Why don't manufacturers refuse to sell to law enforcement

[CamoDeafie]

why should law enforcement have access to guns that citizens cant?

And why can't citizens get access to the Pentagon 1033 program (free or minimal cost armored vehicles, equipment, armor )

 

[American123]

I'm corn-fused, We want better law enforcement But don't want them to have guns? Sounds pretty woke to me.

We want the government to be beholden to the same rules they place upon the citizens. Sounds about as constitutionally originalist as you can get.

 

[Koda]

And why can't citizens get access to the Pentagon 1033 program (free or minimal cost armored vehicles, equipment, armor )

I thought we could buy tanks legally?

 

[CamoDeafie]

I thought we could buy tanks legally?

Yes but... we can't just ask the Pentagon to give us keys to something like a MRAP.. which LE agencies can and do under the 1033 program. Edit. Also, supposedly military body armor plates and inserts are "not released to sell to civilians except LE"

 

[Koda]

Yes but... we can't just ask the Pentagon to give us keys to something like a MRAP.. which LE agencies can and do under the 1033 program. Edit. Also, supposedly military body armor plates and inserts are "not released to sell to civilians except LE"

yeah, I imagine anything more than small arms things start to get complicated.
but the premise still stands, if criminals are just civilians why should LEO need more. Id be fine with them having more than I could if there wasnt a huge prohibition movement to completely disarm citizens. Otherwise I dont need an MRAP and wouldnt care if the cops had one.

Side trivia, I think the worlds largest privately owned air force is owned by a private citizen here in America.

 

[CamoDeafie]

yeah, I imagine anything more than small arms things start to get complicated.
but the premise still stands, if criminals are just civilians why should LEO need more. Id be fine with them having more than I could if there wasnt a huge prohibition movement to completely disarm citizens. Otherwise I dont need an MRAP and wouldnt care if the cops had one.

Side trivia, I think the worlds largest privately owned air force is owned by a private citizen here in America.

Because criminals somehow have "access" to "weapons of war" (see Cartels).... I do remember distinctly that for a while Douglas County Sheriff dept had Glock 18s and those would require SOT FFL creds for being post 1986 production

The prevailing statement is that cops "needs these special arms and weapons" to outgun criminals.. so I ask them, why not have the citizens be as well armed?

And it's not about "needs" it's about wants. if I say I feel safer driving through PDX wirh a MRAP... that's what I feel.safer driving for my family

 

[Koda]

Because criminals somehow have "access" to "weapons of war" (see Cartels)....

Thats actually a very good point. Though citizens fighting back against cartels is a bit more complicated than you or I owning a MRAP but the option should be there.

 

[Alexx1401]

why should law enforcement have access to guns that citizens cant?

In a perfect world they would not but, sadly we have to live with what we have.

 

[jjones123486]

Good luck. All the big manufacturers are in countries with draconian gun regs already (guessing)

Glock, sig sauer, to name a couple.

Then you have our very own US companies that lick boots. (Looking at you Daniel defense)

There's some companies like bcm, and Barrett that refuse to sell firearms to law enforcement that can't be sold to civilians. Would be awesome to see companies totally boycott OSP.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

 

[jjones123486]

It's just business and those companies are there to make money, NOT pander to your rights despite what you think

Some guys in here would rather try to give themselves an attaboy by trying to debate your post. Even if it makes them sound like a hypocrite and a Democrat. It's not companies pandering my rights. Correct me if I'm wrong but the 2nd amendment is their right just as much as mine. Did you just comment to comment. Do you not believe and agree with the 2nd amendment. Do you think that all manufacturers only stand behind the 2nd amendment to sell a product? Are you a anti gun Democrat yourself. You sound like a bitter liberal fishing for an argument and I took the bait. I believe there are more manufacturers that would follow Barret arms if they thought of it or realized that their business would make a lot more money if they don't lose their civilian market. I mean you really think they're government contracts are so big losing customers 1 state at a time isn't hitting them hard. They have a lot more to gain by boycotting law enforcement and government contracts and possibly gaining entire states business back. They want our business. This may be a way to fight back.

 

[jjones123486]

Some guys in here would rather try to give themselves an attaboy by trying to debate your post. Even if it makes them sound like a hypocrite and a Democrat. It's not companies pandering my rights. Correct me if I'm wrong but the 2nd amendment is their right just as much as mine. Did you just comment to comment. Do you not believe and agree with the 2nd amendment. Do you think that all manufacturers only stand behind the 2nd amendment to sell a product? Are you a anti gun Democrat yourself. You sound like a bitter liberal fishing for an argument and I took the bait. I believe there are more manufacturers that would follow Barret arms if they thought of it or realized that their business would make a lot more money if they don't lose their civilian market. I mean you really think they're government contracts are so big losing customers 1 state at a time isn't hitting them hard. They have a lot more to gain by boycotting law enforcement and government contracts and possibly gaining entire states business back. They want our business. This may be a way to fight back.

Don't even respond if you are going to respond to me. This isn't about me or my thoughts. This is about finding a way to fight back. What do we do when a country is breaking a treaty or invading a country. We sanction them. We take something they have became reliant on. Making it hard to be successful and governing their country. How do we use that same principle. We sanction the administration forcing them to buy 2nd grade weapons from the same countries they banned importation of firearms from or bending and not banning our ways of protecting our family's. Your comment got me a little emotional. Think bigger than trying to talk down or make me feel like my idea will never work. That kind of thinking belongs elsewhere. We need solutions not more problems

 

[jjones123486]

I'm corn-fused, We want better law enforcement But don't want them to have guns? Sounds pretty woke to me.

Dude you completely missed the whole point. It's okay. Not a big deal. I don't care how good law enforcement is when eventually they start knocking on all our doors confiscating all our firearms because this gun grabbing continues. Why do you want better armed law enforcement? Dude go back and reread history of America and rethink what the 2nd amendment is meant to do and protect. Or just keep voting for more cops. Guess it will make you feel safer knowing you can't protect yourself anymore. That's what the government/socialist want. Good subjects that rely on them to protect. They know what's best for us. We don't need guns. 911 is here to save the day. Wow.

 

[Old Dog]

I remember hearing, I believe in California. Barret arms refused to do business, repair or maintain any of their firearms that California law enforcement may have had, due to California banning their citizens from having guns. It's too bad all manufacturers won't black list law enforcement in the states that are taking rights from citizens. So it seems manufacturers are aiding in the long term goal of total confiscation by arming the people that will be coming to your house to take your guns. Thoughts?

I told myself not to post in this thread, but here I am. First, California did not ban its citizens from having guns. Just the good ones.

Do you have a list of states (besides WA, OR and CA) that are "taking rights from citizens?" Do you want Americans who may have been working for twenty, thirty or forty years for Colt, S&W, et al, to lose their jobs and/or negatively impact their retirement funds?

And do you really believe the police and military will be coming to your house to take your guns? Do you actually KNOW any officers, deputies or AD military?

How 'bout the majority of all the WA county sheriffs who came out strongly -- in writing -- opposing all of this state's recent firearms legislation? Do you not want their departments to have guns?

Silliest thread I've seen in a while. "Black-list" LE in states with crappy gun laws? It's not the fault of the gun manufacturers, their employees, or the agencies that buy their firearms.

Boycott the businesses in your state that support anti-gun legislation and anti-gun politicians.

Do you really think ANY manufacturer of firearms in any country thinks it's in their best interest to "aid in the long-term goal of total confiscation?"

Do you have ANY understanding of business in a capitalist economy operating in a constitutional republic?

 

[jjones123486]

Dude that's why all this is happening. Half gun owners are so fast to point a finger at other gun owners and quote entire sections from the ATF website. Chastising someone for violating a infringement or not knowing about a new infringement that passed. There is no constitutional gun law. Period. We need more unity and more non compliance. Instead guys want to get pats on their backs for getting their form 1 approved like it's some badge of honor or now they are in a special top tier class of gun owners. It's bass ackwards.

