(courtesy atlantictactical.com)

Back in December, Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop acquiesced to the demands of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in American and agreed to force companies supplying firearms to their police department to answer an anti-gun questionnaire before awarding their next contract. [Click here for the six questions in question, which include “Do you agree not to sell certain models of firearms for civilian use?” and “Do you manufacturer and sell assault weapons for civilian use?”] Some 109 New Jersey mayors signed a letter supporting the move – although not promising to pursue a similar policy. And now wsj.com reports that Fulop’s implementing MDA’s purity test before signing a $500k contract to supply his city’s 800 cops. Only here’s the thing . . .

Middlemen currently handle Jersey City’s firearms and ammo needs. Specifically, Lawmen Supply Company and Atlantic Tactical. While both companies sell “certain models of firearms for civilian use,” the questionnaire doesn’t really apply. Neither company “manufactures” anything, for example. That said, both Lawmen and Atlantic are ready to play ball with Mayor Fullop.

“Ultimately, as long the questions aren’t asking confidential information, I’d certainly share with anybody what our sales practices are because they are ethical and certainly legal,” said Sean Conville, president of Atlantic Tactical.

Chris Ferrari, president of Lawmen, said he would consider opting out of future bids if Jersey City sought to restrict how the company conducted business. “This is definitely a different type of questioning,” he said.

Weasel words, fer sure. The more important consideration: will Jersey City require Lawmen, Atlantic and/or a player or players to be named later to answer the anti-gun questionnaire on behalf of manufacturers, or pass it on to the potential firearms and ammo suppliers? Which was, of course, the point of the whole exercise.

The effort is setting up a fight with gun makers and supporters of Second Amendment rights.

“These politicians are politicizing the purchase of firearms for law enforcement, when law enforcement should be able to buy whatever best suits their needs,” said Andrew Arulanandam, managing director of public affairs for the National Rifle Association.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, a leading firearms trade association, is monitoring Jersey City’s efforts and studying legal action. “It’s an issue that could be of industry concern,” said Lawrence Keane, the Connecticut-based gun-rights group’s senior vice president and general counsel.

And an issue that’s a consumer concern. I don’t think The People of the Gun would look kindly on gun makers and ammo suppliers who let gun control advocates influence the police procurement process. You know; any more than they already do. Watch this space.

90 Responses to Gun Distributors Cave on Jersey City’s Anti-Gun Police Supply Questionnaire

  1. They’ll get the SW treatment if they do. Hopefully our brothers and sisters won’t be sending any death threats like the ones sent to that dealer in CT for trying to sell “smart” guns.

  2. “I don’t think The People of the Gun would look kindly on gun makers and ammo suppliers who let gun control advocates influence the police procurement process.”

    I would boycott any company that caved, for what that’s worth.

    As to the last question, “do you manufacture assault weapons for civilian use?” The answer to that could be an honest “no,” since “assault weapon” is not an actual firearm category.

    • This is how passive-aggressive lefties work. They start out with some “idea” that becomes a burr in their saddle and then feel the need to ram it down everyone’s throat. Because they haven’t been able to work out their own insecurity issues, they have to make sure everyone else knows about it.

      Instead of actually addressing any REAL problems, like why the members of all three branches of government have allowed this country to cave in to the Rothschild family and the rest of their politically monopolistic and parasitic ilk, these “crusaders” ALWAYS go for the low hanging fruit because their insecurity driven logic compels them to violate everyone else’s right in order to preserve what they perceive to be their own.

      If a ship were sinking, these are the people you’d want to get far away from as the ship went down. They’d be the ones suddenly justifying the stealing of lifejackets from children in order to save their own asses. They won’t admit to it, of course, because their fragile egos won’t let them. These people are desperate. They, like their abortion center bomber brethren, who felt likewise “divinely inspired”, would kill someone to prove their point. Sooner or later, that will happen, because they lack the understanding of what is driving them ……… and the issue isn’t about guns, it’s about them feeling insecure.

