The NSSF talks to execs and employees from Mossberg, Stag Arms and Ammunition Storage Components about their businesses and the current climate in Connecticut. What, no Colt? Is this just a (not very) thinly veiled threat that they’ll pull up stakes and relo to friendlier states should Governor Dan Malloy’s gun control agenda pass? You make the call. The NSSF’s press release is after the jump . . .
NEWTOWN, Conn. — The employees and management of three Connecticut-based companies in the firearms industry speak out about their jobs and their combined economic impact on the state in a video released today by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry.
Release of the video featuring individuals from O.F. Mossberg & Sons of North Haven; and Stag Arms and Ammunition Storage Components, both of New Britain, follows the announcement late last week by Gov. Dannel Malloy that he was proposing severe new regulations governing firearms ownership.
Following release of the governor’s proposal, NSSF issued a statement saying, in part, “We are troubled by the Governor’s apparent change in attitude and seeming impatience with the approach of the General Assembly’s bipartisan Gun Violence Task Force and even his own commission. We do not believe a rush to quick-fix legislation is likely to produce real public safety solutions, while it holds the clear potential to hurt good-paying manufacturing jobs in our state.”
The statement continued: “We applaud the General Assembly’s bi-partisan task force for working to fully evaluate all the issues and points of view, including that of our industry, in an effort to craft an effective public policy response. We hope the Governor will give the General Assembly the opportunity to get it right.”
NSSF and member companies based in Connecticut and Western Massachusetts have been working for several weeks to help educate legislators and the public about the economic impact of the firearms industry in the Constitution State as well as what measures are most effective at keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals and unauthorized individuals.
The firearms industry in 2011 directly employed nearly 3,000 in Connecticut, while supporting another 2,400 supplier positions in the state, according to a study by John Dunham and Associates. The total economic impact to the state exceeded $1.7 billion.
Why would Colt care? The number of rifles it sells in Connecticut must be miniscule, and its handguns (when it gets around to actually building them) are not affected by the rules. Colt sells everything it makes (not necessarily all that it can make, but that is a different question), and often at a healthy premium because of the name, and still the demand is unsatisfied.
Colt has also made it very clear that it has no interest in the “civilian” market. It wants to be a government contractor, period.
That is a big mistake on their part.
No.
Colt’s Manufacturing and Colt Defense are two completely different companies with completely different owners. Colt’s Manufacturing did build some M1911’s that it then sold to Colt Defense who in turn sold them to the gov’t but that’s all the collaboration I know of.
If Colt’s Manufacturing “made it very clear that it has no interest in the “civilian” market” then by definition it’s going out of business.
The goal is to always make one less than you can sell, that is remedial marketing and business
Colt nowhere near approaches “one less than they can sell.” And they do not seem terribly quick on their feet either. They announced the resurgence of the Mustang long after Sig was successfully selling thousands of clones, and the product did not arrive in dealerships until well over a year after they said it would.
Holy boring video Batman…
Also, the whole “Modern Sporting Rifle” thing is weak. Call a “spade” a spade.
AR’s and AK’s are Assault Rifles. Whether or not that is a bad thing or a good thing depends on what you use it for. And you can be damn sure that if someone breaks into my house with intent to hurt my family, I am going to use mine to Assault-the-Sh%t out of them until they either leave or expire.
But your rifle is not an “assault rifle” until it assaults someone. Lets call them what they are: RIFLES.
If you have an AR, all you have is a crappy little small bore semiautomatic rifle. I am getting big tax refund this year. That means I am breaking down and buying an M-1. That is the original assault rifle.
Make sure you get one that actually assaulted people so you dont get ripped off.
Steve, using an AR in the way you describe would make it a defense rifle….much better ring than assault rifle or even that modern sporting rifle crap.
That’s funny, because the cops call them ‘tactical rifles’ to avoid the bad press.
I’ll stick with modern sporting rifle. Besides, an assault rifle has select fire.
Ok this BS I’m try’in to watch the video and a Visa Prepaid video kicks on.
Again this is BS, one has to stop the real video untill the damm commercial is over due to over laping audio tracks. Does one need to say forget this site.??
The idea that keeps resonating through this video is in the comments of those interviewed that they hope that the legislators will “come up with the right solution” or “fix the problem”. There seems to be a misguided intention by these employers & employees to come off as “reasonable” rather than “gun nuts” & thereby give concede the central point in this “debate” – namely that there isn’t ANOTHER LAW that will “fix the problem”! There is NO amount of legislation that will stop a determined, homicidal, from attempting & probably taking another life or lives w/whatever means. The legislators think that guns ARE the problem. Where is the outrage by these business owners & employees that these legislators are plotting to shut them down?! Guns kill people everybody, but so do prescription drugs, cars, swimming pools, gas grills, & yes, even hammers – but we aren’t legislating out those businesses.
Besides that,- it’s not a date therefore it’s not an “Assault,” just an aimful experience!