Moralizing and do-gooding state legislatures and governors are finding out their gun control laws are having some unintended consequences.
Six gun companies have announced plans to stop selling any of their products to any government agency in states that severely limit the rights of private gun ownership.
Disappointed with New York State lawmakers and other jurisdictions around the country who have passed strict gun control legislation, the companies—composed of firearm manufacturers, gunsmiths, and sporting goods retailers—have announced these policies in the past week.
Their various statements emphasize that such laws create a class of government employees with rights and and a class of citizens without rights. Thus, they refuse to aid the enforcement of such inequality.
A sampling of these companies' statements:
Extreme Firepower Inc, LLC:
The Federal Government and several states have enacted gun control laws that restrict the public from owning and possessing certain types of firearms. Law-enforcement agencies are typically exempt from these restrictions. EFI, LLC does not recognize law-enforcement exemptions to local, state, and federal gun control laws. If a product that we manufacture is not legal for a private citizen to own in a jurisdiction, we will not sell that product to a law-enforcement agency in that jurisdiction.
Effective today, in an effort to see that no legal mistakes are made by LaRue Tactical and/or its employees, we will apply all current State and Local Laws (as applied to civilians) to state and local law enforcement / government agencies. In other words, LaRue Tactical will limit all sales to what law-abiding citizens residing in their districts can purchase or possess.
Nice touch with the legal angle no doubt as protection from getting sued as has happened in the past, however, without incurring damages.
State officials are finding out that gun owners and 2nd amendment supporters never believed the 2nd amendment to be about skeet shooting and hunting rather a healthy skepticism of the government and particularly an armed government to the exclusion of a law-abiding public.
Never before in our lifetime has this skepticism been brought into sharper focus than two weeks ago with the revelation of a Department of Justice memo putting forth the justification that "informed" people within the executive branch have the power to kill Americans overseas given the flimsiest of pretexts and with zero due process and oversight.
And if you are OK with this because of what you will assume to be the righteous application of this extra-legal power because of the ultimate wisdom and benevolence of the current Commander-in-Chief, then what of his successor?
But back to guns and the 2nd amendment and it's position there within the Bill of Rights: it's almost as if the Founders were saying, "We know the rights contained within the 1st amendment may, in the future, not be so terribly popular with the ruling class... what do we think we ought to do next?"
We do not, for a second, believe that 1-2 punch to be a coincidence. Rights granted by God or inherency but protected by the individual should the government decide to renege on its obligations.
Now, time for some puppy pictures and Cheezburger: what the interwebs were actually created for.