PDA

View Full Version : Barrett will not sell to CA... BEST IDEA EVER!!!


8200rpm
09-01-2007, 2:09 PM
I think it's wonderful that Barrett no longer sells firearms in CA to law enforcement agencies. This is a great idea! If the citizens can't have guns, neither should the police!

Will the other manufacturers give up the CA LE market to support individual gun rights? They should, or else eventually LE will be their ONLY market. But, I doubt any other manufacturer has the foresight to support individual gun rights in this country. They only care about quarterly earnings.

I can only hope that other firearms and ammunition manufacturers follow in the footsteps of Barrett. We just need a couple more large companies to do this. Suppose Federal, Winchester, SIGARMS and S&W follows Barrett. If Glock and Remington swoops in to take the LE market in CA, individual consumers in the rest of the country could boycott Glock and Remington as it was done with S&W and Ruger in the past for betraying gunowners.

This needs the momentum of the larger manufacturers. Barrett alone will not change things, but it is a terrific precendent and a great gesture. I admire Barrett for their novel approach in supporting our rights. It shows great leadership.

We need to push this approach with the major manufacturers. I'm willing write all the major manufacturers requesting this. Has this been covered here at Calguns in the past??? The manufacturers should hear this from all of us. We can't forget about this. We need to support this.

http://www.crpa.org/showpages.asp?pid=1172

Piper
09-01-2007, 2:18 PM
The firearms industry has already said that if microstamping becomes law, the firearm industry will abandone the California market, and the same went with serializing ammunition. A majority of California's legislature are opportunistic self-serving morons who really don't consider or care about the unintended consequences. That in and of itself should tell people which politicians should be replaced. BTW, Ronnie Barrett has been doing this for about 3 years now. In fact, LAPD owns an 82A1 that he refused to repair, because of LAPD's involvement in getting the anti .50 BMG law passed. I won't turn this into a LEO bash, but LE bears some responsibility for getting these laws passed because they approve either openly or tacidly of laws like these.

HK fan
09-01-2007, 2:33 PM
I think this would be a great "wake up call" for the Ca goverment. They have a heightened sense of self importance. It would be a great way to show that there are consequences for their actions and that the world does not revolve around Sacramento.

WokMaster1
09-01-2007, 2:37 PM
None of the PDs give a crap. They're just gonna outsource the repair work & all future weapon purchase to China. If the manufacturers won't ship/do business with this state, in 10 years, all the PDs in California will be armed with AKs & Chinese made Smidth & Weszon, Grocks, Zigs & Berrettar.:eek:



And all of us will either be under exile in Nevada or in a rehabilitation camp next to SAS's property.:D

CSACANNONEER
09-01-2007, 2:48 PM
Although ALS only produces 5-6 50BMG uppers a month, their website states that they will not sell to Ca. LE agencies. They will, of course, still ship uppers to Ca. residents. I think that this is pretty much the standard policy for most, if not all, 50cal manufacturers.

M. Sage
09-01-2007, 2:52 PM
The firearms industry has already said that if microstamping becomes law, the firearm industry will abandone the California market, and the same went with serializing ammunition. A majority of California's legislature are opportunistic self-serving morons who really don't consider or care about the unintended consequences. That in and of itself should tell people which politicians should be replaced. BTW, Ronnie Barrett has been doing this for about 3 years now. In fact, LAPD owns an 82A1 that he refused to repair, because of LAPD's involvement in getting the anti .50 BMG law passed. I won't turn this into a LEO bash, but LE bears some responsibility for getting these laws passed because they approve either openly or tacidly of laws like these.

I'm sure they'll only abandon the commercial market. Betcha they keep selling to LE.

It would be wonderful if they would abandon both, though. That might open some eyes.

Dr. Peter Venkman
09-01-2007, 3:15 PM
Barrett kicks ***.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d123/WiseBobo/fgwhats.jpg

carsonwales
09-01-2007, 3:36 PM
but LE bears some responsibility for getting these laws passed because they approve either openly or tacidly of laws like these.

I would like to take this opportunity to REMIND everyone of the recent Sacramento City ordinances passed regarding ammunition sales and theft/loss reporting.

I listened live to the testimony that night and I am going to paraphrase the Sacramento City Police Chief:

"We do not believe that either one of these laws will have a meaningful or effective impact on crime.

However, we strongly urge passage of this legislation because...even though we can see no immediate benefit...
it gives us another tool in the tool box".

These measures were passed unanimously by the council that night and it was sickening.

I have respect for some LEO, and unbridled contempt for others.

The Sacramento City Police Chief is of the later.

M. Sage
09-01-2007, 3:42 PM
if leo's start buying from china there guns will work just like chp's new smiths. i've actually talked with a few manufacturers to no avail on this.it seems like either the rep doesn't give a shiot or the bean counters won't listen to them.yes this would be awsome do it for all of it hand guns rifles and ammo.

