To No One’s Surprise, Ronnie Barrett Flips Off New York

[h/t Matthew B.]

comments

  1. avatar Leo338 says:

    Awesome! Thanks Ronnie, you make me proud to own one of your rifles.

    1. avatar Eric S. says:

      I wish I could afford one!

    2. avatar RepubAnon says:

      Nice marketing piece for the Second Amendment absolutist crowd – otherwise, hot air.

      On a side note – if the government really wants a list of gun owners, they need only ask Google:

      Law enforcement officials, it seems, have pretty easy and routine access to Google’s search-history database, and this is surely only the beginning when it comes to sifting through huge amounts of data to find evidence of crimes. The SEC, for one, has had a large data-mining team in place for a good five years now, going through enormous quantities of data to look for signs of suspicious activity.
      Source: Reuters: The Long Arm of the Google

      Yep, even if you pay cash for everything, the government can track your web searches without a warrant. The time to worry about some paper-based registration system has long passed… but the time to worry about some of the other parts of the Bill of Rights has not.

      1. avatar nerd_nurd says:

        I try to avoid using google, and if I need to use one of their login services, I make sure to log out as soon as i am done.

        For general web searching, I prefer to use https://duckduckgo.com

        I find the layout to be less annoying than google, plus they claim that they do not track your searches. I think the search results are generally excellent, although there is the rare occasion where I will perform a google search. And google has excellent mapping features.

        In addition, browser add-ons such as no script or Ghostery will prevent a lot of the extra baggage in a web page from loading. As you increase in the paranoia scale, you might start doing your internetting from an open wifi location such as a library or mcdonalds, and make a point to run in private browsing mode so that your cookies are not saved when you close your session. Running your sessions inside a non-persistent-mode virtual machine may also help. Several rungs higher up the security scale, you might start doing your browsing through the Tor network.

        Personally, it isn’t about paranoia, it is more a matter of not being a willing participant who freely gives up the liberties that organizations (private or public) feel they can take. If you are so inclined, I encourage you to join the EFF, to help protect your electronic rights online.

        1. avatar elnonio says:

          I think you are missing the point, perhaps. Google provides search services and crawls many websites, including some intranets. Whether you used Google services or not is not what matters. If data was stored on an internet connected server, it may have been “crawled” by google and other search engines.

      2. avatar Kory says:

        https://startpage.com it is a safe, private, and secure search engine, plus it uses Google’s results.

  2. avatar NS says:

    glad to see some big names start to roll in

    1. avatar pat says:

      Amen. The key word of the enemy is Sinister.

  3. avatar Jarhead1982 says:

    Yeeehhhhaaaa!

  4. avatar Charles5 says:

    The only thing that surprises me here is that it took this long for Barrett to release their statement.

    1. avatar Bryan says:

      Crafting a good letter and running it by your lawyer takes time. Yea Barrett!

  5. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    Can we start convening a citizens’ civil rights court now?

  6. avatar BLAMMO says:

    As a resident trapped behind enemy lines, again, I would like to thank all free Americans who have helped free me as a political prisoner. And to those who are in a position to help, but have not as yet …

    … HAAAAAAAALP!!

  7. avatar Ralph says:

    Ronnie Barrett takes no sh!t from anyone.

  8. avatar Pete says:

    Can i borrow ten grand from someone to show my love for barrett?

    1. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

      That’s kind of the idea, Pete. His letter is long on rhetoric and short on facts. Did they even have any LEO sales to NY?

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        What facts are you looking for? The SAFE act cuts mag capacity to 7 – fvck NY.

        1. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

          Did Barrett have any sales to NY LEO before Sandy Hook?

          And why should I care who MR. Barrett chooses to be customers?

      2. avatar Dfens says:

        It took literally 5 seconds to find a story on Google about the NYPD having Barrett .50’s for “special occasions.”

  9. avatar SCS says:

    Own three Barretts. Need a few more, now.

    1. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

      You just got your own drone.

