States with lax gun laws competing for Connecticut’s gun makers

[Origanalist]

February 22, 2013

By Ana Radelat

Washington -- A growing number of states, most of them in the South, are trying to lure gun manufacturers in Connecticut and other places with tough gun laws.

The offers appear to be tendered by hopes of economic development and to appeal to gun rights voters.

Republicans in Mississippi, South Carolina, Arizona and Texas have reached out to gun manufacturers in the East, often with competing offers.

The pitch is simple: Gun manufacturers would be happier in states with lax gun laws and stronger support for the Second Amendment.

Mississippi's Speaker of the House Philip Gunn, wrote a letter to 14 gun manufacturers, including Hartford-based Colt and Sturm, Ruger and Co., based in the Southport section of Fairfield, urging them to relocate to the Magnolia State.

"Far from demonizing fire arms products made here. We have supported those constitutional rights along with lawful activities like recreational shooting and hunting," Gunn said.

He explained why he is wooing gun makers.

"We need more businesses to establish home base in Mississippi," Gunn said. "We can provide these companies with an educated workforce, a superior quality of life, an evolving education system for their children and the peace of mind that comes with knowing we support their industry."

Meg Annison, Gunn's spokeswoman, said none of the gun makers have responded.

Colt, which has been in business in Connecticut for more than 150 years, has said it might leave the state to avoid new gun laws. Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy announced a new, tough package of restrictions this week.

Colt did not return calls requesting comment.

But Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Friday blasted the attempt to steal Connecticut's manufacturers.

"This preposterous pitch to companies with long, successful histories in our state shows the need for national standards and statutes to reduce gun violence," Blumenthal said. "Competition among states for less protective laws is a race to the bottom that should be avoided."

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, sent letters to 26 gun and ammunition manufacturers earlier this month -- including to New Haven-based Mossberg & Sons -- inviting them to consider a move to Texas.

"As you consider your options for responding to unwarranted government intrusion into your business, you may choose to consider relocating your manufacturing operations to a state that is more business-friendly. There is no other state that fits the definition of business-friendly like Texas," Perry wrote.

Mossberg & Sons, which has operated in Connecticut since 1919, did not return calls requesting comment.

Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar has asked Remington Arms to move out of New York and start making guns in Arizona, one of the few states with an official state gun -- the Colt Single Action Army Revolver.

Gosar wrote his invitation to Remington's CEO after New York's legislature approved a tough, new gun law.

"That this law is ill-conceived and unconstitutional is palpable," Gosar said. "The leaders in New York State have all but told you that your business, your job creation, and your contributions to New York State are no longer welcome."

Gosar will have to wrestle with fellow Republican Rep. Jeff Duncan of South Carolina who has also reached out to Remington.

"In South Carolina, we believe in the right to keep and bear arms. We believe in free enterprise. We believe in the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Our state welcomes any individual or business who believes the same," Duncan posted on Facebook.

Duncan has also contacted a Colorado company called Magpul that had threatened to move its manufacturing operations to another state if new gun laws were enacted in the state.

Colorado's House recently passed a law that restricts magazine size, a move Magpul decried this weekend in a full page ad.

"A magazine ban will do more than hurt public safety in a free Colorado," the ad said.

The pitch promoting greater personal freedom and the unfettered right to bear arms is a new twist in interstate competition for scarce jobs, replacing traditional offers of tax breaks.

But it has worked before.

Two years ago, Bar-Sto Precision Machine, a maker of pistols, moved to South Dakota from California, which has some of the nation's toughest gun laws.


http://www.ctmirror.org/story/19237/states-lax-gun-laws-competing-connecticut%E2%80%99s-gun-makers

[cheapseats]

There is a world of difference between lax gun ownership law and LAX MANUFACTURING:



Jimenez Arms, also known as "J.A.", is an American firearms manufacturer based in Henderson, Nevada. The company was started in August 2004 using the molds and machinery from bankrupt Bryco Arms and currently makes four models of firearm.