Well, all it'll take is one savvy ambulance chaser to look at the model of sidearm his client was shot with, when it was adopted by the dept. carrying it, a look at the "Safe Handgun Roster," and when it was passed, put two and two together and come out with a case that'd be damn hard to beat.

simonov
09-01-2007, 4:39 PM
California probably has more than half of the ten largest law enforcement agencies in the country, plus of course bazillions of municipal PDs and county sheriff offices. It's nice to see a maverick like Ronnie Barrett taking a stand, but it's unlikely many of his fellow firearms makers will follow his lead in giving up the largest commercial and law enforcement firearms market in the US.

PLINK
09-01-2007, 5:04 PM
<snip> Lee Stone,who works for Shiloh Rifle co, has recieved a E-Mail from Allent powder saying that under these new Reg's, that they would no longer be supplying powder to the Defense Dept, that got the Gov'ts notice real fast, which is doubtless why the OSHA just gave them a 60day extension on comments.Just another case of stupidy in action, just because we pay them $100,00 plus a year do you think they know what there doing? I think there a bunch of ldiots. Allant is the biggest powder maker in the world, i believe, so they listend.

Remember the new OSHA proposed ruling on powder which is still in the public comment period. If the above quote is true, then this is really cool of the company to do this for us gun owners/ retailers, etc. I think more of this should go on in CA.

CavTrooper
09-01-2007, 5:13 PM
This has been Barrets stance since the .50BMG ban went into effect, Im shocked that this is fresh news to some. The idea of boycotting firearms manufactures, distributors and retailers that deal with CA gov agencies, LEOs and such has been brought up too. My opinion is that we need to band together to effect the pocketbook and reputation of any and all who choose to do buisness with a government that blatently violates its citizens rights. What sense does it make for a company whos product is banned, BY NAME, in this state to continue to do buisness with the same government that is preventing them from maximize thier potential market? I belive that the people who run firearms related buisnesses should be taking the fight to the government every time a new piece of legislation comes up, just rolling over and taking it doesnt help anyone in the long run. Like I said before though, there are few people out there with the conviction to make this happen, we want our toys, regardless of the concequences.

8200rpm
09-01-2007, 6:31 PM
What sense does it make for a company whos product is banned, BY NAME, in this state to continue to do buisness with the same government that is preventing them from maximize thier potential market?

I wonder if this is true of Bushmaster. They were sued by a couple of the officers injured during the N. Hollywood BoA robbery. I think I'm going to send them an email.

jumbopanda
09-01-2007, 7:11 PM
None of the PDs give a crap. They're just gonna outsource the repair work & all future weapon purchase to China. If the manufacturers won't ship/do business with this state, in 10 years, all the PDs in California will be armed with AKs & Chinese made Smidth & Weszon, Grocks, Zigs & Berrettar.:eek:


Hahahaha :rofl: I want a Grock! :D

virulosity
09-01-2007, 7:14 PM
I wonder if this is true of Bushmaster. They were sued by a couple of the officers injured during the N. Hollywood BoA robbery. I think I'm going to send them an email.

I thought they were using AKs? (the robbers)

DedEye
09-01-2007, 7:24 PM
I thought they were using AKs? (the robbers)

AKs, HK 91 or 94 and an AR15 of some sort.

SemiAutoSam
09-01-2007, 7:36 PM
I'm pretty sure at least one of the Bank Robbers had a AK. Not sure about the other guy.

Ill look for a Vid on You Tube and Google and post anything I find.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=North+hollywood+Bank+robbery+

simonov
09-01-2007, 7:38 PM
pretty much they are all just a bunch of puussees

I met Ronnie Barrett at a party at the SHOT Show in 2005 and I pretty much said that to his face. Yes, I was drunk . . .

Solidsnake87
09-01-2007, 7:44 PM
The hollywood robbers had a HUGE arsenal. They had 2500 rnds of ammunition, 3 AKs (2 were underfolders), 1 Bushmaster XM-15 government model with beta mags, an HK 91, and some 9mm barretta 92 series pistols. ALL of the rifles used in the shootout were illegally modified to full auto. Many LE or news agencies are quick to call ANY bullet capable of penetrating armor of any type as armor piercing ammunition. This was one case where actual bullets designed to pierce armor were used. According to some segments I saw on the history channel, they purchased the ammo online from overseas by the thousand.

8200rpm
09-01-2007, 7:52 PM
My email to Bushmaster...

To Bushmaster Firearms:

Does Bushmaster Firearms currently sell products to California law enforcement agencies?

I am a California resident and an owner of a Bushmaster firearm since 1997. Since 2000, the majority of firearms from Bushmaster have been prohibited in CA by name and/or function. As you are probably aware, law enforcement leadership has often endorsed these ineffective gun control measures. Recently passed gun control legislation prompted Barrett Firearms to make a choice not to provide products and support to CA law enforcement agencies.

