Beretta to build new firearms plant in Tenn

[dmcowen674]

1-29-2014

http://news.yahoo.com/beretta-build-firearms-plant-tenn-200033943.html

Beretta to build new firearms plant in Tenn



Italian gun maker Beretta said Wednesday that Tennessee's support for gun rights was a major factor in its decision to build a manufacturing and research facility in the Nashville suburb of Gallatin.





The $45 million plant is projected to be complete this year and create 300 new jobs.


Beretta has operated in Italy since 1526. The family-owned company makes a variety of firearms, ranging from hunting shotguns to the U.S. Armed Forces M-9 pistol.

Reh, who led the site search, said there were some states considered that "respect Second Amendment rights," but they "didn't have the type of support that we saw in Tennessee."

The other site finalists were Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.

Last year, lawmakers in Tennessee passed and the governor signed a measure that allows people with handgun carry permits to store firearms in their vehicles no matter where they are parked, including company parking lots.


When asked by a reporter if Beretta will allow its employees to keep guns in their cars at work, Reh responded, "if that's allowed by state law, yes."

 

[dmcowen674]

Just hope they are better at making guns than cars.

 

[theeedude]

Last year, lawmakers in Tennessee passed and the governor signed a measure that allows people with handgun carry permits to store firearms in their vehicles no matter where they are parked, including company parking lots.

Does it mean Tennessee government is forcing business owners to allow guns on their private property?

 

[Moonbeam]

Does it mean Tennessee government is forcing business owners to allow guns on their private property?

The gubment wanted ta make it easy fur a disgrunted employee to wipe out his co-workers.

 

[Nebor]

Does it mean Tennessee government is forcing business owners to allow guns on their private property?

Gun rights are more important to people these days than private property rights. The modern gun owner is some kind of communist\tea party hybrid.

 

[MagickMan]

The inside of the car IS the gun owner's private property, not the business'. It's the same as the inside of his home. You take the firearm out of the car in an area where guns are disallowed by the property owner, it's illegal. How hard is that to understand? Where is the Left's breakdown in understanding, here? 😕

 

[unokitty]

I wish Beretta well.

While I don't own a weapon, I do regret not investing in the stock of the companies that make and sell weapons.

Seems like they are one part of the economy that was positively impacted by the Obama stimulus.

Uno

 

[rudeguy]

Does it mean Tennessee government is forcing business owners to allow guns on their private property?

Most states have that.

Even parking lots of gun free zones are exempt. You can't expect someone carrying a gun to stop outside on the street, lock their gun in a safe, throw the safe out their window, then drive onto the property.

But the truth is its not a big deal. I refuse to go into a business that doesn't allow legal guns. Lots of other people feel the same way.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Just hope they are better at making guns than cars.

Beretta has manufactured top quality guns for years, the US military used their model 92 for years. As for cars, the Beretta was manufactured by Chevrolet.

 

[Genx87]

I wish Beretta well.

While I don't own a weapon, I do regret not investing in the stock of the companies that make and sell weapons.

Seems like they are one part of the economy that was positively impacted by the Obama stimulus.

Uno

The only industry Obama has managed to stimulate. And he didnt need a cent of stimulus money to do it.

 

[JManInPhoenix]

:thumbsup:

 

[KB]

Liberals like to kill jobs. Thats 300 jobs we could have had, but now everyone in Maryland gets more taxes to make up for it.

 

[highland145]

Most states have that.

Even parking lots of gun free zones are exempt. You can't expect someone carrying a gun to stop outside on the street, lock their gun in a safe, throw the safe out their window, then drive onto the property.

But the truth is its not a big deal. I refuse to go into a business that doesn't allow legal guns. Lots of other people feel the same way.

The state allowed carrying in the car, on school property, while dropping off kids. People were doing it anyway, like you said.

Beretta has manufactured top quality guns for years, the US military used their model 92 for years. As for cars, the Beretta was manufactured by Chevrolet.

And that goes in the "what were they thinking" category.

 

[rudder]

Does it mean Tennessee government is forcing business owners to allow guns on their private property?

No they are reaffirming a gun owners right to carry a firearm to and from work. If a private business says that to enter the property the gun must be locked in the trunk.. then the permit holder has to comply.

At any rate it is a useless piece of legislation from either perspective.

 

[Incorruptible]

I wish Beretta well.

While I don't own a weapon, I do regret not investing in the stock of the companies that make and sell weapons.

Seems like they are one part of the economy that was positively impacted by the Obama stimulus.

Uno

This is one of the only areas where President Obama has done well. He has helped the gun industry along with helping to arm more Americans.

Excellent job Obama! 🙂

 

[HumblePie]

I wish Beretta luck where they are moving to. Because they were getting fucked over at their current location.

