Your help needed - open letter to firearm and ammo manufacturers

[Chris51080]

I'm hardly eloquent, but this needs to be done. I'm asking for the Calgun community to help craft an open letter to all firearm and ammunition manufacturers, as well as the NRA.

At this point, the only way to get the state to listen to us is by action. The best action I can think of is to get support and stop selling firearms or ammunition to the state or its agencies.

I can't take credit for this idea, but I did start to put pen to paper. I'm asking you to help me make a better letter. Or tell me this is a terrible idea.

In the end, it would be best if this comes from recognized group, but if nobody steps up, I will send it out myself to the individual companies.

This is a work in progress, pretty raw right now. Please provide input and help with wording. I will update regularly with any changes. If this takes off, and a moderator wants to update the post, I'm cool with that.

I want to finish this up and get it sent out there first week of August.

[k1dude]

I would suggest pointing out that so goes California, so goes the nation.

If they refuse to stop selling to the state's agencies, they are only buying time until their ultimate demise.

The fight needs to begin here and now.

[Chris51080]

I would suggest pointing out that so goes California, so goes the nation.

If they refuse to stop selling to the state's agencies, they are only buying time until their ultimate demise.

The fight needs to begin here and now.

Good idea. I was struggling with wording and examples to use last night.

[choprzrul]

I would also note that promoting a nationwide "Boycott California" effort would also put a serious hurt on CA & tax revenue.

Imagine the lost tax dollars if the rest of the country stopped buying CA fruits, vegetables, software, manufactured goods, etc....HUGE!

$$ is the ONLY language that politicians understand...

.

[sulla123]

I'm a teacher, and on the side I help edit and craft letters. I'm happy to do it. I'll take what you have so far, add to it, and we can go back and forth until you're happy with it. Others are welcome to chime in. I'll get started in an hour or so, and pm a draft to you by tomorrow.

[Chris51080]

I'm a teacher, and on the side I help edit and craft letters. I'm happy to do it. I'll take what you have so far, add to it, and we can go back and forth until you're happy with it. Others are welcome to chime in. I'll get started in an hour or so, and pm a draft to you by tomorrow.

Thank you.
I'll update the initial post with whatever changes are made.

[NytWolf]

I like your letter with the exception of the cancelling contracts.

Cancellation of a contract may result in financial disparity and lawsuits. Gov contracts usually include clauses that discourage cancellation of a contract before its fulfillment. They are also usually written to give the gov entity control over the contract. With that said, even if the manufacturers agree with you, they may not be able to act.

[Chris51080]

I like your letter with the exception of the cancelling contracts.

Cancellation of a contract may result in financial disparity and lawsuits. Gov contracts usually include clauses that discourage cancellation of a contract before its fulfillment. They are also usually written to give the gov entity control over the contract. With that said, even if the manufacturers agree with you, they may not be able to act.

Very true. I know that sometimes contracts are able to be voided when circumstances have materially changed. I don't know if this would apply though.

Maybe we ask that current contracts not be renewed and be cancelled if possible?

[elSquid]

This has been brought up a few times.

Things to consider:

a) public companies - generally manufacturers - have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. They are in the business of making money, not making political stands.

b) manufacturers rarely sell direct. Generally gun and ammo sales pass through intermediaries - distributors - which then sell to the retail level.

c) there exist distributors that specifically deal with the LEO and gov't market. There is no reason why these distributors would stop selling to their bread and butter customers.

Private companies - like Barrett - have the ability to pick and choose customers.

http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/rkba-50.html

-- Michael

[Chris51080]

Good points.

I'd argue that taking a stand against California is in their long term interest. If these California laws are allowed to stand, similar laws on the federal level are not far behind. By taking a monetary hit now, these companies will be protecting not only our rights, but the long term survival of their companies.

If it will do any good, I'll include the distributors on the open letter. Their business is just as tired to these laws as the manufacturers.

It's possible, though unlikely, that the manufacturer could refuse sales to distributors that deal with California.


I know this whole thing is a long shot, but we need to start somewhere. If we can get one company to follow Barretts lead, we may be able to start getting the attention and restoration of our rights that we need.

[elSquid]

I know this whole thing is a long shot, but we need to start somewhere.

No harm in swinging at the ball!

If we can get one company to follow Barretts lead, we may be able to start getting the attention and restoration of our rights that we need.

Keep in mind that manufacturers haven't been sitting idle on the CA issue.

For example, I believe that S&W, Ruger and Glock have been active in roster challenges:

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150303/california-update-the-fight-against-california-s-de-facto-handgun-ban-continues

For big companies, litigation may make more sense than trying to put pressure on gov't entities through denying product sales.

Anyways, good luck!

-- Michael