrot!

[DogBonz]

Ok... lets see

Think about this for a moment before you missapply your anger.

I'm not missapplying anger... I'm applying logic and common sense. The same company that will not sell me a sight adjustment tool or sling stud will sell me a working, functioning rifle and the ammo for it, delivered to my door, no FFL. I say again, Whisky... Tango... Foxtrot.

Ahh... so you prefer money to freedom. Why are you complaining?

I assure you sir, that nothing can be farther from the truth. Guns and ammo require $ in order to buy them. Financial independance is a great freedom, just ask any of the founding fathers, all of whom stressed, among all of our other favorite freedoms, financial freedom. And no matter what anyone thinks, being a broker anywhere other that in NY does not pay. I live in NJ, and commute to NYC, and I still am able to pay off college debt and save money faster than any of my friends in the same industry who live in NV, FL, MA, or even tax-free NH.

Also ladies and gentlemen, instead of debating my financial situation, or where I work or live lets stick to the issue at hand.

Back to topic: SG will no longer be getting my hard earned $, not because of my anger, but because their CYOA tactics repulse my and my $.

 

[DoubleTapDrew]

It's too bad the anti states get denied but chances are SG did a cost-benefit analysis and figured it would be cheaper to just filter everything with certain keywords from shipping to certain states than to hire people to check the law of each state and apply it to each of the tens of thousands of items they sell.

It's what I would do if I owned that company. The only way to change it is vote out the current tyrants (I realize that's impossible in certain areas though). In the meantime, order from someone who will ship to you and let S.G. know this.

 

[grimjaw]

Could it be because their legal advisors told them that overeager anti-gun local prosecutors pose a threat to them

They have some of the same legal restrictions that other vendors operate under, and plenty won't ship ammunition to certain places. However, I don't think that's the reason the constantly make "mistakes" in advertisments and shipments of ammunition. Burn me once, shame on them . . .

jm

 

[Lone_Gunman]

I understand your reasoning DogBonz, and would not be too happy with Sportsman's Guide either.

However, I also wish more companies would refuse to do business in state opposed to freedom. This would make those state less desireable, and the residents might perhaps wake up and make their representatives follow the Constitution.

 

[JJE]

Whether you think it's the politicians' fault or the retailers' fault, it obviously makes sense to spend your money at the retailer that gives you the best service. That's why I've started buying from MidSouth Shooter's Supply (http://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/, and have stopped shopping at MidwayUSA (won't ship me bullets or brass) and Sportsman's Guide .

 

[carpediem]

yeah, there's are a lot of ppl venting on calguns about these problems with sportsmans guide. I won't do business with them unless they change

 

[kengrubb]

Also ladies and gentlemen, instead of debating my financial situation, or where I work or live lets stick to the issue at hand.

I agree completely that your financial situation is your own business. Had you elicited info from others for info, leads, etc. about gigs in your field in more gun friendly areas, that would be a different matter.

However, SG is doing the exact same thing you're doing. You choose to live where you live, and work where you work, because of money. SG, and a lot of companies, have taken a business decision, based on money, not to deal in certain items in certain states because of the actions of local prostitutors, er, uh, I mean prosecutors and legislators.

Back to topic: SG will no longer be getting my hard earned $, not because of my anger, but because their CYOA tactics repulse my and my $.

Perhaps there's someone smarter than me who can find a link to this thread on AR15.com archives, but here's a makeashorterlink link to a discussion on the subject in January. Read the fifth post by user MikeWilliamson for more perspective on the issue.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?U29F12DDD

Here's the google link if the makeashorterlink link don't work.

http://www.google.com/search?q=cach...ry"+"yolo+county"+da&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

 

[ambush]

Hey DogBonz....I too live in NJ...unfortunately. I've learned to adapt to all the retailer's restrictions and know where to order what. Some will....and some won't. I do not hold a grudge against any of them. If that guy won't sell me something....hey, the other guy will. For now, I have to live with it and it doesn't really bother me that much. I can't wait till the day I'm looking at NJ in my rear-view mirror. Then I can make fun of NJ like a lot of others here!!

 

[brickeyee]

"Pre-ban mags are OK, but all of a sudden, none of the places will ship them anymore. "


How are they supposed to prove they are pre-ban?
Is there a date of manufacture or serial number stamped in them?

