STAG Arms moving

[cacoltguy]

Complete BS. Nothing in Colorado House Bill 13-1224 bans the manufacture of magazines for sale outside of Colorado. See section 3:

(3) THE OFFENSE DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (1) OF THIS SECTION
SHALL NOT APPLY TO:

(a) AN ENTITY, OR ANY EMPLOYEE THEREOF ENGAGED IN HIS OR HER
EMPLOYMENT DUTIES, THAT MANUFACTURES LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINES
WITHIN COLORADO EXCLUSIVELY FOR TRANSFER TO, OR ANY LICENSED GUN
DEALER, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 12-26.1-106 (6), C.R.S., OR ANY EMPLOYEE
THEREOF ENGAGED IN HIS OR HER OFFICIAL EMPLOYMENT DUTIES, THAT
SELLS LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINES EXCLUSIVELY TO:

(I) A BRANCH OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES;
(II) A DEPARTMENT, AGENCY, OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE
STATE OF COLORADO, OR OF ANY OTHER STATE, OR OF THE UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT;
(III) A FIREARMS RETAILER FOR THE PURPOSE OF FIREARMS SALES
CONDUCTED OUTSIDE THE STATE;
(IV) A FOREIGN NATIONAL GOVERNMENT THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED
FOR SUCH TRANSFERS BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT; OR
(V) AN OUT-OF-STATE TRANSFEREE WHO MAY LEGALLY POSSESS A
LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINE

http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/cl...E62E6F87257B0100813CB5?Open&file=1224_enr.pdf

So in summary the Colorado law sells out the rights of its citizens but protects government entities (law enforcement, armed govt employees etc.) as well as the tax revenue from selling products out of state. I fail to see how this is good for gun rights by any stretch of the imagination nor would I use the Colorado law as an example of how everything is okay and we should just calm down and be quiet. I also fail to see how a company that makes a political statement against this should be looked at negatively in any way. If more people in this country (whether it be companies or individual citizens) would make a small effort to do the right thing even if it entailed a small sacrafice, we wouldn't be in this current mess that we are in as a nation

 

[clutch]

I believe a lot of gun manufacturers located in Connecticut because it is Gun Valley, a term for a region with a long history of manufacturing firearms. That means the specialized infrastructure to support such an effort exists and exists near by.

The comment about moving a machine 3 feet is apt. During the last year we have moved a lot of machines in a non firearms machining setting. 10 feet, 300 feet, not much difference. 500 miles, just trucking time added on. Moving, leveling, connecting, production re-qualifying takes time.

When the product is selling well, there is no time to shut down the money makers, if a gun company moves machines to another location, it isn't politics, it is because management made a long term strategic choice based on their concerns that the location they are working at will become untenable. If the company is public, there is a fiduciary obligation to only do things that serve the stock holders. Political points do not qualify in that setting.

 

[JSH1]

When the product is selling well, there is no time to shut down the money makers, if a gun company moves machines to another location, it isn't politics, it is because management made a long term strategic choice based on their concerns that the location they are working at will become untenable. If the company is public, there is a fiduciary obligation to only do things that serve the stock holders. Political points do not qualify in that setting.

Which is why it is the small, privately held companies that are moving. Large corporations make decisions based on economics. It is also entirely possible that these companies were already planning to make the move for economic reasons and are using the recent political battle to win favor with customers by claiming they are moving based on principal. Regardless, at the end of the day the facts are the same:

• The bans stay in place
• The owner's get some nice incentives and tax breaks
• The workers have to uproot their lives or find a new job

Edit: BTW, I've moved 3 times for work in the past 12 years. It was a huge hassle even though it was my own choice. I also don't have kids or an underwater mortgage to worry about.

 

[MAKster]

While moving to make a political statement might feel good it could be a financial mistake. Just look at what happened when the Marlin plant was closed and production moved to another Remington plant. Quality of the lever actions sank and the situation got so bad they had to close down production until the problems could be fixed. If a company moves to another state maybe 10-20 percent of the employees will move as well. So the reality is that a company would have to hire all new employees and try to train them all at once. That's a big gamble.

