Beretta Rep speaks on how bat$@*% crazy Maryland's Senate is

[irishScott]

And why it would force them, as well as (likely) Benelli and Stoeger, to leave the state.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKx-KP4skKk

 

[glenn1]

He needs to stop talking and start making calls to moving companies. Beretta should have started making the arrangements to move as soon as the bill started getting traction and should set a goal of being long gone from Maryland before the bill becomes law.

 

[Moonbeam]

We must punish them. We are very angry. They can't do this to us. Make them pay. Let the animal come forth and kill. We will have our vengeance. Burn it down. It's the Planet of the Apes. Stoke the rage, stoke the rage, stoke the rage.

 

[monovillage]

And why it would force them, as well as (likely) Benelli and Stoeger, to leave the state.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKx-KP4skKk

I've got no sympathy for them or any other manufacturing company that chooses to remain in a blue state. They, along with other companies such as Smith&Wesson need to get the hell out of there.

 

[CPA]

We must punish them. We are very angry. They can't do this to us. Make them pay. Let the animal come forth and kill. We will have our vengeance. Burn it down. It's the Planet of the Apes. Stoke the rage, stoke the rage, stoke the rage.

Are you commenting about Beretta or the Maryland Legislature? Or maybe it's the liberal quest to completely ban guns...

 

[Genx87]

I've got no sympathy for them or any other manufacturing company that chooses to remain in a blue state. They, along with other companies such as Smith&Wesson need to get the hell out of there.

Well even blue states havent been this batshit insane.

 

[cubby1223]

I've got no sympathy for them or any other manufacturing company that chooses to remain in a blue state. They, along with other companies such as Smith&Wesson need to get the hell out of there.

He makes a good point in the interview that while it would be easy to relocate, he sees the move as only accomplishing further polarization of this country, which is not good for any of us.

 

[monovillage]

He makes a good point in the interview that while it would be easy to relocate, he sees the move as only accomplishing further polarization of this country, which is not good for any of us.

I doubt if his continued presence in a Democrat state is going to make any difference to the country, but it will make a firearm business less likely to be profitable.

 

[Fenixgoon]

i'm going to be calling my reps on sunday and leaving messages.

it's been an absolutely crazy week for me. 0 times to do anything.

 

[guachi]

Given how wealthy Maryland is (and I live here) we aren't like some dirt poor state that has to beg and scrape for businesses. If Beretta wants to whine and leave, fine by me.

 

[FaaR]

Or maybe it's the liberal quest to completely ban guns...

Whenever I read words to the effect of the above, what I actually see is "WAAAA! DON'T TAKE MY GUNS, MY PRECIOUS PRECIOUS GUUUUNNNS! WAAAAAA! (PS: I have more guns than I actually have hands to hold them with...please don't tell anyone!)"

It's so funny. Well, the thousands of people killed by guns every year in the US isn't, but the spastic reactions of gun fanatics every time the topic of harmful effects of gun ownership comes up sure is.

 

[SaurusX]

Whenever I read words to the effect of the above, what I actually see is "WAAAA! DON'T TAKE MY GUNS, MY PRECIOUS PRECIOUS GUUUUNNNS! WAAAAAA! (PS: I have more guns than I actually have hands to hold them with...please don't tell anyone!)"

"I'm not racist. My best friend is black."

 

[Moonbeam]

Whenever I read words to the effect of the above, what I actually see is "WAAAA! DON'T TAKE MY GUNS, MY PRECIOUS PRECIOUS GUUUUNNNS! WAAAAAA! (PS: I have more guns than I actually have hands to hold them with...please don't tell anyone!)"

It's so funny. Well, the thousands of people killed by guns every year in the US isn't, but the spastic reactions of gun fanatics every time the topic of harmful effects of gun ownership comes up sure is.

You just stepped in shit.

Your choice of the word spastic was poetically perfect in my opinion. I really don't like making fun of the mentally retarded by tying them to gun fanatics but, your shoe seems to fit them.

 

[MtnMan]

It's so funny. Well, the thousands of people killed by guns every year in the US isn't, but the spastic reactions of gun fanatics every time the topic of harmful effects of gun ownership comes up sure is.

Except that the facts are counter to your ignorance.

The thousands that die, die at the hand of a criminal that doesn't give a damn how many laws he is breaking by having a gun. Criminals like strict gun laws, it makes their job easier.

People that live where citizens can legally own and carry guns are much safer than people that live in the cities and states with the most restrictions. A gun ban only empowers the criminal with a gun because he knows that no one is going to be shooting back.

Politicians are orgasmic about how they are going to restrict, ban, and even confiscate guns from honest citizens, and not a damn one of them has mentioned taking guns away from the bad guys. Why? Because they are media whores looking for votes from the ignorant that don't have a clue, people like you.

 

[irishScott]

Whenever I read words to the effect of the above, what I actually see is "WAAAA! DON'T TAKE MY GUNS, MY PRECIOUS PRECIOUS GUUUUNNNS! WAAAAAA! (PS: I have more guns than I actually have hands to hold them with...please don't tell anyone!)"

It's so funny. Well, the thousands of people killed by guns every year in the US isn't, but the spastic reactions of gun fanatics every time the topic of harmful effects of gun ownership comes up sure is.

The harmful effects of gun ownership apparently have no effect in Kennesaw, Georgia, a small city of ~35,000 that has since 1982 has legally mandated every household able to must have a working gun and ammunition for it in the house. Their violent crime rate is near zero.