Bryco Arms was an American firearm manufacturing company based at various times in Carson City, Nevada, Irvine, California, and Costa Mesa, California. The company's most famous product was the Bryco Arms Model 38 semi-automatic pistol, available in both 32 ACP and 380 ACP calibers (also known as the P-38). The company was owned by Bruce Jennings.

Bryco Arms was one of the manufacturers of so-called Saturday night special firearms that operated in and around Los Angeles, California, all of which were descendants in some way from George Jennings' Raven Arms. It produced firearms variously branded as Jennings Firearms at its Irvine, California facility, as well as under the brand name of Bryco Arms at its former Carson City, Nevada facility, and at its Costa Mesa, California facility.

Bryco Arms declared bankruptcy in 2003 as a result of losing a lawsuit filed in Oakland, California and which resulted in a jury award of a record $24 million judgment against Bryco Arms. The lawsuit stemmed from an injury to a then 7-year old boy named Brandon Maxfield received from a 20-year old family friend who was attempting to unload the 380 ACP version of the Bryco Arms Model 38. The gun discharged while the 20-year old was attempting to clear the chamber, the gun inadvertently pointed at Maxfield.[1] The discharge paralyzed Brandon Maxfield from the neck down. The plaintiffs convinced the court that due to a design defect, the gun had a cartridge feed problem, made evident when the safety was on and the user pulled back the slide to check the chamber or load a cartridge into the chamber. Rather than re-design the gun to correct the jamming problem, the instruction manual for the weapon was changed to require that the safety be placed in the fire position when checking the chamber or chambering a cartridge, which hid the problem from the user.

Bryco's former foreman, Paul Jimenez, bought the bankrupt Bryco Arms for $510,000 in August 2004, and renamed the company Jimenez Arms. The former Model 380 (the 380 ACP version of the Model 38) was renamed the JA-380, and production of the same semi-automatic pistol design was resumed.

The soon-to-be-named Jimenez Arms (JA) was purchased by Paul Jimenez and resumed operations in Costa Mesa, California. The JA-NINE, the former Bryco Arms Model 380 (renamed the JA-380), the former Jennings J-22 (renamed the JA-22 LR), and the Jennings J-25 (renamed the JA-25) quickly became the only four firearms currently manufactured by the company. Due to California law requiring California-manufactured guns to pass safety tests, Jimenez Arms submitted passing test results on the new guns to the state, but the guns failed subsequent additional independent tests. The law requires that upon failure, the manufacturer must correct the problem and resubmit for additional testing. Rather than complete the process, Jimenez Arms ceased California operations and established itself in Nevada, which has no safety testing requirements for firearms.[5]

A business license was granted on August 30, 2006 for Jimenez Arms to commence operation in Henderson, Nevada, and production has resumed there...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimenez_Arms

[cheapseats]

I do NOT pose this question to Anarchists. People who do NOT accept the premise that Government is a Necessary Evil would NOT support independent/IMPOSED safety testing requirements/REGULATIONS in firearms manufacture. Consumers and Dispute Resolution Organizations can iron out disagreements without force, LOL. One of the funniest things I ever read on this board, I can't remember who said it, was that "SIX MARINES IN A CANOE" could overwhelm an enclave of anarchy.

But I am very interested to hear how garden-variety advocates of Free Markets & Second Amendment feel about NO independent/IMPOSED safety testing requirements/REGULATIONS in firearms manufacture.

[Anti Federalist]

It's my understanding that any defects and damages caused would be handled by private arbitration firms.

Which begs the question: what happens when I say fuck you, I ain't gonna pay?

But, not being an Ana-Cap, maybe somebody has a good answer for that.



I do NOT pose this question to Anarchists. People who do NOT accept the premise that Government is a Necessary Evil would NOT support independent/IMPOSED safety testing requirements/REGULATIONS in firearms manufacture. Consumers and Dispute Resolution Organizations can iron out disagreements without force, LOL. One of the funniest things I ever read on this board, I can't remember who said it, was that "SIX MARINES IN A CANOE" could overwhelm an enclave of anarchy.