 

[matrem]

The workers have to uproot their lives or find a new job

Not good, I agree.
Still a better option than the folks had 152 years ago.

 

[Midwest]

Moving from the Northeast to Southern states the cost of living would drop a lot. I know we are talking Connecticut verses South Carolina. But for the workers, I imagine the property taxes of their new homes in South Carolina would be a fraction of what they are in the Northeast. I know a few people in NJ (for instance) and they say property taxes are $10,000 to$15,000 a year or more. I can't imagine Connecticut being that much cheaper. CT taxes must be in the $5,000 to $10,000 range, South Carolina property taxes must be under $2000. Here in KY we pay $1300 a year.

I don't think it snows all that much in South Carolina if at all. Closing for snow and icy roads could be a thing of the past in SC. Cost of living would be less, quality of life issues could be much better. A company could buy a ton of land in SC for development for a fraction of what it sells for Connecticut. Not only could it be a political move, but a cost savings move. Maybe the company could get some substantial tax breaks on top of it all.

And why exactly should a business supply jobs for a state trying to outlaw their products?

This is the best reason for leaving the state.

What exactly do you think will happen to those jobs and those employees if the "CT Model" is followed nationally?

'

This is a concern that needs to be talked about. Just because some of us live in so called "Free States" doesn't mean we are safe, certainly not on a national political level. We have politicians that we didn't elect (and could not elect) from other states like NJ, NY and CA making policies that decides the fate of millions. I'm not over exaggerating either. The best example was the "Lautenberg Amendment" , the rest of us in the other 49 states didn't have a chance to vote for someone else to replace him (Frank Lautenberg). His politics don't play here in Kentucky, yet his gun policies affected Kentuckians as well as people from New Jersey.

Making a political statement by moving out of an anti-gun state/climate to a much better one sends a strong message in today's economy. It ultimately comes down to money,......... and that is a talking point that politicians seem to understand well.

 

[Sambo82]

I for one (and I presume millions like me) am more likely to buy from a company who stands on principal and moves from a less free state to a more free state. I respect that. In that sense it's a smart business move. And as for the "they should look out their employees" mindset; why does the citizens of CT deserve more to be employed by a great company than the citizens of SC? If a company moves and an employee loses their job, by extension another person becomes employed in another State.

And IMO it's poetic justice that the people who vote more-freedom get the jobs that the people that vote less-freedom lost. If you want someone to blame, look to the people of CT themselves. Like de Maistre said; "Every country has the government it deserves".

 

[larryh1108]

...when one door closes, another door opens.....

Why would a company stay where the government happily takes their taxes and profits and then the same government turns around and uses your tax money to ban your products and stomp on your rights?

The loss of jobs for many would be tragic for those who choose to not leave or who are not offered the opportunity to leave but on the other hand, a family in the new state gets a job when they need to feed their family. Jobs aren't lost as much as they are transferred to other Americans.

I live in CT and the way the lawmakers here jammed this law down our throats and used the tragedy at Sandy Hook to make it happen have sickened me to no end. I will move to a better state where the taxes are less, the politics aren't Bloomberg tainted and who wants me to live there. I hope CT goes broke because they chose to push an agenda instead of protecting their citizens from zealots. We are The Constitution State. (SIC!)
CT deserves to go BK and I will do all I can to make it happen. They (govt) betrayed the citizens and deserve to lose their jobs, their pensions and their state.