I cannot blame a vendor at all.
The politicians in your states passed the restrictive laws, and lawyers are expensive to hire.
Add to that needing an 'in state' attorney to do the research in many cases. How man attorneys do you think have case law for anything other than the state they practice in?
Get the laws changed or live with the consequences.
I avoid vising MA, NY, and a number of other states and cities because they have bond headed laws.
My actions may be perfectly legal, but I am not going to spend MY time and MY money to make sure.
MA and NY will not even abide by the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986 (McKlure-Volkmer).

 

[wally]

Don't blame the companies, blame where it belongs -- your states' stupid laws and their AG's propensity to sue for political purposes.

After CA lawsuit against GM et.al. for "pollution" if I ran those companies I'd immediately stop all shipments of vehicles and parts to CA until the suit was dropped or resolved.

--wally.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

The problem with SGC is their legal department ... and the state legislatures that can't write laws plainly enough for mere mortals to read and understand them.

I live in a state to which SGC will not ship knives. My brother-in-law has a small collection of some rather nice bayonets, and I thought I might buy a couple to join in the fun. SGC has (or used to have) an 1898 Mauser rifle they sell, and they also sell the bayonet as a separate accessory. I didn't want the rifle but I tried to order the bayonet. I placed the order on-line, it was accepted ... and the next day I received an e-mail telling me the order was cancelled.

So I called to ask why. "We can't ship knives to your zip code" I was told. I've bought knives on-line before, from other vendors, with no problem. In fact, I'm now a senior citizen and I've been buying knives by mail order since I was about 12 years old. I know it is not illegal to send me a knife.

Well, the young lady didn't know why they can't do it, she just knew they can't do it. Not to surrender without at least a skirmish, I asked her if she understood that the item I wanted to buy was an accessory to the Mauser battel rifle they also sell. Yes, she knew that. Good.

Me: "Can you sell me one of the rifles, then?"

She: "Yes, of course."

Me: "So you're telling me that you can sell me, directly, a high-powered military BATTLE RIFLE, with which I can probably kill someone from a distance of maybe half a mile ... but you can't sell me the bayonet for it, which would require me to be within just a couple of feet of a person?"

She: [Loooooooooooooooong pause]"I guess it doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?"

 

[Redneck with a 40]

I've probably ordered thousands of dollars of merchandise from Sportsmans Guide over the last few years. I've NEVER had a problem getting anything, including alot of ammo. I live out here in gun friendly rural Colorado, nothing is restricted. I for one like the SG company, I've always gotten my 1000 rd cases of 40 ammo within 3 days of the order. I'll continue to do business with them.

 

[countertop]

Ya'll have a messed up attitude. There are 50 states, with 50 different laws.

its a Pain in the rump to deal with all of them in any line of business. Factor in firearms, and overzealous prosecutors and what else do you expect? They don't want to have to hire a lawyer for each and every sale they make. So instead, they find the business lost in the commie republics doesn't nearly outweigh the risk of doing business with enemy states.

Here's a simple solution to your problems.

MOVE. I got the hell out of Jersey when I was 18. Won't ever go back.

good riddance.

I suggest you try it. Might like it, and then you can order what ever you want.

 

[Ed Ames]

Moving isn't a viable long-term solution. If you let them (the anti-gunners) strengthen in any place (e.g. NYC) they'll spread and forcefully push everyone into accepting their view. They'll see it as reasonable because everyone... that is, everyone they ever talk to, meet, know... that is, everyone in their state... is irrationally anti-gun because all the people who know about guns moved away.

NYC is spreading.... look at the threads about people in PA starting to see them coming. So is CA... the recent housing market pushed a HUGE number of Californians all over the country.. these people are The Chosen... they know it because if they weren't The Chosen why would they have made hundreds of thousands of dollars just for existing? All they did was buy a house ten years ago and now they've got wealth and mobility and they're going to Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, and everywhere else ... going with the absolute knowledge of their superior status in His eyes.... and they are bringing their ideas, including the idea that guns are evil, with them.

No, you don't walk away... you fight. You give guns a good name amongst your friends and aquaintances, you become the positive face that the media won't present... you vote but frankly voting is a lost cause in CA... you call any and every rep you can when an issue is hot, and you SPEND MONEY...buy politicians, buy media, but any and everything you can, because money talks. In fact, if you people in the rest of the country want to protect your RKBA, you should be funding the fights in NYC, CA, WI, and other predominantly anti-gun places. Spending money on protecting your RKBA in Texas is a waste... but and extra $10,000 in the California fight can make a real difference.

