MORE FUD! Getting tired of it.

[FEDUPWBS]

EDIT:this is a clip from an email responce for a request to purchase up to 100 mags from Mississippi auto arms; "The law in CA is extremely vague, so we contacted the CA AG office and were advised that they were legal to ship to CA. We asked for them to provide this to us in writing and they refused to do so. The attorney general in CA has sole discretion over interpretation of firearm laws and with nothing in writing, the laws can change on a daily basis. Furthermore, the anti-gun legal climate is not one that we want to avail our business to, so we make no exceptions. "

Again, from an email responding to a request for Saiga 12 mags (50-100). I get this CRAP alot in my adventures. This guy is saying He knows its ok but wont do it because they (doj) might change their minds! You guys want to do an email campaign to him? It is a public email addy. Also he asked DOJ for clarification of a "non law" who would do that?

[Crazed_SS]

[Choptop]

next time you call, advise the person on the other end of the phone that you are recording the conversation. Record it. keep the recordings.

[kantstudien]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=wKjxFJfcrcA

[Grouch]

people are dumb. Let us know who it is so we never give them anymore of our money.

[thedrickel]

Lemme get this straight . . . they won't send a 10rd mag??

[Sam Hainn]

next time you call, advise the person on the other end of the phone that you are recording the conversation. Record it. keep the recordings.

What would this do? To what advantage? YouTube fodder maybe? Waste of your own time really.

If a customer called me and "advised" me they were recording the call, I would hang up on them. Other than that, they aren't breaking any laws by not shipping to CA, they are just being dumb. Instead of recording them I'll do them one better - I simply wouldn't give them my business. Next step - share the story online, and when enough people hear it, or receive similar answers.... they'll change their policy.

[J_Rock]

Don't order anything from them. Put them on the CA unfriendly list

[CSACANNONEER]

Again, I say "This is America! One should be FREE to run their bussiness any way they want to. If you don't like it, don't do bussiness with them."

Yes, I don't like the fact that many companies are doing this. But, I'm not going to selfishly attempt to forceably take away any part of their freedom! This is America! Love it or Leave it!

[FortCourageArmory]

What would this do? To what advantage? YouTube fodder maybe? Waste of your own time really.

If a customer called me and "advised" me they were recording the call, I would hang up on them. Other than that, they aren't breaking any laws by not shipping to CA, they are just being dumb. Instead of recording them I'll do them one better - I simply wouldn't give them my business. Next step - share the story online, and when enough people hear it, or receive similar answers.... they'll change their policy.

+10,000. Great post. You don't act like jack-booted thugs or rogue CIA agents and record their conversations. You hurt them where THEY care about. Their bottom line. That's the best way to achieve change.

[thedonger]

next time you call, advise the person on the other end of the phone that you are recording the conversation. Record it. keep the recordings.

What would this do? To what advantage? YouTube fodder maybe? Waste of your own time really.

If a customer called me and "advised" me they were recording the call, I would hang up on them. Other than that, they aren't breaking any laws by not shipping to CA, they are just being dumb. Instead of recording them I'll do them one better - I simply wouldn't give them my business. Next step - share the story online, and when enough people hear it, or receive similar answers.... they'll change their policy.

I read that assuming he was saying for the vendor to record the call to the CA DOJ and keep the recording in case they later change their mind.

A recording in place of a written opinion. No?

[draconianruler]

Just take the business some place else. Although I agree that its ****ty they won't deal with CA buyers, they have the right to refuse service.

[bruss01]

Maybe this is the merchant's way of trying to get apathetic CA gun owners involved in taking back their state from the anti's - I don't see anyone getting on Barrett's case about refusing CA sales. If everyone in CA who owns a gun got off their @$$ on election day and VOTED like they wanted to CONTINUE to own a gun, then we wouldn't have half the BS laws on the books we have today. Maybe getting turned down now and then is a way of waking up some of the folks who have gone to sleep at the wheel.

Not saying I agree with that, just mentioning there is more than one way of looking at the situation.

[hoffmang]

Maybe its just a merchant's way of playing right into the hands of LCAV and Brady. I do love the general attitude of non-Californians that we should take legal risks to end overbearing gun control here, but that a merchant in another state is free to be a coward.

It's time we started calling merchants that will not sell to California what they are - constructive supporters of the Brady Campaign and cowards.

-Gene

[FEDUPWBS]

Maybe its just a merchant's way of playing right into the hands of LCAV and Brady. I do love the general attitude of non-Californians that we should take legal risks to end overbearing gun control here, but that a merchant in another state is free to be a coward.

It's time we started calling merchants that will not sell to California what they are - constructive supporters of the Brady Campaign and cowards.

-Gene

Thats EXACTLY CORRECT Gene!! I knew someone would come up with the correct answer. The right to refuse service copout is B.S. when your in the gun business (you live off the 2nd am.) and you are taking $ from anybody thats %100 percent "safe" while leaving those of us under the cloud of opression out to dry. You are only securing your own fate in the end.