Remember...There ARE No Government Owned Armories Anymore...

Ronnie Barrett attended a Los Angeles City Council Meeting...and then communicated the following to head-jackboot, Chief William J. Bratton.

"...At that council meeting, I was very surprised to see an LAPD officer seated front and center with a Barrett 82A1 .50 cal rifle. It was the centerpiece of the discussion. As you know, there have been no crimes committed with these rifles, and most importantly, current California law does not allow the sale of the M82AI in the state because of its detachable magazine and features that make it an "assault weapon." This rifle was being deceptively used by your department. The officer portrayed it as a sample of a currently available .50 cal rifle, available for sale to the civilians of Los Angeles. One councilman even questioned how this rifle was available under current laws, but as I stated, facts were ineffective that day.

Your officer, speaking for the LAPD, endorsed the banning of this rifle and its ammunition. Then he used the rifle for photo ops with the Councilmen each of whom, in handling the firearm, may have been committing a felony. I was amazed.

Since 1968, with the closing of the U.S. Springfield Amory, all of the small arms produced for the various government agencies are from the private sector. Every handgun, rifle or shotgun that law enforcement needs comes from this firearms industry.

Unless the City of Los Angeles has plans of setting up its own firearms manufacturing, it may need to guard the manufacturing sources it has now."

In other words, guess what stormtroopers? Not all gun manufacturers are kiss-up, suck-asses like Smith & Wesson.

Let us do the math:

4 million members of law enforcement in these United States.

An estimated 300 million firearms owned by private citizens.

Over 4 million civilians with Concealed Carry Permits.

80 million gun owners.

Sure, manufacturers would take an unmerciful hit at first, were they to hold law enforcement accountable for their lies and crimes against the people. Crimes they oft times go unpunished for.

But wouldn't an appreciative citizenry turn to a gun maker that stood up for the Constitution?

One thing I do know for certain. Were I to own a firearms business such business would never do business with law enforcement. I'd advertise the reasons why, and along with the likes of patriot Ronnie Barrett, would probably recoup any losses as soon as the word got out. I don't "need" a Barrett .50, but it's on my list just because. And if Ruger, just as an example, boycotted law enforcement there'd never be another new gun of mine that was not manufactured by them or someone like them.

Thanks to The War On Guns