Bob Owens

The saddest truth in politics is that people get the leaders they deserve

Where the are Glock, Sig Sauer, and Smith & Wesson on the New York Boycott?

Written By: Bob - Feb• 24•13

To date, 70 gun companies have stepped up to the plate to defend the natural rights of American citizens that have been attacked by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and his blatantly unconstitutional NY SAFE gun control law, which violates both the New York State Constitution and the Second Amendment of the United States.  The 70 companies on this list refuse to treat New Yorkers as second-class citizens. If the citizens of the state of New York are not going to be able to buy firearms and accessories made by these companies, neither will New York government agencies.

Glock, Sig Sauer, and Smith & Wesson are among the companies conspicuously missing from that list. I’d like to remind these companies that they sell far more firearms to civilians than they do to the government¬† agencies that would just as soon run them out of business.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

20 Comments

  1. Arthur says:

    Since Glock first hit it big on police sales their stand on this issue is more significant than Sig or S&W.

  2. President Downgrade says:

    Maybe the problem with big companies like Glock and S&W is that they sell so much to civilians partly because they sell so much to police. People trust the guns because the police trust them. S&W and Glock are possibly afraid to give up the free publicity of being police guns.

  3. Mollbot says:

    Smith and Wesson at least should remember that taking a stand opposed to law-abiding gun owners can hurt the bottom line. They are under new ownership now or I would still not consider patronizing them.

  4. pat says:

    And they would still be police guns…in states that are still free.

  5. Dale says:

    Not to mention why haven’t we heard about Kahr and Kimber looking to relocate their companies out of New York? Both make great firearms, but I’ll be looking at other choices since I am loathe to let one penny of my money go to Albany!

  6. CNC says:

    And Kimber?

  7. Chaz says:

    Being publicly traded is likely a consideration for them.

    • 4strokes says:

      Exactly. Not sure about Sig and Glock, but Smith is publicly traded. As such they have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. Unless the shareholders voted to participate in such a boycott Smith would be libel for any loss of revenue and would see lawsuits that would bury them.
      Sorry kids, publicly traded companies ca not play this game.

  8. gary says:

    we will remember these companys that don’t support the gun owners

  9. Klingonwork says:

    Every time I’m looking for parts, when I call, I first ask if they are supporting the gun control boycott of any state that has nullified the 2nd ammendment.

    Molon Labe

  10. Publius says:

    Every gun owner who has a firearm from a company that hasn’t joined the boycott should contact the company, asking them to support it. Keep it polite, but make it clear that continuing purchases from them by you will depend on how they respond to this critical issue.

  11. Al Reasin says:

    I heard it hinted at during the MD Senate hearing on our NY-lite gun control law. Now it is in print.

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/24/berettas-dont-bluff-major-gun-company-threatens-to-leave-maryland-over-new-gun-control-proposals/

  12. Comrade X says:

    First they came for our guns in NY and they did not speak out because Glock, Sig Sauer, and Smith & Wesson were not from NY.

    Then they came for our guns in Colorado and they did not speak out because Glock, Sig Sauer, and Smith & Wesson were not from Colorado.

    Then they came for the our guns in MD and they did not speak out because Glock, Sig Sauer, and Smith & Wesson were not from MD.

    And then they came for the guns at Glock, Sig Sauer, and Smith & Wesson and there was no one left to speak out for them.

    Death before slavery!

  13. I can’t believe not a single person in the comments mentioned that these are publicly-owned companies.

    You can’t do stuff like this in a publicly-owned company without explaining why you are leaving revenue on the table. A publicly-traded company has one obligation and one only: return on investment to stockholders. Supporting the 2nd Amendment is ancillary. Sorry, but that’s the way it is.

    Trust me–this discussions are going on in the big companies. I have that one the word of someone who has insider info. When they figure out how to make this work with their stockholders, these companies will stand.

    • Jean says:

      Their fiduciary responsibility is to weigh the value of their future law enforcement market in those states, vice the commercial losses this boycott could levy. Given the restrictive nature of State budgets right now, and the significant effects other popular boycotts have had in this industry, I suspect that is going to be an interesting analysis.

      Does the use of the NYS contracting system by other states factor into this?

  14. Jack says:

    I recently bought a Glock 23 and A S&W SD9.

    My bad.

    Unless these companies stand with us, I will never buy another of their products.

    And for what its worth, I own 13 licensed handguns, including 2 HK USPs, 5 Walthers, and a Beretta. I was planning on a Glock 19 and 32.

    Waiting…..

  15. DontTreadOnME says:

    And Lets not forget about Beretta:

    “Beretta to Maryland: Enact gun laws and we may be outta here”

    http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/02/24/beretta-to-maryland-enact-gun-laws-and-we-may-be-outta-here-52340

  16. DDM4v7 says:

    I think it is time we start a boycott list of the companies that have not yet responded.

    One of the companies I was hoping to make a public statement was Daniel Defense, sad to say they have not.

    Untill they do I will not buy another DD product because, at this point, they have to be putting thier bottom line over my rights.

  17. Repeal 17 says:

    As long as companies don’t make stupid statements like Armalite did, it doesn’t bother me that they are silent.

    As stated, Glock, et al, are publicly traded and this matters. I separate my company’s priorities from my own – I have a job to do and that is what I paid for. My own personal priorities take second place to the company mandates.

    What I would like Glock to do is continue to make a quality product at cheaper prices. More magazines please. I support Glock even though they’re not on the ‘nice list’ since they make a quality product and are not located in a communist state such as IL or CA.