Mark LaRue, LaRue Tactical Leading on Policy to Limit State, Local Law Enforcement Sales to Civilian Standards

Posted on February 8, 2013 in Blog

LT LOGO JPG_DC

According to this statement posted on LaRue Tactical’s Facebook page this afternoon, re-posted below in its entirety, LaRue Tactical will use the same state and local laws for private gun ownership to state and local law enforcement agency procurement. We support Mark LaRue’s thoughtful and reasonable position and thank him for his courageous leadership on this issue. We hope to see other manufacturers, distributors, and retailers follow suit.

We’d like to remind FPC supporters that Mark LaRue and LaRue Tactical are one of the very few firearms manufacturers who have seriously supported the fight for Second Amendment rights in the Golden State. LaRue makes some amazing firearms and accessories, and their great support of America’s gun owners and our Second Amendment rights make buying LaRue an even greater value.

NEWS RELEASE:
02/08/2013 LEANDER, TX.

Updated Policy for State and Local Agency Law Enforcement Sales:

Due to the recent and numerous new Anti-gun/Anti-2nd Amendment laws passed and/or pending across our country, LaRue Tactical has been forced to reconsider how we provide products to state and local agencies.

Effective today, in an effort to see that no legal mistakes are made by LaRue Tactical and/or its employees, we will apply all current State and Local Laws (as applied to civilians) to state and local law enforcement / government agencies. In other words, LaRue Tactical will limit all sales to what law-abiding citizens residing in their districts can purchase or possess.

State and local laws have always been a serious focus of this firm, and we are now dovetailing that focus with the constitutional rights of the residents covered in their different areas by the old and new regulations.

We realize this effort will have an impact on this firm’s sales – and have decided the lost sales are less danger to this firm than potential lawsuits from erroneous shipments generated by something as simple as human error.

Thanks in advance for your understanding.

Mark LaRue

* * This policy does not apply to Military / Federal Agencies * *

, ,

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=645908925 Michael De Armond

    You guys ROCK…..can we get every other manufacturer on board ?

  • http://www.facebook.com/glesniewski1 Gregory Lesniewski

    TThis is great! At last—-somebody w/the balls to resist the government’s anti-gun program!!

  • Shrugged

    Go all they way, guys. Make it apply to Military and Federal agencies, too.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Shaun-Woods/702253122 Shaun Woods

    Appreciate it! Why doesn’t the policy apply to the military and federal agencies?

  • http://www.facebook.com/stramella Scott Stramella

    Standing ovation. If they take from us… We take from them.. Keep it up guys.. Keep fighting for our rights to bear arms.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=715996020 Thayne Erickson

    AWESOME!

  • http://www.facebook.com/joseph.blandford.7 Joseph Blandford

    Looks like I am going to be using a lot more LaRue stuff in future builds. About time states like California and New York where held to their own draconian laws.

  • http://www.facebook.com/triumphrider13 Jerry Chase

    the federal Agencys should also be limited if the government works for us then they should abide by the same rules

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-L-Cameron/1416373696 Daniel L Cameron

    It’s the Federal agencies that are causing most of this. Don’t restrict what is going to the guys In-Country, but maybe restrict the mass purchases to groups like ATF? I don’t like keeping our law enforcement officers under-armed, but it’s their bosses we have to get on board!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jim-Ty/1715541659 Jim Ty

    I’d buy another gun from you all, but they are illegal in NY now.

  • http://www.facebook.com/apavelescu Adrian Pavelescu

    I wish more companies had the balls to do this!

  • 93fd3s

    Yee-haa! Way to go TX, bring that attitude up here to NY! Just wish everyone was on board with this.

  • http://www.facebook.com/frederick.james.7 Frederick James

    You’ve really gotta admire what LaRue is doing, but it’s only gonna work if all the other manufacturers/suppliers get on board, or all that will most likely happen is that LE agencies will just switch around until they find a willing supplier. And the sad thing is, that any brotherhood felt among the builders could be split by a chance to make a lotta green. For, as the old saying goes, Blood is thicker than water…however, gold is thicker than both.

  • http://www.facebook.com/TenzinGyaltsen1970 Tenzin Rob Lowery Gyaltsen

    nice start,….please extend this to at least fed’s i.e- DHS, TSA… they have enough

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=602053557 Laurie Lynn

    I’m gonna have to agree with the other statements here. Go all the way and make it apply to military and Federal level as well. I applaud the effort. I also think that a civilian agency needs to be formed so that every politician/public figure who owns a firearm/s must have them registered and if they are found any way illegal they should be confiscated immediately on site. I will support any and all Firearms manufactures who choose to carry this out. Oh and it would also be nice to see all firearms manufactures pull out of Hollywood. What would Stallone and all the other movie badasses do without their mockups? No more Action……….Jackson lol

  • http://www.facebook.com/DBryantJohnson Bryant Johnson

    Nice gesture…but it’s not the local and state governments that are the danger. Not applying it to the Feds makes it a bit…hollow.

  • I work for my money

    While some states and localities are a problem, someone can move from those areas without leaving the country. We need gun manufacturer’s to stand with us against the Fed.

  • Fat Hubie

    I saw a kit for ARs that had ALL the components listed in Fiendstein’s AWB for $129 at BPS yesterday. It was a bunch of plastic pieces, but she has studied this thoroughly and knows what is best for US.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000278377710 Brad Mallon

    I was super pumped until I saw that disclaimer about the feds and .mil not being limited. I don’t think the .mil should be limited but the feds will just say it’s for .mil use.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001930329481 Benja Sophon Sariwatta

    first I like the product, now I like the owner

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Aaron-Blount/100000068829068 Aaron Blount

    I agree with Shrugged. Being former military, and having fought for our rights, all of our rights. To see them taken away because of knee jerk legislation is a slight on every man and woman who has served our country.

  • http://www.facebook.com/adam.christopher.98 Adam Christopher

    With respect to LaRue (of which I am a fan and customer) I do not see how limiting local law enforcement agencies which neither have authored these restrictive laws, nor have enforced them (yet), will accomplish anything. Meanwhile, the Federal Government, who have a whole lot more to do with these ridiculous rules, are exempt.

  • john

    Guys! The feds are bigger problem here. Go all the way with restriting fed sales to DHS, CIA, FBI etc…

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Nicholas-Testaccio/670893321 Nicholas Testaccio

    Encouraging!
    A step further would be to contact Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Phd, JD, on the proper argument to defend the 2nd Amendment. One that up until now no lawyer in this country takes to court. We The People NY have decided to finally take the battle to the state using the proper argument in support of the 2nd. Bob Schulz a man of the utmost integrity, and fortitude has joined the fight after having considerable success against government agencies. He is using Dr. Vieira’s lawful strategy.

  • Disappointed

    At first read, this seems like a support of the second amendment and what the attack on it means to citizens. If you study the motivation for the policy change, you will see that it is a rational business decision. “lost sales are less danger to this firm than potential lawsuits”. Had these words been replaced with, “we will be happy to provide to any federal, state, or local agency, those products whose citizens in that jurisdiction may own.” The objective of the Second Amendment is to provide for rough parity in arms between the government and its citizens. This new policy falls short because it does not respect this objective and does not include the largest threat, that of agencies of the US government.

  • minion153

    And the impact of this is gonna be what? I’ll reserve ooraaahs!