Capewell

Magpul Clarifies Their Position Regarding LEO Sales

Just minutes ago, Magpul CEO Rich Fitzpatrick issued this statement-

REGARDING LEO SALES
March 1st, 2013

Back in 1990, when I was deployed in Desert Shield and Desert Storm as a Marine grunt, some companies prioritized me items for my M16 for shipping that I purchased with my own funds. After getting out and forming Magpul in 1999, I established the same priority policy for Military and Law Enforcement, due to the requirements of their profession.

The same policy has been in place for 13 years now and has never been an issue until a few days ago. I do not support the idea that individual police officers should be punished for the actions of their elected officials. That said, I understand the concerns that some have with Law Enforcement officers getting special treatment while at the same time denouncing second amendment rights to another citizen in the same state.

With the fight in Colorado right now we do not have time to implement a new program, so I have suspended all LE sales to ban states until we can implement a system wherein any Law Enforcement Officer buying for duty use will have to promise to uphold their oath to the US Constitution – specifically the second and fourteenth amendments – as it applies to all citizens.

Richard Fitzpatrick
President/CEO – Founder
Magpul Industries

Tags:

105 Responses to “Magpul Clarifies Their Position Regarding LEO Sales”

  1. TM says:

    So all they have to do is lie, and then they get what the rest of the citizens don’t get. Got it.

  2. Ivan says:

    I just want to say thank you for supporting are 2nd & 14th Amendments.

  3. Nelson says:

    WAY to go MagPul!

    THAT, is the way you RE-gain trust! Almost lost ya there for…a day! LOL

    Good job.

    • Rogerrabbit says:

      Yes, penalize the low paid, low rank Police Officer for the acts of the Chief(who usually is at the whim of the Politicians)? As I’ve said before the anti-gun crowd must love this. The gun crowd calling for the disarming of the Police. You guys do realize your doing the work for the anti-gun crowd who hate the Police and guns period???

      • Tu says:

        as harsh as it is, those “low paid, low rank” police officers out number the sole chief in mass. If they stood up for our civil liberties and applied united internal pressures to their management, change can be made. having a ban like this might cause such change

      • Dozer says:

        There’s no penalizing anyone. The program was set up to allow LEO’s to do a direct purchase. That has since been stopped in order to allow for the “Boulder Airlift” to be implemented. LEO’s can still purchase thru online retailers or local shops in their areas.

  4. RogerRabbit says:

    No we don’t lie to get what we want. Just to educate some of the apparent folk that have no clue about being an LEO. We all pledge allegiance to the constitution and the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics. So first off, No we aren’t supposed to lie(even though as in all groups some of our brothers/sisters are guilty of this… and should pay the consequences) and secondly we do uphold the constitution daily. Even to the dirt bag child molester, felon or gangster that doesn’t deserve it!!!

    PS, the vast marjority of LEO’s are firms supporters in the 2nd amendment in my experience as a cop.

    • Slushy says:

      Eh, don’t bother arguing. There are people who hate LEO and feel they get preferential treatment for no good reason. People are right, they face threats from people. They may get burglarized, or robbed, or assaulted. LEO on the other hand, put ourselves in that position constantly, because too many people want to be victims and not help themselves, or just demand that we show up. In my city, I have to show up if they request it, no matter how stupid. A majority of civilians don’t have to worry about being shot while sitting in their office, or killed while showing up to a neighbors dispute. The vast majority of Americans that are not LEO don’t have to worry about people showing up at their home to cause them harm just because of their job. The vast majority of the public aren’t looked upon to show up to the bank robbery in progress, or the drive by, or the active shooter. I get it, we choose to do it, but we do it for everyone that can’t or won’t do it for themselves and others. So while the general public runs the risk of dying in an infinite number of ways because thats just the universe, but LEO run that risk 10 fold every second just by the nature of our chosen profession. Now if the next person that bitches wants to explain how at the next mass shooting, they will somehow be the one everyone calls for help, and will somehow be first one there expected to stop the threat and save everyone, then fine, otherwise, chill out, understand that a majority of LEO are very pro second amendment, and want to help to the best of our abilities. Anyways, most people hoard those PMags like they need 100 of them to carry all at once.

      • CanadianCivy says:

        I feel that (we Canadians have the ‘privilege’ not “Right” of owning guns, so bear with me) a Law Enforcement Officer should not be… made higher or lower just because they are a LEO. I think that (to a degree) cutting off the agency in a ban state shows… resolve/show of force/etc, but cutting off the officer, who do face more danger JUST because they are a LEO, is wrong/bad/something-along-those-lines. Banning LEOfficers from… owning PMags for the same reason the (I’m treading a dangerous place with the word I’m going to use) ‘need’ them, is… (I still don’t know a good word to use here) not right. i.e. This fool Bloomberg bans ‘high’ cap mags, but officer J. Doe is blamed for the limit; Is that right? I don’t believe so, but there’s this little bit of me that says “To make an omelette, you’ve to break some eggs” unfortunately the men and women in blue are those eggs.

        • Rogerrabbit says:

          I respect everyone’s opinion, but when you say “break eggs” you do realize your talking about LEO’s getting killed right? Anyone believing that giving a LEO a lower cap mag is going to change anything is clueless. The only person your hurting is that cop who is already outgunned by some law-breaking felon to begin with. The anti-gun crowd must be loving this… gun owners going against gun carriers. Guess the end is closer than we think.

      • Vic says:

        Brothers, I’ve been debating this over and over. People already have this notion that LEOs are some sort of Gestapo, that the Feds are arranging all sorts of nasty business. I’m personally done. People who don’t get it, won’t. This kind of crap drives a bigger wedge between those that serve and those that don’t then any law passed. It saddens me that so many people vilify those that would lay down their life for the innocent.

        It’s hard not to get cynical and to carry on, but I know each one of us will. Slushy, you couldn’t have said it better.

    • MyColors says:

      Not going to touch the “lie” bit, but there is a very tiny group of American LEO’s. It is this group that I think I hear what Fitzpatrick it trying to reach. In that as a LEO you know the law and you know when its BS! Can you enforce a law that clearly violates the Constitution of the United States of America? Or better yet will you? And just like those poor guardsman in LA, will your storm a house on American soil and pray to God you don’t have to kill someone, who you are forceably removing their legaly owned firearms from. All because your chain of command tells you too. I must say we need more Lion’s in Law Enforcement and less Sheep. Just my personal opinion after many years on the job.

  5. Tactidork says:

    Wow…. that is pretty crazy. I’ve seen a number of companies boycott ban states before but it was mostly a token gesture since they had no real relevance. But PMAGS are the standard to which AR mags are held to.. this is actually pretty huge

  6. fmfbest says:

    Just had a vision of Jerry Lee and Burt Reynolds picking up a truckload of PMAGS in Texarkana and bootlegging them somewhere “behind the lines”

  7. E says:

    Personally I see this as a good thing. I’d like to think that the majority of cops are good people.. every group has their bad apples. The military, LEOs, gun owners are no different in that aspect. Good on Magpul.

