Gotta Love that Ronnie Barrett

[Blinking Dog]

Just watched an episode of Shooting Gallery about Barrett and his big guns. In the episode Michael Bane asked Ronnie about the hoopla around not selling his 50 cal rifles to CA agencies. Ronnie said that CA won't allow him to sell to civilians, and that is against the law (his words). So when LAPD wanted to buy 50 cal rifles he told them no...and as long as they're breaking the law (he's referring to the 2nd Amendment) he won't. He was really adamant about it and went on about how folks in CA are violating the constitution and ought to be locked up. You go Ronnie! He said all the firearms manufacturers ought to stand together and not sell to LE agencies in states where they infringe on the 2nd Amendment. That part made me tear up just a little.

[rat31465]

I would like to be the first to officially nominate Mr. Ronnie Barrett for our next Presidential candidate...He would have my vote.

[rubberneck]

It's nice to see someone put their money where their mouth is, but there will be a company that makes a 50 BMG rifle that won't pass on the chance to do business with Law Enforcement agencies in California.

[alvincullumyork]

if you go to the Barett forum they posted a letter he wrote to an official in Hawaii urging him not to pass restrictions on firearms. It is really nice to see someone like him standing up for what is right. Its to bad that I am a poor broke college student and not in the market for a couple thousand dollar rifle or my money would be going his way.

[hatt]

Ronnie Barrett does appear to be a rare individual, just too bad so few are around.

[Blinking Dog]

if you go to the Barett forum they posted a letter he wrote to an official in Hawaii urging him not to pass restrictions on firearms.

Oh yeah, that reminds me, in the show he said he won't sell to HI either. Probably said some other cool stuff but my memory isn't so good these days.
What were we talking about? :confused:

[variablebinary]

This is exactly what the entire gun industry needs to do.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Didn't he also not return some 50 cal rifles from Cal LE that he had in his shop for maintenance or something?

[Honu]

if you go to the Barett forum they posted a letter he wrote to an official in Hawaii urging him not to pass restrictions on firearms. It is really nice to see someone like him standing up for what is right. Its to bad that I am a poor broke college student and not in the market for a couple thousand dollar rifle or my money would be going his way.

being a Maui boy I can say Hawaii gun laws suck !!!
when I lived on Lanai I got away with whatever cause I knew the people that would not care ? but sure that has changed these days with the way it is now ? but maybe not ?

I do think that is cool how he does stuff like that also and wished every manufacture would do that !!!!!

[Macx]

Yeah baby! LE agencies that serve local and federal governments that won't follow the 2nd Amendment need to be limited to HiPoints and Jennings. I don't mean any harm against the boys in blue, but they need to be held to a standard that motivates them to enforce the law rather than act as the brute squad for clueless, hippy, dippy politicians. While they are playing by the rules that make them "special people" they have no motivation beside their oaths and the caliber of officer in recent times doesn't reflect that oaths always mean much. That isn't a slam on all officers, but there are enough bad apples something needs to be done.

I'd vote to put Ronny in any office he ran for and consider moving to any placve he governed.

[Mr.Goodtimes]

FULL AUTO FOR EVERY ONE!!!!! :D

[CarlosDJackal]

Didn't he also not return some 50 cal rifles from Cal LE that he had in his shop for maintenance or something?

That's what I also heard. Some CA LE Agency sent two of their .50-cal rifles for some shop service and he refused to send it back (for fear of breaking the law?).

While I agree with an applaud what Mr. Barrett is doing. I do not agree with the method nor do I think that his approach would work in every instance. For the most part, .50-caliber firearms are a novelty in the LE community and as far as I'm concerned, its use or need is very specific to the terrain and threat that Agency's jurisdiction faces.

If Glock, Sig, Remington, etc. were to take this same stance (as suggested by a poster), the people who would suffer the most is the Public. There is nothing in our oathe as Law Enforcement officers that says that we have to risk our own lives. We do so only because we want the best for our communities and consider it our duty to do our most to protect the innocent.

