Velocity Systems

LaRue Tactical Issues New Sales Policy for State and Local Agencies

Earlier today, LaRue Tactical issued this press release.

02/08/2013 LEANDER, TX.

Updated Policy for State and Local Agency Law Enforcement Sales:

Due to the recent and numerous new Anti-gun/Anti-2nd Amendment laws passed and/or pending across our country, LaRue Tactical has been forced to reconsider how we provide products to state and local agencies.

Effective today, in an effort to see that no legal mistakes are made by LaRue Tactical and/or its employees, we will apply all current State and Local Laws (as applied to civilians) to state and local law enforcement / government agencies. In other words, LaRue Tactical will limit all sales to what law-abiding citizens residing in their districts can purchase or possess.

State and local laws have always been a serious focus of this firm, and we are now dovetailing that focus with the constitutional rights of the residents covered in their different areas by the old and new regulations.

We realize this effort will have an impact on this firm’s sales – and have decided the lost sales are less danger to this firm than potential lawsuits from erroneous shipments generated by something as simple as human error.

Thanks in advance for your understanding.

Mark LaRue

* * This policy does not apply to Military / Federal Agencies * *


212 Responses to “LaRue Tactical Issues New Sales Policy for State and Local Agencies”

  1. Jay The Fillet says:

    All the LEO’s that are complaining, you’re using the same defense that the regular Joe Schmoe is using. That, and you’re now butthurt that LT is treating you on the same plain as us lowly civilians.

    • LAPD Pro-2nd Ammendment says:

      I call bullshit on that…! I support you 100% in you owning and carrying anything you desire! As long as you’re not a felon or a loon! And have shown my support in money, letters to politicians, and a multitude of other avenues. But, you sound like the left-wing anti American jackasses, with your ignorant position. The heads of departments do not speak for me, like Fienstien probably doesn’t speak for you, so smarten up and check your DOPE! Unless you did vote for Obama, then march on.

      • Mark C says:

        Sorry, don’t agree with you. What’s good for a state’s citizens is good for its police force. Let the police buy elsewhere.

      • John Galt says:

        Looks like you want to have special status or special rights.
        Join the rest of us and stop your crying.
        Maybe it’s time for you to run for office and put an end to this unconstitutional behavior.

      • Jay The Fillet says:

        I sound like a left wing anti American? You’re trying to defend a point for LEOs to have a special status over ordinary people. I think they should do what Barrett did and extend it to Federal LE who operate within that state. If the defense for LE to have higher round counts or certain cosmetic features, then it should be good enough for non-LEOs.

      • AR 2A says:

        Judging from the LAPDs response to just one man, they don’t appear qualified enough to carry anything more that a whistle.

      • TRUE Northern California says:

        LAPD, I call bullshit on your bullshit claim. If I’m not allowed to have it after the service I’ve given this country, you damned sure don’t deserve to have it just because you wear a badge.

        I’m also POST certified, I spend more training time on the range in a month than your department does all year and I don’t have a habit of shooting up vehicles without knowing who/what the f*ck is in them. Since I’m not employed as an LEO though, I’m limited in what I can purchase. Outdamnedstanding that you now face the same limitations I do.

      • Dan says:

        If it is not OK for the people then is is not good for the cops and given their current display of judgment and marksmanship in the LA area the limiting of firearm sales to LA police will most likely save lives.

    • Doc B says:

      Police ARE civilians, thus, they should only be permitted to carry what everyone else can. Simple.

  2. Kevin says:

    well if you think you will lose money over this and are still going through with it, you have just got a new customer out of it . I will be ordering from you. thank you from myself and my children for making a stand to protect my rights. Kevin,Shannon,Blake,Maci,Lily,Kayla

    • LAPD Pro-2nd Ammendment says:

      Another happy anti-2nd Amendment Obama supporter heard from in Kevin.

      • Anon says:

        For along time I always thought the LAPD took anyone who applied. You’re proving that to me. You must respond well in a high stress environment if you act like this when someone disagrees with you. Take your anger out on your union and chief for making idiotic remarks on firearm control, not on normal citizens and LaRue. I hope more companies follow what Barrett and LaRue did. They survive off civilian purchases, not agency contracts.

