TYR Tactical

Firearms Companies Boycotting NY LE – Updated

Awhile back we posted about a few companies who have pledged to boycott sales to New York Law Enforcement after that state passed its so-called SAFE act effectively banning any weapon that can accommodate a magazine over 7 rounds. That little list has grown to well over 80 companies with more jumping on board every day. I’d like to pay particular attention to one of our advertisers, Bravo Company for standing our constitutional rights.

I could reproduce the list here but I won’t because someone else has made a full time job out of it and he is doing great. Visit NC Gun Blog for the latest updates. I only take umbrage with one thing on his list. He’s created a naughty list and placed GT Distributors on there. They don’t belong. That is a company with a long commitment of service to the LE community. Before there was panic buying they made their money from sales to LE and in order to support that customer base and they’ve decided to limit sales of semi auto rifles and 30 round magazines to them. It’s not like civilian customers were lining up to buy stuff from them before the panic so it’s more than a little foolish to vilify them for conducting business with their regular customers. The ones that will be there for the long haul.

Update – I checked with GT Distributors and they had temporarily modified their sales policy to support long-term LE customers during the height of the panic. However, now, you can go and order anything that is in stock; military, LE or civilian. To be sure, they are strongly committed to the Second Amendment.

Law Enforcement writ large isn’t bad and it isn’t the enemy. The issue is with bad laws written sponsored by uninformed and ill intentioned legislators as well as opportunists. Our industry needs to support LE in appropriate ways. Every situation is different and sometimes that means saying “No” both to them and to consumers.

23 Responses to “Firearms Companies Boycotting NY LE – Updated”

  1. TM says:

    Nobody’s asking anyone to boycott LE. We’re simply asking companies to offer LE the same products they offer non-LE. Cops should not be permitted to outgun the populace. Period.

  2. jellydonut says:

    What’s the problem with putting GT Distributors on the list if they only make money, and only want to make money, from the LE community anyway?

    Let them sell to LE, let civilians buy from companies that don’t think LE are a separate class of citizens.

    • Doc B says:

      Law enforcement ARE civilians.

      • Redleg says:

        Try telling them that.

        • Dave says:

          I bought 4 block 17 mats from GT Distributors three weeks ago as a civilian that they got in stock that day (as did a bunch of others) for $22 each. Are you kidding me? They support the industry and aren’t scalping magazines, weapons or Ammunition like Ch$%#er than d@#t!

  3. Thanks for the link.

    I understand your concern with GT Dist. They’ve been promising since Friday to “do the right thing,” so don’t be surprised if they come off the naughty list soon.

    TM is correct. I don’t need anyone to stop all sales to LEOs. I just want the LEOs in a State to follow the same laws as the people in that State. GT could get off my naughty list with a simple statement. “We will no longer sell items to police officers or state agencies that are prohibited to the people of the same state or locality.”

    I don’t care if they only sell guns/ammo/magazines to LEOs and not to me. That’s their business. I just want them to tell the States of NY, California, and others that they won’t can’t make one rule for citizens and another for State employees.

    I’m looking forward to taking GT off the naughty list soon.

  4. Redleg says:

    I disagree. I’ve seen far too many “Law ENFORCEMENT Officers” (as opposed to old school “Peace Officers” who were loved and respected by most) gladly enforce clearly illegal and unconstitutional laws day in and day out without question.

    The cognitive dissonance of LE is mind boggling, even among the so called “Oath Keepers.” They say in no uncertain terms that they will not confiscate our guns but when you ask them why apply their legal discretion only to firearms confiscation they look lost. When I ask them about the other unconstitutional laws like limiting magazine capacity and preventing peaceable citizens from carrying firearms for protection without state sanction they mumble stuff like I must enforce the law or some other such nonsense. You and I both know that they will throw you in a concrete box in a New York minute for carrying without their permission or for having a standard capacity magazine, just ask SSG Haddad about that.

    So again I disagree with your statement that Law ENFORCEMENT isn’t bad. Perhaps I am jaded being stuck in Southern Kalifornia where cops are a completely different breed from “Peace Officers” in Montana but I have seen more than enough tyranny by cops here in Collectivistafornia to ever consider them “good” again. The good ones down here are the exception, not the rule.

    When they start acting like “Peace Officers” again and applying discretion rather than acting like mindless automatons I’ll change my mind but with current trends around here I don’t see that happening any time soon. Anything that singles out the hypocrisy of the current system and forces them into a state of parity with the rest of us is a good thing.

    • Doc B says:

      Your statement paints LEOs with a very broad brush. In my own estimation, there is nothing any different to them than there is to anyone else. What I mean is that, speaking of a person in any profession, in any place, at any time, you are going to be able to get along very well with some, okay with (probably) most, and there are going to be examples that make you hate anything that they stand for.