I for one would never willingly put myself in a situation in which I have to trust my life and the safety of my community to anything but the best I can get my hands on. If the other manufacturers were to follow Mr. Barrett's lead and refuse to allow me to purchase their products for duty use, I would resign as would a lot of the other "Gun Friendly" LEOs. What the public will probably be left with are LEOs who are not as well-versed on firearms; but are working that job becausse it is a paycheck.

How many of those LEOs do you think would be willing to run towards the sound of gunfire instead of away from it? JM2CW.

[Honu]

If Glock, Sig, Remington, etc. were to take this same stance (as suggested by a poster), the people who would suffer the most is the Public. There is nothing in our oathe as Law Enforcement officers that says that we have to risk our own lives. We do so only because we want the best for our communities and consider it our duty to do our most to protect the innocent.

I for one would never willingly put myself in a situation in which I have to trust my life and the safety of my community to anything but the best I can get my hands on. If the other manufacturers were to follow Mr. Barrett's lead and refuse to allow me to purchase their products for duty use, I would resign as would a lot of the other "Gun Friendly" LEOs. What the public will probably be left with are LEOs who are not as well-versed on firearms; but are working that job becausse it is a paycheck.

How many of those LEOs do you think would be willing to run towards the sound of gunfire instead of away from it? JM2CW.

I can say maybe then the public would realize guns are not the evil things that kill everyone but the things that can protect us !!!

maybe they need to get a wake up call and realize that criminals do not care about gun laws at all ! and will still have them ! maybe they need to realize guns are part of this world !
guns are not the problem there views on criminals are whats wrong

so I am one of those that think gun manufactures should just say fine we wont ship to your state anymore !!! and lets see what happens to the public view then

of course the lefty wacks will blame the guns not the criminals ?

and when you wont go put yourself on the line unarmed which I would understand maybe the public will be forced into realizing things are not ideological like they think they are and loving the criminals cause they are someones children does not work

[RyanB]

I think the firearms industry should voluntarily apply all laws to law enforcement as they apply to civilians. Yes it would hurt. Thats the point. When LE administrators couldn't get good weapons that worked and the TV news picked up on it, things might change.

[Jim D]

If Glock, Sig, Remington, etc. were to take this same stance (as suggested by a poster), the people who would suffer the most is the Public. There is nothing in our oathe as Law Enforcement officers that says that we have to risk our own lives. We do so only because we want the best for our communities and consider it our duty to do our most to protect the innocent.

I for one would never willingly put myself in a situation in which I have to trust my life and the safety of my community to anything but the best I can get my hands on. If the other manufacturers were to follow Mr. Barrett's lead and refuse to allow me to purchase their products for duty use, I would resign as would a lot of the other "Gun Friendly" LEOs. What the public will probably be left with are LEOs who are not as well-versed on firearms; but are working that job becausse it is a paycheck.

How many of those LEOs do you think would be willing to run towards the sound of gunfire instead of away from it? JM2CW.

And when the LEO's make a stink about having to play by the same rules as the public, it'd draw more attention to the lack of the public's ability to defend itself.

The ramifications of such an industry boycott would be huge....but it may be what is needed to wake people up. IMO.

[Jay Cunningham]

So, do LEO's make the law?

Let's act like adults here and keep the LEO bashing non-existent, shall we?

[RyanB]

I don't see any LEO bashing here. Certainly officers would be the ones to suffer but it's like a strike, you have to make someone uncomfortable or nothing will change. The day that a mayor has to go on TV and tell his citizens that his officers are undergunned against criminals because they have the same equipment you or I can buy, we might see some change.

[SW-Shooter]

That's what I also heard. Some CA LE Agency sent two of their .50-cal rifles for some shop service and he refused to send it back (for fear of breaking the law?).

While I agree with an applaud what Mr. Barrett is doing. I do not agree with the method nor do I think that his approach would work in every instance. For the most part, .50-caliber firearms are a novelty in the LE community and as far as I'm concerned, its use or need is very specific to the terrain and threat that Agency's jurisdiction faces.

If Glock, Sig, Remington, etc. were to take this same stance (as suggested by a poster), the people who would suffer the most is the Public. There is nothing in our oathe as Law Enforcement officers that says that we have to risk our own lives. We do so only because we want the best for our communities and consider it our duty to do our most to protect the innocent.