 

[cacoltguy]

Business owners in this country has become demonized no matter what they do and its getting borderline ridiculous. Okay maybe the Connecticut firearms companies should just do nothing in opposition to ridiculous laws. Then one day United States can become like Europe where all the firearms companies make it healthy profit selling only to their federal government and foreign militaries all the while depriving their citizens of most firearms ownership. But hey at least their employees don't have to relocate. I live in California so I know all too well what happens to a government when its people stop caring and are too afraid to move out of their government guaranteed mediocre life style. It gets out of control and they feel emboldened now to do anything they want because people are apathetic. If the state of South Carolina gets those jobs is because they deserve them. The people there had the guts to vote for leaders who cared about about creating oppurtunities and basic constitutional rights while the people in Connecticut sat idly by and voted for their own destruction. Most of their employees will have the option to move I'm assuming and for the ones who decide not to do that then hey its a free country for both business owners and workers

 

[Nanook]

If the state continues to get worse with regards to guns, eventually they will have the antis wet dream and the companies will close up shop.

Those employees would get hosed then as well. They might as well move with the company to a free state now rather than lose it all at some future date.

From what I see, the anti gun thing is like a religion with many of them. They'll never stop trying to disarm us, they'll never stop trying to pass stupid, feel good but do nothing laws.

Taking money out of their grasping paws is a tactic they will understand. Moving a company out of one of those states is perfectly understandable. I'm surprised it isn't done more often.

 

[BSA1]

In the past I based my purchases largely on what represented the best value for my needs/wants.

No longer.

In today's political environment and Obamas all out war on gun owners the geographical location of the manufacturer will become a consideration. I am unwilling to send my hard earned money to a state whose firearm laws are contrary to my beliefs.

Stag Arms may make a fine product...but so do other manufacturers in other states.

 

[Walkalong]

The owner of the company is throwing all of his employees life into turmoil simply because he didn't get his way. It is political, it is petty, and it shows a lack of respect for one's employees.

This is a bit over the top IMO.

While no one disagrees it is a hassle for all concerned, sometimes businesses move due to changing situations. The all out war on guns and manufactures of guns or support products is very real and adversely affecting companies, employees, and millions of law abiding gun owning citizens.

I would suggest directing your angst toward the politicians that are hell bent on taking away our freedoms, including the right to bear arms, instead of lashing out at the owner of a company faced with a very difficult decision forced upon them by zealous politicians attacking their companies products.

 

[armarsh]

My first job was with a company that moved for labor reasons. I replaced someone that did not want to move. It was a good job with a wonderful company. I'm glad to see others will have the same opportunity I did.

 

[thump_rrr]

Being a Canadian I don't know enough about what makes CT a high tax state and SC a low tax state for a business.

Lets assume we have 2 states with similar populations of the same physical size.
How can one state be run with a much smaller source of revenue?
Is the tax burden passed down to the workers who have a higher property or income tax rate?

Both states still need to keep up infrastructure and some level of social programs.

 

[ugaarguy]

Being a Canadian I don't know enough about what makes CT a high tax state and SC a low tax state for a business.

Lets assume we have 2 states with similar populations of the same physical size.
How can one state be run with a much smaller source of revenue?
Is the tax burden passed down to the workers who have a higher property or income tax rate?

Both states still need to keep up infrastructure and some level of social programs.

Thump, CT has overpaid bureaucrats, grossly overpaid union workers, and excessive government spending. Most social(ist) programs in the US are maintained at the Federal level - except in CA and many NE States where they have duplicate socialist programs to throw more money at the leeches. In fact, Massachusetts' Romney Care state universal health care system was the blueprint for Obama Care. Also, did you know that most workers in the firearms industry in the northeastern US belong to UAW? Yep - the United Auto Workers Union. Why do you think Fabrique Nationale shuttered the Winchester / USRAC plant in CT and moved production to FNMI in Columbia, SC several years ago?

 

[thump_rrr]

Thump, CT has overpaid bureaucrats, grossly overpaid union workers, and excessive government spending. Most social(ist) programs in the US are maintained at the Federal level - except in CA and many NE States where they have duplicate socialist programs to throw more money at the leeches. In fact, Massachusetts' Romney Care state universal health care system was the blueprint for Obama Care. Also, did you know that most workers in the firearms industry in the northeastern US belong to UAW? Yep - the United Auto Workers Union. Why do you think Fabrique Nationale shuttered the Winchester / USRAC plant in CT and moved production to FNMI in Columbia, SC several years ago?