  8. Casey says:

    Are you fucking kidding me? Magpul can go fuck themselves. Its so disappointing that Magpul is jumping on the bandwagon of companies whose frustration with lawmakers is surfacing as anger towards police officers.

    • majrod says:

      Relax. If you are not in an anti 2nd Amend State you’ve nothing to worry about. If you are you have MUCH bigger problems.

  9. justin says:

    I love seeing these companies stand up for our rights. Question though;

    States that pass high cap mag bans are having state entities boycotted by gun and mag companies. (Great!) What if the federal government passes this nonsense? Will these same companies refuse to do business with the federal government entities? Seems like a consistent application. I won’t hold my breath, though.

    • SSD says:

      If the federal government imposes a ban on so-called high capacity magazines, few of the companies that currently produce thn will sell them to the government because most will go out of business. It won’t be economically feasible to manufacture them.

  10. Bill says:

    No way I’m promising to please some corporate interest or political action group. I already swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and statutorily enacted law before the citizens of the jurisdiction that commissioned me. Their product is good, but I’m not selling my professional soul to get it.

    As for non-cops bitching that we get this stuff for “personal use,” what could that possibly mean? Guns and support equipment are the tools of my trade. Do carpenters have personal use saws and hammers and professional use saws and hammers? What is not selling to me supposed to accomplish? Does Magpul think that Chiefs and Sheriffs are going to adopt our collective will and march on the Capital? Not bleeding likely.

    Full disclosure: I own 3 older PMags, but switched brands years ago when they wouldn’t reliably lock in my M&P. Magpul’s suggestion involved Dremeling my receiver to fit their magazine, instead of fixing the magazines to fit the rifle. Obviously I’m mystified by their business model.

    • Bill – it’s actually real simple; your salary and all your equipment are paid for by the citizens your sworn to protect; how is it that you should be able to have high capacity magazines for your duty rifle , that they pay for, to help protect them when they cannot legally ( depending on the state you live in ) own the exact same magazines to protect themselves and their family ?

      That is what all this is about – eliminating the LEO exemption so cops have a dog in this fight; so maybe we can get LE on our side pushing back against the politicians and chief LEO’s that enact this crap

      Maybe that won’t work- but ill tell you this; letting LE slide with exemptions sure as the hell ain’t working so a whole bunch of people are trying a different approach this time around

      • mike says:

        Larry,

        It’s actually really not that simple if people end up dead to try and prove a point. So if the next Beslan kicks off tomorrow in NY,CA,Ill, or any other state with retarded magazine laws are you alright with sending LE there with only ten round mags to prove a point?

        Members of the military have their salaries and equipment paid for by the citizens they swore to protect also, so using your argument I guess we shouldn’t let them have high capacity magazines for their issue weapons either if the citizens they protect can’t own them. But that wouldn’t make much sense would it?

        Oh yeah, “chief LEO’s” don’t enact this crap. Legislative Branch of government enacts this crap. The vast majority of cops are pro gun and don’t like this crap either. However, they only get one vote at election time just like you. And just like when you were serving your country they don’t get to stand up in uniform in front of cameras and voice their political opinions whenever they differ from the elected or appointed officials running the show. If they do, they get fired. So they can only do it as private civilians when they aren’t getting paid by the citizens. Like you, they vote, send money where it will help, write letters, and try to spread the word to inform people of the truth.

        So it really isn’t that simple when you’re the one being called to the gunfight with one hand tied behind your back so someone who isn’t there can prove a point. When you went to combat to protect myself and every other American Citizen I expected my tax dollars and my elected officials to give you the right equipment to get the job done. It’s no different for the cop you expect to defend the home front. Like you, good or bad, rain or shine, they just show up, suck it up, and get the job done even if that means getting hurt or killed. If you expect them to run to a gunfight you at least owe them the right equipment to get the job done. Their lives shouldn’t be used as leverage against politicians who are trying to pass stupid laws.

        • Rogerrabbit says:

          Well said!!! from one LEO.

        • KP says:

          Military personnel are NOT civilians. You ARE civilians. Under the Constitution we’re guaranteed equal protection so whether you’re outgunned or not, IF you live and work in a state that bans non-LEO purchasing and/or possession of regular magazines, it is unconstitutional.

          I don’t begrudge LEO’s their unbastardized equipment. If we non-LEO should have our 30 rounders, so should you; but the fact of the matter is, if we go on with law enforcement exemptions, it IS promoting a caste system and that is quite simply unacceptable. Further, even if it’s not CLEO’s who enact legislation, they have been the ones standing in uniform behind Feinstein as she and her cronies trot out this crap.

          So we’ve all heard cops and deputies tell us they can’t speak for the uniform. Fine. What can you do? You have police unions that are supposed to represent you. You have CLEO’s – do they have ears?

          Voting, writing letters, joining and donating isn’t working so we all need to find other ways of getting in the fight.

          And let me reiterate – I have no hate for LEO’s. I don’t even want them to be barred from having normal magazines. But I don’t want for there to be an exemption showing that cops are legally superior to non-LEO. We’re all civilians after all.

          • mike says:

            KP,

            Easy to say when you’re not the one who has to respond to the call. If you’re son or daughter was LE would you willingly send them to shoot it out with drug cartel members armed with full auto weapons knowing they only have 10 round mags? When terrorists set their sites on a school in California are you alright with only having cops show up with 10 round mags and bullet buttons while our children are slaughtered? Because that’s what you’re essentially advocating at this point if the current laws aren’t changed.

            Like I said it’s not that simple, I wish it was. Trust me I’m on your side and the vast majority of cops are. It’s not about me, it’s about my kids and their kids and Americans 500 years from now still having their rights. Cops know better then anyone that when a citizens life is in danger, including their own family, LE is still 5 minutes out. That’s why most are very pro gun. But using peoples lives as pawns in a political game isn’t the answer. It’s not about cops being “legally superior to non-LEO.” It’s about asking them to go into harms way and potentially die so you don’t have to. To keep the peace to ensure we still have a functioning country so the government doesn’t use the military to take back control. If you want them to do the job you need to give them the right tools.

            As for police chiefs, I hate to tell you but they are pretty much puppets of the mayors and city counsels that hire them. And police unions, well they really only care about gaining favors for the next contract negotiation. Matter of fact politicians have even made it to where it’s mandatory to pay union dues. Automatically taken out of your check whether you like it or not.