I'm probably going to be moving to Texas soon. Not because of the gun laws, but because my employer wants me in Texas. But I'm not giving up the CA fight just because I won't be present here for a while. I have every intention of staying as active as possible in the CA process... because CA is one of the places that matters. If I was from NYC I'd stay active in that process (such as still exists) for the same reason.

And part of presenting a good face is NOT accepting the role of criminal. If you act like a criminal, everyone will assume you are a criminal. Normal people assume that laws are in place because they need to be... and that restrictions are based on laws. If one of my fence-sitting friends read through the shipping restrictions in the SG catalog, the first thing they'd say is "that stuff must be bad if they can't ship it here." Don't think so? I had a friend ask me, in all seriousness, about the safety of "Assault Weapons"... they had just heard about the law which bans specific guns and came to me asking "What's wrong with them? Do they blow up or something? Are do they break and hurt people?" It took him a while to understand that there was nothing wrong with the listed guns and they were perfectly safe to use and no different than rifles he'd shot when I took him shooting but they looked scary... his assumption was that the only reason for banning by name was that the named guns were some how defective. And, if he hadn't had a "positive face" to turn to for education, he'd still be thinking the law was there to protect people from bad guns. He'd think the same sort of thing about the stuff in the SG catalog. Why cause that situation? Why push the "positive face" people out of the state or underground? How does it serve the long term goal of protecting the RKBA for everybody?

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

It's pretty simple.

X = Profit from selling certain legally-complicated item to certain state.
Y = Cost of having legal figure it out.
Z = Money set aside for fines/legal fees if someone messes up.


If X < Y+Z, there isn't much business sense in trying to get X. (The business types will be annoyed that I didn't include opprotunity cost, but that would make things more complex.)

Now, people have complained that other companies, such as Cabela's, will sell the same things. SG is a discount retailer. Therefore, X tends to be smaller than a company like Cabela's and not as attractive. If you find an item that both places sell, it will be about $20 less at SG. At the same time, Cabela's is a much larger company, so they benefit from economies of scale when it comes to Y and most likely Z.

If you are in these states where they have restricted some things, do you order other things from SG for the low prices or do you order everything from Cabela's for the service? SG is betting on the former.

 

[hillbilly]

I know all kinds of people will come out on this thread to defend SG.

But if you look closely and in detail at the specifics of SG's policies, you will see a pattern of silly paranoia on SG's part.

Go to this thread, and look for my post #24

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=163122&highlight=sportsmans+guide


I followed up those examples with this thread, too.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=163122&highlight=sportsmans+guide

Again, there was any consistency at all in SG's policies, then yes, I think you could argue that SG was merely being prudent.

But the fact that some items are restricted in one month's catalog, but not restricted in the next month's catalog, or the fact that almost identical
items can be okay and also restricted shows a pattern of silly paranoia to me.

hillbilly

 

[dfaugh]

All it takes is for them to accidentally ship one restricted item to a customer in the wrong state and they end up facing criminal charges and fighting a costly court battle.

That's probably a good part of it. As someone said, it would be a virtual impossibility to keep up with all the gun laws (especially now that we're seeing them on the LOCAL level), so they may just stay conservative.

Look, these place are in business to sell things to us, and make money on it. I doubt that they are gonna pass up sales unless they have a reason (right or wrong).

P.S. This could also be laziness on a part of their computer programmer(s) (I'm a database programmer..."Well, we can't ship certain AR-15 parts to NJ....so I'll just do a mass update of anything that says "AR-15" and prohibit selling it to NJ". With thousands of items to manage I could easily see this happing.

 

[hso]

Thanks, kengrub.

The Yolo County, CA DA got the ball rolling in threatening businesses based outside his state with prosecution for selling anything that might be interpreted at illegal to own or sell. Some companies settled out of court, SG being one, because they were advised it would be more expensive to fight than settle. They changed their policies to a very self-protective position. Due to the Yolo County DA's success other extortionists-in-government-clothing took up the battle cry and threatened the tactic elsewhere.

Don't blame the retailer for not selling in your state when it's dangerous for them to do so. They're exercising a form of avoidance, which we tout as the first step in dealing with danger.

 

[stevelyn]

SomeKid,

Even though SG and CTD are outside the domain of the Marxist Paradises, pukes like Bloomberg have proven that companies aren't safe because they are outside the states they are selling in.

