Sunday, March 10, 2013

In case you're keeping count

There are now 123 arms manufacturers and dealers who are refusing to sell weapons to jurisdictions -- city, county or state -- that restrict the public's right to bear arms, according to The Police Loophole, which tracks this sort of thing. Many of them have a longstanding policy in this regard, such as Barrett, which makes the world's finest sniper rifles -- although Dragunov might argue -- but most are newcomers responding to the recent onslaught of state and federal efforts to pass legislation to take away the right to bear arms. Alas, the folks on the list are pretty small potatoes, for the most part. No Smith & Wesson, no Colt, Glock, Baretta, etc. On the other hand, Baretta is threatening to move its manufacturing facility out of Maryland if the legislature goes forward with it's ludicrous gun-control plans (hint: won't survive court review). Likewise, Magpul, which makes magazines for various weapons that hold more than the arbitary 10-round limit many states, including Colorado, are pushing, also has said it will leave Colorado if legislators there pass restrictions that make it illegal for Magpul to sell its products there.

So quit telling me that no one wants to take my guns, that legislatures just want to reduce crime. At least Colorado state Rep. Claire Levy (D-Whackoville) had the honesty to say of the gun control bill she is backing, “I make no assertion that this bill will either increase or reduce violent crime. That is not the premise of the bill.” (Video here.) They just want to take away 2nd Amendment rights. The numbers don't work for them, so they can't argue that these various bans and restrictions will help prevent crime. It's been tried, it doesn't work. So the more honest among them have dropped that argument. They just want to ban guns. So I think it is perfectly legitimate for gun dealers and manufacturers to ban them. If only the big boys would get on board.

No comments: