Thursday, January 17, 2013

All (Gun) politics is local

Riddle me this: why didn't President Obama issue 23 Executive Orders about guns in August of last year, surrounded by the widows and orphans of the Aurora, CO theater shooting?  Simple: he was running for election in a competitive race.

And riddle me this: why won't Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid introduce an "Assault Weapons" ban?  And if he did, why would it be voted down by Senators Mark Begich (D - AK), Mark Pryor (D - AR), Mark Udall (D - CO), Tom Harkin (D - IA), Mary Landrieu (D - LA), Max Baucus (D - MT), Jeanne Shaheen (D - NH), Tom Udall (D - NM), Kay Hagan (D - NC), Tim Johnson (D - SD), Mark Warner (D - VA), and Jay Rockefeller (D - WV)?  Simple: they want to win re-election.

And riddle me this: why did the New York Legislature just ram through a gun control bill that nobody read, and is widely seen as doing nothing to stop shootings?  Simple: they don't see a cost to doing so.

You see, New York is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party.  And so there's no perceived downside to them (or Massachusetts, or Connecticut) putting the most stupid restrictions on lawful firearms owners.  And doing things like getting the State Employees pension fund to divest firearms stocks.

Well, OK then.  Maybe we can do something about that.

The following firearms manufacturers are based in New York, providing thousands of jobs to New York citizens.




Probably others - clearly my work ethic in researching this topic after a 14 hour day leaves something to be desired.  Feel free to leave more names in the comments.

These companies are behind enemy lines, at the mercy of a Legislature that feels no compunction about screwing over lawful gun owners.  And so we should encourage them to relocate from New York to the United States of America.    I don't think that a boycott qua boycott is necessarily (yet),  but a polite letter to their VP of Marketing expressing bewilderment that they would stay in that environment, paying taxes to an enemy government (as opposed to the governments of Alabama or Oklahoma) might have an impact.  Especially if you mention that you'd like to buy from them but only buy American.

The Political is Personal, and gun politics is local.  And we need to punish the New York Legislature any way we can.


Brad_in_IL said...


I'm not questioning you're suggestion. I think it to be a valid one. I would submit, then, with what happened to MA laws in 1994, and in 2004 when Romney revealed his true colors, was there an outcrying for Smith & Wesson to pull out of Springfield and move to a "free" state? There might have been. Perhaps one of your readers can shed some light.

Thank you.

- Brad

Brad_in_IL said...

Oops . . . what happened in 1998, not 1994. Too many different, arbitrary and capricious dates to track. Oy.

Dave H said...

And so we should encourage them to relocate from New York to the United States of America.

It's nice to know Free America has our back, sir. For many of us moving isn't an option. I suppose waving at the trucks as they leave for North Carolina will have to do.

Borepatch said...

Dave, until the politicians have to answer for job losses or some other cost, they will never have the incentive to stop.

That Guy said...

Kahr is located in MA.

.45ACP+P said...

I began a campaign, when Governor Cuomo first bloviated, to push the Governor of Virgina to recruit Remington Arms. They would be a good fit for Southside Va.

The Czar of Muscovy said...

Worked here in Illinois: when Armalite announced it was leaving Illinois because of Gov. Quinn's anti-gun crap, suddenly a lot of the proposed legislation was crushed. Armalite is staying: so the gun manufacturers wield tremendous influence and ought to get involved in NY.

Ultimately, NY's new gun laws will not survive the legal challenges already queuing up.

Ruth said...

Remington may already be headed in that direction, based on what I was getting off the news yesterday before I got pissed and shut off the tv.

JD Rush said...

Harkin will vote for any insane gun ban that comes along. The crazier, the better. All that PMC money doesn't buy gun votes.

Jay in WV said...

Rockefeller just announced recently that he is not seeking re-election, so unfortunately I think that is a vote that would go the wrong way if a ban is introduced into the Senate.

strandediniowa said...

The only way Harkin would not vote for a gun control bill is if he thought a stronger one would be better.

I agree with JD, Harkin is such a puke he'd gleefully vote yea.

I have a quote from him that he wants all guns loaded on a barge and sunk at sea. He's openly anti-gun but always scares old people that Republicans want to implement Soylent Green to save money.

And too many Iowans are stupid enough to vote him back in.