So does anyone know what the average wage for a machinist is for each state?
Will employees be trading $1.00 for 4 quarters by making less money and paying less taxes while employers reap the benefits?

 

[Steve CT]

I live in CT, and I'm pretty damn happy that PTR and (hopefully) Stag are going to stand up to the political, feel good tyranny that these political weasels have dumped on us.

If I worked for them, and my company was willing to have a job for me in a FREE state, I'd move myself in a heartbeat. The hypocrisy of our Governor presenting that these firearms were not acceptable in CT, but we welcome you making them here and sending them anywhere else is mind boggling!

Our Governor clearly has his eye on "movin' on up" from CT into a more National position, I feel sorry for all of you that will soon join us as the recipients of his wisdom and narrow mindedness.

 

[HoosierQ]

A little bit off topic, but why did some of the newer gun manufacturers locate themselves in CT if it is a high-tax, high-regulation state? Is it because of the skilled labor and proximity to suppliers that are there with the long-time manufacturers?

Back in what were truly "the good old" days, Connecticut was the heartland of the firearms industry. So as new companies like Stag came along your statement was correct...lots of skilled firearms industry workers, managers, supply chains and all the rest were already there.

 

[rdhood]

The war between the pro and anti gun forces is on... full force, maybe permanently. At this point, every firearms company has to start evaluating the odds of states taking punitive measures against every aspect of their business. A certain administration made a promise to put the coal industry out of business. It makes sense that politicians in certain states might proclaim (and act on) the same sort of promise against gun manufacturers

 

[Deltaboy1984]

I hope they all leave Conn. The elected state leaders passed the laws and they should pay the price.

 

[SilentStalker]

I am going to chyme in here and say this, if I was currently employed by Stag and I found out they were moving their business to protect my rights and their business then I would be applauding them for doing something. Yes, it would suck to uproot my family or lose my job but it happens everyday and we move on. Those that have the skills will no doubt be able to find more work. Machinists are needed all across the nation for various different things. Just because they did work I the firearms industryit doesn't limit them to only that. Again, I feel bad for them but if I was in their shoes I would be proud that my place of employment was actually doing something and making an honest statement unlike most people who are all talk. And before anyone says that I would not know what it feels like to be laid off or any of that mess I will have you know that I know this all too well. No, it's definitely not something I would want to go through again but I adapted and with the Lords help I overcame that and now have the best job I have ever had! Who knows it may even be better for them.

 

[PavePusher]

I feel sorry for the workers at these companies. With the company moving they have the hard choice to either uproot their families and move to keep their job or start looking for a new job. All because their boss wants to make a political point.

And you know for a fact that the employees don't agree with the point, and are against the move?

 

[Ryanxia]

Any source on Stag moving?

 

[JSH1]

Being a Canadian I don't know enough about what makes CT a high tax state and SC a low tax state for a business.

Lets assume we have 2 states with similar populations of the same physical size.
How can one state be run with a much smaller source of revenue?
Is the tax burden passed down to the workers who have a higher property or income tax rate?

Both states still need to keep up infrastructure and some level of social programs.

Individual states in the USA provide very different levels of services. They also have very different tax structures. Federal spending also helps make up the difference in taxation as on average federal spending makes up 37% of state budgets nationwide but poor states receive a larger share of federal spending than wealthy states. For example, Connecticut received $0.69 in federal spending for every dollar paid in federal taxes while North Carolina received $1.35 for every dollar paid.

 

[JSH1]

And you know for a fact that the employees don't agree with the point, and are against the move?

Of course not but I do live in reality. As others have said, at best 10-20% of the staff will make the move as most people either don't want to move cross-country or simply can't. My current company moved engineering from AL to OH and then back to AL 9 years later. Less than 10% of the employees moved each time. Likewise my wife's company purchased a company in FL 3 years ago and shut down the FL facility on consolidated production to AL. All employees were offered the opportunity to move but less than 5% did.