      • “Rothschild,” eh? Code for “International Jewish banking conspiracy?” I suggest investing in industrial-strength tinfoil, the stuff you’re using now doesn’t seem to be getting the job done.

    • Old Ben turning in grave says: ‘As to the last question, “do you manufacture assault weapons for civilian use?” The answer to that could be an honest “no,” since “assault weapon” is not an actual firearm category.’

      Old Ben, most states that have assault weapon bans or restrictions have defined these weapons by using some version of the (in)famous “features test”, which is codified in the state law(s) on that subject. You or I may not agree with such a made-up category (I know I don’t), but to deny it exists masks the problem, and we can’t afford to bury our heads in the sand on this stuff if we are to defeat it.

    • I already only buy AR parts from companies like BCM, Larue, and others who have posted statements saying they will apply the same legal restrictions to law enforcement as are applied to law abiding citizens in a given state or just flat out refuse to do any business with law enforcement in states such as New York with heavy firearms restrictions. Larue tries to be political about it stating that it is to avoid making mistakes/ complexity when processing orders whereas others just flat out say it how it is acknowledging that LE basically sold “civilians” out by receiving generous carve outs and exemptions in the new wave of anti gun legislation.

      • I go one step further and won’t set foot in any of these freedom robbing states! Plus most of these states are over populated and I don’t like crowds.

        • I’m big on driving. I’ll go into any state. And be carrying the whole time!

  3. So what do you suppose would happen if all suppliers refused to answer the questions AND refused to sell guns and/or ammunition to those communities asking such questions?

        • Some hungry newcomer would likely sell their soul to the devil to get their foot in the door… unfortunately

        • Excellent. The law enforcement agencies would receive the lowest quality firearms at premium prices, how long would it be until someone figured this was not “the way”. This all harks back to SW in the ’90s, and to my knowledge nobody even organized a boycott, it was all rather automatic. Completely destroyed the company, until they were sold at an 80% loss, before recovering with responsible positions.

      • True, but giving up $500,000 to actually stay in business for the rest of the world’s market value to your potential sales may not be a bad decision, either.

        Didn’t someone post some numbers on here recently about the relative sizes of the police market vs non-police market (ha…I almost fell into the ‘civilian vs police’ language trap).

        I notice that the MDA influenced questionnaire did fall into that trap…if the manufacturer sells to cops, that *IS* for “civilian use.” Ugh.

        Anyway, so a LE contract sounds like a single big sale, it may pale in comparison to total net bottom line (for some companies, not sure about these two) for the entire rest of the US market.

        Said another way…companies can choose to look short term tactically, or long term strategically. It’s not always as simple as “I’ll do anything to get THIS sale.”

        • To the manufacturer, no, not so much, but again, these guns are being sold by a distributor, and then the economics change significantly, don’t you think?

        • ‘the economics change significantly, don’t you think?”

          Perhaps; depends entirely on the size of the market they serve. If mostly “local,” yes, sure. If national, loss of one sale may not matter much at all.

  4. Yikes. How about refusing to sell anything to New Jersey law enforcement ? You know CONSEQUENCES.

    • Could I see individual manufacturers not selling to Jersey? Sure. Could I see middlemen (who probably make their living selling primarily to regional law enforcement) not selling to Jersey? Nope.

    • Nah, they should show their support for NJ gun laws by insisting they will only sell to the police firearms and magazines available to the general public.

      – Police have no duty to protect individuals
      – Police primary justification for carrying weapons is the same as civilians. Self-defense. Their other reason for usage is detaining individuals with threat of lethal force which only requires the presence of a weapon- not greater capacity than available for civilians.
      – They operate in teams with backup available by radio and have less of a requirement for standard capacity magazines than non-LEO citizens acting alone and without backup.

    • At the rate things in NJ are going, the only ones who can buy anything more complicated than a zip gun are the cops. Oh, and politicians too.

