Smith and Wesson Stops Selling in CA

Thus is kind of misleading. They are going too stop selling some guns like they're m&p line because they are going to make performance changes that will force them to retest their guns under California's idiotic laws but they will continue to sell their specific California compliant models like the shield. They reference the Times article but don't report all the information from that article. California laws are ridiculous, no questioning that, but the article should provide all the information or it is misleading.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk
 
Coming to a city near you!

If you think this crap will be privy to just CA, your kidding yourself!

The time is fast approaching when there will be blood on the street...

I'm just sayin...


Sent from behind Enemy Lines.
 
Coming to a city near you!

If you think this crap will be privy to just CA, your kidding yourself!

The time is fast approaching when there will be blood on the street...

I'm just sayin...


Sent from behind Enemy Lines.

Yep! The antis never give up. They keep chipping away at whatever they do not like!
 
Interesting - S&W just finalized a 5 year deal for 13,000 M&P 9s with LA County Sheriff's Dept last August. Largest single order placed by a sheriff's dept. in S&W history. LACSD is transitioning away from the Beretta 92. S&W knew that most of their autos would fall under the Unsafe Gun Act, which went into effect last year, when they inked the deal; appears to me that S&W wanted one last big score before their autos fall off the approved list in August of this year and they announced the end of affected semi sales in CA. Or perhaps law enforcement agencies are exempt from this requirement and S&W see this as a loophole that will allow them to continue selling autos to the CA government. I don't claim to know all the ins and outs of the microstamping requirement, but it puts a big question mark in my mind where S&W is concerned.
 
Good for these companies. I wish more companies would do the same thing. Auto makers, oil refiners, gun makers and just about every other company that produces a product has to produce a special version for California. I wish the big auto manufacturers would tell California that they can pass all the laws the wanted to because they would just sell their cars in other states. It would not take long before the people of California made a few changes involving the law makers in that state.
 
Good for these companies. I wish more companies would do the same thing. Auto makers, oil refiners, gun makers and just about every other company that produces a product has to produce a special version for California. I wish the big auto manufacturers would tell California that they can pass all the laws the wanted to because they would just sell their cars in other states. It would not take long before the people of California made a few changes involving the law makers in that state.

What do you think is more expensive for auto manufacturers (or any other highly-regulated merchandise, like guns for instance) to do, quit selling in jurisdictions with restrictive regulations, or adapt to those regulations and fold the costs of adapting into the sales price to the end user?

Industry is not supposed to be in the business of politics, they're in the business of selling merchandise and services. I share ezkl2230's skepticism about just exactly what S&W is doing in CA, but whatever it is, I'll guarantee you that their bottom line comes ahead of making a political statement of any kind, and if it doesn't, some CEOs and CFOs and COOs should be getting the boot from their shareholders.

The only people who get hurt in CA if S&W stops selling there are the gun-owners and 2nd Amendment advocates who still live there. The gun-grabbers get exactly what they want, so if there's any politics involved in whatever S&W is doing, it goes in favor of the gun-grabbers. Does that make sense that a political statement would be part of S&W's decisions?

My guess is that backing out of the retail CA market only makes sense at their bottom line because of over-regulation, and has nothing whatsoever to do with CA politics, nor should it IMO. I imagine there is little that S&W can do to make it profitable to adapt to that over-regulation because the products they make will not still *effectively* perform their intended functions if they do. An over-regulated car will still provide effective transportation though, so the car companies aren't going anywhere.

It may seem cold, but it is unreasonable to expect corporations to include political considerations in their decision-making processes, except to the extent that those political considerations positively affect their bottom lines.

Blues
 
What do you think is more expensive for auto manufacturers (or any other highly-regulated merchandise, like guns for instance) to do, quit selling in jurisdictions with restrictive regulations, or adapt to those regulations and fold the costs of adapting into the sales price to the end user?

Industry is not supposed to be in the business of politics, they're in the business of selling merchandise and services. I share ezkl2230's skepticism about just exactly what S&W is doing in CA, but whatever it is, I'll guarantee you that their bottom line comes ahead of making a political statement of any kind, and if it doesn't, some CEOs and CFOs and COOs should be getting the boot from their shareholders.

The only people who get hurt in CA if S&W stops selling there are the gun-owners and 2nd Amendment advocates who still live there. The gun-grabbers get exactly what they want, so if there's any politics involved in whatever S&W is doing, it goes in favor of the gun-grabbers. Does that make sense that a political statement would be part of S&W's decisions?