      1. avatar ADub from TTAC says:

        Don’t worry. The Barretts will survive the house being blown up. 😉

      2. avatar Matt in FL says:

        Somehow I missed this comment the other day. Full of win.

  10. avatar GlennF says:

    Indeed! Eloquent & precise. I plan on using some of his verbiage with my next letters to Congress.

  11. avatar Greg Camp says:

    Will New York governments hold buybacks to arm their law enforcement officers? I just love the idea of the NYPD begging citizens to turn in a Raven Arms .25 so the poor cops can have a gun.

    1. avatar In Memphis says:

      Ha! Greg thats an awesome thought

    2. avatar BLAMMO says:

      I wonder when we might start hearing about straw purchases by PA or OH for NY LEOs.

    3. avatar Pyratemime says:

      Something tells me it would be more of a roundup rather than a buyback.

  12. avatar SGC says:

    Well done sir!~

  13. avatar Gene says:

    Those would unalienable rights, Ronnie… unalienable. Love your stance and maybe one day I can afford one of your rifles.

    1. avatar Abprallen says:

      Its definitely inalienable.

      1. avatar Jim L says:

        We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these..

        you sure about that?

        1. avatar CSARdiver says:

          Both have the same meaning and are both correct.

  14. avatar jwm says:

    Did we expect less from Barrett?

    1. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

      Less than what? Are they actually giving up any sales?

      1. avatar Abprallen says:

        I’m sure they’re losing some sales now. Perhaps not a whole lot but some. Whats more important is that this letter sets yet another precedent for future sales to the Federal government (which uses Barretts quite extensively) and warns them not to overstep lest they lose the ability to replenish or maintain their large stock of Barretts.

        1. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

          If that makes you feel better, than whatever. Lets cut to the real root cause, let’s stop voting for Progressives, like Obama, not worrying about who’s selling what to who in a free market society.

  15. avatar Glenn says:

    I cannot say THANK YOU enough!

  16. avatar Sammy says:

    My thanks to Mr. Barrett and Company.

  17. avatar JWhite says:

    What a great marketing campaign.

    Ohoh oh!!! They said my home state!

    Komifornia

  18. avatar Nazgul says:

    Ronnie Barrett is the man! 🙂

  19. avatar Roger Cain says:

    Thank you Barrett! Great to see another big name getting in the trenches in the fight against these unconstitutional policies.

    1. avatar Pyratemime says:

      Barrett isn’t getting in the trenches is is the grizzled veteran NCO looking at the raw recruits growling about effing time.

  20. avatar Randy Drescher says:

    Some come to trial & some do not. I couldn’t have put it better, Randy

  21. avatar Brian says:

    wow… i wonder how he REALLY feels

  22. avatar creekside says:

    I know for a fact that Barrett’s stance is having results. A Bay Area (California) county had to accept a donation of a .50 caliber Barrett from a decedent’s estate as a means of getting one.

    http://www.co.sanmateo.ca.us/bos.dir/BosAgendas/agendas2010/Agenda20100914/20100914_r_50.htm

    1. avatar Bill in IL says:

      Too bad the estate didn’t sell it on the open market to a private citizen. I do hate to see these scum bags getting one this way.

  23. avatar William says:

    When it comes to words, he was MINCELESS.

  24. avatar JAS says:

    Bravo!! Encore!!

  25. avatar Silver says:

    A man who really gets it and doesn’t tiptoe around it.

  26. avatar DaveY says:

    Great public sentiment and nice to see them standing with some gun owners…

    But

    Does Barrett actually do any business with NY local or state .govs?

    A truly pro-2A statement would be to redirect their .gov business to the commercial market. Instead, as recently as last year they were actively seeking the DHS PDW contract for the “7000 assault rifles” –
    https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=d791b6aa0fd9d3d8833b2efa08300033&tab=ivl&tabmode=list

    So maybe Ronnie’s heart is in the right place. If so, he can tell the Feds, and states like NJ, MA, HI & CO that their agencies won’t be supplied or serviced either. Again, redirect those weapons and accessories to the commercial market – it will ease the market prices for us and have the benefit of denying the armament to the regimes that don’t want people like TTAG readers to have them. Win / Win.

