Why are so many domestic firearms HQ/plants located in anti-gun states?

[checkmyswag]

Why do these plants remain in states that are hostile to gun rights?

IL has Springfield Armory and Armalite I believe.

MA has S&W.

CT has Colt.

I'm sure there are more but these are major ones.

Has to be more than simple economics or they'd up and move to the South or West.

 

[ny32182]

Several reasons:

1) Moving a plant is expensive
2) Moving a plant is expensive
3) The laws that govern manufacturers have nothing to do with the laws that govern civilian ownership. It just doesn't impact their operations, most likely.
4) They were there before the anti-gunners.

They might be able to get more favorable tax advantages, etc, in "red" states if they were starting from scratch today, but refer to #1 and #2 above.

As with any business, the ultimate goal is to make a profit. Everything else is second, and only really measured in terms of how it impacts profitability.

 

[Furncliff]

You're talking about the two areas of the country that have the highest concentration of machinist, tool makers and professionals who are the heart of building quality firearms.

 

[checkmyswag]

Auto plants left detroit and moved south. Domestic ones too not just japanese I believe.

Watch your lane.

 

[AirForceShooter]

These plants were built before anybody even thought of the ridiculous notion of gun control.

AFS

 

[Kynoch]

Why do these plants remain in states that are hostile to gun rights?

IL has Springfield Armory and Armalite I believe.

MA has S&W.

CT has Colt.

I'm sure there are more but these are major ones.

Has to be more than simple economics or they'd up and move to the South or West.

History. The Connecticut Valley and Springfield Illinois are two very famous and historic gun-making centers in the USA.

Some time ago, Ruger closed shut down manufacturing at its Southport, CT birthplace and moved it to Prescott, AZ, which was originally Bill Ruger's winter vacationing spot.

 

[DPris]

Ruger didn't "move" a plant to Arizona, as such, they opened the Arizona plant quite a while back & ran it concurrently.
Today they have factories in New Hampshire & Arizona, still run concurrently.
Denis

 

[checkmyswag]

Ruger didn't "move" a plant to Arizona, as such, they opened the Arizona plant quite a while back & ran it concurrently.
Today they have factories in New Hampshire & Arizona, still run concurrently.

Good example.

Just weird for a company to do business in a state and pay huge amounts of taxes to a government that attacks their business and overall industry.

Suppose it is just a calculation though and buying/building a new facility and having to find/train a new workforce may cost more than dealing with the goofy laws of their current state and the hostile environment.

 

[icanthitabarn]

Conn. isn't that bad on gun rights, compared to many other states. They do have a couple major headaches, thou. As of now, it doesn't seem like they want to go all out for unknown reasons.

 

[dak0ta]

Don't forget Henry in New Jersey and Ithaca Gun was formerly in New York.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

I believe Smith and Wesson was founded in Massachusetts and Colt was founded in Connecticut in the 19th Century (1800s) before the do-gooders were obsessed with reforming America with the Sullivan Act, the Volstead Act, the Harrison Act, and other acts of voodoo criminology, including modern gun control.

 

[checkmyswag]

I definitely get the "maintaining the company lineage" and even being loyal to a community and workforce.

I am just really surprised more of them haven't packed up and moved to the outskirts of some major urban center in a more business, especially gun business friendly state.

 

[benEzra]

Conn. isn't that bad on gun rights, compared to many other states. They do have a couple major headaches, thou. As of now, it doesn't seem like they want to go all out for unknown reasons.

The Brady Campaign ranks CT as 5th strictest in the nation, after CA, NJ, MA, and NY. Hawaii, MD, RI, and IL round out the worst 9, per their criteria.

 

[Kynoch]

Ruger didn't "move" a plant to Arizona, as such, they opened the Arizona plant quite a while back & ran it concurrently.
Today they have factories in New Hampshire & Arizona, still run concurrently.
Denis

Actually they opened in AZ, then expanded in AZ and then moved most of the Southport manufacturing to AZ. Their HQ is still in Southport and they do have manufacturing operations in other places.

 

[Kynoch]

I definitely get the "maintaining the company lineage" and even being loyal to a community and workforce.

I am just really surprised more of them haven't packed up and moved to the outskirts of some major urban center in a more business, especially gun business friendly state.

It's really not that easy.

In Colt's case they had a union and local gov't to deal with. There are clean-up costs to deal with and there is a matter of moving/hiring new skilled labor. It gets mighty expensive.

While there are reasons (cost) for not operating in places like IL and CT, the anti-gun atmosphere is not a concern for a manufacturer.

 

[Kynoch]

Keep in mind that this part of the East was the 19th century Silicon Valley first anchored by the Springfield Armory and later by Colt, Winchester, etc. This is the part of the USA where precision instrument making (of all kinds) was taking place.

 

[armoredman]

We'd love to have more manufacturers move out here, plenty of room, many days with sunshine, work force available.

 

[Texan Scott]

The East and Midwest were industrial BEFORE they were liberal. Opening a NEW plant there might not make sense, but keeping the old ones running DOES. Of course, if their labr force went liberal (not all labor unions or union people are, but some are) then moving might make sense (by 'make sense' I mean cost-effective). This explains, in part, why a car company might prefer to move out of Detroit and set up in Alabama or somewhere, yet S&W stays put... they own the plant where it already is, and as long as their employees are more proud of being 'S&W' than 'United Machinists #whatever' there is insufficient motivation for them to move. Even when Ruger moved most of its operation to AZ, I suspect it had more to do with needing to expand and the cost of real estate being lower in AZ than NH.

 

[GEM]

Kimber moved from gun friendly Oregon to NY.

Remington has supposed threatened to pull out of NY if microstamping legislation was passed.

Isn't ParaOrdnance in Canada?

Henry is in Brooklyn - probably both Kimber and Henry like good deli.

 

[BBQLS1]

I definitely get the "maintaining the company lineage" and even being loyal to a community and workforce.

I am just really surprised more of them haven't packed up and moved to the outskirts of some major urban center in a more business, especially gun business friendly state.

The money just isn't there for them to do so. There is enough money for the auto industry to do so.

 

[flyskater]

States benefit from companies. (no matter what company, the bigger the better) Large companies bring jobs, which stimulates the economy and thus keeps their population. Not to mention corporate taxes, state income tax and 10 other misc taxes that have a domino effect that takes at least a book to explain.
That's why other states give alot of fortune 500 companies some incentives to encourage them to stay or move to a certain a state.

 

[tarakian]

Para Ordnance moved to North Carolina a few years ago.

 

[rajb123]

NY, CT and Mass were not always unfriendly...... gun manufacturing goes back a couple of centuries..... they "anitis" are relative new commers which started their harrasment after JFK was shot in the early 1960s... their views and activities will likely not change and they only will be more successful in creating new obsticles in the future....

 

[pseudonymity]

It is hard to believe sometimes that firearms manufacturers actually stay in NY. In 2010 NY had to push a law that allowed manufacturers to work on and produce suppressors in NY. Remington wanted to bid on a contract to update rifles (M24 SWS maybe?).

Of course, no suppressors for us commoners. In the Empire state, if you are part of the aristocracy in the financial or industrial empires life is good.

 

[Cosmoline]

My understanding is that in spite of the anti-gun ownership policies, even the liberal politicos sing a different tune when it comes to protecting their own manufacturing base. So as a well-known example, old Ted Kennedy fought long and hard to keep the M14 as the main US service rifle because it was being made in his turf. They've made the business environment friendly even while attacking individual ownership.