            So, just like you I only get one vote on election day. What does make a difference is money. Magpul threatening to leave CO, Beretta threatening to leave MD, that my friend makes aholes in office listen. Potentially losing the next election because they let a crap ton of jobs leave the state makes politicians think twice. Well except for ones in Ca :)

          • KP says:

            It is definitely easier for me to say these things since I’m not directly affected, but I’m also trying hard to not be the angry jealous non-LEO since, like you said, you’re the one (and you are someone’s son/brother/father) and you’re the one who by trade must go TOWARDS a dangerous person, rather than away (as a smart individual would do.) But I’m trying to stay objective about this. In principle, it is the right thing to do. In practice, it might not make a difference, and it certainly doesn’t make a difference so long as one company out there produces magazines and continues sales per LEO exemption. I support this principle stand since it’s not at a point where it will affect what you’re functionally able to purchase as there are other sources for normal magazines. Whether a responding officer has a PMag or a USGI mag, he’ll still have full capability so it’s not quite so dramatic as using people’s lives as pawns in a political game.

            To you it’s not about legally differentiated classes, but to me it is. But it’s also about having the right tools to do the job since you guys have a job to do and like I said, I really don’t begrudge you of your gear – you and other LEO’s lives are more important than my 30 rounder – but no matter how it’s cut, if we accept the legislation exempting law enforcement from magazine bans then we enforce the acceptability of a tiered society. I know that you don’t, and none of the LEO’s I know think it’s okay, but simply disagreeing with something never changed anything. The problem isn’t that cops want to be some vassals to our legislative rulers (at least not most of them) but that law makers are forcing the situation and creating a society where law enforcement will carry out there will. These policies take that away. I don’t know what’s going to happen in the future but at some point I hope that legislators won’t be able to trot out CLEO’s to support their cause. That’s unrealistic since those very politicians are the ones who appoint the chiefs. It’s unfair that they’re allowed to posture politically.

            And in fact, I’m from California, which may color my opinion. Obviously a huge loss in revenue does nothing to deter those running my state. We here in California are trying to figure out what else can be done. So what can be done inside of law enforcement for 2A? The immediate answer is “nothing” but please at least think about it. Everyone needs to be thinking that.

          • mike says:

            KP,

            Like you I’m in CA so I know your pain. I grew up here so I’ve been dealing with this as a regular joe civilian also long before getting into LE. I remember the fallout from Stockton in 89, the federal ban in 94, and the 2000 ban here. All I can say is most cops are on your side and the side of the 2A. As LE there’s only so much we can do to voice our opinions in uniform though. The tax payers cut us a check to keep the peace, not publicly voice our personal opinions on current events while on the clock. The head of the organization is the only one who can decide to do their own thing and speak publicly about topics like this without getting fired and even then a police chief can get fired at any time. The Sheriff at least has the luxury of being locked in for 4 years.

            Here in CA groups like the calguns foundation have done some good things and we’ve figured out a lot ways around some of the stupid laws we have. I don’t hold a grudge against any company that decides not to sell to LE. I may not agree with it, but honestly I’m just glad they are finally doing something. If all these companies would have jumped on board years ago to help fight for people’s rights in places like CA maybe we would all be in a better position right now. Lets be honest, more AR’s and Pmags were probably sold in CA in the last couple years then any other state. Still most companies just turned their heads and said screw them. It wasn’t till the attack came to their front door did they finally decide to speak up. Well except for Barrett.

      • JDT says:

        LAV – If there were a way to remove all standard capacity magazines from circulation then I would not mind transitioning to a magazine with such limited capacity that it receded into the dark, deep abyss of my magazine well. However, consider this scenario:

        A NY LEO with his/her seven round magazines responds to an active shooter/armed suspicious person(s)/etc call. Arrives on scene to confront one or multiple threats with “pre-ban” magazines or magazines that can easily be purchased just across the PA border.

        Should we set officers up for failure and put them (and those they protect) at risk because of the need to “put another dog in the fight” and exert political pressure? In order for LEOs to do their job they should be armed to the highest denominator of the public. Otherwise cops would still be running around with billy clubs and .38s, getting mowed down on warrant services and traffic stops.

        With all of that said, I am firmly in support of companies banning agency sales of “banned” equipment. Agencies will always be able to find a company to supply their needs, but if enough companies do this maybe the higher-ups will take notice. Just don’t punish the beat officer who is trying to do his/her job. Individual officer sales are paid for by individual officers out of their own pocket. Chances are a LEO going out of his/her way to purchase the equipment he/she needs is already a dog in the fight for the Second Amendment.

        For a side note: When I reported for duty I was issued 4 PMAGS purchased by the tax payers and no rifle. I volunteered my own because my agency could not afford to buy one.

        • Matty says:

          Well seeing as how NY cops can’t hit a target yeah they probably should have less ammo so they do less damage to bystanders.

      • Rogerrabbit says:

        Really LAV? I don’t chose what equipment I get to use. My department and armorer/rangemaster does. So if my rangemaster goes to you(an expert) your going to tell him that me(lonely single LEO) should not have an hi-cap mag for that fight when I’m by myself in the middle of the night with no backup in sight??? Really… For me that’s sad to hear from someone many of us in LE respect and admire.

        Apparently the general public thinks there we are allowed to speak out on the matter. Last time I checked most of us aren’t allowed to speak out publicly on matters related to departmental issues. Wow, disarming LEO’s too and not just Civi’s thats the way to go…

      • Rogerrabbit says:

        Well actually Lav most of us pay for our own equipment. Secondly what your saying is that as an expert(which I venture your extensive experience and knowledge would qualify for) was approached by a departments armorer/rangemaster you’d tell them that we should use 10 round mags vs 30 for our AR’s? There are times we are alone with no backup in sight for minutes(which as you know a lifetime) by suspects that outnumber and outgun us and your ok with us not having a hi-cap mag?

        As someone(like many I’m sure) in LE that respects LV I can’t believe you are arguing this point. Besides most departments do not allow us to speak out publicly on department matters. It truly is a sad day when someone like LV is me being out there being equiped less than I can be.

