I try to make it a point to avoid telling a business person what I think he/she should, and should not, do ...
Their business, so it's their business.
On the other hand, I have no problem taking my business elsewhere should I decide I dislike some policy, practice, philosophy, etc. of a business to the point where it overrides my desire to buy some product or receive some service from them. Sauce for the goose, so to speak.
Firearms & firearms-related business subjects do tend to raise hackles when it comes to this sort of thing, though, especially on firearms-related forums. Not really surprising.
So, when folks start to mix business practices & decisions with political considerations & situations? Well, it won't take long for folks to start voicing opinions and 'taking sides'. Again, not surprising.
Funny thing, though, I've never thought to ask the political leanings & philosophies ... nor specifically the RKBA beliefs, if any ... of the automobile & motorcycle sales & service facilities I patronize, nor the grocery store, coffee shop, restaurants ... nor my doctor, either. Would I refuse to patronize them, or receive their services, should I ask and discover they have strong feelings counter to my own in areas not related to why I'm receiving care and/or services from them?
In this specific instance it appears the OP says he's reacting to a new administrative requirement of the state of CA to which he objects and which directly impacts his ability to do business in this state, and which he is seemingly disinclined to work with, so his choice is to not do business in the state any longer. With anyone. Even with the folks who had no part of crafting, requesting, implementing or supporting this administrative change.
Hey, it's his choice, though, and I can't gainsay his decision on refusing to do business in CA. Not my place.
Until such time as the citizens of California return to their senses, regain control of their sorry government and repeal this and all similar laws, rules or administrative regulations, I will not be shipping any firearms to California.
Perhaps this is a 'last-straw' personal reaction based upon his views and opinions of CA's political and legislative environment. Maybe?
Hey, whatever, it's his business, and his call to make.
Now, CA's political environment and demographics may, or may not, allow for it's laws & regulations to be changed by its population expressing the desire for such change ... in the manner stated as being desired by gun owners on these forums. Maybe the beliefs, desires and day-to-day concerns of the state's growing population - as a whole, or even a significant majority - just won't ever place the subject of changing firearms laws and firearms-related administrative regulations on any sort of high priority ... or concern themselves with meeting the expectations of folks from other states. Dunno.
I wouldn't be overly surprised, however, to see such things as occur here slowly spread to some other states, if only in small numbers. Once again, not exactly surprising.
I've lived in CA for more than 50 years, although I wasn't born here. I've seen the state change in significant ways during that time.
When I retire I'm planning to move to another state. I'll be doing so for a number of reasons ...
As far as the major firearms manufacturers changing from being in business to make profits to being in business to promote political change? Well, not sure I'd hold my breath on that one
... especially when it comes to those companies whose their parent offices are owned by foreign corporations in countries which don't have similar political and governing philosophies. It's business, not personal, and not political. It's business.
I'd suspect the eventual decision of some firearms manufacturer(s)...
if it occurs ... to stop making CA compliant firearms because of the F/P microstamping legislation, would be because of a business-based (manufacturing cost/profit) reason, and not because they might consider it as an 'unreasonable encroachment upon the rights' of persons to own firearms.
