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; Gun manufacturers continue to aid gun banners | Buckeye Firearms Association Editor's Note: This article has also been published on U.S. Concealed Carry Magazine's national ...

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 82

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

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array JonInNY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Mid-Hudson Valley New York State
    Posts
    4,207

    Gun manufacturers (Kimber) continue to aid gun banners

    Gun manufacturers continue to aid gun banners | Buckeye Firearms Association

    Editor's Note: This article has also been published on U.S. Concealed Carry Magazine's national website.

    By Ken Hanson, Esq.

    Having just devoted a substantial chunk of pro bono legal work fighting governments committed to destroying your gun rights, I was horrified to read the March 2008 editions of several of my favorite gun magazines. Prominently featured in each edition was a feature story about a large manufacturer of 1911-type guns, breathlessly detailing the “gee whiz” details of their newest model dedicated to a California police agency. Each of the stories went into the history of the department the gun was designed for, yet one critical piece of background information was omitted from the tide of “fanboy” coverage.

    These guns were all designed for a local government committed to stripping civilians of the right to own this same gun.

    Please don’t misunderstand me. I love this particular manufacturer, and I personally carry their product almost daily. I have unreservedly recommended their product to students when asked. Honestly, given a choice, I PREFER their product. But there is no avoiding this conclusion: This manufacturer is designing firearms for police agencies in California at a time when California is committed to abolishing civilian ownership of these same firearms. If any of the gun writers who covered the unveiling of this product chose to question the wisdom of this sell-out, I have not yet found it.

    The height of unintended irony comes in the March 2008 American Rifleman, which prominently featured this gun on the cover. Numerous sentences in the review article talked about the gun’s features, the accuracy and the other general minutiae expected of the genre. Flipping a few pages past the review article brings the reader to a separate article talking about how yet another complete handgun ban in San Francisco has been thrown out by a court decision, but the NRA legal team remains ever-vigilant for the next attempt by California to destroy your gun rights.

    Think about this for a moment. These governments in California will work continuously to strip civilians of the right to own handguns, whether through outright bans or by requiring “smart gun” technology or other “safety measures” that makes it impractical to sell handguns in the state, or makes it dramatically more expensive to do so. (The fanboy coverage neglected to mention whether this new model is being shipped to the police with chamber microstamping or if it would function with non-lead ammo, in case the police department finds itself in a shootout with nesting condors nearby.) Not to mention the fact that these same local governments are waging a legal jihad against gun manufacturers, attempting to recover money judgments against gun makers for medical treatment costs associated with the criminal misuse of their products.

    So in an environment that is committed to the very destruction of the gun industry as a whole, this manufacturer wades in and designs a custom edition gun for a California police agency. This makes as much sense as General George Custer taking a quick look around at Little Bighorn and deciding “This Native American Calvary is pretty high-speed low-drag. Imagine the free P.R. if I was supplying them with custom arrows!”

    This manufacturer has placed the short term benefit gained from selling several hundred units to a “prestige” law enforcement agency ahead of the longer term benefit of not dealing with those committed to their very destruction. All police departments rely on private firearm manufacturers, and for far too long police have enjoyed a “good for we but not for thee” atmosphere, thanks to a complicit firearms industry. I, for one, am sick of it, and I am not going to silently abide this absurdity.

    It is time that gun owners coalesce and organize to bring these wayward manufacturers into the correct frame of mind. Unfortunately, it is apparent that not all manufacturers are as enlightened as Ronnie Barrett or STI International. In case you do not know the story, Ronnie stopped selling his products in California in response to California banning his rifles. The cherry on top was when he wrote a California police chief and told him to come pick up the department’s rifle, because Ronnie wasn’t working on it and wasn’t shipping it back. Similarly, STI stopped their practice of selling to California Law Enforcement when the chamber microstamping bill was passed.

    This is a difficult journey to undertake. This manufacturer, like many others selling to California, supports shooting sports graciously, and is a large advertiser in most gun magazines. The mainstream gun press is not going to rally to this particular flag willingly, and this is understandable. It is uncomfortable to take friends to task for their wayward ways, and it is legitimate to question whether the harm they cause by dealing with California is outweighed by the good this manufacturer does for shooting sports? It is a familiar quandary.