        • Roger rabbit

          Who pays your salary as an LEO ? Who provides you the money to buy any of your own equipment ? You guys don’t understand if we don’t make a stand now then sometime in the future we won’t have anything to make a stand for

          We all need to pushing in the same direction – the fight is with the politicians and police chiefs who are anti gun – organize yourselves and take your fight and frustration to them

          I am standing up for the 2nd Amendment and what it is about- I make no apologies for that ; if that makes me a bad guy in your eyes then so be it

          Next time you get a chance, if you are so inclined, go to my website and review what I have done on behalf of my country ; let that soak in for awhile before you demonize me

          • R & R says:

            Hey Larry, it doesn’t make you a bad guy, just shockingly lll informed. And fyi…I, as a citizen of the City I work for, pay into my own salary as well, and have a dog in the fight ass you stated, with my family being protected by the officers I work with. And as apposed to acquiescing in the lefts attempt to disarm us all, I would hope a man of your stature, would take a far more measured approach. Perhaps your superman and can be your own PSD for your family 24/7, whether you’re home or around them or not. Most of us are mere mortals. But at some point, as shocking ans outlandish as it sounds, they’ll have to head out by themselves. And though I agree that the good citizens should be as well armed as us cops, most aren’t. But we’re not the guys disarming them, it’s the politicians. The masses voted for the tard in the White-house, so I’m just as pissed as you and every other upright walker as to how our country got so jacked up. It’s disappointing to see a guy with your experience opine in such a fashion. You’re grossly missing the point, some are trying to make in a non-argumentative point, but some are opining out there rear pocket. And as for your unquestioned service to our great country, you didn’t do it all by your lonesome, many of us are former and current military men and women walked the same walk. We just don’t have an outstanding TV show to add to our resumes. Sincerely, good for you. But I digress… And we street Cops are on your side, with respect to the 2nd Amendment. You’ve asserted yourself into the conversation in a way that is awfully sanctimonious, and appears a knee-jerk and emotional one at that. Which is also far beneath the high regard I hold you in. I have purchased thousands of dollars of Aimpoint and Daniel Defense products, so I guess I pay your salary as well. I also paid your salary when you were in the Military, and with all the Military contracts that you and the companies that you’re associated with enjoy. So I guess I’m still paying your salary. Is their any relevance in the conversation to that?…. I say no. When people toss out the “I pay your salary” line, they should immediately tattoo “I’m an asshole” to their forehead. You being a former Military man of great distinction, seem to have cast aside any chain of logic gained through years of service and hard work, with your stated position. By your rationale, you drastically inflate the amount of input you think we flat foots have by your expectations, with respect to the amount of leverage you or any of us have on the SOP’s and TTP’s of an entire organization. Especially a municipal law enforcement organization. By your argumentative approach, you’re cheapening your credibility, and calling into question the amount of merit one should give to your input in this “debate”. IMHO

            I support all of you good citizens rights to Keep and Bare arms. I find the hypocrisy palpable, that you don’t share that position. It’s a shame and very telling to your level of commitment.

            Magpul and any of these companies can do what ever their hearts desire. That’s the beauty of being an American company. And at least magpul is stating that they are trying to figure out the best approach. Given what they’re going through in CO, I don’t blame them. I will continue to support them, and hope that the CO Bill dies. Also I, being in SoCal am actively assisting to ensure the bills defeat. I will continue to support magpul and other industry companies because it’s the right thing to do.

            Stay Safe all and vote Conservative!

            ******Full name withheld, due to the internet being what it is, and my department being lead by an infestation of squints that may get seek retribution for even the slightest issue I may take with their incompetence.***

          • KP says:

            It’s not hypocrisy, it’s principle based on equal protection before the law. And right now the law sucks (at least in California and other ban states.) I’m sure you’ve heard it before by now but this puts us all in the same boat for better or for worse (and who’s to say that it won’t get better in the future or worse.)

            I’m not unsympathetic but this inner-partisanship needs to stop. It’s very clear that with companies having these policies, it’s bad for law enforcement. It’s unclear if this is all good for 2nd Amendment rights – since it’s a fact now, we need to all find ways to make sure that this stuff isn’t for naught.

      • Blue Line Medic says:

        not all cops get “all their equipment paid for” larry…some of us are required to buy our own stuff it we want it

        • R & R says:

          ^^^^ Pays for ALL of his uniforms, equipment and weapons, other than the standard antiquated equipment I received back in the day. I also pay for all of my own training, of which I do a lot of to stay sharp. Get your topknot checked LAV.

    • SSD says:

      So I understand this. You don’t use MagPul products, but you feel the need to comment on their business decision? Is that correct?

      • Bill says:

        If that’s directed at me, I use exactly 3 Pmags, purchased with my own money, dedicated to one of the ARs that they function in, used on duty and purchased with my own money. I own and use a number of other Magpul accessories, purchased with my own money, on duty weapons, purchased with my own money. I have no idea of how many AR mags I own in total from a variety of other manufacturers, all purchased with my own funds for weapons purchased with my own funds on the job where I earn that money.

        My main issue is with this “promise” they want in exchange for the privilege of spending my money on their stuff. The sole and only promise I’m making is the one I made when sworn in, which included upholding the Constitution.

        If it’s truly a issue of fairness, should agencies have to promise that when they buy police package cars that they won’t use any of the enhanced performance features unavailable on the civilian market? Granted, that isn’t a Constitutional issue, but if you want a level playing field, the principle is the same.

        • When it becomes a CONSTITUTIONAL right to have the same automobiles to defend ourselves and our families from the gov’t and bad guys then yes the car thing will become an issue

          Until then let’s focus on what is relevant – the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

          • Bill says:

            Apparently you didn’t note that I said the car analogy wasnt a Constitutional issue, but it is an apt comparison between the actual need for certain types of equipment by the police, versus the perceived need for the same by others. I guess you also didnt read my call for anyone with extra mags to donate them to other guys and girls who are short. I dont suppose you have a couple to spare?

            The real issue is divisive business practices and more importantly some BS scheme to require public servants (me) to make promises to private corporations (Magpul). I’m pretty sure the Framers would be just as pissed about that as any infringement on the Second Amendment.

  11. Matt says:

    We here at Black Bag Designs LLC support your decision and will get on board with your decision! Don’t Tread on Me!

    Matt Campbell
    CEO/Owner
    Black Bag Designs LLC

  12. Ross Botha says:

    An Oath is exactly that, an Oath. We MUST keep our Oaths. We must also not allow the forces of evil to divide us, for then they will rule us. I have lived through disarmament in my Old Country. This feels like Deja Vu … Do not let this slip in our Republic, if you do: Everything we hold dear and true will be lost. God Bless our Republic, May Jesus His Son protect us. This is THE fight.

  13. Brandon says:

    Im a cop and I can tell you the only cops that think this gun control crap will work are chiefs in liberal cities where it helps them secure their job. Or they truly believe that becaise they liberal already. In Florida, every Sheriff has signed a pledge to support the second amendment. Every cop I know personally knows gun control will not you or eye any safer. We all recommend owning firearms and getting training. Then if you NEED to do harm to a criminal thug, do it well so he isnt wasting tax payer money.

  14. erick says:

    I fully support Rich’s decision to run his business and sell his products as he sees fit.

  15. mgc says:

    we are all citizens and are all subject to the constitution and 2nd & 14th amendment.

    Accordingly, we should all be treated equally. Take the stand, and follow thru.

    Thank you for taking the position and sticking to it.

