Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
August 29, 2014, 11:43:28 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Olympic Arms Tells New York Government to Pound Sand (will not do business with  (Read 719 times)
Roger Bacon
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 21036


Roger Bacon tries to be witty and fails


« on: February 14, 2013, 11:04:53 PM »

 Grin

Olympic Arms Tells New York Government to Pound Sand
February 12 2013

Olympic Arms has joined the ranks of Magpul and LaRue Tactical in taking a stand against state governments who are trying to infringe the Second Amendment rights of their citizens.

Olympic Arms primarily manufactures entry level AR-15 style weapons and other firearms.

Olympic Arms released the following press release via their Facebook Page.

Press Release: Olympic Arms, Inc. Announces New York State Sales Policy

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Olympic Arms is a staunch believer in and defender of the Constitution of the United States, and with special attention paid to the Bill of Rights that succinctly enumerates the security of our Divinely given Rights. One of those Rights is that to Keep and Bear Arms.

Legislation recently passed in the State of New York outlaws the AR15 and many other firearms, and will make it illegal for the good and free citizens of New York to own a large selection of legal and safe firearms and magazines. We feel as though the passage of this legislation exceeds the authority granted to the government of New York by its citizens, and violates the Constitution of the United States, ignoring such SCOTUS rulings as District of Columbia v. Heller – 554, U.S. 570 of 2008, McDonald v. Chicago – 561 U.S. 3025 of 2010, and specifically the case of United States v. Miller – 307 U.S. 174 of 1939.

Due the passing of this legislation, Olympic Arms would like to announce that the State of New York, any Law Enforcement Departments, Law Enforcement Officers, First Responders within the State of New York, or any New York State government entity or employee of such an entity – will no longer be served as customers.

In short, Olympic Arms will no longer be doing business with the State of New York or any governmental entity or employee of such governmental entity within the State of New York – henceforth and until such legislation is repealed, and an apology made to the good people of the State of New York and the American people.

If the leaders of the State of New York are willing to limit the right of the free and law abiding citizens of New York to arm themselves as they see fit under the Rights enumerate to all citizens of the United State through the Second Amendment, we feel as though the legislators and government entities within the State of New York should have to abide by the same restrictions.

This action has caused a division of the people into classes: Those the government deems valuable enough to protect with modern firearms, and those whose lives have been deemed as having less value, and whom the government has decided do not deserve the right to protect themselves with the same firearms. Olympic Arms will not support such behavior or policy against any citizen of this great nation.

Olympic Arms invites all firearms manufacturers, distributors and firearms dealers to join us in this action to refuse to do business with the State of New York. We must stand together, or we shall surely fall divided.

Sincerely,

Brian Schuetz
President
Olympic Arms, Inc.
Report to moderator   Logged

24KT
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Female
Posts: 24402


Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244


WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 14, 2013, 11:08:53 PM »

Guess whose taxes are gonna get audited?
Report to moderator   Logged

w
JBGRAY
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2021



« Reply #2 on: February 14, 2013, 11:12:48 PM »

Good for them.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8370


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #3 on: February 15, 2013, 05:11:31 AM »

Good.  I hope my state gets everything it deserves
Report to moderator   Logged
tonymctones
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 25142



« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2013, 05:13:35 AM »

hahaha this is called a classic move

"If the leaders of the State of New York are willing to limit the right of the free and law abiding citizens of New York to arm themselves as they see fit under the Rights enumerate to all citizens of the United State through the Second Amendment, we feel as though the legislators and government entities within the State of New York should have to abide by the same restrictions."

still havent heard one argument as to why the police "need" these guns but the citizens dont
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8370


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2013, 05:16:28 AM »

Magpul Responds to Proposed Colorado Magazine Capacity Limit
Guns.com ^ | 2/12/13 | David Higginbotham
Posted on February 14, 2013 10:04:21 PM EST by Red Steel

Magpul is one of the nation’s leading manufacturers of AR-15 magazines. Their PMAGs were popular before the current rush on all-things-AR, but now they’re almost impossible to find in stores. Even with the increased demand, Magpul is holding their prices steady. And they’ve increased production to meet the increase in demand.