    In my analysis, this is an intervention that is very worthwhile. We, the consumers, must intervene to help save gun manufacturers from their self-destructive habits. Like any other intervention, tough love is needed. “We love you, we love your products and want to support you, but we can no longer stand by and watch you destroy yourself.” Make no mistake, this is what is happening. Gun manufacturers are in the co-dependent relationship from Hell, faithfully committed to those that would destroy them. Gun manufacturers blindly believe that these cities do not intend them permanent harm. “Sure, California sues me and bans my products, but they don’t really mean it, and besides, they buy a few of my guns occasionally.”

    Girlfriend, it is so over. California would not care if you ceased to exist tomorrow, and the fact that you giddily make guns for the gun banners intent on your destruction has everyone laughing at you, not with you.

    This is not a “California problem.” Just as Mayor Bloomberg is trying to regulate gun sales nationwide, California is attempting to regulate the entire firearms industry through their “consumer protection” powers. It is already expensive for a manufacturer to meet California’s requirements, and that expense grows daily with measures like microstamping. Do you honestly feel that manufacturers will segregate this development expense and asses it only against models sold in California, or do you think our gun prices will increase nationwide? That is very much the situation we face today – if you are buying from a manufacturer that does business under California’s absurd laws, you are paying the costs of those absurd laws.

    California will continue to pass new law after new law so long as the gun industry continues to sell in the California market. This will continue until 1.) Manufacturers say enough is enough, we aren’t selling in California anymore, or 2.) California gains de facto regulation of the entire firearms industry through our indifference. It will not matter what your local legislative bodies allow, California will be the standard that all must adhere to so long as the industry chooses to sell in California. The costs associated with setting up dual-production runs is simply too prohibitive in a slim profit margin industry like firearms.

    So, today I announce project “Correct Kimber.” While I readily acknowledge Kimber’s valuable support of shooting sports, it is my intention to publicly call gun owner’s attention to Kimber’s support for gun banning regimes, and encourage gun owners to do all within their power to correct Kimber’s wayward ways. The Kimber SIS, which is the second example of Kimber fawning over a California police agency, is an exercise in anti-gun idolatry, a tribute to an agency that is part of an apparatus dedicated to the destruction of the firearm industry. Kimber needs to be chastised for this. They aren’t going to self-correct, so gun owners need to encourage Kimber to do so.

    Please take a moment to contact Kimber today at 914-964-0771 x324, or via US Mail at Kimber, 2590 Hwy 35, Kalispell, MT 59901. Please be polite, professional yet firm. A suggested script for either a letter or phone call would be:

    Introduce yourself and any Kimber Products you own.
    Acknowledge and thank them for their generous support of shooting sports.
    Say that you are greatly distressed that they are selling to California Law Enforcement departments, and that you think it is wrong that any gun manufacturer deals with agencies of government committed to stripping civilians of the right to own the same pistols Kimber is selling to these law enforcement agencies.
    Tell them you wish them the best of luck, but as long as they are selling to California Law Enforcement, you will no longer be purchasing Kimber products.
    You are sending a copy of the letter or making a phone call to your local dealer to share your feelings with the local dealer.
    Let us know about any feedback you receive!
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch; Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
    -- Benjamin Franklin

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Ex Member Array Ram Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    13,687
    Never owned a Kimber or S&W for that matter.

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array edr9x23super's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,108
    Well, I am happy to say that I will never have to worry about buying a Kimber; I prefer Springfield Armory or the ultimate 1911, a custom built STI.
    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array Rob72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    OK
    Posts
    3,468
    I would submit that if the SIS (and all other Cali LE agencies) was stuck using unsupported Gen 2 S&Ws and Model 60s unless/until the State changed its position, the FOP might put some of its money into helping the citizens. Let the Calis fend off Los Surros and lovely inner-denizens with harsh language.