  16. Rob says:

    Before the recent legislative unpleasantness I was not an owner of mapul products, I had alternative preferences for magazines and accessories. Now, when the market relaxes from it’s dose of D.C. vitriolic medicine, I will give as much business to Magpul as I can. Cheers Magpul because Winter is Coming and we’ve gotta stand together!

  17. chris says:

    its really a waste of resources to posture with LEO agencies and individual officers. Once the politicians make the laws, then thats it. Instead of bickering with LEOs the industry should focus on putting pressure on polticians that have direct influence the law making process. I can assure that rank and file cops don’t sit around hoping to get collect and seize guns from good citizens.
    Lets work together to stop this crazy legislation now, not posture up at agencies, because most agencies don’t buy from Magpul, larue, & other high end compaines anyway.

  18. mark says:

    to mr. vickers, who told you cops are provided all they need by their ageny? you need to ask around before making a statement like that. i have been a cop since 89 and have spent thousands yes thousands of dollars on guns, gear and uniforms not otherwise supplied and received no reimbursement. to anyone else out there harboring unadmitted dislike for law enforcement, we are an executive branch function. we dont make or interpret law. the only LE people who support the current rash of knee jerk laws are elitist liberal agency heads from crime ridden sewers. denying individual officer sales of something like a rifle mag is no different than any other piece of lifesaving equipment. to all the patriots in the weapons or accessory business, how about stepping up to the plate and shutting off your business with the federal government? same for ammo companies. but we all know that wont happen. take it out on the local officer, deputy or state trooper. stay classy firearms and accessory industry!

  19. APMD says:

    ACAB

  20. Bill says:

    Maybe as a show of solidarity, everyone with a slew of magazines should set aside 6 for each compatible rifle they own, and gift the rest to shooters who aren’t so fortunate.

    I’m pretty sure that plan isn’t going to catch on. Neither would the idea of Magpul absolutely flooding the states threatening bans with free, or at-cost, mags to shooters before any ban went into effect. That might build a customer base. There can’t be any logical business reason to not give away your product, or sell it at a greatly reduced price, if you’re only other plan is to intentionally stop sales to specific groups.

  21. As my buddy Ken Hackathorn says ; ‘All you cops need to remember your just one paycheck from being like everyone else- a civilian’

    And yes Ken has time as an LEO

    Try looking at things from that point of view and see what your take is on all this now

    • Blue Line Medic says:

      it’s clear from your recent comments that you’ve never spent a day in LE and how you really feel about cops on the beat

      • Blue Line Medic – no I want LE to realize they have a dog in this fight; it is in their best interest to make sure law abiding citizens have the same 2A rights as them

        I have trained countless LE and Military personnel – as it stands now I would not legally be able to conduct certain types of training in states such as NY, NJ and others because I am a civilian ; not LE

        But yet my expertise is such that I am contracted to come provide training on weapons and magazines that I could not legally own in those states

        Explain to me what sense that makes ? If LE is exempted as they have been in the past they have no vested interest to fight for the 2A rights of the citizens they protect ; we need everyone engaged with no exceptions as I have said before as then everyone is in the same boat

        • Bill says:

          So you will quit doing business in those states? That’ll show them.

        • Blue Line Medic says:

          Is it really about the 2A? or is it about your new inability to prostitute your DD214 to internet commandos and mall cop fan boys in those states?

          I PROMISE you the % of pro 2A LE is far greater than the % of pro 2A average Americans. We are NRA members, we vote, we talk to our friends, we speak our minds, do you want us marching on the street with M4’s? Not every cop got picked on in school and is trying to be some type of higher class citizen, some of us just like the rush of being the first one called when bad things happen (sound familiar?).

          Are you going to keep pimping DVD’s and Slings to the .gov in ban states too?

          No hate LAV, I’m just still disgruntled that the medic sling got discontinued before I had a chance to buy one myself. Thanks for all you do for the community and for the 2A. Keep up the hard work.

        • mike says:

          Larry,

          Every cop I know is well aware that the next day they come to work is potentially the day they get fired. The reality is most cops are pro 2A and stand with you and the rest of the gun community. As LE there’s only so much we can do to voice our opinions in uniform though. So if you don’t see rank and file cops on the news in uniform speaking up on the issue it isn’t because we don’t care. The tax payers cut us a check to keep the peace, not publicly voice our personal opinions on current events while on the clock. Just like the military we have a chain of command. Everyday we come to work that chain of command gives us a mission to do. At no time is that mission to use our position to persuade elected officials to vote one way or another. That would be abusing our power and we would be fresh out of a job and that’s the way it should be. I was an infantryman also and back then speaking publicly in uniform about politics or about public officials was not allowed. At any time in your military career did you ever stand up in front of the cameras to publicly express your disgust for the laws passed by your elected officials or to publicly disagree with the choices made by congress or the president? It’s the same for cops. The reason I don’t use my full name on here is because I might be punished if I did.

          Unfortunately the heads of LE organizations don’t follow the same rules they layout for the rank and file. Trust me, every time some clown like Charlie Beck from LAPD gets on TV holding an inert AT4 or LAW tube and talks about how his gun buy back program just took a rocket launcher off the streets we all hang our heads in shame. But like the military we have a job to do protecting the nation. So we suck it up and drive on. Also, one thing to remember next time you see some police chief on the news asking for more gun control. They don’t represent the true feelings of most cops just like that douche Stanley McChrystal doesn’t represent the feelings of most members of the Army or Special Operations Community on gun control.

          So trust me, we stand with you and we are in the fight.

    • KS Cop says:

      Yes Mr. Vickers you and Mr. Hackathorn are correct WE cops are just a paycheck away from being like everyone else. What you fail to see, get, or grasp…WE cops don’t put on the uniform for the paycheck. We put ourselves in harms way to protect “everyone else”. It may sound cliche, but that is why I have put on the uniform for 16 years. It angers me that you think my life should be used as pawn in politics.

      It has been said before by several others here. Your line level officer supports gun owners rights. I am thankful that I live in a state that supports the Second Ammendment. I pray for my brothers and sisters that go into harms way in the states that don’t.

      I hope that no LEO looses their life because of a company policy. However, I support that company’s right to do as it chooses. Just like I support the right for you to voice your opinion. One more thing, you to are dependent on paycheck and the support of the public. Some of of those who support your paycheck are the cops. I for one will take my business elsewhere.

  22. erick says:

    Larry – Ken is correct; however, you are mistaken about what agencies (departments & offices) do and do not supply their people.

    We had a patrol rifle for eleven years before the office supplied any rifles; when the DRMO / -1033 program rifles showed, they were issued with a carry strap, two-20rd magazines and one-30rd magazine. Nothing more, neither lights nor optics. Anything that any of the street cops have came out of their pocket. For many years training time, maintenance, etc, everything other than ammunition came out of their pockets too. And we’re better off than many.