  5. I’d answer the questionnaire, only in such a way that showed MDA and NJ that I am not going to comply with whatever their wishlist is.

    That is, I’d answer the whole thing negatively as a big middle finger to them.

  6. They might as well come out and say it: “Civilians are our enemy. Do you provide arms to our enemy?”

    • But cops are civilians, so if they are selling to cops, they should answer “Yes,” and if they feel like it, explain this point on the questionnaire.

      • But they wear scary black uniforms, have vehicles with big tires and plating, and call us “civilians”. I guess they get the “best of both worlds” – all the guns and gear, swat-magazine talkin’, HSLD operatin’ and tacticalin’, dog shootin’, firearm pointin’, no-knockin’ goodness of para-military?

        I wonder when the UCMJ really kicks in.

        • Without the risk! How good does it get? Just a few civilians to operate on each day, to remain operational, but no actual resistance! This is GREAT!

    • It’s true! They DO consider the folks who pay their salaries to be their enemies. Clearly, this is the case.
      So what if we all turned ourselves in for an imaginary crime, and demanded imprisonment?

      All police departments would be BROKE and out of commission within about 18 months. Who would they sell all the property they confiscated to?

      Oh. That’s right. THE CHINESE. Who will become their new bosses.

      • It would take about a week for them to start shooting us and burying us in unmarked graves. Don’t go there. Surrender is not an option.

  7. More meaningless Kabuki Theater. Anti-Gun Libs pretending to do something meaningful and trying to appear as though they are making a difference, when it’s clear it’s all just feel-good illusions. And I’m sorry but N.J. is the canary in the coal mine for those of us lucky (or determined) enough to live in free America. When the canaries in California, Colorado, and many of the eastern states finally all choke to death on the fumes and sulphur then I might take notice. But I won’t be coming to help or intervene in your world. The world you helped create, and then allowed to grow, and prosper. Two Americas indeed!

    Good luck.

    • Yeah, that was the exact same attitude most of Europe had in the late 30’s. That thinking worked out well for them, huh?

      • I learned my lessons from that period in Europe that you mention, and I’m still learning every day. Apparently many of the people in the less-free areas of America didn’t study that part or they got an entirely different message from it than I did. Not my problem, I can’t save everybody. And what right do I have to force my beliefs on others? NONE. And they have no right to try and enforce their unconstitutional ideas on me. Some may eventually try, but I’m betting they don’t have the manpower to get very far with that.

        I’m thankful for places like New Jersey, New York, Maryland, California, and their kind. They are my West Bank, my Gaza Strip. They are my buffer zone. I’m in a gun-friendly state surrounded by gun-friendly states, nearly a thousand miles from NYC and two thousand miles from California. All that can’t change overnight, and if it did then the world (or what’s left of it) has much bigger problems than little ol’ me.

        • Except that the states you mention have the majority of the population of our country and therefor the highest percentage of representation in our Congress. You don’t think that a sweeping change in federal law won’t affect you immediately?

        • Reply to Dev @ 13:28

          No, I’m sure that even a sweeping overnight change in Federal law wouldn’t affect me immediately, because they would have to come way out in the middle of nowhere to find me, and unless I was #1 on their Most Wanted list they don’t have the manpower to do that. I already have my weapons, and they are widely dispersed. I will never allow their interpretation of the Constitution to overrule my interpretation of the Constitution, and it is my duty to ignore unconstitutional laws.

          There is only me, I don’t have a wife and children to protect or worry about. That gives me great latitude in how I respond. I’m not a criminal, never been arrested, charged or convicted of anything. Squeeky clean. I live right in the center of Fortress America, and I don’t think any invading force, whether foreign or domestic will survive long enough to get anywhere close to me. If they do then I’m truly prepared for that eventuality, and I really like my odds. Unless they have long range weapons then I’m probably out of reach, and if they’re using those then they aren’t coming for the individual, a nobody, like me.