However, their average income/household is around 60k, so they don't have much need for violent crime. If you applied their laws to a ghetto, the ghetto would eat itself alive.

Point being, we need to work on standards of living, mental health, and the actual sources of crime. As for gun regulation, I'd be up for more if the regulation being suggested didn't consist of the most idiotic and ineffective measures possible; ad the fact that said measures are the ones being proposed says one of two things: 1. Our leaders are idiots or 2. They want to get rid of guns for their own ideological purposes.

Now assuming someone smart enough to win an election isn't an idiot, that leaves us with number 2.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Whenever I read words to the effect of the above, what I actually see is "WAAAA! DON'T TAKE MY GUNS, MY PRECIOUS PRECIOUS GUUUUNNNS! WAAAAAA! (PS: I have more guns than I actually have hands to hold them with...please don't tell anyone!)"

It's so funny. Well, the thousands of people killed by guns every year in the US isn't, but the spastic reactions of gun fanatics every time the topic of harmful effects of gun ownership comes up sure is.

preserving the rights of 300million citizens isn't funny either

 

[shadow9d9]

preserving the rights of 300million citizens isn't funny either

Some things need to be changed. This country has changed a ton from its inception, including allowing non white landowners to vote as well as removing slavery. 2nd amendment is outdated as well. Guns have changed. Our country has changed.

Your obsession with killing machines is your problem.

 

[KK]

If you applied their laws to a ghetto, the ghetto would eat itself alive.

Why the hell should I care about the ghetto. Screw the ghetto, if they all killed themselves I wouldn't shed a tear as the country would be better off.

 

[jpeyton]

Some things need to be changed.

If the facts behind the argument for change support it, I agree. Unfortunately there are no facts to support the need for a ban on semi-automatic firearms or standard capacity magazines. Using emotional arguments to promote such legislation is poor governance.

This country has changed a ton from its inception, including allowing non white landowners to vote as well as removing slavery.

The core principles of this country supported those changes. They supported life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for everyone, which is why slavery/segregation fell by the wayside. The 1st amendment has adapted to 200 years of change in the way we "speak", and the 2nd amendment has been regulated through the more than 20,000 firearms related laws on the books. But at their core, both amendments are solid and don't need to be repealed or reworded.

Our country has changed.

Indeed. We lose more people per year from bad lifestyle choices (poor diet, smoking, drinking, sedentary lifestyles, etc.) than we lost in the entire Civil War. It really puts into perspective the miniscule amount of firearms related homicides that occur every year, despite the fact that there are more firearms in private hands than ever before.

Your obsession with killing machines is your problem.

Firearms are simply tools. 99.9% of all firearms out there haven't killed a single human. You're the one obsessed on a fraction of crimes committed by a tiny fraction of criminals using an even tinier fraction of firearms.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Some things need to be changed. This country has changed a ton from its inception, including allowing non white landowners to vote as well as removing slavery. 2nd amendment is outdated as well. Guns have changed. Our country has changed.

Your obsession with killing machines is your problem.

Do you really think that millions of gun owning Americans are going to give up their rights just because a few people like you have a hard on for dictating how the rest of us should live? If so I suggest you volunteer to be one of the people who goes door to door searching for guns if it ever comes to that, you will be in for quite a surprise.

I'm already paying a ton of taxes thanks to you people, the least you can do is leave my hobbies alone so I can enjoy the money you so graciously let me keep.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Read this:

Barrett’s Position Regarding the Assault on Liberty
February 20, 2013

Barrett opposes those who are illegally disarming the American public from their efficient arms and creating superior armed elitist government agencies.

Elected state officials of New York, having been sworn to protect our Constitution, have instead committed an offense against it and their citizens by stripping inalienable rights duly protected and guaranteed under the Second Amendment. By their deliberate and sinister actions, these officials now cause their state and local policing agencies to enforce these unconstitutional and illegal so called “laws”.

By current law, Barrett cannot be an accomplice with any lawbreaker, therefore, cannot and will not service or sell to New York government agencies. Barrett also applies this stance to the individual elected official who, as a matter of public record, has voted for or created regulation that violates the constitutional rights of their citizens. This is an expansion of our 2002 ban against the California government due to their second amendment infringements, and shall apply to any future violators.

In the course of world history there have been officials that strip inalienable rights from the people that were given to all by our Creator. Most of these officials inevitably come to trial, some do not.

Intentionally violating constitutional rights by officials that have sworn to uphold them should have severe prison sentences.

With the clear vision of horrible events in history repeating itself, all manufacturers of firearms or related equipment remaining in partnership with such violators should have a respectable fear of being found with the guilty on their day of trial.

During this era of assault on liberty, Barrett will remain steadfast in our efforts to serve law-abiding citizens of all fifty states, and stands together with you in the struggles we will fight and win.

Ronnie Barrett
Chairman and CEO

 

[Doppel]

Why the hell should I care about the ghetto. Screw the ghetto, if they all killed themselves I wouldn't shed a tear as the country would be better off.

I think we would all do well to stop using ghetto killings in our general stats. Ghetto killings (inner city) are responsible for a hugely disproportionate amount of violence in general, and as irishscott mentions, it doesn't make sense at all to try to deal with ghetto violence and non-ghetto violence in the same ways. I'd rather some regular joe with a job have his own machine gun than a high school drop out crack head have a 22 pistol, but evidently it's more likely that crackhead has the pistol.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Just emailed my local legislators (counties where I live/work). Will be following up with calls later in the week hopefully