 

[jjones123486]

I told myself not to post in this thread, but here I am. First, California did not ban its citizens from having guns. Just the good ones.

Do you have a list of states (besides WA, OR and CA) that are "taking rights from citizens?" Do you want Americans who may have been working for twenty, thirty or forty years for Colt, S&W, et al, to lose their jobs and/or negatively impact their retirement funds?

And do you really believe the police and military will be coming to your house to take your guns? Do you actually KNOW any officers, deputies or AD military?

How 'bout the majority of all the WA county sheriffs who came out strongly -- in writing -- opposing all of this state's recent firearms legislation? Do you not want their departments to have guns?

Silliest thread I've seen in a while. "Black-list" LE in states with crappy gun laws? It's not the fault of the gun manufacturers, their employees, or the agencies that buy their firearms.

Boycott the businesses in your state that support anti-gun legislation and anti-gun politicians.

Do you really think ANY manufacturer of firearms in any country thinks it's in their best interest to "aid in the long-term goal of total confiscation?"

Do you have ANY understanding of business in a capitalist economy operating in a constitutional republic?

 

[Old Dog]

Dude that's why all this is happening.

Nope. It's all happening because the woke snowflakes, with guidance from the mainstream media and liberal politicians, decided that gun control was an easy issue to get elected on, especially with all the nutjobs in Democrat-ran cities good with letting minority gang members slay thousands of other minority gang members annually, while promoting the agenda that guns are the actual problem, not drugs, mental health, gangs and crime. They all understand that emotion, not critical thinking, drives election results.

Half gun owners are so fast to point a finger at other gun owners and quote entire sections from the ATF website.

Of course, I've only been owning firearms and shooting them for a little over fifty years while spending 44 years of my adult life in the military and law enforcement, so maybe I haven't been paying attention... but I simply have never seen that. Half of all gun-owners? Seriously?

If, as a private citizen gun-owner, you want to place yourself in an adversarial position to those in law enforcement or the military because they can buy, use or carry firearms that you cannot, you are not seeing the bigger picture. And if you cannot understand that almost all of those working in law enforcement and certainly almost all of those in the military do not want to, nor would they follow orders to, confiscate guns from law-abiding American citizens, you're spending too much time on the wrong websites and for sure, don't get out of Mom's basement enough.

Is confiscation of all firearms on the radar of our anti-gun liberal opponents of the RKBA? Absolutely, YES! But just don't let yourself live in the same alternate reality that these cretins do...

 

[TTSX]

Some guys in here would rather try to give themselves an attaboy by trying to debate your post. Even if it makes them sound like a hypocrite and a Democrat. It's not companies pandering my rights. Correct me if I'm wrong but the 2nd amendment is their right just as much as mine.

Not all gun companies are American, so no, the 2nd may in fact NOT be their right as much as yours. They're just here to make money, that's it.

Did I hurt your feelbads? Grow up, you're not the center of the universe

 

[Maximum Magnum]

I remember hearing, I believe in California. Barret arms refused to do business, repair or maintain any of their firearms that California law enforcement may have had, due to California banning their citizens from having guns. It's too bad all manufacturers won't black list law enforcement in the states that are taking rights from citizens. So it seems manufacturers are aiding in the long term goal of total confiscation by arming the people that will be coming to your house to take your guns. Thoughts?

Yep. Ronnie Barrett is the GOAT.

 

[awags_86]

I'm quite shocked at some of the responses.

Whatevs. I don't think law enforcement should have any more rights or access to firearms than civilians. Period. IF the order came to go kick doors and take guns you can count on the majority of Leo's "just doing their job". That does not mean I don't respect law enforcement nor do I want them defunded.

 

[FireArm]

whenever the question is why the answer is money

Merica'!!! umkay