4 ms·
Yeah that's what I was thinking about as I was reading the article, too. Maybe Spitzer should have spent a little less time with his mistresses and a little mo
by Kadin 18y ago
Yeah that's what I was thinking about as I was reading the article, too. Maybe Spitzer should have spent a little less time with his mistresses and a little more actually understanding the firearms industry in the U.S.
First, there are a lot of companies that sell exclusively or almost-exclusively to the civilian market, or are kept alive in between periods of major government purchasing by the civilian market. E.g.: Bushmaster, who is almost certainly one of those companies that Spitzer would like to punish, doesn't shy away from military/LEO orders but is primarily a civilian arms company.
Given the choice between relatively consistent sales on the civilian market or feast-and-famine by selling to the government (who can inundate you with orders one year and leave you with nothing the next), it wouldn't surprise me if some manufacturers just turned down government orders if they came with too much red tape.
The net result of Spitzer's plan might be a decrease in the number of suppliers willing to deal with the government, rather than the civilian market; it might also cause companies to split off rough parts production and have the finish work done by separate companies -- one for the government and one for the civilian market.
Of course, if such a scheme keeps people like Spitzer occupied and from making a real mess, more power to it. Gun control isn't a vote-getter because, for a great many people anyway, it really isn't a significant or pressing problem.
- defen 18y agoYou really would think he would know, especially considering his previous (totally failed and backfired) attempts at gun-control. http://www.nytimes.com/2000/03/30/us/gun-maker-s-accord-on-curbs-brings-pressure-from-industry.html http://www.nytimes.com/2000/03/30/us/gun-maker-s-accord-on-c...