Democratic mayors attempt to enact gun control via economic threats

NCDM The National Conference of Democratic Mayors wants more gun control and they are frustrated that, because of gun owners like you who vote, they cannot achieve it through legislation.

So … they have a backup plan. They are going to use taxpayer dollars, in the form of contracts to supply law enforcement agencies, to threaten manufacturers who do not voluntarily enact their draconian proposals.

And they are not trying to hide their agenda. Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak, who leads the group, proudly announced the details of the plan after the NCDM meeting in January.

“When we were lobbying on Capitol Hill, it became clear that our goal of trying to pass laws that make it easier to make our communities safe was going to be opposed by the gun and ammunition manufacturers. We recognize as mayors, we help fund that, because we are one of the largest purchasers of guns and ammunition in the country.
So at the Democratic mayors meeting last night, we agreed that we would all go back to our communities, gather information from our police chiefs and procurement officers about how many guns and how much ammunition we purchase, bring that in from the Democratic mayors so that we have a common list of how much money we’re spending, what purchases are pending and who we’re buying from. [This data will then be handed over to New York Mayor Bloomberg's anti-gun group in order for the manufacturers to be rated.]
Then we’re going to do everything we can as mayors to use … the collective buying power of many millions of dollars in guns and ammunition, to support those who will support common-sense laws and oppose those who are fighting us in Congress.”

Let me summarize that for you. These Democratic mayors are going to punish those who exercise their constitutional right to petition the government. And they will use YOUR tax dollars to conduct this attack on the shooting sports industry.

However, this plan might just backfire on the cities these mayors represent. Let’s do a little math. According to the ATF, in 2012 American consumers (not including government purchases) purchased almost 19 MILLION firearms. If we use a conservative average of $500 per transaction, that is 9.5 BILLION dollars worth of sales to consumers. And that number doesn’t even take accessories and ammunition into account.

So if you were the CEO of a company that sells firearms in America and you had the choice to anger those who bought 9.5 BILLION dollars worth of guns or face a possible boycott from those who bought a couple millions dollars worth, which would you choose?

There is precedent. It took years and a change in ownership for Smith & Wesson to recover from the consumer anger that was directed against them when they caved into similar demands by the Clinton Administration.

In fact, manufacturers should consider going all-in and completely refusing to sell to local and state government in those states that enact draconian laws. In this too there is precedent. When California moved to ban the 50 caliber rifles that Barrett Manufacturing pioneered, company CEO Ronnie Barrett told California’s government agencies to go elsewhere with their business.

“Barrett cannot legally sell any of its products to lawbreakers. Therefore, since California’s passing of AB50, the state is not in compliance with the US Constitution’s 2nd and 14th Amendments, and we will not sell nor service any of our products to any government agency of the State of California.”

If every manufacturer in the country were to band together and do the same it would have an immediate and devastating impact. It’s time the gun industry adopted the tactics of those who would destroy it.

After all, those mayors certainly want the men guarding them and THEIR families to be armed. It is just YOUR family that is disposable.

Monday, February 4, 2013