Microstamping Bill causes STI to pull out of California

Status
Not open for further replies.

Samuel Adams

Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
548
Location
Coastal Georgia
I found this in "Handguns" magazine.

Cessation of California Firearm Sales

As a company, STI adhered to California’s drop test certification and DOJ listing process in 1998 for the people in competition shooting and for those who desired self-protection DESPITE the financial strain placed on a small company such as ours. Listing our two most popular firearm models was not an inexpensive undertaking. We even redesigned our compensator systems to adhere to the CA “no threaded barrel” law. Then CA’s onerous liability laws were enacted and we chose at that time not to renew certification nor to sell to LEO and governmental agencies in CA, regardless of their exempt status, because there was no exemption from liability or legal fees which could bankrupt this company. When federal law overrode CA’s liability laws, we resumed LE sales because we felt our product could be used to LE’s advantage. With the micro stamping bill, we as a company have decided enough is enough. While our sales to Law Enforcement agencies are not huge, all revenue sources are important to a company of our size and it hurts us to turn our backs on those revenues.

While we truly feel badly for the law-abiding citizens of California, we feel it is necessary to take a stand against irresponsible legislation designed solely to inhibit the American citizen’s right to keep arms. We are fierce proponents of the Second Amendment, and it is our hope that other manufacturers will follow our lead. It is time for the gun industry as a whole to take a stand against the insanity of the anti-2nd Amendment activists. We simply believe that some things are more important than profit.

In all honesty, when we made this decision we had no idea of the responses, both positive and negative, it would evoke. We just did what we thought was right and, because of our size, didn’t really expect much notice. Since we 4announced this new policy however, we have been deluged by customers contacting us to show their support and by others who consider it a “stunt” of some type. We greatly appreciate all of the supporting comments and would like to thank everyone who has taken the time to express, even contrary, opinions. We do understand that this action on our part will have little effect on California’s criminal or political element.

To our loyal supporters in California, we sincerely regret the measures we feel we must take and will continue to honor all warrantee obligations. We hope for a speedy resolution of this ill-conceived violation of the Second Amendment.

http://www.stiguns.com/CA-PressRelease.pdf
 
We simply believe that some things are more important than profit.

It's great to see someone actually stand up for what they believe in, but for most others, the bottom line is the bottom line.

You'll never see a company owned by shareholders take a stand like this, because their sole purpose is to make cash no matter what.
 
:cool:Way to go STI, and I've heard that other company's are just about ready to pull the plug on this northern Mexican province too! Come on Gaston, come on S&W pull the plug and quit kissing up to these wackjobs! Let em buy their police pistols from China. :uhoh:
 
STI has been out of CA for a long time... they only sold to LEOs... they just stoped doing that... BFD...
 
I read the article as well, and I too am glad STI will stand up for what it believes... which just happens to be what i believe..

So on that note, i'm going to have to get another STI.. maybe a 2011 this time to show my support for there company..
 
MASTEROFMALICE said:
Now all we need to do is convince the other 500 manufacturers to do the same......
And the anti gun goofs will have a victory - no gun sales in California. :banghead:

Better to go after the goof-balls that put the lousy legislation together and get rid of them. :cuss:
 
And the anti gun goofs will have a victory - no gun sales in California.

That's a big negatron on the anti-gun victory. What STI is doing by pulling out of the state isn't just not selling to people, they're not selling to agencies.

If all the companies followed suit, the police would be disarmed. I think that's what they're trying to get at.

I have little doubt the feds would step in and provide weapons if that ever happened, though.
 
Why don't gun companies ever say No to LE/Gov sales, YES to private citizens? If the cops want a gun made by a company, they go to the store. Buy as individuals, no LE discounts, no +10 mags.

Yah yah, pipe dream.
 
The 2nd amendment respects the RIGHT of the people to keep and bear arms. It doesn't, however give you the right to be able to purchase a firearm.

Odd, but the anti's are taking this into a direction where they can (theoretically) win. Unless people accuse them of making an end run around the ammendment. Barret did something similar. You get enough of these stories together and then make a correlation that the Anti's in California are passing these laws specifically to obtain these kind of results.

Interesting from a legal perspective.
 
More BS. We have idiotic 'political correctness' on our side too.

Perhaps STI can hire someone competent that actually knows what's going on, which laws are in force when, etc.

The CA microstamping bill, while enacted, is not active and would not be active for awhile - and likely never will be (at least in the next 17+ years, likely much longer) due to intellectual property concerns about the technology. It's a feel-good law that had the teeth filed down by Friendly People.