My guess is that backing out of the retail CA market only makes sense at their bottom line because of over-regulation, and has nothing whatsoever to do with CA politics, nor should it IMO. I imagine there is little that S&W can do to make it profitable to adapt to that over-regulation because the products they make will not still *effectively* perform their intended functions if they do. An over-regulated car will still provide effective transportation though, so the car companies aren't going anywhere.

It may seem cold, but it is unreasonable to expect corporations to include political considerations in their decision-making processes, except to the extent that those political considerations positively affect their bottom lines.

Blues
Barrett and STI did it.
 
Barrett and STI did it.

I'm not sure what STI did, but Barrett only shut down an inquiry from a cop-shop about maybe buying one or two of their sniper rifles. They didn't leave the state refusing to make or sell weapons at retail. I'll bet STI didn't either, and if they did, the only people they hurt is the gun-owning public, not the state that they're supposedly making a political statement about.
 
I'm not sure what STI did, but Barrett only shut down an inquiry from a cop-shop about maybe buying one or two of their sniper rifles. They didn't leave the state refusing to make or sell weapons at retail. I'll bet STI didn't either, and if they did, the only people they hurt is the gun-owning public, not the state that they're supposedly making a political statement about.

Actually, Barrett has refused to sell any weapons to any California agency. Here is Ronnie Barrett's open letter to California:

Dear Fellow Citizens

In the never-ending battle to destroy our constitution, more "big lie" propaganda is being dumped on our elected officials. The rhetoric given forth by the Violence Policy Center (VPC) so easily deceived the legislators of California, resulting in the banning of fifty caliber rifles because they are powerful and their bullets punch holes when they strike. Even single shot .50 cal rifles were banned. It's hard to believe we live in such a dark time that someone has actually banned a single shot rifle. But as you will see, this is the cleverest of all gun bans, and the end goal is civilian disarmament, the confiscation of your tools of liberty, your rifles.

What lies before us is the continuation of the misinformation campaign, trying to coax yet another state to infringe upon the U.S. Constitution as California did. The anti-freedom/anti-gun movement has discovered how transparent they appear when they propose sweeping gun bans and now are successful by biting off a little at a time. Ever so small, many politicians are trading off your rights without you recognizing their violations.

First we had the "Saturday Night Special" which was all affordable handguns, then "sniper rifles" which were any scoped deer rifles. Those were obvious, too big a scam to go unnoticed, but with the creation and demonization of the term "assault weapon," the Clinton's Crime bill produced a wasted 10-year setback on your freedoms and safe gun design. Now comes another scam. This time they are shocked to discover that rifles are "accurate and powerful."

This is the same bull the officials in the 1950's fell for when they banned the self-unfolding knife. First the knife was demonized by giving it an evil name, "switchblade," then we (the trusting public) were told that the problem of gang violence was solved with its banning. How ridiculous. It's surprising they didn't ban the leather jacket. In reality, gang violence was and is a serious social problem, but it was not related to manually unfolding verses self-unfolding knives. The elected officials voting to ban an object like a knife proved themselves unwilling or uncaring to understand the problem, and thus, incapable of any real solutions.

The handful of people that make up the VPC are solely responsible for the big lie on .50's, claiming fantastic destruction capabilities. They manipulate fear by claiming terrorists will use these rifles on targets of our infrastructure. "They will shut down our airports in flames" they claim. VPC's Tom Diaz refers to them as "super guns" lying to his dupable group of politicians, concealing the facts that there are many rifle cartridges that are comparable in performance (those will be added to the list in phase two). He is boldly telling these officials (and all who will listen) that the risk of terrorist attacks on these targets will be solved with the banning of powerful rifles, in this case, the .50 caliber rifle. In reality, terrorism is complex and will be defeated with improved intelligence. In this instance, the officials voting to ban an inanimate object like a rifle prove themselves to be ignorant of the problem of terrorism and are wasting time and resources.

You must understand the brilliance of this dangerous back door deception. Your politicians are being told that the fifty is a highly destructive cartridge that can destroy airplanes, fuel transport trucks and depot storages of fuel. They show videos like the one on 60 Minutes showing a 1/2 inch plate of steel being pierced by a .50 cal round while stopping a .308 caliber. This is all to confuse the people, those with little exposure to firearms; their impression concludes that the .50 punches holes in sensitive targets where other rifles cannot. Had they shot actual aluminum that is used on airplane construction, or aluminum or steel used in actual transport or tank construction, both the .50 and the .308 will pierce along with most all centerfire cartridges. But this, they must keep secret.