  6. #5
    Member Array realitycramp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    157
    One of the dangers of capitalism. One of the many benefits is that we can do just as he says in the article. If a large movement of gun owners stopped buying Kimber products all the gun manufacturers would take notice. I was considering a Kimber .45. Not now.
    Facts are negotiable, perceptions are not.

  7. #6
    Senior Member Array Duisburg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Duisburg, Germany
    Posts
    754
    So, I now have two more manufacturers to add to my "do not buy list" after Ruger (after Bill Ruger issued that infamous magazine capacity letter to congress).
    I am sworn to protect the Constitution of the U.S.A. from all threats both foreign and domestic.

  8. #7
    Senior Member Array kahrcarrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    IN
    Posts
    615
    It is my impression the SIS Kimbers are made available to the officers as private purchases, the local government isn't buying them to supply the cops.


    Private purchases. I know a couple of people who own an SIS Kimber. Hardly pandering to California lawmakers, in my opinion. Can any citizen in Cali buy one? I don't know.

    A lot of handgun manufacturers sell to California police, obviously.


    Tempest in a teapot?

  9. #8
    Senior Member Array KenInColo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    991
    When I saw that issue of American Rifleman, I too was struck by the irony. It made me glad that I bought an H&K P2000 instead of the Kimber Aegis I almost went with.
    An armed populace are called citizens.
    An unarmed populace are called subjects.

  10. #9
    Member Array HeadHunterII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Marrero, Louisiana
    Posts
    32
    Better discredit Hilton Yam too... He helped design the SIS.

    The mainstream gun press is not going to rally to this particular flag willingly, and this is understandable.
    How, you moan about Kimber but don't place blame on the mainstream gun rags that ignore this very fact? Seems like gun rags spreading the word would work alot better than a couple of guys refraining from buying a couple guns from the largest 1911 producer EVER.
    "The will to survive is not as important as the will to prevail... The answer to criminal aggression is retaliation."-- Col. Jeff Cooper, USMC.

    "We didn't fight our way all the way to the top of the food chain to become vegetarians."-- Unknown

  11. #10
    Senior Member Array sisco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kansas, GCK
    Posts
    616
    Hey, I got an idea! Lets all boycott Kimber, Ruger, S&W etc and put 'em out of business. Sure would save the Brady Bunch a lot of time and money if we just did it ourselves.
    I'm a child of the 60's, but I got over it.

  12. #11
    Member Array HeadHunterII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Marrero, Louisiana
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by sisco View Post
    Hey, I got an idea! Lets all boycott Kimber, Ruger, S&W etc and put 'em out of business. Sure would save the Brady Bunch a lot of time and money if we just did it ourselves.
    You couldn't put Kimber out of business if you wanted to. The fact is that a very small number of shooters pay attention to the stuff on the internet and gun rags...
    "The will to survive is not as important as the will to prevail... The answer to criminal aggression is retaliation."-- Col. Jeff Cooper, USMC.

    "We didn't fight our way all the way to the top of the food chain to become vegetarians."-- Unknown

  13. #12
    Member Array braindonor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Out west
    Posts
    116
    I am not clear on what police force this guy is talking about...........is it Frisco?
    Anyway, his panties are in a bunch and he doesn't know the first rule of business: everybody's money is green. If Kimber doesn't make the sale, someone else will.

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,179
    It's the LAPD Special Investigation Services or sumpin like that SIS
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .

  15. #14
    Member Array braindonor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Out west
    Posts
    116
    Thanks duke

  16. #15
    New Member Array Laevus Levus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    SW Indiana
    Posts
    10
    I understand the whole business end of this. But I have alot more respect for someone like Ronnie Barrett. He has the strength of conviction to say that if civilians can't buy my guns in your state, I won't sell them to the govt either. Do you think that was easy to do? I bet his accountant, and or banker were against it. But if you ask me, he has the bigger picture in mind. If Kimber won't feel some of us not buying their guns, they probably wouldn't have felt the lack of a SIS contract either. I personally like their products, but I would have more respect for them if it seemed like they were on our side.
    Glock 26/19/17
    Catchy sig line under construction.

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... 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.