      • John Galt says:

        More union goon behavior, not very professional.

        • A voter says:

          Who is John Galt (had to), hey now, enough of this anti-union stuff. I’m Union, and I wrote, called, and have chased down my higher union bosses making it plainly known that my contributions to any political funding has been terminated as a direct result to Feinstein, and that they should pass that info along. your post is nothing more than a similarity to LAPD Pro-2A, in that it just talks trash. Nice job. Think it out; 2A rights are the very heart of Free speech rights, worker rights, civil rights, human rights, on down the line…it’s all the same entity. Besides, the very truth of the matter can be found within the LAPD itself, just ask Rodney King.

      • Gregory K. Sloat says:

        LAPD Pro-2nd Amendment, don’t you get it? This is one of the best things that LaRue could have done. Read the policy statement, again, and read between the lines. Hey, these guys are on YOUR side. Really!

        This is some very creative “noodle-using” (thinking) by Mark LaRue.

        Vent your anger at your legislature. Start throwing out the bums or impeach them. Also, take full advantage of nullification. It’s not a “law” if nobody obeys it, and nobody enforces it (think, Real ID Act).

        Most important of all, remember the Oath you took to the Constitution. That Oath supersedes any order from your commander, any “law” from any legislature or the federal government, or even any command or Executive Order from the president. If you haven’t already, look into joining Oath Keepers and learn about the “Ten Orders We Will Not Obey” (

        The time is quickly approaching where you will be called upon to choose sides. Choose wisely.

    • Angrymike says:

      You are absolutely right, big Atta boy to LaRue, I shall be making purchases through the LaRue web sight. Very good equipment, with a very intelligent owner……..

  3. JPate says:

    The movement recently has been for the states to try and do what the federal government will have trouble doing. Look at New anorak, Maryland, and California. Weapon and magazine restrictions could be or have been put in place by State governments easier than getting them passed by the Federal government. That is why LaRue madebh stand. Good on them.
    Sent by a gun loving 18 year law enforcement veteran.

  4. JPate says:

    Meant New York, damn auto correct.

  5. firedoc says:

    My comment will only address those who question why LEO or PD need suppressed weapons and hi-cap magazines.

    I am on a SWAT team that is made up of multiple agencies. Several of the men are from the Drug Task Force. Several of these men have suppressors for their rifles and subguns. The reason is to reduce muzzle flash inside a meth house, if they had to engage someone. Also, for hearing protection. A lot of these rifles are short barrel rifles and shooting in enclosed spaces without hearing protection allmost guarantees temporary hearing loss.

    Most only carry 3 or maybe 4 magazines anyway(long gun) and 2 extra for pistol.Why should they be restricted to 10 or 7 round magazines? That doesn’t make much sense does it?

    • EatARock says:

      Doesn’t make much sense to restrict law-abiding citizens to 7/10-rnd magazines for their own defense when they generally only have 1. Seems pretty selfish and self-centered to say our hearing isn’t as important as your hearing. That doesn’t make much sense does it. firedoc, thank you for cleaning up after people and making an honest attempt at ridding this country of filth, but respectfully, go F*** yourself and your ‘almighty’ SWAT team.

    • Zermoid says:

      It doesn’t make sense for ANYONE.
      But since your masters think it’s all some of us need why isn’t it all any of us need? Afterall civilians are usually the first on scene anyways, who do you think calls your ass to show up 20 minutes later?

    • robert says:

      I agree with you 100%. I can’t find any mags 10 and under for any of my subguns or my ar15s. proMag has 1,000,000 payed for on back order. Is your team having problems finding ammo. I live in Iowa and can’t find any. Good guys need to be able to match the firepower of the bad guys. But what do we know! Right

    • AlShaw says:

      For the same reason we should be restricted to 10 or 7 rds.

    • Smith says:

      Marines in Fallujah were kicking down hundreds of doors a day clearing rooms without suppressors using various weapons.

      • Doc B says:

        Your “reasoning” behind suppressor use is pathetic, at best. Suppressors aren’t intrinsically safe, so your meth house pseudo logic, such as it is, doesn’t even begin to apply. Save your department and f’ing taxpayers a little coin and get a Blackout from BE Meyers for 85 bucks.