First, with the confusion of massive, (although incorrect) technical data and the hammering of urgency, the VPC demands a ban or strict regulations on rifles that chamber a cartridge that has the ability to penetrate targets. Sound ridiculous? It is.
VPC's Tom Diaz appears often on TV with maps of Washington, DC, irresponsibly instructing where to position one's self to illegally fire on vulnerable important targets of our government, promising these specific targets will be safe when .50's are banned. He pressures politicians to act quickly on this URGENT legislation needed to make these terrorist targets safe, hoping they will act before the VPC lies are discovered.

Now slow down. A ban on a rifle because the cartridge it shoots penetrates targets? By the legislation naming and defining the targets that are damageable by rifle fire, and in this case, .50 cal. rifle fire, they create a new class of rifles. This new class is not defined by such foolishness as detachable magazines, flash hiders, or pistol grips. Instead, the test is; does it fire a bullet that punches a hole, and can the hole result in damage to specified and named targets? If so, the law-abiding citizen shouldn't be allowed to have this, so they must ban this class of rifle before they can be misused. This is the very thing California has just passed!

"Now, we are only talking about those powerful .50 cals, right? It's such a small class, no one will mind or even notice." That's what the VPC's lies have lead you to believe. No, remember they are banning rifles because specific targets named in our infrastructure are susceptible to damage. Now tell me, what centerfire rifle cartridge won't punch holes in those targets? What centerfire rifle cartridge is not powerful? Not many or not any? So, in order to comply with the spirit and intent of the law, the Attorney General or State Secretary must add those cartridges to the banned list. The big lie is exposed. They aren't just talking about .50's. They're after your hunting rifles, centerfire target rifles-just about any rifle you own.
Unlike California, we cannot allow any of our local, state, or federal officials to be deceived with any of this "big lie" gun control propaganda. The U.S. has every gun law that could possibly be needed. Virtually every real world scenario of firearm abuse is already covered in some law that is currently on the books.

Many of you have inquired as to the outcome of the letter I wrote to Police Chief Bratten of the LAPD. Unfortunately, the chief's position did not change. He continued to use his officers in the same deceptive practices formerly utilized with the city council. These few officers testifying in Sacramento ultimately contributed to the unconstitutional AB50 law being passed. It saddened me to have to tell members of the LAPD SWAT team that they would have to send someone for their rifle, because I refused to assist anyone or any organization that is in violation of the United States Constitution. In turn, the department arranged to pick up their un-serviced rifle.

Barrett cannot legally sell any of its products to lawbreakers. Therefore, since California's passing of AB50, the state is not in compliance with the US Constitution's 2nd and 14th Amendments, and we will not sell nor service any of our products to any government agency of the State of California.

I appreciate all the phone calls and e-mails from LAPD officers and civilians during that time, encouraging and supporting our actions. We shall see if other firearms companies will follow this path. I know many are corporately owned and feel like they are unable to risk the life of their company for the liberties of our nation, but if we lose our Republic, our freedom, what good is any of it? I am in the proud and fortunate position that many of our forefathers were in when they risked all for our liberties.

"Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" -Patrick Henry

This "ban large bore" insanity failed in Washington years ago, but that didn't discourage the VPC. Now it's resurfacing in city council meetings, in individual states, and it's being reintroduced in Washington. NRA-ILA Executive Director, Chris Cox, once told me "These (anti-freedom, anti-gun) guys never go away, and they never quit."

I've received thousands of e-mails and letters from you offering encouragement and support. Our Republic, our liberty, needs and demands your support. You must take action to guard your rights. First, find your State Senator and State Representative. Tell them not to fall for this scam. This lie depends on the elected official being naive about firearms and their capabilities. Stand ready to carry this same message to your U.S. Senator and Representatives. Know all of your elected officials' positions on gun issues. DO NOT ELECT ANY ANTI-GUN PERSON TO ANY POSITION!

Position yourself with me in the battles that we must fight. You need to join the NRA, the Fifty Caliber Shooters' Association, and the NSSF in order to stay informed. These people have been with me in the trenches, fighting for every inch of the liberty you enjoy.

Today we draw a line; there will be no more nibbling at our freedom. Today you stand idle no longer. Today you do something to save our country!

Ronnie Barrett Owner and CEO Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, Inc.

And here his is letter to New York stating that he will sell nothing to any New York agency:

Barrett’s Position Regarding the Assault on Liberty
February 20, 2013

Barrett opposes those who are illegally disarming the American public from their efficient arms and creating superior armed elitist government agencies.

Elected state officials of New York, having been sworn to protect our Constitution, have instead committed an offense against it and their citizens by stripping inalienable rights duly protected and guaranteed under the Second Amendment. By their deliberate and sinister actions, these officials now cause their state and local policing agencies to enforce these unconstitutional and illegal so called “laws”.

