Bank of America

[J.P.]

Yup.....

 

[dennishoddy]

So...

SO.....
Why do we bother to worry about "this bank" and "that bank", retailer, etc. when it comes to support of 2A rights?

For some time now I've maintained that if we are going to attempt to push, sway, boycott, or otherwise educate a private business in regards to their support of 2A rights that we should worry less about the local bank/grocery store and more about the real culprits.
Take a long hard look at which businesses are supporting the only actual entity capable of restricting our rights.
You won't like the answer very much but that doesn't change the facts....
Look toward the gun and ammo manufacturers themselves!

Ronnie Barrett had the nutz to take a stand against the CA DOJ....does SIG SAUER?
COLT?
GLOCK?
WINCHESTER?
REMINGTON?

ANYONE!?

And there's yer lesson for today......

I might have a clue what your talking about.

Enlighten the masses, and I'll comment.

 

[J.P.]

I might have a clue what your talking about.

Enlighten the masses, and I'll comment.

Oh, I thought it was well known around these parts or at least on most of the gun boards.
However for those who do not know.....

Impending legislation (or perhaps on the heels of it) in California actually banned .50 cal weapons/ammo.
This obviously placed the almighty Barrett .50BMG rifles on the evil no-no list.
Ronnie Barrett took a stand and decided to inform the California DOJ of his extreme displeasure with the legislation and that Barrett firearms would no longer service nor support any of their service/duty weapons.....he was straight up cutting them off.
I'm sure the infamous letter from Barrett to the DOJ would be easy to find with a Google search.

Additionally, in a very slick move indeed he introduced a new non-.50 cal cartridge caliber for his newest upcoming line of weapons:

The .416 Barrett, which actually packed more power than the .50BMG and further told them to "suck it".

Of course now I doubt we'll ever see SIG, S&W, or HK take a similar stand considering they hold very lucrative contracts with ye ol' Department of Homeland Security.....and if you ask me I think it's just this side of chickensh!+.....

I firmly believe that with the firearm/ammo manufacturers holding this much power, we seriously need to ask them....why aren't they taking a stand?

This, I believe, is an area that can/should be addressed.
Of course I harp about it from time to time but I have seen little to no response in favor of this from members of the gun community.
If anything you might get the ol'..."it's all about money" line here and there but that's about it.
Sure it's about money but it seems rather obvious in this situation that the manufacturers hold a very unique position of power with virtually nothing to lose if they'd stick together...

Therefore I contend that if they truly care, they would apply the appropriate pressure as needed......and if they don't, we should let them know what we think.
We really should hold some feet-to-fire on this!

This would seemingly have a far greater impact on preserving 2A rights than bitching about the Piggly-Wiggly puttin' up a "no guns" sticker.

There, I said it...

 

[Boehlertaught]

Bravo for Mr. Barrett. As for Bank of America, the story may or may not be true but it appears there are a lot of folks here that have had issues with the bank...so heck with them. Just in case the story is true put the bank in the don't shop there category with Target, Whirlpool, Maytag, ConocoPhillips and any other 2A naysayers.