        As Mr. Smith states above, Marines (and soldiers) ran DA missions for years in places far more dangerous than a clan lab without suppressors, just fine. Go grab some electronic ear pro, and your ears will be just fine, too.

    • Steve-O says:

      If a cop, or SWAT team needs high capacity magazines then the citizens they protect need HIGHER capacity magazines! After all how many times are cops there when something bad is actually happening? They are always called AFTER the fact… thus they are NOT 1st responders, they are 2nd responders.

  6. Christopher Levy says:

    With all due respect, all members of Law Enforcement are in fact Civilians as well.

  7. Peyton says:

    Civilians have the same needs as you described why LEOs need suppressors and standard cap mags. Many home invasions involve children of the home owners. I would argue suppressors are more necessary for civilians in the interest of their children’s hearing. I am not a doctor, but I anticipate that a developing child exposed to a 45ACP being discharged in a cofined space could be detrimental and possibly permanently impare that child’s hearing development. It is certainly probably worse of small child than an adult.

  8. Katie says:

    Good for LaRue. For the law enforcement who are upset about this, you’re missing the point. If you NEED the fire power/capacity, you’ll have to take a stand politically against these crazy anti-gun laws.

  9. Mr Bond says:

    “Most only carry 3 or maybe 4 magazines anyway(long gun) and 2 extra for pistol.Why should they be restricted to 10 or 7 round magazines? That doesn’t make much sense does it?”

    What makes them any better than the rest of us?

  10. Bret Widdifield says:

    Thank you LaRue. You are another example of a modern “Minute Man”. It takes real personal and business courage to do what you are doing. Bravo!!
    I too will become a customer for my firearm needs.
    By the way, I am a huge fan of our Law Enforcement Officers, and yes, they too are citizens being hurt by leftist anti-gun activism. Unfortunately, it is many of their department heads that buckle to political pressure. Your actions will hopefully put the squeeze on these politicos and drive home the point that they need to find answers to violence without trampling our rights! If you are a LEO, thank you for your service and “fight” to preserve our 2nd Amendment rights. Get politically active!! Thanks again LaRue Tactical!

  11. LAPD Pro-2nd Ammendment says:

    I would have supported this new SOP in theory as well, if they included everyone. But they didn’t, they only singled out front line LEO’s. Which is cowardice it best! This smacks of a purely symbolic move. Sack up and implement it across the board, or you lack the courage of your stated conviction. And for the record, I have not , and would not, ever order something that would be against my departments authorized carry list. If I did, depending on the item ordered, I might be committing a felony, and subject to termination, and possibly legal ramifications. So yes, this pisses me off, as it does quite a few, not because we would order a weapon we’re not authorized to purchase, but because most of us stand WITH all of you, but this is how you turncoats respond and look as us front line cops? And you laud this decision like its a decision against Obama or Fienstien themselves. When in reality, if la rue was making this decision based on substance, it’s the Feds and Military they would be targeting, not patrolmen and deputies. But then they would be loosing bigger money from their GSA contract, and that’s just how committed and empty their symbolic gesture is! Don’t want to stop sucking from the teet of the Government and loose contract #GS-07F-5784P! So yes, mediocre job la rue, your move displays a lack of true commitment to your stated position!

  12. LAPD Pro-2nd Ammendment says:

    All this is doing is playing into the hands of Fienstien and Obama. The lefts asymmetrical warfare is demonstrably working on the intellectually challenged (la rue tactical), and you guys are falling for it hook line and sinker. Great job on a major FAILURE! Now we will be fighting with each-other, instead of the idiots in office, and the ignorant puppet police chiefs and sheriffs. You just lost another costumer!

    • EatARock says:

      LAPD, please look at it this way. If you are truly on ‘our’ side. You are now upset because LaRue Tactical is refusing to sell you items which are illegal for non-LEO to obtain, and rightfully so, in the name of safety you are having your hands tied by a company. What about the rest of us, does OUR safety not count either whose hands are tied by the government? Instead of yelling at LaRue, why don’t you yell and scream at your legislature and representatives for tying the hands of EVERYBODY!