By current law, Barrett cannot be an accomplice with any lawbreaker, therefore, cannot and will not service or sell to New York government agencies. Barrett also applies this stance to the individual elected official who, as a matter of public record, has voted for or created regulation that violates the constitutional rights of their citizens. This is an expansion of our 2002 ban against the California government due to their second amendment infringements, and shall apply to any future violators.

In the course of world history there have been officials that strip inalienable rights from the people that were given to all by our Creator. Most of these officials inevitably come to trial, some do not.

Intentionally violating constitutional rights by officials that have sworn to uphold them should have severe prison sentences.

With the clear vision of horrible events in history repeating itself, all manufacturers of firearms or related equipment remaining in partnership with such violators should have a respectable fear of being found with the guilty on their day of trial.

During this era of assault on liberty, Barrett will remain steadfast in our efforts to serve law-abiding citizens of all fifty states, and stands together with you in the struggles we will fight and win.

Ronnie Barrett
Chairman and CEO

Here are some other statements from other firearms manufacturers:

Effective today, in an effort to see that no legal mistakes are made by LaRue Tactical and/or its employees, we will apply all current State and Local Laws (as applied to civilians) to state and local law enforcement / government agencies. In other words, LaRue Tactical will limit all sales to what law-abiding citizens residing in their districts can purchase or possess.

Due the passing of this legislation, Olympic Arms would like to announce that the State of New York, any Law Enforcement Departments, Law Enforcement Officers, First Responders within the State of New York, or any New York State government entity or employee of such an entity - will no longer be served as customers.
In short, Olympic Arms will no longer be doing business with the State of New York or any governmental entity or employee of such governmental entity within the State of New York - henceforth and until such legislation is repealed, and an apology made to the good people of the State of New York and the American people.

The Federal Government and several states have enacted gun control laws that restrict the public from owning and possessing certain types of firearms. Law-enforcement agencies are typically exempt from these restrictions. EFI, LLC does not recognize law-enforcement exemptions to local, state, and federal gun control laws. If a product that we manufacture is not legal for a private citizen to own in a jurisdiction, we will not sell that product to a law-enforcement agency in that jurisdiction.

We will not sell arms to agents of the state of New York that hold themselves to be "more equal" than their citizens.
As long as the legislators of New York think they have the power to limit the rights of their citizens, in defiance of the Constitution, we at Templar will not sell them firearms to enforce their edicts.
Templar Custom is announcing that the State of New York, any Law Enforcement Departments, Law Enforcement Officers, First Responders within the State of New York, or any New York State government entity or employee will no longer be served as customers.


Based on the recent legislation in New York, we are prohibited from selling rifles and receivers to residents of New York. We have chosen to extend that prohibition to all governmental agencies associated with or located within New York. As a result we have halted sales of rifles, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, machine guns, and silencers to New York governmental agencies.

Serbu:
“Unfortunately, we have a policy of selling to state law enforcement agencies only what is allowed to be sold to private citizens in that state. Since the passage of the NY SAFE act, the BFG-50A is considered an assault weapon and as such is no longer available to private citizens in the state of New York. Therefore we have to respectfully decline to supply your department with BFG-50A rifles.”
 
Unless they actually sold firearms to any NY or CA agencies then those companies are just blowing smoke as marketing BS.
 
Yep! The antis never give up. They keep chipping away at whatever they do not like!

Exactly! We have learned the hard way in the past that you CAN NOT compromise with the antis. Every time we would make a concession they would immediately come back with more demands. FIGHT THEM tooth and nail ON EVERYTHING!!!!!
 
Actually, Barrett has refused to sell any weapons to any California agency. Here is Ronnie Barrett's open letter to California:



And here his is letter to New York stating that he will sell nothing to any New York agency:



Here are some other statements from other firearms manufacturers:

I don't know why you guys are trying to convince me of something I never took a stance against. I answered a post that said that more companies should refuse to sell anything in CA, like over-regulated cars and over-regulated guns. All I said was that if they completely cut off doing any business in CA or any other state, it would be a ridiculous business decision. Cutting off the cop-shops and continuing to sell to citizens is not counter to anything I said, and yeah, I saw after I made the last post that Ronnie Barrett had cut off more than just the NY inquiry that I remembered, but the premise is the same - he's not cutting off The People, only the cops, and thus protecting his bottom line. I'm reasonably sure that the vast majority of his gross sales goes to the military anyway.

