This is a discussion on Gun manufacturers (Kimber) continue to aid gun banners within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Who says you can't buy guns in California? Barrett IS making a statement about California, but I bet he doesn't have to sell that many ...
Who says you can't buy guns in California? Barrett IS making a statement about California, but I bet he doesn't have to sell that many $6000+ rifles to make a living.
If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.--Samuel Adams as Candidus, Boston Gazette 20 Jan. 1772
NRA Benefactor Life
Tennessee Firearms Association Life
Why is he complaining about Kimber? How many other makers sell guns in Cali? I recall also that ALL the SIS officers PAID for their own Kimbers.
The LAPD SIS needs a dependable weapon to protect their own lives like we all need a dependable gun to protect our lives when we walk out the door. The LAPD enforces the laws of the state and local governments, not make the laws. We all know what needs to be done to defeat the gun grabbers. Let's be ready for the next onslaught, and not blame a particular gun manufacturer for dealing with a government entity that that doesn't make the laws.
I understand the sentiments of the OP. Empathize with your view, but don't agree. There are anti's trying to put away the 2nd amendment in many more areas than California, and if Kimber banned sales in all those areas based on those feelings, the market would simply adjust and another manufacturer would step in and fill the void. In the end, some of the money used to purchase those SIS's is recycled through Kimber's generosity to the industry, so I also look at it as using the anti's money against their own cause.
I will keep my Kimber
GUN CONTROL= I WANT TO BE THE ONE IN CONTROL OF THE GUN
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
THATS IT!! I'm selling all of my Kimbers.... er wait, I dont have any cuz I cant afford any
John I thouroughly enjoyed the freudian slip. I find your posts informative, thank you for the info.Do you honestly feel that manufacturers will segregate this development expense and asses it only against models
On a serious note, there are manufacturer issues, as well as 2a issues, working the forest and the trees are great endeavors, together, or exclusively to help the reason (read as rationality) of ownership due to existence in a world where there is probability of harm (greater than zero). Help where one can, not argue from the same side of the bleachers!
That said, Smith and Wesson, Ruger, anyone? Kimber is not the first. The marketing/legal departments of some gun manufacturers are in need of a 2a breath of fresh air, lest they cut their throats.
I still have issues finding +5 mags for a Mini 30 (anybody trade me for an AK)?
As far as a duty specific weapon making 'a' officer, a better officer, that is bs. Read as "why would it be different than what Glock, Springfield, Beretta, etc offers. Ability is the result of training. The mention of protecting our lives and a dependable weapon for use is sensical, however add on to it ' with microstamping' because it makes us...why are taxpayers footing this bill?
Perhaps, b/c the sheriff or chief, a sheriff or chief that fails to use his budget on training, cannot change, nor admit to prior practice that lacks results? I've heard that argument and it is sinful, "I like him as a man, but he is...sights vs. no sights argument, this is what we need we'll scrap.., [insert others here]."
Junk. I was tired of complicity when triggers came standard at 8 lbs 'ish, for anyone.
That is just one more reason for me not to buy a Kimber. I've always been partial to Springfield Armory anyhow.
USMC rule # 23 of gunfighting: Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet.
I am the God fearing, gun toting, flag waving conservative you were warned about!
Given the reputation of the LA police to do whatever it takes to get a conviction regardless of guilt or innocence and their propensity (perhaps in the past) to violate civil rights I wouldn't have named any weapon after them.
I also feel that police anywhere should not be allowed to have anything the general public cannot. If the public has no need of a mag that holds more than 10 rounds, neither do the police. If the public has no need of an evil black rifle neither do the police.
"Lots of bullets means lots of chances to make use of expert marksmanship skills" --- Gecko45
"Some people ask: shoot to maim, or shoot to kill? I say, empty the chamber and let the good Lord decide." - Deputy Garcia (Reno 911)
Ok, this article is outrageous. That's right. It's absurd. One thing has nothing to do with the other.
For those of you who forgot how our gov't works...
The police, aka, Executive Branch, enforce the laws.
The judges, aka, Judicial Branch, interpret the laws.
The commy's, aka, Legislative Branch, write the laws.
What does supplying police with firearms have to do with eroding the 2nd amendment? It doesn't even make sense.
The article is hogwash. I guess we should throw away all the Glocks, too.(well, I personally like that idea)
You guys are way too easily led. You read a headline about our rights being eroded, and you're all up in arms, and that scares me.
There is nothing in the article to justify the headline. It's yellow journalism at best.
Last edited by Kerbouchard; June 6th, 2008 at 02:33 PM.
There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.
Who is John Galt?
The way I look at it is they're designing and selling guns. This means they're making money and, as long as they haven't made any deals on the side, that's a good thing. This money can be used to defend against law suits and support the shooting sports, which Kimber does. It's kind of like taking the anti's money and using it against them.
Member NRA, SAF and Georgiacarry.org
ďAmerica will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.Ē Abraham Lincoln
If you want to boycott Kimber for selling to CA...what about all the other places (Illinois, NYC,etc) that have the same or worse laws. Are you going to boycott the manufacturers that sell to their LEOs as well? That's going to do more to hurt our cause than help it.
Boycott the cities/states that take your rights away...
"If I was an extremist, our founding fathers would all be extremists," he said. "Without them, we wouldn't have our independence. We'd be a disarmed British system of feudal subjectivity."