    • Mark C says:

      Wrong again. Back to your hole.

    • Ash says:

      “Now we will be fighting with each-other”

      You’ve been the one ranting and raving… Instead of whining, how about doing something? Like not lashing out at others by dismissing them as ignorant or cowardly because they don’t have the depth of insight you allegedly possess.

      If you don’t want to “be fighting with each-other”, then how about you stop fighting? Lead by example.

  13. Tim says:

    Thank you for taking this step – it is important and more than a statement of support. Putting your resources where your “mouth” is demonstrates not only to Citizens but to other companies that a stand can be taken. I have taken oaths to support and defend the Constitution and respect, and patronize, businesses that respect that spirit and oath. Thank you!!

  14. Uncle Buck says:

    Not really hard to figure this out folks. Many LEO offices place their orders and get put in front of civilian orders and often at discount pricing. The rush of everyone (Civillians and LEO agencies and officers) is greater than LaRue’s capacity to deliver product in a timely manor to everyone. Thus it is a first come first serve basis with no more favoritism to ether group so that the civilians get a chance to get their product too. Thinking if from a point of view of waiting for a product but people keep cutting in line constantly and your not able to get in with the number of people cutting in line. The business comes in and says no more so the people who are cutting are threatening to leave. So what, there is a long line behind you waiting to pay. That’s not even figuring if there is a discount involved for the people cutting in line. So what. Get in line with everyone else.

    As far as which group is more important. The LEO protecting me is BS. I protect me and my family. LEO show up to collect the bodies. My need is no less than theirs if anything it is greater as “I” am the first responder if someone tries to harm me or my family.

    • Aninymous says:

      Let’s first set the parameter that I agree “ALL citizens should have this right” and let’s agree that “All citizens have an obligation to protect themselves” I agree. So Legally in NV you can own a detachable mag on your AR. In CA you can’t as a citizen, but as LE you can. Why is LRue deciding to restrict the legal (LE) purchase of such a gun and applying the non-LE law to LE in this State. I am assuming LaRue is pro 2A, but in this decision they are now RESTRICTING legally owned guns to a group of people in CA (LE)……let me restate that LaRue is restricting legal gun sales to a group of law abiding citizens in CA (LE). What aren’t they the ones that are saying change the laws if you don’t like them! Yet La Rue is not following their own ROE’s! Please someone explain why a Pro 2A company is restricting my legal purchase of their firearm! Take the argument we should all have them out! I AGREE! Take the LE/Mil/CIV side of it out of the debate- LaRue is restricting legally purchased guns to a member of society! WHY? Riddle me this!

      • SonOfSpartans says:

        It is really simple and poetic. If your state has restricted what the citizens can legally purchase and own then you are unable to buy these items. You are a citizen first/last and always. If you think you are a “Super citizen” because other citizens write you up that way, you will understand why we regular citizens have no sympathy for your plight. Do not yell at the people that support larue, yell at the people that passes a law dividing us into the privileged and the repressed.

        Good job Larue. I hope others file suit and if the ban goes through on the national level, this should apply to ALL non military agencies. That means even DHS, ATF, FBI and all state agencies except the National Guard. All suppliers should state this as pending policy. This is civil disobedience at work.

      • sean says:

        Cops are Civilian Authority, you are not above the people, no matter how much you want to be you will always be a civilian before, during, and after your a cop.

        As Public Servants you shouldn’t have any more rights than a janitor gets with his job. This I am your Overlord crap won’t cut it.

  15. Wade Ritchie says:

    I fully support this decision & appreciate LaRue’s team standing up for citizen rights. Arms good enough for local law enforcement should be good enough for the citizens, and vice versa. In addition to opposing any new Second Amendment restrictions, I’m also for RESTORING previously lost Second Amendment rights. Repealing the National Firearms Act of 1934 would be a great start! Thanks so much, LaRue!

  16. firedoc says:

    I will try to clarify something in this post. I do not think civilians should be restricted to low cap mags. I think civilians should be allowed to own anything they can afford and are able to own. Our state just recently approved short barrel rifles for civilian ownership. My earlier post was just trying to explain to someone why PD needs suppressors, mainly. I am with everyone else on this.