As a California resident who highly values the individual's right to keep and bear arms, I strongly believe that Barrett has made the RIGHT choice. Public consumers in all states together with firearm and ammunition manufacturers must stand together to condemn the infringements upon the individual's right to keep and bear arms. Firearms industry leaders must take this stand in order to preserve our rights and ultimately your future consumer base.

I would like to encourage Bushmaster and other firearm industry leaders to take a stand and cease all future business with California law enforcement agencies. Drastic choices must be made to open the dialogue for common sense and ensure the future well-being of gun owners and the firearms industry alike. Thank you very much for your support.

X X
NRA, CRPA
Bushmaster user since 1997



Ronnie Barrett's letter to Chief William Bratton...
http://nramemberscouncils.com/caspec...nbarrett.shtml


December 11, 2002

Chief William J. Bratton
Los Angeles Police Department
150 North Los Angeles Street

Re: LAPD 82A Rifle, Serial No. 1186

Point of Contact: Jim Moody
213 485 4061

Dear Chief Bratton,

I, a U.S. citizen, own Barrett Firearms Mfg. Inc., and for 20 years I have built .50 caliber rifles for my fellow citizens, for their Law Enforcement departments and for their nation's armed forces.

You may be aware of the latest negative misinformation campaign from a Washington based anti-gun group, the Violence Policy Center. The VPC has, for three or so years, been unsuccessful in Washington, D.C. trying to demonize and ban a new subclass of firearms, the .50 caliber and other "too powerful" rifles. This type of nibbling process has been historically successful in civilian disarmament of other nations governed by totalitarian and other regimes less tolerant of individual rights than the United States .

The VPC's most recent efforts directs this misinformation campaign at your state, attempting to get any California body to pass any law against .50 caliber firearms. In March 2002 the VPC caused the California State Assembly, Public Safety Committee to consider and reject the issue by a 5 to 0 with 1 abstaining vote.

Regrettably, the same material has been presented to your city council. I personally attended the council meeting in Los Angeles regarding attempts to bar ownership of the .50 caliber rifle in your city. I was allowed to briefly address the council. The tone of the discussion was mostly emotionally based, so the facts that I attempted to provide were ineffective to the extent they were heard at all. The council voted to have the city attorney draft an ordinance to ban the .50, and further, to instruct the city's representatives in Sacramento and in Washington D.C. to push for bans at their respective levels.

At that council meeting, I was very surprised to see an LAPD officer seated front and center with a Barrett 82A1 .50 cal rifle. It was the centerpiece of the discussion. As you know, there have been no crimes committed with these rifles, and most importantly, current California law does not allow the sale of the M82AI in the state because of its detachable magazine and features that make it an "assault weapon." This rifle was being deceptively used by your department. The officer portrayed it as a sample of a currently available .50 cal rifle, available for sale to the civilians of Los Angeles. One councilman even questioned how this rifle was available under current laws, but as I stated, facts were ineffective that day.

Your officer, speaking for the LAPD, endorsed the banning of this rifle and its ammunition. Then he used the rifle for photo ops with the Councilmen each of whom, in handling the firearm, may have been committing a felony. I was amazed.

Since 1968, with the closing of the U.S. Springfield Amory, all of the small arms produced for the various government agencies are from the private sector. Every handgun, rifle or shotgun that law enforcement needs comes from this firearms industry. Unless the City of Los Angeles has plans of setting up its own firearms manufacturing, it may need to guard the manufacturing sources it has now.

When I returned to my office from Los Angeles, I found an example of our need for mutual cooperation. Your department had sent one of your 82A1 rifles in to us for service. All of my knowledge in the use of my rifle in the field of law enforcement had been turned upside down by witnessing how your department used yours. Not to protect and serve, but for deception, photo opportunities, and to further an ill-conceived effort that may result in the use of LA taxpayer monies to wage losing political battles in Washington against civil liberties regarding gun ownership.

Please excuse my slow response on the repair service of the rifle. I am battling to what service I am repairing the rifle for. I will not sell, nor service, my rifles to those seeking to infringe upon the Constitution and the crystal clear rights it affords individuals to own firearms.

I implore you to investigate the facts of the .50, to consider the liberties of the law-abiding people and our mutual coexistence, and to change your department's position on this issue.

Sincerely,
BARRETT FIREARMS MANUFACTURING, INC.


Ronnie Barrett
President

RRangel
09-01-2007, 8:11 PM
I've read it before, but that's still awesome.

carsonwales
09-01-2007, 8:49 PM
Thats what you call a patriot folks.

We all can only hope to find ourselves in a position to make such a powerful statement.

Thank god for patriots like Mr. Barrett....

Gene, Bill etc....you guys are equal to this....