By every estimate, Magpul is a model company. Their products are used by civilians, law enforcement and the military. They employ more than 200 people in Colorado, their home state, and their presence there guarantees work for more than 700 suppliers and subcontractors.

By all accounts, Magpul is not a major employer, but there are close to 1,000 jobs directly associated with the company. And this is Colorado, a state that is predominantly rural. Though modest in size, Magpul is an important part of the Colorado economy.

So why would the Colorado House propose legislation that would shut Magpul down, or force the company out of Colorado? Colorado HB 1224

The Colorado House Bill 13-1224 essentially aims to regulate the production, sale and ownership of magazines for a rifle, handgun and shotgun. Here is the exact language of the bill:

The bill prohibits the sale, transfer, or possession of an ammunition feeding device that is capable of accepting, or that can be readily converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition or more than five shotgun shells (large-capacity magazine). A person may possess a large-capacity magazine if he or she owns the large-capacity magazine on the effective date of the bill and maintains continuous possession of the large-capacity magazine.

A person who sells, transfers, or possesses a large-capacity magazine in violation of the new provision commits a class 2 misdemeanor.

A large-capacity magazine that is manufactured in Colorado on or after the effective date of the bill must include a serial number and the date upon which the large-capacity magazine was manufactured or assembled. The serial number and date must be legibly and conspicuously engraved or cast upon the outer surface of the large-capacity magazine.

The Colorado bureau of investigation may promulgate rules that may require a large-capacity magazine that is manufactured on or after the effective date of the bill to bear identifying information in addition to the serial number and date of assembly.

A person who manufactures a large-capacity magazine in Colorado in violation of the new provision commits a class 2 misdemeanor.

It would seem that this language not only limits the rights of most of us, but really singles out Magpul as a company. Magpul wouldn’t even be able to make magazines for sale in other states without complying to Colorado’s new restrictions. Magpul’s response?

Magpul is a model of restraint. As the demand for PMAGs escalated, and the civilian consumers became more concerned with potential bans, Magpul seemed to remain aloof. Instead, they made magazines. But now they’ve responded. The full text of their open letter can be found at the company’s Facebook page.

HB 1224, Prohibiting Large Capacity Ammunition Magazines — a measure that bans the possession, sale, or transfer of magazines over 10 round capacity. The measures and stipulations in this bill would deprive Colorado residents of the value of their private property by prohibiting the sale or transfer of all magazines over 10 rounds. This bill would also prohibit manufacture of magazines greater than 10 rounds for commercial sale out of the state, and place restrictions on the manufacture of military and law enforcement magazines that would cripple production.

We’d like to ask all Colorado residents to please contact your state legislators and the members of the Judiciary Committee and urge them to kill these measures in committee, and to vote NO if they reach the floor.

What would happen if the bill does pass? Magpul says:

Due to the highly restrictive language in HB 1224, if passed, and we remained here, this measure would require us to cease PMAG production on July 1, 2013.

In short, Magpul would be unable to remain in business as a Colorado company, and the over 200 jobs for direct employees and nearly 700 jobs at our subcontractors and suppliers would pick up and leave Colorado. Due to the structure of our operations, this would be entirely possible, hopefully without significant disruption to production.

Nothing ambiguous about “pick up and leave.” Where would they go? Texas, maybe. But that’s just conjecture based on the overwhelming number of comments on the Facebook posting. But there are many other options.

But I don’t know anyone who wants Magpul out of Colorado. First, it would mean a huge defeat for freedom in the state. But Magpul is very much a part of the state’s culture. Conclusion

I’ve tried hard to refrain from editorializing, but here it goes. Magpul is known for their 30 round magazines. This is not a “high-capacity” magazine. It is a standard capacity magazine. We know this. Limiting the manufacture of these magazines will do nothing to reduce gun crime. And Magpul knows this.