In a way, I wish the entire gun industry would give a big FU to states that aren't gun friendly. Which means no more gun or ammo sales in any such state to anyone, including LEO, military, and any other government agency based there. Would love to see the shitholes those places become shortly afterwards.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Beretta has manufactured top quality guns for years, the US military used their model 92 for years. As for cars, the Beretta was manufactured by Chevrolet.

Perhaps he was meaning Tennesseans manufacturing things, there is still a GM plant in Spring Hill that used to make Saturns. I think they make the Equinox and some other small SUV there now.

Either way it's just McOwen being McOwen...

 

[rudeguy]

I wish Beretta luck where they are moving to. Because they were getting fucked over at their current location.

In a way, I wish the entire gun industry would give a big FU to states that aren't gun friendly. Which means no more gun or ammo sales in any such state to anyone, including LEO, military, and any other government agency based there. Would love to see the shitholes those places become shortly afterwards.

Honestly...most of those places already are shitholes. Those places have out of control crime and citizens who have to commit felonies just to protect themselves. We should let those places leave the union if they hate guns that much.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally Posted by
Beretta has manufactured top quality guns for years, the US military used their model 92 for years. As for cars, the Beretta was manufactured by Chevrolet.

Perhaps he was meaning Tennesseans manufacturing things, there is still a GM plant in Spring Hill that used to make Saturns. I think they make the Equinox and some other small SUV there now.

Either way it's just McOwen being McOwen...

You are correct unlike that other deranged fan of mine.

 

[HumblePie]

Honestly...most of those places already are shitholes. Those places have out of control crime and citizens who have to commit felonies just to protect themselves. We should let those places leave the union if they hate guns that much.

Oh no. I want it to be the definitive experiment to end all doubts. Remove all guns and ammo legal purchases into those areas period. For normal citizens and government employees alike. Nothing comes in through legal channels. Let them try to stop the illegal methods themselves. See what happens to those areas. I prefer it happen to many areas at once so that gun-grabbers can finally see what happens on a definitive undisputed large scale social experiment.

 

[Daverino]

Oh no. I want it to be the definitive experiment to end all doubts. Remove all guns and ammo legal purchases into those areas period. For normal citizens and government employees alike. Nothing comes in through legal channels. Let them try to stop the illegal methods themselves. See what happens to those areas. I prefer it happen to many areas at once so that gun-grabbers can finally see what happens on a definitive undisputed large scale social experiment.

Haven't we been having this experiment for years?

San Antonio (Guns galore! Polite population.)
2013 homicides: 75.
2013 Population: 1.3 million
Murder rate: 5.8/100,000

New York City (Only criminals and cops have guns! Cesspool!)
2013 homicides: 333
2013 Population: 8.3 million
Murder rate: 4.0/100,000

Entire country of Japan (Disarmed nation on the way to Facist devolution)
2013 homicides: 939
2013 Population: 128 million
Murder rate: 0.7/100,000

 

[irishScott]

Haven't we been having this experiment for years?

San Antonio (Guns galore! Polite population.)
2013 homicides: 75.
2013 Population: 1.3 million
Murder rate: 5.8/100,000

New York City (Only criminals and cops have guns! Cesspool!)
2013 homicides: 333
2013 Population: 8.3 million
Murder rate: 4.0/100,000

Entire country of Japan (Disarmed nation on the way to Facist devolution)
2013 homicides: 939
2013 Population: 128 million
Murder rate: 0.7/100,000

No, but we've had the discussion where international comparisons have been proved completely invalid.

Liberals love to compare the US disfavorably to the rest of the western world in terms of gun violence, but not a one can propose any effective way to get there, so the comparison is meaningless.

Not to mention you might want to look at suicide rates in Japan. I keep hearing how easy access to guns improves the odds of suicide, yet Japan, for all its lack of guns, has close to twice the suicide rate of the US.

 

[Daverino]

No, but we've had the discussion where international comparisons have been proved completely invalid.

Liberals love to compare the US disfavorably to the rest of the western world in terms of gun violence, but not a one can propose any effective way to get there, so the comparison is meaningless.

Not to mention you might want to look at suicide rates in Japan. I keep hearing how easy access to guns improves the odds of suicide, yet Japan, for all its lack of guns, has close to twice the suicide rate of the US.

So scrap the Japan comparison, I don't care.

Show me a correlation between local rate of gun ownership and local crime in the United States. Whenever I post up low-violence high-gun control examples, I'm told instead that guns do not affect the crime rate. But Humble believes there is a correlation and I'd like him to show it.

Now if he has said there was a correlation between education funding and crime, or economic opportunity and crime, I'd believe him. The cities that are the most violent hold the most poorly educated or impoverished.

