Gun manufacturers (Kimber) continue to aid gun banners

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 ...

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 82

Thread: Gun manufacturers (Kimber) continue to aid gun banners

  1. #16
    Member Array braindonor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Out west
    Posts
    116
    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.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    VIP Member
    Array falcon1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,484
    Quote Originally Posted by braindonor View Post
    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.
    I understand what you are saying, but making a living isn't the problem...it's meeting a payroll every month or two weeks. Now that's pressure!
    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

    Veteran--USA FA
    NRA Benefactor Life
    Tennessee Firearms Association Life

  4. #18
    Senior Member Array Rustynuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    777
    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.

  5. #19
    Member
    Array armado's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    433
    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.

  6. #20
    Member Array Vested's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    45

    I agree

    Quote Originally Posted by armado View Post
    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.
    +1

  7. #21
    Member Array Slabsides45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Deep South (near Memphis)
    Posts
    277
    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.

  8. #22
    Member Array matt8185's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Spring Hill, TN
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by armado View Post
    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.
    +1 Kimber is not the problem here, and heck I don't even own a Kimber.

    Matt
    -----------------------
    -SW1911
    -Sig P229
    -M&P 40c
    -Glock 30 SF

  9. #23
    VIP Member Array cdwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    MS
    Posts
    2,261
    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.

  10. #24
    Member Array firestarplus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    western south dakota
    Posts
    167
    THATS IT!! I'm selling all of my Kimbers.... er wait, I dont have any cuz I cant afford any

  11. #25
    Ex Member Array jmsstnr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    A=(pi)200mi.^sq
    Posts
    105
    Do you honestly feel that manufacturers will segregate this development expense and asses it only against models
    John I thouroughly enjoyed the freudian slip. I find your posts informative, thank you for the info.

    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.

  12. #26
    Distinguished Member Array SubNine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Anchorage Alaska
    Posts
    1,969
    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!

  13. #27
    Member Array rkhal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    65
    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)

  14. #28
    VIP Member Array Kerbouchard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,894
    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.

    http://miscmusings.townhall.com/

    Who is John Galt?

  15. #29
    Senior Member Array ronwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    816
    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

  16. #30
    Senior Member Array dunndw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    1,123
    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."

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Psychological Profile of Gun Banners by an MD
    By ExSoldier in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: July 28th, 2012, 07:25 AM
  2. Is Glock going to continue making Gen 3 ??
    By crue2009 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: January 24th, 2011, 09:44 PM
  3. Manufacturers Box
    By movingshrub in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: December 23rd, 2010, 10:34 PM
  4. Dragoons continue to reach out
    By Bumper in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 25th, 2004, 02:28 PM

Search tags for this page

boycott kimber
,
destroying firearm
,
firearm manufacture banners
,

gun manufacturer banners

,

gun manufacturer decals

,
gun manufacturer gun banners
,

gun manufacturers banner

,

gun manufacturers banners

,
how will kimber continue manufacturing in new york
,

kimber banner

,

kimber firearms banner

,

kimber guns qualified for california

Click on a term to search for related topics.