All it takes is one lawsuit.

 

[countertop]

WHat I do not understand, is if SPG and CTD are outside the anti domain, how could the anti's attack them? If I shipped something that was illegal in MA to MA, then too bad, I am not inside MA. Doesn't this violate the interstate commerce clause?

You ship into the state (or heck, even run an advertisment there), you are doing business in the state and the long arm statute gives prosecutors and the courts jurisdiction and pulls them right in. Thats basic civil procedure 101.

 

[SomeKid]

Steve,

I see your point. Wouldn't the businesses have some kind of counter-suit available if the cities did something like that though? (Not a lawyer, but it sounds like malicious prosecution at the least.) As I recall, Bloomburg is being counter-sued isn't he?

 

[gunsmith]

they don't have much of a choice

a lawsuit could ruin their chances of staying in biz.
is it illegal to open a po box or mail box etc in another state and ship it there?

 

[blackhawk2000]

I'll sell you guys anything that's legal in your state. I can get a pretty wide variety of items. Shoot me an email if you are having trouble getting stuff, and I'll see what I can do for you.

Thanks,
John

 

[hillbilly]

Sportsmans Guide "legal eagles" (as I call them) are not showing good business sense.

While the general notion of "protecting yourself" is a good idea, I'm not talking about "general notions" here.

I'm talking the real, actual, specific decisions that are really made by Sportsmans Guide.

Their specific decisions reveal a total lack of consistency and common sense.

If you look at the threads I linked above, here's what you'll see.

In one month's catalog, LEATHER BELTS AND HOLTSTERS are listed amongst the "restricted items." Yes, Leather Belts and Holsters.

How can even the most paranoid, idiotic reading of a state law cause leather belts to be verboten for shipping to a certain state?

Thank goodness not everyone sniffs the same glue that the legal eagles at Sportsmans Guide do.

However, the very next month's catalog, those very same leather belts and holsters are listed as unrestricted.

One month Leather Belts are restricted, the next month, okay......Go Figure. I know I can't.

I suppose their "good business decisions" just depends on how much bourbon their attorneys have been snorting that particular month.

On one page in their catalog, there is a big, double-edged dagger that is RESTRICTED and cannot be shipped to my home state of Arkansas.

However, just a bit down the same page there is an even bigger, double-edged dagger that is UNRESTRICTED for sale in Arkansas.

Okay. Got it. They are "Just Protecting Themselves" and they are not making idiotic paranoid decisions in their catalogs.

In their catalog, they list a Cordura Glock Range Bag (yep, a nylon, zip-top range bag) as a RESTRICTED item for certain states.

Yes, that's a right, a nylon bag with a zipper and two nylon strap handles is restricted in some states according to SG.

Can I please have some of what they are smoking?

In their catalog they list packets of DESSICANT as restricted items. Packets of freakin' dessicant???

What kind of "good business decision" and urge to "protect yourself" could possibly lead someone to decide that packets of dessicant must be RESTRICTED items and not shipped to certain states????

As I point out in the threads I linked above, in one of their catalogs they list some items as being RESTRICTED under CODE 37.

But if you look in the middle of that particular catalog where all the RESTRICTED codes are listed, they don't have CODE 37 listed!!!!

Apparently, for Sportsmans Guide, CODE 37 is some sort of double-secret restriction that's too sensitive to even tell you about!

While the general notion of protecting your corporate butt may be a good idea in generalized theory, Sportsmans Guide has proven over and over and over that their specific, documented applications of this general idea are silly, stupid, paranoid, and downright idiotic.

I hope they continue to pay the economic penalty for their stupid decisions.

I know they aren't getting any more of my money, ever.

hillbilly

 

[MassMan]

Sportsman's Guide

I tried to order a Fobus holster from SG and was refused. I live in MA. and was in total disbelief. I emailed GOAL to find out why and was told that SG sold a minor in MA a pellet gun 8 yrs. ago and that person shot another who suffered severe injuries. Our out going AG (thank GOD) threatened them and the SG agreed not to ship anything the AG felt was "dangerous". Goal informed me I could argue the holster denial with them, but admitted that I probably would not meet with success. I didn't pursue this as I purchased the same item from another mail order Co. for about a $1.00 more. However, the whole issue has left a sour taste in my mouth.

For those living in MA., be sure to check with GOAL to find out who will support our 2nd ammendment rights in the up coming elections.