          I wish all good Americans were as lucky as me, but I am truly one of the luckiest people on planet earth. I owe it all to the Founding Fathers, their Constitution, the men and women who have defended our freedom for over 200 years, and my family. I’m not going to give that up without first giving my life to the cause. But I’ll not go looking for a fight in enemy territory, to defend those who are at best indifferent about the things that are more dear to me than life itself.

        • Andy, your arrogance is borne out of the arrogance of the Illusion of Separation. Did the people of Hitler’s Germany who lived in the Outlands escape Hitler’s reach?

          No. They did not. If you can get where you are, so can they. And they have helicopter gunships. And Predatator Drones.

          You can’t wait it out. Your paradigm is built upon self-delusion.

        • Nah, there’s just a point where you don’t much give a rip, come and take ’em. And fire up the GoPros.

        • William Burke your arrogance and ignorance is borne out of the delusion that you think you know what you’re talking about, and probably a typical American education by TV. I’d say it’s pretty arrogant to make pronouncements about me, someone you know nothing about.

          And helicopter gunships and Predator (or “Predatator” as you spell it) drones? You watch too many TV shows and crappy movies. Once they bring in the big guns, they aren’t looking for 1 single individual, a nobody, like me. Do you really believe there are enough helicopters and Predators, pilots and agents to go after everyone? Are you really suggesting that I might be the first American killed on U.S. soil by a Predator drone? I’ve broken no laws yet, so I’d say the odds of me dying by drone strike are ZERO. If that were even possible, why didn’t they use a Predator on Dorner, a known killer who had clearly stated his intentions to kill many more? Or the Tsarnaev brothers? They had all of Boston and much of the state of Massachusetts on lockdown with all the police and MRAPS they could muster. And yet no armed drones! And most of the helicopters in the air belonged to the media. The commie state of Connecticut is full of newly created gun felons but they haven’t brought in a single gunship yet. I haven’t even heard of a raid on one of those gun felons yet. So go back to your television set and continue your education and just ignore me, because I don’t live in the world of fantasy, and I won’t be taking advice from someone who can’t spell “Predator”, even with the help of a computer!

  8. Seems like any distributor could form a separate subsidiary to sell only to governments. That subsidiary could answer the questionnaire to placate the hoplophobes and get a contract, without having any impact on the parent company’s sales to the consumer market.

  9. The questions are silly, and nothing in the requirement to answer says anything about being disqualified for answering honestly. Do you think the police will allow the administration to buy them HiPoints because of the government has political disagreements with Glock?

    – What do you do to combat illegal gun trafficking and illegal gun crime? We are not a police agency. We comply with all applicable laws on the sale and distribution of firearms, and cooperate with police agencies when requested in connection with criminal inquiries.

    – Do you manufacturer and sell assault weapons for civilian use? We manufacture semi-automatic rifles that are in compliance with all applicable laws in the jurisdictions in which they are sold.

    – Do you agree not to sell certain models of firearms for civilian use? We comply with imitations on sales to civilians set by federal and state laws.
    – Are you requiring your dealers to conduct background checks? We do not impose such requirements; this is a requirement imposed by federal law for non-leo persons.
    – Do you fund research related to gun violence and smart gun technology? “Gun violence” is a catchphrase invented by politicians to describe a problem with mostly inner city violence among gang -affiliated youth, most if not all of whom, whether by age or by conviction, are disabled from legally possessing firearms. Violence is a social issue, not a manufacturing issue, and will not be solved by limiting the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. Our research, and the research of our competitors, has not developed any viable, reliable, and economical “smart gun” technology. Implementation of such technology will not reduce suicides, and will have minimal if any measurable effect on the few accidental deaths of children that could have been avoided by reliable and cheap alternatives for the safe storage of firearms.
    – Will you commit to prohibiting your brand name from being used in violent video games? No. there is no documented connection between violent video games and violent crime.