The legislators drafting these measures do so in spite of the fact that nothing they are proposing will do anything to even marginally improve public safety in Colorado, and in fact, will leave law-abiding Colorado residents less able to defend themselves, strip away rights and property from residents who have done nothing wrong, and send nearly 1000 jobs and millions in tax revenue out of the state.

We like Colorado, we want to continue to operate in Colorado, but most of all, we want Colorado to remain FREE.

We agree. But I think I speak for a lot of AR enthusiasts when I say I want Magpul, no matter where they are made.

TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; US: Colorado; Click to Add Topic
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8370


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2013, 07:06:53 AM »

I’m sure in his mind it makes sense.
 

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama reached out to an online audience Thursday, taking questions on deadly subjects like drones and gun violence while also musing about the anachronism of pennies and the “chill” factor in Hawaii. [...]
 
Obama also defended his proposals to ban certain weapons and bullet magazines and expand background checks on gun buyers.
 
“We already have some restrictions.” He said. “We can’t purchase a grenade launcher from a store, although there may be some folks who want to buy those. And the reason is that we think that on balance the second amendment does not automatically assume that any weapon that’s available you can automatically purchase.”







LMFAO!!!!  How dumb is Obama?
Report to moderator   Logged
Roger Bacon
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 21036


Roger Bacon tries to be witty and fails


« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2013, 01:45:11 PM »

Seven companies now!

LaRue Tactical
Olympic Arms
Extreme Firepower Inc, LLC
Templar Custom
York Arms
NEW: Cheaper than Dirt
NEW: Midway USA


“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.”
Report to moderator   Logged

Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8370


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2013, 01:53:22 PM »

Seven companies now!

LaRue Tactical
Olympic Arms
Extreme Firepower Inc, LLC
Templar Custom
York Arms
NEW: Cheaper than Dirt
NEW: Midway USA


“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 Glock and Smith and Wesson get on board that would be huge since that is what most cops carry. 

Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8370


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2013, 02:15:27 PM »

COLORADO PASSES HIGH CAPACITY MAG BAN!
 
(Newser) – Colorado has taken the first step toward banning high-capacity gun magazines: A bill limiting magazines to 15 rounds passed the state House today, the Denver Post reports. Just three Democrats voted against House Bill 1224 for a 34-31 vote. Three more gun bills are up for a vote today: two involving background checks and one involving concealed carry permits. The next step for HB1224 is the state Senate, where Democrats have a majority, and then Gov. John Hickenlooper, who backs the bill.
Report to moderator   Logged
Roger Bacon
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 21036


Roger Bacon tries to be witty and fails


« Reply #10 on: February 18, 2013, 02:22:59 PM »

If Glock and Smith and Wesson get on board that would be huge since that is what most cops carry. 



I would absulutly love to see them bring the police/feds to their knees!!

Glock is Austrian, so I guess they don't give a fuck.  Lips sealed
Report to moderator   Logged

Kilo Medic
Getbig II
**
Gender: Male
Posts: 252


« Reply #11 on: February 18, 2013, 02:40:29 PM »

Seven companies now!

LaRue Tactical
Olympic Arms
Extreme Firepower Inc, LLC
Templar Custom
York Arms
NEW: Cheaper than Dirt
NEW: Midway USA


“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.”
Barrett has been like that for years.  They even included that statement in their magazine ads!
Report to moderator   Logged
GigantorX
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5463


GetBig's A-Team is the Light of Truth!


« Reply #12 on: February 18, 2013, 06:33:37 PM »

COLORADO PASSES HIGH CAPACITY MAG BAN!
 