 

[HumblePie]

Haven't we been having this experiment for years?

San Antonio (Guns galore! Polite population.)
2013 homicides: 75.
2013 Population: 1.3 million
Murder rate: 5.8/100,000

New York City (Only criminals and cops have guns! Cesspool!)
2013 homicides: 333
2013 Population: 8.3 million
Murder rate: 4.0/100,000

Entire country of Japan (Disarmed nation on the way to Facist devolution)
2013 homicides: 939
2013 Population: 128 million
Murder rate: 0.7/100,000

San Antonio is a (D) town. There isn't guns galore as there is some actually pretty strict city policies towards all weapons in general here. San Antonio has had an influx of drug cartels and gangs recently as well. Several places of business, some of them very prominent, have been put out of business for drug money laundry schemes. Criminal organizations move to where crime is lucrative. Right now San Antonio is pretty damn lucrative for crime organizations. So were seeing a large influx of criminal activities because of it. Which is a bit of the reason I'm living in a city near San Antonio and not working or living there exactly. Although it is about a 20 minute drive to there for me.

As for NYC, they are putting tons of cops on the streets. In record numbers. When there is that many cops, it does help deter crime. Which has zero to do with gun ownership. However, remove guns from those cops and see how crime statistics change in NYC.

But you are forgetting other cities cracking down on gun ownership and seeing sky rocketing crime rates. Chicago and DC for example?

A blanket listing of trends of murder rates in a few places isn't exactly a good way to draw a strong corollary for what ever you are trying to point out. And then to use a whole country.... yah that is stupid. Japan has a very homogenous population. The vast majority of the people that live there are all Japanese. It has had a massive economic prosperity time span for the last few decades overall. It has completely different cultural values and teachings. They don't have the same level of population segregation and slums as over here. IE no "ghettos" to speak of. Their whole population basically follows a set of ethic teachings that is based off centuries of history for honor.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dg...its-immigration-policies-not-its-gun-control/

So to use Japan as an example in your argument is very stupid.

 

[Daverino]

San Antonio is a (D) town. There isn't guns galore as there is some actually pretty strict city policies towards all weapons in general here. San Antonio has had an influx of drug cartels and gangs recently as well. Several places of business, some of them very prominent, have been put out of business for drug money laundry schemes. Criminal organizations move to where crime is lucrative. Right now San Antonio is pretty damn lucrative for crime organizations. So were seeing a large influx of criminal activities because of it. Which is a bit of the reason I'm living in a city near San Antonio and not working or living there exactly. Although it is about a 20 minute drive to there for me.

As for NYC, they are putting tons of cops on the streets. In record numbers. When there is that many cops, it does help deter crime. Which has zero to do with gun ownership. However, remove guns from those cops and see how crime statistics change in NYC.

But you are forgetting other cities cracking down on gun ownership and seeing sky rocketing crime rates. Chicago and DC for example?

A blanket listing of trends of murder rates in a few places isn't exactly a good way to draw a strong corollary for what ever you are trying to point out. And then to use a whole country.... yah that is stupid. Japan has a very homogenous population. The vast majority of the people that live there are all Japanese. It has had a massive economic prosperity time span for the last few decades overall. It has completely different cultural values and teachings. They don't have the same level of population segregation and slums as over here. IE no "ghettos" to speak of. Their whole population basically follows a set of ethic teachings that is based off centuries of history for honor.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/dg...its-immigration-policies-not-its-gun-control/

So to use Japan as an example in your argument is very stupid.

Well it's pretty herpy-derpy to suggest disarming the police too. So far as I know, that's not a goal of sensible gun control.

So what do we got? Cities with good economic conditions have less crime and cities in the shitter have lots of it. How is that new? DC has always been violent and had the gun control laws on the books for years. They were struck down and DC is STILL a violent place. Why? I would say because DC has some of the craziest economic segregation in the country. The reason the crime rate goes down when you get to Bethesda isn't because they're more well armed in Maryland.

Newark is less than 30 minutes from Manhattan (tunnel gods, allowing) but has a high crime rate. However, it has less restrictive gun control laws. But Newark is also desperately poor and has a terrible public education system.

But I have seen no examples of crime and lawlessness descending on high-prosperity high-gun control areas of the country, solely because the population is unarmed and therefore 'easy pickings.' If that were true, the crime in Newark would flow to the 'easier' New York and the the crime from Washington DC would flow to the 'easier' Bethesda. And by corollary, crime from Mexico would stay south of the border because the guns in Texas would act as a natural deterrent.

But that never happens. Violent crime is local and does not mystically move to where it is easiest to be violent. Few criminals are violent for the sheer sake of enjoying the violence.