Friday, March 1, 2013

- The NY Firearms Boycott

I'm making this a separate post because it's too important a point to miss. I clipped the link below directly from the NCGunBlog post regarding the boycott of gun companies that fail to support firearms equality. Let me say again, you should go read the whole post which is linked, but you really shouldn't miss this part:

Let’s do some math. There are about 800,000 sworn law enforcement officers in the entire US. That includes Federal, State, and Local police, plus every other armed agent of the state with police powers. There were a minimum of 2,495,440 guns sold in the US in January 2013 alone!

If every single sworn law enforcement officer in the US chucked their guns into a metal shredder and bought a new gun, that would be less than one-third of the total number of guns sold to residents in January alone!

WE are the market. Glock, SIG, and S&W sell guns to the police so that WE will buy them. They sell guns to them as a marketing gimmick, so they can say “See, they are good enough for the police, they’re good enough for you!”

In 2000, Smith and Wesson, which was owned by a British corporation at the time, made an agreement with Bill Clinton to stop selling certain guns to the general public. The general public responded by boycotting Smith and Wesson. The British corporation bought S&W in 1987 for $115 Million. In 2001, after only 13 months of being boycotted, they sold S&W to their present owners for a package price of $45 million. The new owners immediately repudiated the Clinton agreement and are now profitable once more.

Every gun company knows this. Every company knows that when the day comes that their customers tell them, “it’s us or them,” they will have to side with us. So call them and ask them to side with us now. We don’t have to threaten them with a boycott yet. They already know. Just ask them to join our boycott.

The liberals in government think they're doing great harm to the gun companies by ordering public pensions to divest their interest in them. This is the pond I swim in so I can assure you, it won't matter at all. If the public pensions sell their stock, then other buyers will step up. The gun companies are all producing fabulous revenue and sales numbers, so they will outperform the market, and if the public pensions don't want any part of that for political reasons, there are plenty of other people in the market who won't be so squeamish.

But if the customers go away, well that's a different story. As soon as the big 4 learn that even a portion of their customers won't work with them, they will repent. And if Sean's numbers above are correct (and I have no reason to believe they aren't - they certainly seem about right to me) then it won't take too many.

The goal of these new firearm laws is not to reduce violence. Everyone knows (even the Obama justice department admits) that they won't prevent any violence. All that is just a sham for 'Snooki-Americans' who don't understand this issue any better than any others. It's designed to make their incremental-ism sound reasonable and to get them over this particular political hurdle toward their long term goal of nationwide forced disarmament of the populace.

What the goal of this law really is, is to take guns away from the law abiding, not from criminals. Liberals know that the law abiding gun owner is their biggest threat over the long term. Even possession of those guns represent political power. And if liberals want to achieve all their goals they need to take that power away from their opposition.

I want to say that again. The goal of Andy Cuomo's and Mike Bloomberg's "dead of night" gun bill was not to disarm criminals, it was to disarm their political opponents - a group of honest law abiding citizens who they constantly dehumanize in the press as "gun-nuts', or ultra-right wing 'militia members', or 'gun toting tea party psychotards'. That's all.

No one was made safer by it. In fact, the people who are being disarmed are made less safe. It was a callous, cynical, exploitation of a tragedy to achieve a blatantly political goal. And if a few of those newly disarmed citizens need to get raped or killed to achieve that political goal... it's considered a small price to pay by people like Cuomo and Bloomberg. They're all just peasants anyway.

Even if you don't live in NY or NJ, you have to know that the liberals in your state feel exactly the same was as these two do. We all need to push back on this, and we need to do it now. Because if we are all disarmed as they would obviously like, then there is nothing else left to stop them.


Keith said...

Enough said. Tine for everyone to take action. Join the NRA, write merchants who support us as well as those that refuse to take a stand. If money, rather than principle, has to be the bottom line, then so be it. Manufacturers will take heed.

ikaika said...

We can assume the Public Pensions "dumped" their positions in the Gun Manufacturers starting in January and then cleaning up the positions no later than Feb20.
The two big Pub Pen Funds's sent out a presser saying that they were investing in "Socially Conscious Investments"
They probably had a decent profit in Smith and Ruger, but the missed a significant move in the gun stocks B/w feb 20 and now. Conversely if they used their gun proceeds in Windmills or Solar, their portfolios are underperforming the market.