      There are poor examples of humanity, of justice, of wisdom, of any criteria you care to judge by in any place you care to look.

      The important thing – my opinion only, obviously – is that you don’t alienate an entire subset of person and create walls and “sides” where there don’t need to be any.

      • Redleg says:

        Doc B, again my perception is based solely on observing those here in Southern Kalifornia. I know for a fact that there are some great cops who are real patriots and who don’t harass the citizenry in the “free states” which is why I kept referring only to Southern Kalifornia in my screed. I know that Sheriffs in NorCal have gone on record that they would not confiscate weapons…but that isn’t the consensus down south. I took took a number of criminal justice courses to become better informed and I found that all of the cops and sheriffs here were very anti-gun in the citizens hands. They were very open and blatant about wanting a monopoly on force so again my perception is based on a small sector of the country and I know that we have it much worse here than other parts of the US.

  5. ian says:

    Even if you could get all American producers on board, HK would be their supplier of choice.

    Germans don’t have a 2nd amendment to support.

    Nice, but still symbolic, funding the NRA isn’t. Go donate.

  6. Leland says:

    We need to push these companies to do the same to California and any other state that doesn’t follow the US constitution and Federal gun laws. Dianne Feinstein and her CA democrats need to be stopped.

  7. Redleg says:

    “Law Enforcement writ large isn’t bad and it isn’t the enemy.”

    And then we have something like this happen:


    Every single day for myriad reasons and not just for guns and I find myself questioning your statement which I quoted above.

    Someone has to go out of their way to enforce this crap…and they always seem to find someone who wants to do so and who seems to enjoy doing so, especially here in Southern Kalifornia. I can’t tell you how many abuses like this I have seen here and I won’t bore you with all of them…but if most cops were good we wouldn’t see this crap reported every single day.

  8. Stephen Brian says:

    I find it curious that while so many are quick to jump on the local/State LEO bashing band wagon, there has been little discussion on the apparent hypocrisy of the firearm’s companies who are “taking a stand” against state imposed gun restrictions while maintaining lucrative contracts with Federal law enforcement and the DOD. Seems like a double standard. I suppose the argument is that the Feds and Military “need” these weapons while civilian law enforcement and the citizens (in their communities) who they have sworn to protect do not. A government that is attempting a “full court press” against our constitutional right to bear arms would never try to utilize federal authorities or the military against its own people, because that would be against the constitution right? IMO there seems to be a degree of self aggrandizing going on. Is a civilian LE oath to protect the constitution somehow “less” than that which is taken by our warriors in the military or vice versa? It’s really quite simple, either you support the constitution, or you don’t. Citizen, Civilian LE, or veteran alike. It appears that constant infighting and division does more to hurt these facts which we all appear to ardently support and believe than any outside influence or attack.

    • Redleg says:

      Good points.

    • Redleg says:

      Stephen Brian, here’s some Fed hypocrisy for you and why so many gun owners are speaking out these days. They are fed up and have had their fill of the double standards:


      FBI Disciplinary rulings:

      1. Domestic Violence: During argument with spouse, Employee broke spouses e-reader in half and pointed unloaded gun at dog’s head while dog was sitting in spouse’s lap. In mitigation, Eniployee [sic] had been struggling with spouses mental health issues and fol!owing [sic] this incident, entered marriage counseling. In aggravation, Employee introduced a firearm into a domestic dispute, an extraordinarily serious escalation.

      PENALTY: 45-Day Suspension
      OFFENSE: Assault/Battery, Offense Code 4.1

      “A regular Joe would have received a conviction or plea bargain involving domestic violence and that would have been his/her right to own guns gone right there,” the TTAG commentator opined. “And WTF with pointing it at the dog? What is it with LEO’s and dogs?”

      Some are obviously more equal than others. I didn’t spend almost two decades in the Army to facilitate BS like this.

    • Anibal Perez says:

      A lot of the companies are in legal contracts to provide the Feds certain items, unless you want to bankrupt and have the CEOs of those companies arrested for contract violations, there isn’t much we can dr we can do what has been going on, the Feds need local police and Sheriffs to do their dirty work if they really want to confiscate our weapons, and in many places they will get 0 assistance, and in hopefully all they will get open resistance from our police and sheriff departments or let them all know they WILL be replaced

  9. Redleg says:

    Looks like the NY counties are fighting back against this travesty, 25 Counties have passed local legislation opposing the NY SAFE Act and 19 more have legislation in the works:


  10. orly? says:

    NYC, the number one target in the world by pretty much every spectrum of extremism.

    No one in even America seems to make up their minds about it.

  11. MRROGERS1 says:

    Great list of those already taking a stand can be found here http://www.thepoliceloophole.com/ support these businesses!