Hornady no longer selling to New York state

[tony pasley]

Hornady stated that they will no longer sell ammo to New York state agencies due to the governor's decree. The article was posted on guns,com. What I would love to see is all firearm related businesses ban together and follow suit. I know it is a pipe dream but it would shake up that state and several others.

 

[t4terrific]

Hornady stated that they will no longer sell ammo to New York state agencies due to the governor's decree. The article was posted on guns,com. What I would love to see is all firearm related businesses ban together and follow suit. I know it is a pipe dream but it would shake up that state and several others.

I doubt Hornaday had any NY agency customers anyway. In other words, Hornaday isn’t cancelling any contracts or turning down actual sales. They are just making a PR statement.

If I’m right, it’s easy for them to make this statement and perhaps buffet their civilian sales.

I’d love to see every gun manufacturer, ammo maker, and every American that believes in liberty refuse to do business with the state, and others like New York. Tyrants without weapons can not commit tyranny.

That is a pipe dream, though.

 

[DaleA]

I'm glad this was posted in its own thread. It was mentioned in a thread about Hornady getting an ammunition contract from the Feds here:
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=595420

I think the criticism that government officials are trying to strong arm financial institutions into NOT providing their services to the gun industry is spot on and I am at a loss as to how they can justify this. Like it or not 'guns' are still legal and the companies that make them and the folk that buy them should NOT be denied the services of these financial institutions.

Here's some articles about this:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...omptroller-threatens-banks-over-gun-business/

https://nypost.com/2018/04/04/dinapoli-urges-banks-credit-companies-to-crack-down-on-gun-sales/

 

[Armed_Chicagoan]

I'd like to see firearms and ammo companies refuse to sell firearms, ammo, and magazines to any government agency that bans them for the peasants. No ARs and >10 round magazines for California police for example.

I'd also like to be irresistible to supermodels.

 

[DPI7800]

Not only stop their gun sales to oppressive government states but stop the supply for replacement parts. That would have a faster impact than the guns themselves. Would also like to see ATK/Orbital Group stop ammo sales. FYI ATK is probably the largest supplier for all government agencies.

 

[Lohman446]

I'd like to see firearms and ammo companies refuse to sell firearms, ammo, and magazines to any government agency that bans them for the peasants. No ARs and >10 round magazines for California police for example

Perhaps straying off topic but I feel at this time that all gun laws should not have exemptions written in them for police, security forces, government agencies, etc. If the idea is that the weapon itself is so dangerous and not the intent of the user than the laws should disallow the weapons without exemption.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Perhaps straying off topic but I feel at this time that all gun laws should not have exemptions written in them for police, security forces, government agencies, etc. If the idea is that the weapon itself is so dangerous and not the intent of the user than the laws should disallow the weapons without exemption.

There you go, trying to apply logic again.

 

[doofus47]

Armed_Chicagoan:

I'd also like to be irresistible to supermodels.

If you don't already look like Leonardo di Caprio, or own 3 yachts, I think you need to invest in cocaine and/or tongue depressors. Probably either works just as effectively.

thank me later.

 

[DPI7800]

Perhaps straying off topic but I feel at this time that all gun laws should not have exemptions written in them for police, security forces, government agencies, etc. If the idea is that the weapon itself is so dangerous and not the intent of the user than the laws should disallow the weapons without exemption.

The only real issue I see with that is they would quickly apply it to everything, ie first responders now following all traffic laws regardless. Need medics at your home quickly and it is rush hour, oh well guess they get there when they get there. Don’t think that would happen guess again there would be some attorney that would make them comply.

I like the idea but know how it would end up getting applied.

 

[Lohman446]

The only real issue I see with that is they would quickly apply it to everything, ie first responders now following all traffic laws regardless. Need medics at your home quickly and it is rush hour, oh well guess they get there when they get there. Don’t think that would happen guess again there would be some attorney that would make them comply.

I like the idea but know how it would end up getting applied

I think there is a counter argument for emergency service workers. I have not fully articulated it but there are some premises:

The use of firearms by authorized personal, while part of the job, is not central to it. The actual shooting of the firearm is fairly rare even by those individuals in law enforcement and security. The use of a firearm requiring more shots than civilian legal limits is also fairly rare. Further if there is justification for this special class of "we the people" to have these weapons there is justification for us.

Emergency response vehicles, on the other hand, are routinely used outside of normal traffic laws and this is central to the job in many cases. Further many traffic laws that are altered are civil in nature and not criminal. While we are guaranteed the right to free travel the use of the roads is regulated and that regulation does not seem to be central to any Constitutional argument.

Further it seems no one is arguing that the emergency vehicles are the CAUSE of the crime. Somehow people do argue this with guns.

 

[jackstrawIII]

What I would love to see is all firearm related businesses ban together and follow suit.

As someone who lives in NY, it makes me really upset when I encounter people who think this way. I'm a pretty active gun owner and gun buyer who happens to live in NY... and I find someone in TFL saying they want me to lose my ability to buy ammo. Why do you want to make life even more difficult for me?

In the same vein, many times I've tried to buy guns on Gunbroker that are 100% legal for me to own in NY. However, some self-righteous, NY hating seller refuses to sell to me because they're trying to prove a point.

Tell me, how does that help me, the NY gun owner?

 

[5whiskey]

In the same vein, many times I've tried to buy guns on Gunbroker that are 100% legal for me to own in NY. However, some self-righteous, NY hating seller refuses to sell to me because they're trying to prove a point.

Tell me, how does that help me, the NY gun owner?

I doubt it is because they hate all New Yorkers or you personally. They just do not want to take the time to learn the ins and outs of New York law, and do not want to run afoul of it. So... they just don't business with NY or CA. It's not about hating the Pro-2A gun owners who live there, it's about not wanting to get in trouble for sending something illegal there.

That being said, with firearms, you would think they would get over it since it must go through an FFL that will assure the legality of it?!?!?! I know this has bearing in the decision though.

 

[adamBomb]

Wonder what will happen if amazon bans a state...what an age we live in, companies banning states lol.

This only impacts gun owners, the people who probably support hornady and are against the gov in the first place, meaning I don't think it makes sense. My guess is that the hardcore gun ban folks are happy with this and want more companies banning guns in their state. So they probably agree with all of you in that they want more companies to stop selling products in their states.

 

[tony pasley]

This ban is only to state agencies not civilian companies.

 

[44 AMP]

...what an age we live in, companies banning states lol.

Companies in the firearms & accessory field have been "banning states" for a couple decades (+) now. Really became noticeable after the rabid frenzy of assault weapon laws that passed in various states along with the 94 AWB.

Look in the fine print for lots of places who sell magazines, ammo, etc and you'll find a "we do not ship to..." and a list of several states.

been going on for a long time now, and its done not so much to make a political statement, but to protect the business, as those listed states seem to be constantly changing their laws and requirements.

Ruger (and I understand some others) aren't submitting new handguns to CA for "testing", apparently because they rudely refuse to reconfigure their manufacturing process to include the CA required microstamping. or so I remember hearing....

But that is a different matter. This is Hornady's response to a NY public official's not so subtle attempt to interfere with business financing. This is not a "we don't like you, you sell bullets, we don't want them sold here" thing restricting or further regulating or even out right banning sales in "their" state.

This is a direct attack essentially saying, "we don't want you selling ANYWHERE, we want you out of business, and we're going to cut off your credit to do it. And its not just Hornady, its all of you in the gun and ammo business..."

Of course, that's just my interpretation, but that's what it looks like to me.