But I am very interested to hear how garden-variety advocates of Free Markets & Second Amendment feel about NO independent/IMPOSED safety testing testing requirements/REGULATIONS in firearms manufacture.

[cheapseats]

It's my understanding that any defects and damages caused would be handled by private arbitration firms.

Certainly it is better to receive a buncha bucks if one has been paralyzed by faulty gun manufacture than tp NOT receive any monetary compensation but, really, does anyone think PARALYSIS FOR CASH is a good deal?

Without regulation, however, settlement awards do not correct the problem of faulty manufacture. Sure, another and another and another and another tragedy, another and another and another and another settlement...combined with bad press >> lower sales...will probably eventually drive an unscrupulous gun manufacturer out of business, but does that sound like a righteous path?



Which begs the question: what happens when I say fuck you, I ain't gonna [COMPLY]?

That is always the bottom-line problem with the "non-aggression principle". The notion that unscrupulous and conscienceless people care one whit about ostracization/shame is kindergarten-childish. Now, ostracization in terms of NO SALES/REVENUE would certainly faze a Bad Guy, but:

1.) If the Bad Guy is manufacturing something people WANT, Americans have no collective principle/discipline.
2.) If the Bad Guy is manufacturing something people NEED, he has 'em over a barrel.
3.) Competition can and will come to the rescue, but not immediately.
4.) How many are needlessly paralyzed/killed in the meantime?

[Anti Federalist]

Shrugs.

Human nature.

It's better than the alternative that we are creating right now.


Certainly it is better to receive a buncha bucks if one has been paralyzed by faulty gun manufacture than NOT to receive any monetary compensation but, really, does anyone think PARALYSIS FOR CASH is a good deal?

Without regulation, however, settlement awards do not correct the problem of faulty manufacture. Sure, another and another and another and another paralyzed or dead person, another and another and another and another settlement...combined with bad press >> lower sales...will probably eventually drive an unscrupulous gun manufacturer out of business, but does that sound like a righteous path?




That is always the bottom-line problem with the anarchy model. The notion that an unscrupulous person cares one whit about ostracization/shame is absurd. Now, ostracization in terms of NO SALES/REVENUE would certainly faze a Bad Guy, but:

1.) If the Bad Guy is manufacturing something people WANT, Americans have no collective principle/discipline.
2.) If the Bad Guy is manufacturing something people NEED, he has 'em over a barrel.
3.) Competition can and will come to the rescue, but not immediately.
4.) How many are needlessly paralyzed/killed in the meantime?

[mad cow]

Hopefully,most of the gun manufacturers in the rabidly anti-gun states will show the good sense of Jimenez Arms and move to less fascist environs,with more respect for the Constitution and less boneheaded juries.

Anybody stupid enough to need a warning label Caution,do not point at the neck of seven year old family friends while attempting to unload printed on the barrel of his guns deserves to live in California under their ridiculous regulations.

[cheapseats]

Hopefully,most of the gun manufacturers in the rabidly anti-gun states will show the good sense of Jimenez Arms and move to less fascist environs,with more respect for the Constitution and less boneheaded juries.

Anybody stupid enough to need a warning label Caution,do not point at the neck of seven year old family friends while attempting to unload printed on the barrel of his guns deserves to live in California under their ridiculous regulations.


Sound advice.

But it skirts the question at hand: Do NON-anarchic Liberty Lover slash Freedom Fighters say YAY or NAY to imposition of gun safety testing requirements on the MANUFACTURE of firearms?

[mad cow]

NAY.

[cjm]

Sound advice.

But it skirts the question at hand: Do NON-anarchic Liberty Lover slash Freedom Fighters say YAY or NAY to imposition of gun safety testing requirements on the MANUFACTURE of firearms?

voluntary standards, and buyer beware.


What Keeps Us Safe?
Mark Thornton

Look at the back of your computer monitor, the bottom of your table lamp, or the label on your hair dryer. Chances are you will see the symbol "UL" with a circle around it. It stands for Underwriters Laboratories, a firm headquartered in Northbrook, Ill., and an unsung hero of the market economy.