    We are having trouble getting ammo. We buy .223, not 5.56. But we are having trouble getting it. We are using Blazer for practice ammo.

    At eatARock, I would if I could.

  17. MTW says:

    Thank you Larue. I hope this hits home with the few states this does effect. I do not believe Larue is targeting individual police officers as much as they are those in authority to make changes on a state level who rely on protection from police officers. If the entire gun industry stopped supporting states like CA., then maybe the powers that be there would take a long deep look at reconsidering their gun laws that heavily restrict their citizens.

  18. Way to go says:

    Awesome! I commend you!!!

  19. KP says:

    To LEOs, I don’t want you to be restricted either but now is the time to stand up for OUR rights, just like the rest of us have to. This can only divide the 2a community if you let. Instead, now that you’re lumped in with the rest of us(as far as LaRue rifle purchases are concerned so none of you are actually hamstrung unless you can only run LaRue gear) you gotta use whatever avenues you got to support the Second Amendment. And I’m sure you have but LEOs also have a closer line to those chiefs. The ones running their mouths.

    The LEO hate is stupid so let’s get past that. Let’s not celebrate that a CA officer would get a LaRue with a bullet button but fricken come together on this. I have little respect for officers who feel more important than other civilians (obviously not all of them) but I wouldn’t want their rights restricted the same as I wouldn’t want mine restricted. The bottom line to all of this is the same as always – United We Stand.

  20. Gregory K. Sloat says:

    WAY TO GO, LaRue Tactical!!!

    What a creative and clever way to make your case and your point. Those of you in law enforcement who are complaining, your efforts would be better spent in stopping the erosion of our Constitution and our rights by focusing on your state lawmakers.

    Also, you have an obligation to that Oath you took to the Constitution to NOT enforce any so-called “laws” that violate or abridge it. Saying, “I don’t agree with the law, but I have to enforce it,” is NO EXCUSE. That’s the “Good German” argument, and you KNOW what happened to them at Nuremberg, right?

    As another writer stated, police ARE civilians, and the same laws that apply to us apply to the police, so if you have a problem, it’s not with the public, and it’s not with LaRue. It’s with your state legislatures. The 2nd Amendment IS our “line in the sand.” It has to be, or the whole country is lost.

    I only wish LaRue could extend this policy to the Feds and the military (probably would violate some contracts, though). I’m proud to say that I’m a LaRue customer, and this new policy only further cements my loyalty (and Mark, I “get” it ).

  21. String Hunter land lover says:

    Bravo LaRue Tactical. Thank God for our President Barrack Obama, and true leaders like Sen. Diane Feinstien, and TV commentator Piers Morgan. …Soon all of you will be disarmed and it will be because you are as stupid and irresponsible as we on the progressive side always knew you were. I love it. All this bickering, is perfect. All of you fellow citizens on this thread, and all of you who say you’re LEO’s that agree with LaRue Tactical, are doing all the work for us, so thank you for your steadfast support in banning all assault weapons. We needed to start disarming the police anyway so that we can start implementing significant change. The citizens like most of you have already began being disarmed, and this will speed up our movement. Thank you so much for helping us rid the country of all these assault weapons. I love to see all of you fighting with one another, it’s poetry to our ears! Great job LaRue Tactical. Keep up the separation of your alliances, it is so much appreciated in this fight to rid the country of all guns All this tough talk. Real men hunt with bows, not assault rifles. Every single one of you is a coward. So hurry up and just turn in your weapons… You don’t need them, our President and his army will protect you. The constitution should be rewritten anyway, to reflect the current majority, who voted for Barrack Obama, and are not supportive of your antiquated positions on the 2nd amendment. So, again keep up the great work LaRue Tactical, now we just need you to add the federal employees and the military. President Obama will make the right decisions and finalize his AWB in his 3rd term. Keep up the bickering you mindless minions…We love it, as it’s so entertaining. 😉

  22. String Hunter land lover says:

    And we should start with the LAPD, NYPD, CPD, BPD, APD and all the major LE departments!!!!!! Then on to the military, so that our Federal authorities can go and take all the guns, with no pesky police and sheriffs in the way!