    Talked with a cop at a pretty large midwest agency, in another “occupied state” today. He has to buy all of his gear; at least I get a bit issued.

    But, hey, all of us should spend as much time & effort demonizing less than one third of one percent of the US population as we can.

    We can just forget about those truly causing the problems in regards to our firearms and the rest of our freedoms.

  23. MEUSOC Jarhead says:

    First off I come into this conversation, having used to respect Larry Vickers a great deal. And will a egomaniac like him realy care about 1 guy on the world wide web? I doubt it. But after this embarrassing display of Adam Henry-itous, his show and anything he does has rendered him persona non grada! He’s no better than Obama in my eyes now!

    When ever someone has to name drop, I call bullshit! The more I read of Vickers bs, It’s clear as a bell, that his shtick is all bullshit and self promotion, sprinkled with some past glory. If this really is Larry Vickers? He’s just a bitter douche! I cannot believe all the garbage he’s spewing. News flash Vickers, we’re all just regular pilgrims standing in 7-11. Clearly you think, cops feel we’re above the law, for some unknown arrogant/ignorant reason. You too are just a pilgrim standing in 7-11, you’ve just turned out to be a bigger d-bag.

    I couldn’t believe what I was reading, so I just fired this link off to a former Green Beenie, buddy of mine who said he is embarrassed by his lack of bearing or understanding. Not exactly a “Quiet Professional”. He said, “we have SF guys that go brain dead in too. Shit happens.”

    Vickers, do us all a favor, and keep your high and mighty BS to yourself and have the courage of your conviction. Stop referencing Law Enforcement in your TV show and STOP dealing with all of us low-brow bottom dwelling LEO’s all together. It’s clear you have an axe to grind, so sack up and just quit training or contributing to law enforcement all together, trust me, we don’t need you, and you clearly don’t need us. Build your pistols, eat your Bon Bons, and enjoy your self induced misery. But, for the record, does DD share your hatred of Law Enforcement. It appears that they don’t. But after the pejorative tone I’ve read in all of your posts, perhaps they should consider the relationship. That or maybe you’re just drunk?
    Show me clear!

  24. Bill says:

    No one is saying that non-cops shouldn’t have anything they want. They can have GAUs for all I care. I know Ken Hackathorn, too, and also know that there are cops in the county he lives that make minimum wage, that is, the ones who are actually paid and not volunteer reserves and auxiliaries, and buy their own everything, except for the cruisers that were donated to their departments when deadlined by a larger agency.

    Don’t treat us like pawns in a political fight. We get enough of that from the IACP, NSA and national FOP.

  25. majrod says:

    Photo of LEO (NOT CHIEFS) supporting anti 2nd Amendment measures.

    Minneapolis, Minn w/pres http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/obama-talks-gun-control-in-minneapolis/

    Yeah, it’s only the politically appointed chiefs. You guys aren’t getting it when it’s right on fromt of your face. That blue wall must be blinding you.

    • KUTF says:

      I seem to remember recurring photos of Soldiers, Marines, Sailors, etc standing with politicians during visits to overseas locations and CONUS military bases.

      You think those service-members have a choice in skipping that formation?

      Neither do those cops….

    • R & R says:

      majrod…. Is a Major Rod!

  26. Bill says:

    Funny how they MSM can’t be trusted, until they show you what you want to see. When you are assigned to a VIP detail, you go to the VIP detail.

    This is getting juvenile. Maybe because I disagree with Mr. Vicker’s position, he should get his sling back. The anti-gun lobby has nothing to worry about, the pro-gun lobby will destroy ourselves with stupid grandstanding.

  27. Scribby says:

    Larry Vickers I have lost a lot of respect for you after reading how you feel about Law Enforcement, apparently you have forgotten that your own profession has people who do not support the 2nd amendment. Remember this http://soldiersystems.net/2013/01/08/mcchrystal-serious-action-on-guns-needed/ ?

    I will defiantly be taking my money elsewhere. I hope all LE out there will think twice before training with LAV or buying anything from a company that he endorses.

    I am a pro 2nd amendment LEO and will continue to fight for our freedoms and our safety weather I use department equipment or all of the equipment I have had to purchase with my own funds.

    • R & R says:

      AMEN! Vickers is a total Zero, and has uncovered himself with his spiteful comments!

  28. dude says:

    It’s real simple. Police are civilians. Civilians are banned from owning some stuff in some places. Thus, companies aren’t selling banned stuff to ANY civilians in those places.

    Laws that prohibit stuff to civilians but make an exception for law enforcement personnel set the latter apart as a separate class. That’s not cool.

    If asked, I’m sure any expert will advise any department to get the best stuff it can. I’d be surprised if anyone would say a cop only needs a 10 pack in his Glock; the question is one of should that be available.

    Bryant said it best, “You know the deal. If you’re not cop, you’re little people.” I saw far too much of that in response to Canipe’s post.

    If you truly believe in the 2nd Amendment, you understand why the people gets really nervous by the idea that the government gets better stuff than we do. Police are the most visible agents of the government so they get the brunt of anger and frustration. That the people should have to depend on a subordinate part of the government to ignore its superior to ensure we aren’t oppressed is unacceptable. It just reminds us that a sheepdog is just a wolf the shepherd has beaten into submission. The dog answers to the shepherd, not the sheep. And if the dog makes a mess on the carpet, he’ll be beaten back into line or replaced a more pliant wolf.

    • KS Cop says:

      So you would rather de-fang/de-claw the sheepdog who protects the sheep…nice logic. What pains me most is the tone of Mr. Vickers. I understand that people out there are worried that we will come knocking/kicking down doors to take guns and mags away. I can only speak for the men and women that serve in my department. This will not happen…even if the command/law comes down the chain. I would rather turn in my badge than violate something I am sworn to protect.

      When someone comes out with the…I pay your salary comment…it tells me that they have no idea of why I do my job. Yes I am a public servant. Yes I answer to the public I serve. Yes I am just a paycheck away from something different. Mr. Vickers has failed to realize that his statement about paychecks goes both ways. I by products and look to other professionals for training. I will take my money to someone who In my option understands the average beat cop.

  29. ODCODE3FTP says:

    I am glad you stand with us on this issue, Larry.
    To the whiny LEOs – get your damn house in order.

    • c says:

      you will/would be screaming for the “whiney leos” when/if your house get burglarized or you car is stolen. you guys need to focus on law makers not law enforcement, it really makes the gun culture look paranoid of so called “gun police” and more like the people on doomsday preppers.

    • mike says:

      Actually it’s your house, you get it in order. The guys calling the shots were either appointed by the elected officials or it’s the sheriff. All of which were on a ballot you got. Cops don’t get some special ballot to vote who their leaders are going to be and we don’t go to tribal council each week to vote off the weak link.