    • This ^^^^ should be circulated to all potential dealers for NJ law enforcement contracts as a template for their responses to the questionnaire. Very well said!

    • “there is no documented connection between violent video games and violent crime.”

      There is between violent gamers and takers of SSRI inhibitors.

  10. The FAQ for Lawmen Supply states this regarding individual sales:

    “Individual Sales for Firearms
    Lawmen Supply Company is an authorized distributor of Glock, Smith and Wesson, Ruger, Remington, Beretta and a number of other manufacturers of firearms. Lawmen Supply Company is an authorized distributor for ATK, Hornady and Remington ammunition. Lawmen Supply Company’s authorizations for sale of these products is limited to serving first responders including federal, municipal and volunteer first responders who are duly authorized and credentialed individuals or agencies. It is a violation of our supplier authorizations to sell firearms and ammunition to individuals or agencies that are not credentialed first responders. First Responder customers are required to show a badge or other form of acceptable identification to purchase a firearm or ammunition. It is the policy of Lawmen Supply Company to refer individuals who are not credentialed first responders to the appropriate authorized commercial dealer in the local area for service. Customers denied access to firearm or ammunition products may present credentials to Chris Ferrari, President Lawmen Supply Company if they feel they have been improperly denied service under the terms of this policy. Chris Ferrari may be reached at 856-488-4499.” – http://www.lawmensupply.com/FAQs.html

    It looks like they only supply law enforcement with firearms and ammo, and they’ve been around for 30 years now. Of course they will cave to the demands and any civilian boycott won’t hurt them much if at all.

    • I wonder how much pressure could be exerted on the manufacturers to cancel their supplier contracts with any distributor who plays this game?

      What it all boils down to is the non-LEO civilian market for firearms is much, much larger than the LEO civilian market. If the antis really want to use economics to push their agenda, we’ve got the bigger stick.

  11. I’ve been to Atlantic Tactical two or three times searching for ammo. The staff is friendly but the store is clearly geared towards law enforcement so this isnt much of a surprise that they would cave to maintain their customer base.

  12. Let’s take this back to the beginning.

    How many of us buy and use products made, transshipped, sold, or used in anti gun US states? Because that’s funding unconstitutional governments via tax revenue.

    Now lets include financial transactions with banks which don’t approve of gun rights. I’ll bet that means most of us here would be living and transacting on a strict cash only basis. (I realize some of you live in remote areas and transact via barter, but that’s not the majority. )

    So, unless you’re reading this from a computer made in a pro gun rights place, sold at a pro rights business, using money from a pro rights bank, you’re guilty of supporting antics financially-just like those guys in NJ. The thing about principle is, if you’re benefiting from one cent of gun control business ,it’s the same as $50,000 or $500,000.

    Think on that.

    • The vast majority of internet traffic flows through anti-gun states as well, so by using the internet we are supporting those states.

    • On some issues it difficult to avoid doing business with people or companies that are anti 2A. When it comes down to people or companies in the firearms industry that are playing ball with the antis, then that’s another matter entirely. If Glock or any other firearms company agrees to such demands then they might as well not sell to the general public at all because we know what would happen if they do.

      • It’s no different in principle.

        These guys kowtow to the antis to make a buck. We kowtow to them to buy a car, use a debit card, or fly on an aircraft . Ever paid a toll driving through IL? Then you’ve directly funded one of the most corrupt and anti gun regimes in America.

        The enemy isn’t the guy using a credit card at an anti gun bank, buying a computer made in an anti gun country, or working for an employer headquartered at an anti gun office. The enemy is the guy who thinks gun control is a good policy, and the poltician selected based on that metric.

        We can’t solve that problem with a boycott.

    • I disagree. If one situation offends you more than all the others, you pick that one and make your stand. We do not need to challenge each other on absolute purity, we need to PUNISH somebody, clearly running them out of business because of anti-gun positions.