STI could have submitted any or all their other guns before the bill passed, anyway - and paid to keep them on the Roster.

Also, their worries about CA 'liability' are moot and conclusive proof of idiocy:
the NRA-driven, Bush-signed PLCAA (Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act) covers them. Even if they didn't have that protection, they'd still have exposure, as STI pistols can readily be imported into CA without being Rostered, into CA under the single-shot exemption (with appropriate upper), or via interfamily transfer or inheritance, or purchased by LEs. For LE sales, if STI doesn't wanna sell direct to CA, an intermediary FFL would be found - that's how we got legal off-list AR rifles & receivers into CA from mfgrs intimidated by CA DOJ FUD BS.

All STI did was deprive themselves of a large market of well-heeled customers. It made ZERO political statement except amongst the unread and the unwashed, the folks who can't afford to be their customers anyway - relatively few folks even know who STI is, and many folks won't feel too deprived as there's a ton of good 1911s out there anyway.

Sounds like gun control by gunnies to me.

Contrast this with behavior of other gun makers who are lining up for a fight against Calif DOJ shenanigans :)


Bill Wiese
San Jose CA
 
Manufacturers refusing to sell to LE in CA won't work in the long run. Imagine this... The vast majority of manufactures who stop selling to LE will create a VERY profitable market to the ones that will. What a sweet deal it would be if only one manufacturer provided firearms to the CA LE. Other manufacturers are going to see this and are going to want a piece of that pie, too. LE in CA will ALWAYS be equipped with new stuff if they want it. That's the way the market works.
 
Bill Wiese - all the types of compliance you are talking about cost money. The money may be insignificant to Glock in light of the size of their sales in California, but to these guys it is a very significant cost. It amounts to banning by regulation.

Perhaps what you say about the liabiity laws is correct; I don't know. But neither does STI, and they don't want to pay big bucks to some lawyer to figure it all out.

If you think the costs are insignificant and the procedures are not burdensome, why don't you contact STI and offer to pay all the costs and do all the paperwork for them.
 
Why don't gun companies ever say No to LE/Gov sales, YES to private citizens? If the cops want a gun made by a company, they go to the store. Buy as individuals, no LE discounts, no +10 mags.
Barrett did. Won't sell or service to CA LE/Gov agencies.

If I owned a firearms company I'd get fed up pretty quickly with the CA requirments too. It sucks for the honest folks living in CA to have to be subjected to all the laws created by the elected anti-gun gov't. I can't think of anything that could get me to move there.
 
If you think that a business can't influence Gov mandates, go here:

http://whokilledtheelectriccar.com/

PRK mandated the all cars were to have zero emissions. GM, under duress, came out with the EV-1. They fought CalGov every step of the way until the gov folded and repealed the mandate. Then GM took the EV-1 off the market.

If gun manufacturers do this and band together, they will make a profound statement against gov that is too big for it's britches. But only if they hang together.

"More BS. We have idiotic 'political correctness' on our side too.'

Yes, its B.S. - a Business Strategy. Before the Military-Industrial complex came along, many gov-issued weapons were made by the Gov. at Springfield Armory. If gun manufacturers refuse to sell to Cali, Cali. may have to make their own Armory. Then they can make all the crazy laws they want. If not, then the Lord-Protectors' henchmen won't have any weapons to use in their blissful utopia.
 
And the anti gun goofs will have a victory - no gun sales in California
Yep; no gun sales to anyone - police agencies included. See how long they like that ;)
 
LAK said:
yep; no gun sales to anyone - police agencies included. See how long they like that

That's only in a perfect world which will never exist.

No publicly-traded company will make that decision. And no rational company mgmt will give competitive advantage to a competitor that decides to do so.

As an exception, I note that Ronnie Barrett sells guns to CA citizens, just not CA LE agencies (as long as they're not chambered in 50BMG post-2004). He can do this because (1) he sells a high priced 'luxury' item and (2) most, except the largest, CA PDs aren't part of his customer base.

That's a bit different than a company selling 9mm/40S&W autoloaders.


And to the above poster complaining that lawyers are expensive: the CA NRA's lawyers at Trutanich-Michel would be most interested in working with companies trying to sell guns in CA and dealing with DOJ issues. It's possible for a reasonably small-sized company to do this, and expose themselves to a large market.

STI would sell more handguns, at a higher price, to folks in CA than to OR, WA, ID, UT and NM combined. Go to a CA gunshop, and new HKs, Glocks and Sigs and higher-end 1911s outsell Ruger P89s and S&W Sigmas by a large margin: go outside CA, and the skew is much smaller (or even inverted).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top