That letter that he wrote to CA is awesome. It's a great bit of rhetorical flourish, but comparatively-speaking, how much money did he really put on the line? I'm sure there are some .50 cals in some cop agencies around CA, but would anyone presume that they're common for police use? I know the M82A1 retails for around $10K. I don't know what the distributor and/or agency discount is, but pick a number and multiply it by however many of those rifles you think his company might sell to cop-shops in CA over whatever time-period you wish to include, and then figure out what his retail and military gross sales are over the same time-period, and you'll surely see that he didn't put his company at any financial risk at all.

And if you think he will lose a single dime on the maintenance/parts contracts, I don't think so. He's the only one who makes the parts, so the agencies will have to hire private armorers and Barrett will still sell the parts that will end up installed on agency rifles. And there ain't a thing in the world wrong with any of that, except that WAY too many gun owners are easily enough fooled into believing that a great piece of writing and patriotic fervor equates to Ronnie Barrett actually putting something significant on the line. The guy is not only a great American, he's a great inventor and a great businessman. I wouldn't include that last thing if I really believed he put his bottom line at risk, instead of simply making a symbolic gesture that cost very little (if anything).

In any case, I didn't say that there weren't gun manufacturers who did absolutely nothing, I said that they're not in the business of politics except to the extent that it doesn't hurt their bottom line. Considering that Barrett is among the most successful companies in the arms business, I'd say that now stands as a proven fact, even if I did miss the letter and denial of merchandise to CA LE agencies.

Unless they actually sold firearms to any NY or CA agencies then those companies are just blowing smoke as marketing BS.

I agree that there's a marketing component to it, but it's hardly accurate to say that their stands are "just" marketing BS. I believe that Ronnie Barrett's letter expresses his true beliefs as a citizen, and they're consistent with virtually all of the civilians who might one day become his customers and so their simpatico may well give him a marketing edge, but his beliefs seem sincere nonetheless, as do the other companies' stances. There's certainly nothing wrong, hypocritical or unethical about profiting from a political situation not of one's own making. It's the American Way.

Blues
 
The CA handgun roster can be looked up here, Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale - Firearms Division - California Dept. of Justice - Office of the Attorney General, including the obituary, http://oag.ca.gov/sites/oag.ca.gov/files/pdfs/firearms/removed.pdf, and the quite nonsensical (empty) list of recently added handguns, http://oag.ca.gov/sites/oag.ca.gov/files/pdfs/firearms/recentlyadded.pdf.

It seems that all have an expiry date for being on the roster, which means that all semi-autos will potentially fall off due to the microstamping requirement. Can anyone confirm that not only new models won't make it onto the roster, but also old models automatically will fall off the roster, because they expire?
 
Does this only apply to new guns? If it does, the used gun market will be really busy.

From Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale - Firearms Division - California Dept. of Justice - Office of the Attorney General:

"... no handgun may be manufactured within California, imported into California for sale, lent, given, kept for sale, or offered/exposed for sale unless that handgun model has passed firing, safety, and drop tests and is certified for sale in California by the Department of Justice. Private party transfers, curio/relic handguns, certain single-action revolvers, and pawn/consignment returns are exempt from this requirement."

Note the "offered/exposed for sale" clause, and the "private party transfers" exemption.

Can anyone living in CA actually comment on the current used gun market?
 
meh.

S & W will stop selling guns to private citizens because they don't think the expense of jumping through the hoops to make their guns "legal" for Commiefornia is worth it. State government agencies will continue to get their guns (which make up the bulk of S & W's business in CA anyway). So this only affects civilians trying to purchase guns in Comiefornia. The gun grabbers get exactly what they want - 1 stop closer to a police state.
 
From Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale - Firearms Division - California Dept. of Justice - Office of the Attorney General:

"... no handgun may be manufactured within California, imported into California for sale, lent, given, kept for sale, or offered/exposed for sale unless that handgun model has passed firing, safety, and drop tests and is certified for sale in California by the Department of Justice. Private party transfers, curio/relic handguns, certain single-action revolvers, and pawn/consignment returns are exempt from this requirement."

Note the "offered/exposed for sale" clause, and the "private party transfers" exemption.

Can anyone living in CA actually comment on the current used gun market?

in order to LEGALLY buy a used gun in CA you have to go through the same process as buying a new one...and the same laws apply. You have to take it to an FFL dealer who will do the paperwork, register the serial number, and hold it for the waiting period. You cannot sell a grandfathered gun, nor can it be inherited. It must be surrendered to the police...At least that was the law when I left a year or so ago.

Private sales of guns (person-to-person) in CA is a crime.

I believe there is a C&R exemption but as a former C&R holder, I can tell you it's a pain in the a$$ - you get harassed constantly. I got audited twice in 6 months...and I hadn't even bought any guns!
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,525
Messages
610,668
Members
74,995
Latest member
tripguru365
Back
Top