  13. A company answers to one group, and no other: Their shareholders. Be they stock owners, board members, partners, or an individual owner. The dollar rules a corporation’s activity. That is the first rule of business: “We are in business for three reasons: Profit, Profit, Profit.”

    We shouldn’t be upset with a company that wants to make money. Like a previous comment mentioned: quickly destroy your computer, your smart phone, your tablet, all other electronics, the majority of your clothing, your automobile, and about 90% of your possessions. They are made in nations where gun control is absolute. Hell, toss your Glocks, your Sigs, your HK’s, your FN’s, any comm bloc guns and ammo as well. Made by countries or companies who support absolute gun control.

    We need to get real. Attempting to ostracize a company with revenue in the millions or billions when you avoid spending 500 bucks on their product means nothing to them.

    • As long as they are willing to give up the money that they generate from us, the general public. If they loose enough of our dollars then they might reconsider. How much do they make from non law enforcement / military as it stands?

    • Have you ever actually OWNED a business…small or large?

      Because I think it is a touch more complicated than that…you are stating a sound-bite sized oversimplification.

      Yes, the motivation is “profit,” but if the business goes under, there is no profit.

      There is a thing in financial analysis of the health of a business called “goodwill asset” or similar names. In short, it is like cash flow due to ‘mind share,’ brand recognition and reputation. It is VERY hard to quantify, but it exists on company financial documents. (Do any stock investing, and you should be familiar with this).

      For a company that sells to huge markets of people passionate on the issue of gun rights, it must maintain “favor” with those passionate people.

      Or, how are things going for Armatix? Or, the Freedom Group?

      “Feel” about companies drives markets sometimes as much as actual product quality. Principles matter when it comes to this.

      • I agree with the point that you are trying to make in your post but feel obligated to put my accountant’s hat on and explain what goodwill means on a financial statement. In financial accounting (reports intended to be seen by parties outside of the entity), goodwill is an intangible asset that indicates that the reporting entity purchased another entity and paid more for it than the value of its assets. The purchasing entity “carries goodwill” on its balance sheet to plug what would otherwise be a hole because the purchased entity is assumed to be worth what was paid for it on the date it was purchased. Auditors test goodwill for impairment as part of the audit process. If goodwill is impaired it must be adjusted down and will be reflected by a corresponding reduction in equity on the other side of the balance. The goodwill from a specific acquisition should never be adjusted up. Kind of technical, but since you obviously read financial statements, I thought that it might interest you.

        • Yes, it does interest me and thanks for the info.

          The other thing I was trying to get at and recognize that it’s not called “goodwill” is intellectual property assets.

          But, the gist is, as you’ve more rightfully called it, I was trying to emphasize “intangible assets” in the most general sense.

          Thanks again!

    • It meant a lot (about 80% of their investment) to the EU buyers of S&W. I never withheld a zillion dollar contract from them, I just stopped buying their products altogether, and apparently so did everyone else. Nobody asked if they had rehabilitated themselves, nobody cared. They were dead, and stayed that way as stock prices went down and down, revenues almost invisible, until they sold at an inconceivable loss. And S&W began to come back, as the fine American company they are.

  14. While I disagree with the practice I think the outrage is a little overblown. They give these questionnaire’s to the companies to appease the anti-gun groups (which is bad), but I haven’t seen any reports (yet) that any of them are actually making any decisions based on the answers.

    • Yeah, just trust me! Never mind what I say, trust me! Don’t even consider my obvious actions, trust me! Are you going to believe me, or your eyes? What are you thinking?

  15. All the gun distributors should simply answer in unison:

    “We comply with all local, state, and federal firearms regulations.”

    This simple answer, if given by all gun distributors, would render this stupid line of questioning worthless.

    • Agreed..
      It is such a simple answer then invalidates all other ones.
      I don’t blame the resellers. They need to make money.
      Most of the questions don’t really correlate to the way guns are even sold.