  23. majrod says:

    I support LEO but those complaining here about the policy need to “police” their own…

    Check out his link and note who’s in the background…

    Here’s another one. Who’s behind Sen Feinstien?

    As a citizen I don’t see or hear of any contrary positions from those department’s officers. I understand police may have to enforce the local law but they don’t have to agree with it.

    Appreciate all LEO does but what about a suggestion on how to deal with LEO that do support more gun control? I don’t have anything against LEO but they have to do their share and it starts by admiting there’s a lot of LEO that don’t support citizens 2A rights. That’s tough. Loyalty between LEO is legendary right or wrong.

  24. Long time reader says:

    Interesting that the only folks who seem to be howling over this are self identifying as law enforcement. And they’re labeling any civilians who agree as leftist playing into the hands of the leftists.

    There’s a lesson here. The truth of the matter is that by making active and retired LE protected classes that gun laws don’t apply to, the antigunners have gotten LE to play right into their hands. For all of these years they’ve been bought off by politicians who make laws for the little people, but leave LE immune. It’s high time that their silence on gun legislation has some consequences. I hope more gun companies join LaRue and ammo companies too. Maybe then the law enforcement community will join the citizens they protect and serve in opposing useless gun laws.

    • Anon says:

      Well that is because LE is the only one it applys to!!!! Law allows them to have an exemption, but that apparently isn’t good enough for you or LaRue! I am not sure why you think because someone is LE the don’t work to protect 2A rights! I can tell you that is a huge assumption that in my state is wrong! No big deal I support the 1a also…..just remember dividing is a sure fire way to conquer!!!!!

  25. LASO Deputy M_-_-_-uez says:

    Well, CA Deputy here. I say, thanks for the half baked idea larue. You don’t have the courage to include the Feds in your little game huh? Didn’t think so! They pay you to much money, so you’re really just a bunch of fat kat hypocrites. That’s cool, you just saved me the time and money of buying four mounts. I’ll just stick with the mounts Aimpoint sent with my optics. I already have my M4’s! So screw all of you feeble little cry babies that are crying like little bitches about the big bad LOE’s having AR’s, waaaaa. You bed wetters cannot get the guns you want. Every one of you sound like a whinny little turd…. Waaaaaa law enforcement get the guns we want….. waaaaaaa. Bunch of jealous little split-tails, crying and stomping your feet. Suck it up and find a shoulder to cry on. You clowns voted for these people, so you reap what you’ve sewn. Don’t think there are any of you citizens and veterans on here that sound like they’re mature enough to posses a gun in the first place. Na nite ladies!

  26. Larue convert. says:

    I’m confident this was a decision based on principle, driven by dignity. However, as a side note it’s a great business move because now I’ll buy from LaRue at every opportunity I have, simply to support a company that would do this. Right on, fellas.

  27. Whatever says:

    Larue doing this is borderline meaningless. I think it is safe to say there are not a ton of ban state agencies / departments using their rifles for duty.

    It would take Glock, Sig, S&W, and / or the actual major LE AR manufactuters (Colt, LMT, etc.) saying that they will not sell their firearms and magazines to PD’s to actually have any impact, and even then the PD would just source through a distributor.

    Will be interesting to see if they apply this to Feds and MIL if Federal restrictions are put in place.

  28. hemker says:

    Who cares! Law enforcement wont be hurt by this, there ate over 40 ar-15 manufacturing companies in the U.S. L.E has done zero to very little business with this no name company, this is nothing mote than a marketing ploy.

  29. Jason says:

    Fantastic LaRue! Hopefully more major firearms manufacturers will take notice and follow suit!

    Domestic civilian LE should be subject to the same firearms restrictions as non-LE civilians. The only reason the Left-Wing, Gungrabber Politicians exempt LE from the restrictions is so that LE will continue to protect them and their anti-2A agenda.

    For instance, Mayor Bloomberg would have a much different attitude, if he wasn’t surrounded 24/7 by an armed Law Enforcement security detail protecting him and his anti-2nd Amendment agenda.