Most people don't realize that dozens of products in their homes--toasters, fire extinguishers, space heaters, televisions, etc.--have been tested by the Underwriters Lab for safety. The Lab also tests items like bulletproof vests, electric blankets, commercial ice cream machines, and chicken de-beakers, among thousands of other products.

But the Lab isn't an arm of the government. It is privately owned, financed, and operated. No one is compelled by force of law to use its services. It thrives, and makes our lives safer, by the power of its excellent reputation....

more: http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=193

[cheapseats]

Human nature.

Human Nature will knowingly cut corners to increase the profit margin...including, as we have MANY times seen, corners that WILL compromise safety.


voluntary standards, and buyer beware.

Guns don't kill people, bad people and reckless people and angry people and vengeful people and scheming people and careless people and stupid people and UNLUCKY people kill people.

That said, guns ain't any ol' product. If manufacturer defect does not manifest until I actually USE the product I bought, that is apt to be a much more drastic experience with a gun than with an ice cream maker.




Shrugs.

You say NAY to the death penalty in ALL CASES, including Jeffrey Dahmer caliber heinousness, but you are indifferent to how many are maimed/killed via inferior gun manufacture?

"Pro life" is obviously not the overarching principle.

[cjm]

Guns don't kill people, bad people and reckless people and angry people and vengeful people and scheming people and careless people and stupid people and UNLUCKY people kill people.

That said, guns ain't any ol' product. If manufacturer defect does not manifest until I actually USE the product I bought, that is apt to be a much more drastic experience with a gun than with an ice cream maker.

So you find a government certification like "FDA approved" to be more reassuring than a private certification like "UL approved"? Maybe you should read the article that I linked to.

[Anti Federalist]

You say NAY to the death penalty in ALL CASES, including Jeffrey Dahmer caliber heinousness, but you are indifferent to how many are maimed/killed via inferior gun manufacture?

"Pro life" is obviously not the overarching principle.

What kind of lunacy are you trying to draw me into here?

Sorry, busy right now, not gonna play, but here's a cookie.

[cheapseats]

So you find a government certification like "FDA approved" to be more reassuring than a private certification like "UL approved"? Maybe you should read the article that I linked to.

Did you read MY POST?



But I am very interested to hear how garden-variety advocates of Free Markets & Second Amendment feel about NO independent/IMPOSED safety testing requirements/REGULATIONS in firearms manufacture.




UL (Underwriters Laboratories) is a safety consulting and certification company headquartered in Northbrook, Illinois. It maintains offices in 46 countries. UL was established in 1894 and has participated in the safety analysis of many of the last century's new technologies, most notably the public adoption of electricity and the drafting of safety standards for electrical devices and components.[citation needed]

UL provides safety-related certification, validation, testing, inspection, auditing, advising and training services to a wide range of clients, including manufacturers, retailers, policymakers, regulators, service companies, and consumers.

UL is one of several companies approved to perform safety testing by the US federal agency Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). OSHA maintains a list of approved testing laboratories, which are known as Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UL_(safety_organization)


If "nationally recognized testing laboratory" UL does gun safety testing, great. Presumably some private contractor, not boots-on-the-ground government agents, already do such testing in states that require it.

You vote nay on IMPOSED gun safety testing requirements; you think it should be VOLUNTARY.

Did I miss anything?

[cjm]

Did you read MY POST . . . which didn't require LINKING somewhere else?

Yes. I read your post and quoted it in my response.



If "nationally recognized testing laboratory" UL does gun safety testing, great. Presumably some private contractor, not boots-on-the-ground government agents, already do such testing in states that require it.

You vote nay on IMPOSED gun safety testing requirements; you think it should be VOLUNTARY.

Did I miss anything?

I think you got everything you were looking for.

[QuickZ06]

Well give credit when credit is due.


Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, sent letters to 26 gun and ammunition manufacturers earlier this month -- including to New Haven-based Mossberg & Sons -- inviting them to consider a move to Texas.

He at least he is doing something right, but we know he did not write them nor send it in the mail. I don't even think he could find the right end of a stamp to lick for the postage. Whats those three departments you're cutting Rick?