      Here is how I would answer.
      – What do you do to combat illegal gun trafficking and illegal gun crime?
      Hey we are an FFL we perform background checks on everyone! Except cops, because we sell under big contracts for those.
      – Do you manufacturer and sell assault weapons for civilian use?
      We only sell what is legal to civilians in the state or states in which we operate.
      – Do you agree not to sell certain models of firearms for civilian use?
      We only sell what is legal, see response above.
      – Are you requiring your dealers to conduct background checks?
      All FFL dealers have to perform background checks. It isn’t our rule that is the law.
      – Do you fund research related to gun violence and smart gun technology?
      No. That is not our job or requirement.
      – Will you commit to prohibiting your brand name from being used in violent video games?
      We are a reseller, we do not have our name on guns. Besides what difference does it make?

  16. Let New Jersey get the least up to date firearms and accessories and let the companies who deal with communist states like CALI -JERSEY be blackballed.I don’t think they can even ask those questions as it is like asking what religion or color you are before I buy from your store! Prejidicial and profiling.The Gun rights groups ,which far out weighs MDA and Brady ,need to get into these States and get rid of the one sided views that the antis are slanting.

  17. Once again,,, the Mayor of Jersey City is requiring more information than is prescribed by law; he has already been admonished by the Court system, for doing just that with citizens permits to purchase… and yet he continues to violate New Jersey’s gun laws; My question here is when will New Jersey’s Attorney General indited him on violating New Jersey gun laws which has a minimum sentence of 5 years in prison? When are liberal progressive politicians going to suffer any consequences for THEIR ACTIONS!!!!

    • But they’re not. I don’t have to address which state we’re addressing, ANY state, they’re not.

  18. Just more validation that my thoughts on 2A and gun industry are correct. The gun industry does not operate with the protection of my unalienable, natural or god given rights first and foremost. In fact the gun industry rightfully sees themselves as businesses first and last. They ally and engage with whoever can promote self interest as a business. Hence with those that can make them money.

    Individuals in the industry might be “good guys” in the 2A sense – Ronnie Barrett for instance. Others might be other than “good guys” – like the Maryland jerk who was going to sell the smart guns. But as a whole they don’t have me and my rights in mind. The bigger the company or the more foreign the company or where the execs are the cookie cutter Wharton types, the less I see a Constitutional defender who will stand with me at the barricades.

    We fool ourselves by electing these guys to the NRA Board of Directors. We fool ourselves by thinking the NSSF (the industry PR outlet) or the NSSF policies and pronouncements as “US”.

    I will continue to strenuously object every time there is any implied connection between the gun industry and my rights. Like I say, I don’t recall Martin Luther King letting some corporations take the lead instead of the good reverend himself.

  19. This reminds me of Bloomberg’s attempt to boycott Glock until he was informed that most of NYPD’s officers were equipped with GlocK 19’s. “DUH”!

  20. Anyone involved in the industry doing business with New Jersey has already sold out so far a bit more won’t make much of a different.

  21. Gun manufacturers, ammo makers and distributors need to start putting the Constitution above profits. Besides sales to government agencies are only a small percentage of a manufacturer or distributors sales. Cut off Jersey City and the cities where their mayors signed off on supporting such bilge. Given enough time it will bring these cities to their knees.

  22. Jersey City has dug its own shithole grave. As have other cities in the same, miserable state.

    Don’t ANYONE, EVER, come to their support. If you throw in your lot with this Death Star, you deserve everything that’s going to come to you.

    There is not going to be room for willfully stupid, ignorant sheeple in the world we are entering into. The strong and resolute will survive.

    Everyone else…. NOT SO MUCH.

  23. Two vendors I will never support now that they’ve done business with that candy-assed Marine Steve Fulop.

  24. I wonder what would happen if they went around asking “Would you hire a black/Hispanic man/woman/manwoman as a police officer?” What about “Do you support/not support gay marriage/abortion/amnesty for illegal immigrants?”

Leave a Reply

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