    • Hemker says:

      Wrong with the exempt portion of your statement, Law Enforcement AGENCIES are exempt, but not individual Officers. I cant walk into a gun store and flash the badge and buy what i want, i still need a permit to purchase, or a department letterhead, and we cant buy machine guns or high cap mags (in areas that they are banned). LaRue is trying to punish the AGENCIES that reside in these liberal states. There is a HUGE diffrence between big metro L.E agencies ( L.A, NY, Boston, and so on) and the rural americia L.E. The vast majority of your local and county L.E is very pro gun, and believe you should be able to buy and carry what you want and when you want. We support the 2nd ammendment to its fullest, is there a few bad eggs? of course, there always is in every profession. It outraged me when i saw a picture of a group of MPLS, and St. Paul cops standing behind President Obama this past week as a prop, i personally think they should be fired if they honestlt want to limit the rights and freedoms of the U.S citizens. L.E as a whole is going to need help from the law abiding citizens sooner than later. Once the wellfare money runs out there is going to be mobs of welfare, government dependent a-holes burning down our cities, stealing and and commiting every crime in the books, and with all the cuts to L.E in the past 7 years there is no way we can protect everyone in a timely manner. So please spare me and the rest of the majority of pro gun L.E officers the “use against the cops” mantality because we are on the same side!!! as far as LaRue, i’m not loosing sleep over it, there are several other better manufactors of AR-15 that will not black ball us, and try to divide us.

      • Jason says:

        I guess I wasn’t clear, sorry for that. By exemption, I meant that LE ANGENCIES should not be exempt from State and Local firearms restrictions. LE officers ON DUTY should only be allowed to use the same tools to defend themselves as the citizens in their jurisdiction.

        So, where are these mass hordes of LEOs in places like New York and California publicaly speaking out against the desecration of the 2nd Amendment in those States?

  30. Whatever says:

    Wow…promote the neutering and disarmament of state and local LE, the only forces that have publically stated that they would defend civilians against anti 2nd legislature and tyranny. That makes a lot of sense. How many Feds / branches of the military have made such bold statements as below.

    I don’t know a single anti 2nd cop, and news flash, they don’t create state laws. They also use discretion and judgement in enforcement, and swore an oath to defend the constitution.

    • SSD says:

      Go back and reread LaRue’s new policy. It doesn’t say ALL LE, just those agencies in areas enacting anti-2A legislation. As far as I know, neither Utah nor Oregon have done so, nor plan to.

  31. Just a Man! says:

    Man are we in trouble! All of you anti law enforcement posters are showing your ass. I just spend a lengthy amount of time actually reading all the posts here. Man are we 2nd A supporters divided. The lapd guy seemed a little hot and argumentative, but brought up valid points, he didn’t ask or appear to expect special treatment. Conversely you guys on the citizen and Military side seem a little butt-hurt about the cops having access to certain guns, even if they’re covered by law. wtf over? Aren’t we all on the same side? And La Rue Tactical, it seems like if you want to make a symbolic point, and lets not kid ourselves, that’s all this is, then you should include all federal and government sales as well. And SSD, respectfully, you may be point. If La Rue wants to make a point, it appears to me that they are clearly not adding the feds and gov, because they get paid, serious cash from those contracts. So singling out the cops that are pro 2nd A, seems ill thought out., and counter productive in the fight against the libs. Way to many people emotional in here, letting their pissing and moaning get in the way of logic. Bottom line, either La Rue hits it across the board, or go back to the drawing board.

  32. Aquaviva says:


    You just gained a customer.

  33. sean says:

    Hats off to you, I will be ordering soon.
    For the Civilian Authority thats crying about it. Your in a better position to change it. Refuse protection details to anybody who’s for gun control. Respect their rights to not like guns and refuse to use any for their protection or have any in their vicinity.
    Refuse to enforce gun control laws, or work with any agency that does.
    Refuse to take a weapon into a no gun zone, inform any business and schools that you will respect their wish to be gun free. How many kids will send their children to a school where police say they refuse to enter the property
    Just quit thinking your Overlords above common man.
    Ideally I would like to see all gun owners just stay home one day, refuse to work, or act on behalf of non gun owners (children
    How long do you think some of these stars and politicians would change their minds if their bodyguards respect their wishes and refuse to protect them?
    Hold gun buy backs then resale them to raise money.
    I know, not ideal solutions, but much better than a civil war.