(Newser) – Colorado has taken the first step toward banning high-capacity gun magazines: A bill limiting magazines to 15 rounds passed the state House today, the Denver Post reports. Just three Democrats voted against House Bill 1224 for a 34-31 vote. Three more gun bills are up for a vote today: two involving background checks and one involving concealed carry permits. The next step for HB1224 is the state Senate, where Democrats have a majority, and then Gov. John Hickenlooper, who backs the bill.

Lame and useless.

I bet they patted themselves on the back for it, though.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8370


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #13 on: February 18, 2013, 06:41:55 PM »

DENVER — Limits on the size of ammunition magazines and universal background checks passed the Colorado House on Monday, during a second day of emotional debates that has drawn attention from the White House as lawmakers try to address recent mass shootings.

The bills were among four that the Democratic-controlled House passed amid strong resistance from Republicans, who were joined by a few Democrats to make some of the votes close.

The proposed ammunition restrictions limit magazines to 15 rounds for firearms, and eight for shotguns. Three Democrats joined all Republicans voting no on the bill, but the proposal passed 34-31.

"Enough is enough. I'm sick and tired of bloodshed," said Democratic Rep. Rhonda Fields, a sponsor of the bill and representative of the district where the shootings at an Aurora theater happened last summer. Fields' son was also fatally shot in 2005.

Republicans argued that the proposals restrict Second Amendment rights and won't prevent mass shootings like the ones in Aurora and a Connecticut elementary school.

"This bill will never keep evil people from doing evil things," said Republican Rep. Jerry Sonnenberg.

The House also approved a bill requiring background checks on all gun purchases, including those between private sellers and firearms bought online.

Other proposals would ban concealed firearms at colleges and stadiums, and another requires that gun purchasers pay for their own background checks. Democrats eked out the closest vote on the background check measure, which passed on a 33-32 vote.

Democratic Rep. Ed Vigil, who represents rural southern Colorado, voted against the four bills, saying his decision was rooted in the state's rugged history.

"This is part of our heritage. This is part of what it took to settle this land. I cannot turn my back on that," he said.

But even though a few Democrats joined Republicans in voting no for the bills, the Democrats' 37-28 advantage in the House gave them enough leeway.

The Senate still needs to consider the proposals. Democrats will need to be more unified in their support there because their advantage is only 20-15. That means Republicans need only three Democrats to join them to defeat the bills.

House lawmakers began debating the bills Friday. Lawmakers debated for 12 hours before giving initial approval to the bills, setting up the final recorded votes Monday. During the debate Friday, Vice President Joe Biden called four Democrats, including two in moderate districts, to solidify support for the measures.

Democratic Rep. Dominick Moreno, who represents a district in suburban Denver, was among the four lawmakers. He said Biden "emphasized the importance of Colorado's role in shaping national policy around this issue."

Castle Rock Republican Rep. Carole Murray brought up Biden's calls during Monday's debate, saying she didn't appreciate "East-coast politicians" trying to influence Colorado legislators.

Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper supports the expanded background checks, and thinks gun buyers should pay for them. He also said he may support limits on the size of magazines, if lawmakers agree to a number between 15 and 20. He said he hasn't decided whether to support banning concealed firearms on campuses and stadiums.

Republicans say students should have the right to defend themselves.

"Do not disarm our young adults in general and our young women in particular on our college campuses in the name of a gun-free zone," Republican Rep. Jim Wilson said.

The gun debate highlights a fundamental philosophical difference between many Democrats and Republicans.

"I resent the implication that unless we all arm ourselves we will not be adequately protected," said Dickey Lee Hullinghorst, the Democrats' leader in the House.

Republican Rep. Christ Holbert became emotional while explaining his opposition to the bills. He said he understood Fields cares about the bills, because of her district and because her son was shot and killed in 2005.