I for one would never willingly put myself in a situation in which I have to trust my life and the safety of my community to anything but the best I can get my hands on. If the other manufacturers were to follow Mr. Barrett's lead and refuse to allow me to purchase their products for duty use, I would resign as would a lot of the other "Gun Friendly" LEOs. What the public will probably be left with are LEOs who are not as well-versed on firearms; but are working that job because it is a paycheck.

How many of those LEOs do you think would be willing to run towards the sound of gunfire instead of away from it? JM2CW.

I for one don't count on Law Enforcement for my protection. I view them merely as an administrative organization. When I need to file a report I'll call them to fill out the paperwork, other than that I have no use for them. Now EMS & Fire, that's a whole other story. For the most part the police don't prevent crime they respond to it. It's each citizens responsibility to ensure the physical security and safety of their family. So I'd be pleased as punch if every company took Mr. Barretts stance.

It's been my experience that a large majority of L.E. officers that I've met are some of the least knowledgeable folks about firearms and the laws pertaining to their ownership. But there are also those that take their job seriously and don't just "do their job", they are some of the the most professional out there.

So basically I take the responsibility to have the tools and training to take care of mine, myself! I'll take my lumps now.

[Savior 6]

I don't see any LEO bashing either and I don't believe anyone's intent would be to keep officers at the mercy of criminals and their firepower. I think the intent would be to put the public at a discomfort knowing their LEO community would be at a disadvantege and in turn force their politicians to revoke their unjust laws. Politicians do not suffer in the streets, they can only suffer in the polls.

[sjc3081]

So, do LEO's make the law?

Let's act like adults here and keep the LEO bashing non-existent, shall we?

No LEO's don't make the law. But if they choose to enforce laws that are in direct contrast to the Founding Fathers original intent. They are just as guilty as the traitors that write the law, and they should be held just as accountable.

[hatt]

I think the whole point of the Constitution is to prevent government officials and representatives from being above the law. Having an array of laws that only apply to citizens doesn't seen to be consistent with that.

[Jim D]

While I agree with the concept...I don't see it ever working.

HK, Remington, Beretta, S&W, SA, Glock...non of them have the balls to put principles before profits.

HK in particular has shown us for years just how much they care about civilian firearm ownership....all it takes is one company to undercut the others.

They'd all leap at the opportunity to issue their guns to the pretty much all the LEO's in Kali.

In a way, it's the same as manufacturers who make "post ban" guns to sell to NY, NJ, IL, etc. Those states don't make as much noise, they just live with it. If they couldn't get them at all...I think you'd see more political pressure about it.

[cobra90gt]

...That isn't a slam on all officers, but there are enough bad apples something needs to be done...


Sure it is, you're just masking your "slam." Do you really think the rank and file coppers are the ones who are making the policies out there to oppress the citizens? No, for the most part it's the politicians...go slam them instead, or better yet, write to them if you are living in an oppressed state.

[Nathan_Bell]

Sure it is, you're just masking your "slam." Do you really think the rank and file coppers are the ones who are making the policies out there to oppress the citizens? No, for the most part it's the politicians...go slam them instead, or better yet, write to them if you are living in an oppressed state.

If the manufacturers would cease all sales to un-gunfriendly states, and the officers state that they would not be doing their jobs, we would get action much faster than the writing of letters.

Politicians are scum that only fear losing their office and not being able to land a sweet gig after they lose their office. If they are known as the one who was in charge when their PDs all said screw it, they will not land that cushy job.

LEOs are not being slammed here, it is the laws that have been crafted to make them a different class of citizen that are being slammed.

[glockshooter]

Some of you guys are funny. I am a LEO and personally am all about the 2nd Amendment, but I am also required to enforce the law. I may not agree with everything, but it is my responsibility. I personally would love for gun laws to be the way most of us believe they should be. I don't have any problem with Mr. Barrett's stance on the matter. It is his company and his choice, but in the end is he actually making a statement to the eople that make those decisions? No, he is only hurting the LEOs in CA. Now am I defending the peoples republic of CA, NO. Do I believe they are 100% wrong, absolutely.