  27. avatar Weentastic says:

    Well, Barrett will get a sale from me sometime in the future.

  28. avatar Lance says:

    Great response to NY. Come on RF buy every member here a Barret M-107 to be in solidarity with Barret for this.

  29. avatar Larry2 says:

    Well done Barrett, well done. Thank you for your leadership.

  30. avatar Woodekt says:

    I’d like to see Kimber bolt from NY.

  31. avatar CSARdiver says:

    God bless you Mr. Barrett.

  32. avatar Accur81 says:

    Hmmm, would selling a good car to get a .416 Barrett result in a divorce? It’s tempting.

    1. avatar Leo338 says:

      Do it! She will understand. Explain to her how your car will devalue anyway and you can always sell the gun for at least the same price or more based on what POS Obama does.

  33. avatar percynjpn says:

    Whole lotta AWESOME!!

  34. avatar JMS says:

    Wow. Can’t get much more strongly worded than that!

  35. avatar Billy Wardlaw says:

    I agree with Mr. Barrett, to wit:

    I believe that any author and cosponsors of a law that is found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, in whole or in part, should be charged with a crime against The Constitution and the Peoples of these United States. Further, any Congressmen or Women who voted in favor of it should also be censured and have removed their privileges to incumbency.

    I believe this would go a long way towards cleaning the critter’s acts up. It would cut way down on the amounts and recurrences of frivolous power grabs. And it would end once and for all any of this “we have to pass it to find out what’s in it” bullshitte!

  36. avatar ADub from TTAC says:

    Every time I hear Barrett, I think of The Simpsons where Homer goes to buy a gun:

    CLERK: Well, you’ll probably want the accessory kit. Holster…
    HOMER: Oh, yeah.
    CLERK: Bandoleer.
    HOMER: Baby.
    CLERK: Silencer.
    HOMER: Mm-hmm.
    CLERK: Loudener.
    HOMER: Oh…
    CLERK: Speed-cocker.
    HOMER: Ooh, I like the sound of that!
    CLERK: (holding up a huge weapon) And this is for shooting down police helicopters.
    HOMER: Oh, I don’t need anything like that… yet…

  37. avatar Rick says:

    There is a difference between unalienable and inalienable. Here’s a source for your reading pleasure.

    http://www.gemworld.com/USA-Unalienable.htm

  38. avatar daveR says:

    “Armed government agencies”

    So this is saying that Barrett is no longer supplying the US military?

  39. avatar Derek says:

    Schweet! Now if only I had $9,000 to buy one of his rifles…

  40. avatar Dfens says:

    Here’s a pretty pertinent article from 2011 where the NYPD Commish was bragging about their ability to take down a small enemy plane with their Barrett .50.

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/09/can-the-nypd-shoot-down-a-plane-kinda-sorta-not-exactly/

  41. avatar My Name Is Bob says:

    Mr Barrett you ROCK! I’ve been saving up for one of your fine rifles for a whole now and should be able to get one in the next year or two, and I CAN’T WAIT!!!

  42. Ronnie Barrett was one of the first (if not THE first) gun manufacturers to officially boycott an unlawful government (California, due to AB50).

    Inspired by recent events and probably in no small part due to Mr. Barrett’s courageous 1st step:

    5 manufacturers boycotting NYS…

    Hornady, Smith & Wesson, Ruger, and others providing petition forms for people to contact their elected officials…

    Online firearms vendor CheaperThanDirt donates $ 100,000 to Second Amendment Foundation…

    World’s largest independent magazine manufacturer Magpul threatens to leave Colorado if anti-hi-cap-magazine bill is passed. Colorado House passes the bill, plus 3 others…

    TWELVE MORE gun manufacturers officially boycott New York, some extend the boycott to ANY state/county/city that violates #2A rights…

    Shield Tactical gives the middle finger to California, departs for Texas…

    And now, it comes full circle. Ronnie Barrett officially boycotts New York.

    I. LOVE. IT.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email