      If the Police Chief in your city speaks in favor of gun control get off your butt, grab your friends and head down to the next City Counsel meeting and demand he be fired. If they don’t listen, keep going, protest outside city hall, start a recall election against the council members or mayor, give money to their rival at the next election. If you don’t then don’t bitch. It’s the peoples house, they just work there.

    • Bill says:

      Ther’a an old saying – “a community gets the police it deserves.” You don’t like the way your police operate, jock up and fix it. And look at a copy of your state’s basic LE curriculum and see how many training hours are spent on community policing, interpersonal communications skills for the whiny and cultural diversity, versus firearms and jack-booted thuggery.

    • R & R says:

      ODCODE3FTP…… Put a bib on while you’re working that thing!

      • ODCODE3FTP says:

        Guess y’all proved me right…
        Thin Blue Line? More like Thin Blue WHINE.
        You can keep perpetuating the Us vs. You crap by refusing to stand up for the 2nd Amendment – Just remember there are a lot more of US, than there are of YOU.

        • R & R says:

          I have but one word to describe guys like you ODCODE3FTP….It rhymes with hunt, but begins with a “C”. Enjoy your psychosis nerd,

        • KS Cop says:

          As many of us have said before we DO support the 2nd Amendment. The main issue in debate here is sending people into harms way without the best equipment available.

          If anything I see more hate being spread by posters like you…odcode3ftp. Go be an asshat somewhere else. As for Mr. Vickers and what has been said…take some time and read all of the posts.

        • mike says:

          Can you give us an example showing our refusal to stand up for the 2A? All I see is your refusal to step up and do your civic duty. If you don’t like what you see in your local government, get off butt and do something to change it. Don’t just sit on the internet and complain and ask someone else to do it for you. If you’re not part of solution then your just part of the problem. I defend and uphold the Constitution every day, how about you.

  30. KS Cop says:

    I apologize for part of my above statement…I speak for the men and women that I work with that I have spoken to about the issues. I shouldn’t type angry or assume.

  31. Jason says:

    I am curious why the civilian LEO’s posting on here think it is somehow worse to deny them the appropriate tools to defend themselves than it is to deny non-LEO civilians in the same States those same tools?

    • Blue Line Medic says:

      who said that? or is that just what you think the opinion LE has about the issue?

    • mike says:

      Jason,

      Not saying that at all. When a cop goes to work they accept the fact they might have to die that day to protect you, your family and your community. All anyone is asking is that you don’t stack the deck in the bad guys favor to try and prove a point and get leverage against politicians. They will confront the dangerous situation when you call them so you don’t have to put yourself in harms way. That’s why you pay them, just give them the tools to do it, that’s all we ask. We’re on your side.

  32. c says:

    I don’t want anyone to be banned from having hi-caps. But LEOs have to carry guns at work, not when they want to. agencies are going to get hi-caps no matter what, there will be a distrubtor out there that will sell the items, or the agency will buy a different brand. gun owners need to stand together not single out LEOs/non-LEOs for this infighting. With the current panic buying, compaines can say they are not selling to this place or that, but once the panic is over, we will see if they continue to do so. LAV’s comments have really turned alot of LEO customers against him at this point. as Gun OWNERS LETS COME TOGETHER AGAINST THIS LEGISLATION NOT BICKER WITH EACH OTHER~!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • R & R says:

      Well said “c”…. But Vickers has already fired those rounds out of the chamber. It wasn’t only 1 shot, but a pattern of conduct by him that has revealed his split-tail status. So he’s just another self promoting shit-bird to most of us from now on! He can go shit in his fist. Vickers wants to run his suck in an ignorant and argumentative fashion, he deserves the scorn he will reap! F-him!

  33. Bill says:

    And when this madness ends, and the fit and fury dies down, should I return to Magpul as a customer, and never mind that they cut me loose when it was politically expedient to do so?

  34. R & R says:

    Man there sure are a lot of diaper wearing, thumb sucking, booger eating Cop haters on SSD! It’s getting sad. What a shame.

    • Washed says:

      R & R, your use of language is juvenile. Bring something articulate and mature to the discussion if you want to be taken seriously. I hope you don’t act or speak in such a manner with the public during the course of your day at work.

      • R & R says:

        Like in this case, I only resorted to foul language, when attacked in an argumentative fashion, and when the attacker is incapable, due to his level of attack, of understanding civilized language. Which is precisely what has transpired here. If you’re offended by foul language, I don’t know that there is anything I can say at this point. And quite frankly, if you haven’t taken the time to read all the comments and your a fair and objective individual, then you’re part of the problem. But civilized discourse was attempted, and SSD was unwilling or incapable of keeping the cop haters at bay. If you’re prepared to acquiesce in the disrespectful tome of LAV, then you reap what you’ve sewn. You fight fire with fire.

        • SSD says:

          Big boys rules. I gave my opinion about the situation and told folks to cut the anti-LE rhetoric. You’re the flip side of that coin. I’m not here to hold your hand or pat your back when others don’t agree with you. Dealing with adversity is a maturity issue.

          Ultiamtely, you’ve got to figure out why people that are pro-gun are unhappy with LE and either live with it or reach out and mend the fences. It’s up to you. LAV is a grown man and is entitled to his opinion just like you are.

          My rules remain that you interact with other commenters by only posting things that you would say in person.

        • Washed says:

          Foul language has its place. That place is usually on a job site, and not in a debate. Well thought out, and articulate comments by everyone will help to move the subject forward.

          I support all LEO in having all required tools, safety equipment and standard capacity mags to perform the job safely and make it home to their families. No question.

          I understand the point Magpul is trying to make – Support of 2a, and in the case of ban states (in violation of 2a), that all citizens in said ban state be treated equal under that states laws. This includes the gov’t and those in her employ. I believe this is the position that LAV supports. This position is being taken to protect 2a and get everyone active in its defence. One team, one fight if you will, in support of 2a.

          Unfortunately, the above position is proving divisive. One can see how it negatively impacts law enforcements ability to protect themselves. Non-LEO citizens have a very similar fear when seeing 2a infringed, and their aibility to defend themselves compromised.

          Our debate should center on whether Magpuls position will be effective in achieving its goals of defending 2a, and whether or not LEOs need to be negatively impacted by ban state laws in order to get the gov’t and/or the people of the state to act.

    • SSD says:

      You know it cuts both ways. Why would you expect the average citizen to respect you or your profession when you go on like this? It actually makes me wonder if you are really a cop and not some plant, posting here to turn even more people against the law enforcement profession.

