Olympic to New York Authorities

No guns for thee, at least that which you do not allow for civilians. Actually, I would be fairly pleased with the constitutional standard being anything that’s in common police use is protected. That would certainly include pistols that hold more than ten rounds, as well as the AR-15. It would also make the increasing militarization of the police have consequences. The feds might think twice about surplusing so many M4s and M16s to police departments if the consequence of that is that we have a right to them too.

Related posts (automatically generated):

  1. Mass Police Strapping Some Serious Firepower
  2. “He Pulls a Knife, You Pull a Gun”
  3. Armor Piercing Ammo

19 thoughts on “Olympic to New York Authorities”

  1. This is a line I’ve been pushing for a while among my acquaintances. It gives an answer to “well, where’s the line, or can you own nukes?” without giving up anything practical. It redirects people to thinking about why the police carry firearms officially (to defend themselves and others.) It opens the door on “why then and not us?”

  3. I purchased my first AR, and currently my only one due to the supply shortage, from Olympic a little over a year ago. Not only did I get a great firearm, but I’m happy to see I was able to support a company that is willing to stand up for OUR rights! Even when that stand could hurt their bottom line.

  5. I’d go a step further – You may ban ownership of any firearm from a person that is not in use by any agency that has any jurisdiction over said person. Any. Not just police, but FBI, DHS, BATFEIEIO, etc.

    If anyone who can claim to have arrest powers over me can have a particular firearm, so can I.

    1. Sounds like a nice compromise to me, I wonder if they’re willing to neuter their storm troopers?

  6. Pingback: Olympic Arms joins LaRue in consistency : Newbie Shooter

  7. I’d like to see them do the same for CA and MA, and any other state that restricts. They may not be as bad as NY (yet) but they are still bad.

    1. Why do you think it wouldn’t be? The link goes to the official Facebook page that is linked by the company website.

      1. It’s just that i had this very same thought after cuomo signed the bill. Never thought any of them would actually do it.

  9. If I am in danger, and I call the police, and they bring a semi-automatic firearm with a detachable magazine that holds 15 rounds, plus spare magazines, and an AR-15 in the car: then it seems those items are appropriate for my defense.

  10. Magpul has stated they would relocate their business if Colorado passes their proposed law.

    ***

    I’d love to see more, I’d love to see Glock and S&W inform New York State that none of their handguns are available to law enforcement any longer. As they do not sell a firearm with only a 7-round magazine and have no intention of producing a 7-round magazine in the near future. THAT would be the actual “gun lobby” in action.

    2. Actually, Glock does make a couple of guns with 6 round magazines: the Glock 36 (in .45 ACP) and the Glock 39 (in .45 GAP). I’ve read that the NY State Police already use the .45 GAP (though in the larger noncompliant frame sizes).

  11. I hope a lot more gun and ammo manufactures do the same thing, it may get their attention.

  13. I do not own a firearm and enjoyed shooting target-pistols when I was younger. I will be visiting the La Rue, Oly Arms, and Magpul websites to order “swag” from them in support.

Comments are closed.