To the guys who say they don't rely on the Police for the protection, I think that is great, but you are the minority. The truth of the matter is that Police work is reactive. Most criminals that are caught in the act, are caught out of luck. It may be that there just so happens to be a unit in the area, or they do something stupid to draw attention to themselves. We all, police or not, should take the responsibility for our safety.

Matt

[RyanB]

Glockshooter, I want to see a Colt RO933 in every cop car and I don't care if ya'll mount 240s to armored personnel carriers. We need you. Some of us less than others, but I don't want to have to worry about my family--I know if they call, someone will do their best and come help them.

But if there was a way to get our rights back, and you had to carry the burden, I'm sorry bro, I'd say a prayer for you and keep going. Thats how strongly I feel about our rights. I know it's not gonna happen, which is a shame, cause it might actually work.

[CarlosDJackal]

And when the LEO's make a stink about having to play by the same rules as the public, it'd draw more attention to the lack of the public's ability to defend itself.

The ramifications of such an industry boycott would be huge....but it may be what is needed to wake people up. IMO.

Do you really think that if most of the cops were to either walk off the job or be more reactive that the left-leaning sheeple and the anti-gun politicians they elect will do anything pro-gun? Are you people really that naive? :rolleyes:

[CarlosDJackal]

If the manufacturers would cease all sales to un-gunfriendly states, and the officers state that they would not be doing their jobs, we would get action much faster than the writing of letters...

And the gates of Heaven will open wide and Angels will put down their harps and intermingle with mortals. You guys really must get out of your basements more and see reality.

If the politicians don't offer gun makers subsidies to only sell to the "state" and State Agencies; they'll create a Government own gun maker (how did Springfield Armory get its start again?). These morons would rather see teh Constitution flushed down the toilet than let something you are (disgustingly) suggesting happen.

Instead of blaming and alienating the rank-and-file cops, why don't you get you head our of your fourth-point-of-contact and gain their support by GROWING UP AND BEING REALISTIC.

Did either barf.com or g-talk somehow acquire this site? :eek:

ADDED: I actually teach Basic Pistol classes AT NO COST through my club in order to help law-abiding citizens obtain their Concealed Handgun Permit and to promote safe gun handling and ownership. I am also a Volunteer Deputy and a member of the Army Reserve. In both capacities I have sworn to defend and uphold the Constitution to the best of my abilities.

[Macx]

Sure it is, you're just masking your "slam." Do you really think the rank and file coppers are the ones who are making the policies out there to oppress the citizens? No, for the most part it's the politicians...go slam them instead, or better yet, write to them if you are living in an oppressed state.

Nah, nothing masked there. I tend to outright offend if that is my intent. My intent was not to offend, but to communicate a need. Cops and citizens should have the same protections under the law. Elevating LEO's to something like feudal Japan's Samurai (where in they are the only ones allowed to carry weapons for self defense and are allowed to execute peasants for affronts against their honor or for sport . . . above the law and answerable only to their own) . . . well, Japan in that era is very romatic, but as an American in this time, I blanche at the thought of the continued slide towards paramilitary law enforcement and LEOs as a social caste. The people are far better served by LEOs who stand shoulder to shoulder with their fellow citizens and try and make better and safer communities. Far better if the doctor, priest, and cop are all given the same respect and entitlements. The same 2nd Ammendment that should allow
a Colt RO933 in every cop car and I don't care if ya'll mount 240s to armored personnel carriers for LEO's should also allow me to keep an AOW or other (currently) NFA item ready for self dense in my car.

I understand the inclination to take what I am saying as cop bashing, again, I say I am not. I have read Animal Farm and am painfully aware of the course of governments when some strive to be "more equal". That all men are created equal is a fact I regard as self evident, the idea of elevating a caste, especially one with such an important charge to a state of unbalanced power is reprehensible. It is quite evident that the politicians are completely and totally detatched from the will of the people. We are led instead by a kleptocracy. Naiveté is believing the system still works as the founding father's intended.

[Jay Cunningham]

You people cannot take a hint.