"But I care passionately about the United States Constitution and the constitution of this state, and the oath that we have taken," Holbert said.
Report to moderator   Logged
Fury
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 21035


All aboard the USS Leverage


« Reply #14 on: February 18, 2013, 08:05:47 PM »

Good for them. They don't need to sell to them anyway. Plenty of Americans would love to purchase what they're selling so they'll have no shortage of eager buyers.
Report to moderator   Logged
tbombz
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 19164


Psalms 150


« Reply #15 on: February 18, 2013, 08:50:08 PM »


still havent heard one argument as to why the police "need" these guns but the citizens dont

give me one argument why the government needs nukes and citizens dont.
Report to moderator   Logged
Fury
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 21035


All aboard the USS Leverage


« Reply #16 on: February 18, 2013, 09:13:13 PM »

give me one argument why the government needs nukes and citizens dont.

Shitty use of a straw man argument. Answer his question.
Report to moderator   Logged
24KT
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Female
Posts: 24402


Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244


WWW
« Reply #17 on: February 18, 2013, 09:59:41 PM »

This is nothing more than grandstanding and the exploiting of an issue to garner free publicity.
They can refuse to sell to law enforcement all they want, but the fact remains that under NDAA, they can simply swoop in and take the entire inventory without having to buy it. All this does is make the 2nd Amendment advocates feel good. Sorry, it's just a statement with no substance. It glitters, but it ain't gold.
Report to moderator   Logged

w
tbombz
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 19164


Psalms 150


« Reply #18 on: February 18, 2013, 10:18:10 PM »

Shitty use of a straw man argument. Answer his question.
no, my argument is perfect. if you want to ask why the government needs a weapon when the citizens do not, then you need to ask that about all weapons.

just a hint = i dont support gun regulations.  (im just playing devils advocate against certain ridiculous arguments which are nonsensical)
Report to moderator   Logged
tonymctones
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 25142



« Reply #19 on: February 19, 2013, 04:59:54 AM »

give me one argument why the government needs nukes and citizens dont.
the police arent the military, I can see youre argument for the national military as they fight wars....

they police dont fight wars, they are exposed to the same dangers regular citizens are...

try and not be a complete dunce every now and again Wink
Report to moderator   Logged
tonymctones
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 25142



« Reply #20 on: February 19, 2013, 06:30:00 AM »

no, my argument is perfect. if you want to ask why the government needs a weapon when the citizens do not, then you need to ask that about all weapons.

just a hint = i dont support gun regulations.  (im just playing devils advocate against certain ridiculous arguments which are nonsensical)
So you believe that it's nonsensical for constituents to be well armed as the govt that governs them have bigger weapons?

Lol talk about nonsensical, are you back on the drugs again kid?
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 8370


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #21 on: February 19, 2013, 06:40:49 AM »

So you believe that it's nonsensical for constituents to be well armed as the govt that governs them have bigger weapons?

Lol talk about nonsensical, are you back on the drugs again kid?

1992 Riots are exacty the reason and good example as to why citizens need to be armed.  The cops are not there to protect you or anyone else. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Roger Bacon
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 21036


Roger Bacon tries to be witty and fails


« Reply #22 on: February 19, 2013, 02:02:06 PM »

The government should only do what we can't do for ourselves.
Report to moderator   Logged

tbombz
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 19164


Psalms 150


« Reply #23 on: February 20, 2013, 12:02:46 AM »

So you believe that it's nonsensical for constituents to be well armed as the govt that governs them have bigger weapons?

Lol talk about nonsensical, are you back on the drugs again kid?
i think people should be allowed to have whatever weapons they want.

but i dont think your argument that "police has em, so people should to" holds any weight unless your willing to apply it to every weapon.
Report to moderator   Logged
tonymctones
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 25142



« Reply #24 on: February 20, 2013, 05:08:28 AM »

i think people should be allowed to have whatever weapons they want.

but i dont think your argument that "police has em, so people should to" holds any weight unless your willing to apply it to every weapon.
explain drizzle, your first ignorant comment was about nukes...so if youre backing off of that and making a new argument then explain it.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!