      • R & R says:

        And given the level of contempt leveled at Law Enforcement on this thread, you should be ashamed of yourself for even hinting that I somehow had anything to do with the down right despicable way YOUR readers excoriated LEO’s. And the fact that you’ve felt the need to take the callow way out and stand up for the pathetic and telling behavior of Mr. VIckers is also very telling, and direct contradiction in pattern to your previous thread. Quite a position. I guess if someone is famous, some people loose all logic and rational. My argumentative approach was due to my shit-meter being full, and Mr. Vickers attacking LEO’s and taking such an ignorant and arrogant position. Quite disheartening, coming from a man so long in the tooth. But, hey, the worlds full of disappointment. We’ll pull up our boot straps and march on. Good luck with your website, I hope you guys right your bearing. All these companies are doing is further isolating themselves. But it’s their right to implode, so they get what the seek. It’s unfortunate, that with all the law enforcement contacts, these companies don’t get that we little guys have zero voice in this fight. Anything I donate, which is a lot is done as a civilian, and nothing to do with my Military or municipal law enforcement titles. People like Larry Vickers are using their names and thinking they’re helping the Pro 2A cause, but instead are helping the left. It has always amazed me how people I thought were pretty smart, could end up possessing as much sense and logic as a box of hammers. Again, good luck. With all your anti law enforcement malcontents, you guys will sure keep it classy, by failing to escape mediocrity. No need too answer the below question, it’s clear you don’t have the stones to tell LAV he was out of line. Show me clear!

        • SSD says:

          Btw, my readers are your fellow citizens. And by and large, these are law abiding, tax paying, voting folks. That’s really something to take to heart.

          • Bill says:

            That doesn’t guarantee that they have valid, evidence based insight into or knowledge of what the LE profession entails. I can recognize a firetruck 9 out of 10 times and I pay my taxes, but that doesn’t make me qualified to pass judgement on how firefighters should do their jobs. I’m sure that there are subtleties involved in turning a basement into an in-ground swimming pool that I’d never consider.

  35. R & R says:

    One question SSD. Do you stand with Vickers on his position? Yes or no?

    • SSD says:

      I believe that laws curtailing the Second, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments are unconstitutional. I think you should too if you support the Constitution.

      Do I believe that the boycotts are having their desired effect? Sort of. On one hand, it’s getting people to discuss the issue at hand who wouldn’t have before the boycott. But will the boycott place cops in danger by stopping LE from getting the products they need? No. Will the boycott inconvenience individual officers? Possibly.

      • Bill says:

        Funny thing is, the Supreme Court thinks that laws that contravene the Constitution are unconstitutional, too. I don’t have the luxury of deciding myself, this being nation of laws and such. We aren’t allowed to make it up as we go along. It isn’t “supporting” the Constitution, it’s upholding it, as in “uphold and defend.”

        And clearly, if cops aren’t at risk from any inability to get mags, certainly the citizenry isn’t either.

  36. Jon says:

    I applaud Magpul and other companies and this should have happened years ago.

    Being complicit because you’re “doing your job” or “following orders” is no defense.

    Once the politicians make the law that’s it? Yeah, of course when the law CLEARLY violates the Constitution and was passed by politicians talking about going against the 2A. Yup just following orders…..

    Wonder what would happen if all the LE refused to enforce it, or quit?

    • Bill says:

      No, that isn’t it. Assuming an unconstitutional law were to be intentionally passed, which is pretty tough to do nowadays, there is this thing called the Supreme Court. You remember them, like, from the Heller decision?

      I’ve been waiting for somebody to trot out Katrina as an example of nefarious government skulduggery. Well, if it was, it was a miserable failure, because the system worked. A suit was filed, evidence was presented, arguments were heard, and the court ruled in the gun owner’s favor.

      And are you suggesting that if I disagree with a Supreme Court decision, I should not follow it? Ignore cases like Mapp, Terry, Miranda, Heller, Gideon, Graham and any others I might disagree with? Really? Is that what you want cops to do? Really? Really, what do you think would happen if every cop in the country quit? Seriously, I’m curious. Are you going to handle traffic crashes and domestic dispute yourself?

      If you don’t like the rules of a representative republic, try living without them. Give Chechnya a try. You’ll love it, no pesky laws, and more guns than you can shake a RPG at.

  37. R & R says:

    Right on Bill…….. To the rest, here’s a clear an distinct difference between the naysayers on this thread and police officers like me. We want all of you to be able to carry concealed everywhere in the country, just like HR218. And we’re not with our chiefs and the left wing loons that want you disarmed. To the contrary, even the malcontents on here would be a force multiplier to most leo’s in a gun fight with a criminal. And as for some of these self professed “firearms professionals” who ask, rather smugly, do I need the tools I have? Yes! Will cops be put in harms way by these boycotts? Maybe, but then most didn’t go through Magpul for P-mags, so the principal of there position is more like a symbolic FU to the working cop. And to the ignoramuses who don’t think cops need an M4, the unit I work actively tracks down the worst of the worst. Not looking to get into a gun fight, but the percentages are far greater. I’ve be fortunate to make it a point, taught to me by my father a 35 year cop, to focus my attention as a leo on thugs and predators. I don’t sweat the working man/woman or soccer moms. So yes, when I read the types of divisive and anti law enforcement comments spread throughout this thread, it naturally requires addressing. Now, I’m lucky, I work for a department with all the resources in the world, from airships, to all the officers I could ever need on an incident. But the times I’ve been involved in shootings, It’s us proactively looking for predators, not responding to a radio call. Or sweating some pimple faced kid or ticketing a soccer mom. So I read the disrespectful and viol comments on this thread, and consider my fellow Officers on smaller departments, and that their safety greatly affected by boycotts like Magpul and it rubs me the wrong way. And I would think that Magpul wouldn’t want that at all, just to try and make a point to my puppet chief.
    That we are out there actively looking for gang members, rapists, robbers, burglars, murderers, baby and child rapists, one would think that any upright walking realist would want their leo’s armed as well as they could be, while they’re proactively looking to mitigate the effect these predators have on our country. If it were their daughter in the house of a child rapist, who’s door I was about to rip off the hinges, I should think they would want the guys in the stick equipped as best as possible? But some of the comments on this thread somehow reflect the commentators intent on making the police less well equipped, just to prove a symbolic point. Unfortunately, my fellow officers and I aren’t waiting for trouble to maybe come knocking , like most of the non-leo commentators, were out there trying to locate it, before it locates you and your families. And our job has the most finite consequences….for a “civilian”. I won’t write a thesis on this, but you get the point. I’ll just finish, with even those on this thread, that I think are grossly missing the point, I would rather have you all armed with CCL’s than not. Again, because it’s a force multiplier for law enforcement. Our constitutional republic may suck the way its run at the moment, but it’s better than anything else out there. But like Bill said, if their are any of you that would like to give Chechnya a go, I’m sure your concerns will be given substantial weight at the Caucus community meetings.

  38. R & R says:

    I was tired…18hour day.. couple typos, “there=thier, and viol=vile”.