G17GUY
09-01-2007, 8:56 PM
My email to Bushmaster...




Ronnie Barrett's letter to Chief William Bratton...
http://nramemberscouncils.com/caspec...nbarrett.shtml

Did Bushmaster ever respond?

8200rpm
09-01-2007, 9:29 PM
Did Bushmaster ever respond?

I sent it just a few minutes before posting it. Do I expect to hear back from them? Not really. If I do, I'll keep you posted.

Piper
09-02-2007, 11:46 AM
Listening to NRA news, I've heard that any bans or additional restrictions and regulations would have to translate to LE firearms as well because of legal ramifications. Think of it this way, if a firearm is placed on the dangerous weapons list and LE uses it and actually shoots someone, you can bet some trial lawyers will be looking for some deep pockets. It's really hard to justify use by LE and not private owners.

It would be nice though if firearm manufacturers took a stand and forced California governments to abandon the restrictive laws. California is big, but there are times when a person just has to take a stand and say enough.

LAK Supply
09-02-2007, 11:57 AM
I was just reading through an issue of Special Weapons and I noticed a Barrett ad....... in the lower right-hand corner of the ad they have a little note about how they won't sell to CA because of the situation being discussed here. I love Ronnie Barrett! :chris:

RRangel
09-02-2007, 12:13 PM
Listening to NRA news, I've heard that any bans or additional restrictions and regulations would have to translate to LE firearms as well because of legal ramifications. Think of it this way, if a firearm is placed on the dangerous weapons list and LE uses it and actually shoots someone, you can bet some trial lawyers will be looking for some deep pockets. It's really hard to justify use by LE and not private owners.

It would be nice though if firearm manufacturers took a stand and forced California governments to abandon the restrictive laws. California is big, but there are times when a person just has to take a stand and say enough.

Legal ramifications yes. Look at the California "safe handgun" testing. Law enforcement is exempt. So they can use "unsafe" handguns on duty. That means these handguns are so dangerous we can't defend our lives with them, but when you call 911 law enforcement using the same firearms are magically safe. So much for safety. It doesn't get more transparent than that.

They were only exempt so that the victim disarmers could get the bill through without LE opposition. Had they not exempted LE it might have turned out different. Divide and conquer.

chris
09-02-2007, 3:57 PM
I fully support Barrets decision on not selling to any gov angency in the jacked up state. I have known about this sinec the ban passed.

I have to say that LE has played in some part to create the hositility towards firearm ownership. I know there are many LEO that are flat out against the crap being shoved down our throats year after year. But I have to say they too are responsible and should be unable to obtain any firearm banned in this state this also includes the 10 round magazine limit.

It is unforntuante that firearms industry will not cutt off gov agencies to purhcase firearms. I wish they would if microstamping becomes law. Most of us here know if WE do not get involved and call, fax and e-mail sacramento that we WILL LOSE it ALL. This is the bill to start it off.

Hoop
09-02-2007, 6:00 PM
I won't turn this into a LEO bash, but LE bears some responsibility for getting these laws passed because they approve either openly or tacidly of laws like these.

Well, a good number of cops aren't really "gun enthusiasts," they just carry one on their belts as part of the job.

Piper
09-02-2007, 6:48 PM
Actually, I'm not a huge modern firearms enthusiast either. I'm more into archery, flintlocks and muskets. But I do have a modern pistol for self defense and I have my old duty weapon, but that's just me. The thing that really urks me to no end is how the arrogant politicians of California continue to infringe on our 2nd and 14th amendment rights. And California law enforcement, from the slick sleeved rookie to the chief's and sheriff's create that unconstitutional barrier between the law abiding people and our rights. But do they care? I think not. Do they care if you are killed by some thug who would just as soon kill you for your ipod as look at you? Do you think they care if your wife or daughter is raped? Do you really think for one second LE gives a rats @$$ about your safety? NO, NO and NO. Quite frankly, only a small number of LEO's actually work in the cities they live in, so most of the time, the contacts are very impersonal. And any concern about crime is more about them and their stats than it is about protecting individual citizens. While they are talking to the victims survivors they will use enough perceived compasion to avoid getting a complaint, but after the reports done, they will be back to business as usual. If LE did care about the citizens LE promises to serve, they wouldn't be so quick to atimately disagree with RTC. If LE really cared, they wouldn't be so quick to persecute someone who has a loaded firearm for personal protection. I had one LEO say this to me, "If I have to have an ID card and badge to carry my gun, everyone else needs a CCW to carry their guns." How ignorant is that? It would be nice if law abiding citizens in California could get a CCW as easily as I did when I lived in Washington state. But with the exception of a few counties, it's just not happening.

To the moderators, I'm sorry if this looks like a LEO bashing post but it really is their actions that bring on this type of response. LE are the new crew that is using the "I was only following orders" defense.