There are places were you can shoot in New Jersey, perhaps the editors of the South Jersey Times should go there instead of writing so much crap.
Mandela’s corpse hasn’t turned to worm food yet, but boy, liberals can’t wait to start exploiting “Madiba” for their wicked agendas.
In an editorial called Essay questions for gun bidders?, this is what they say:
As we remember Nelson Mandela, it’s instructive to note that economic isolation of South Africa helped end the scourge of racial apartheid.
Public entities in America, and most of the free world, had policies to bar investment in South African companies and/or public purchases from firms that did significant business with the segregationist country. The pressure was a factor, in addition to the determination of Mandela and his supporters, in getting the white government to end the discrimination.
Will the tactic work with gun policy? Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop wants to find out. The effort seems ill-advised, though.
The city’s contract specifications for police weapons will soon include some rather esoteric opinion questions for the gun makers.
Some samples, according to the Associated Press:
Would the company refuse to allow its products to appear in violent video games?
And, on the potentially more relevant end of the spectrum:
What does the company do to combat illegal drug trafficking?
I don’t know, what do bakers do to combat obesity? What do gyms do to combat members who don’t show up? Here’s an idea, gun companies should stop selling guns to NJ PD’s until they remove those stupid questions.
Social responsibility can be a factor in naming a “responsible” bidder, whether a town wants a building contractor or a vendor of $200,000 worth of guns and $150,000 worth of ammunition. But we see a couple of problems here.
First, essay questions do not belong in bid proposals. How does one grade the responses?
Secondly, it’s hard to fathom anything but stoically monolithic answers from the gun makers. Will one bullet producer endorse high ammunition taxes when the others won’t? Not likely.
In terms of social enlightenment, gun makers are where Big Tobacco was in 1994, when all the CEOs testified before Congress that their cigarettes were not addictive. (“Our guns don’t kill people, criminals do,” yada, yada.)
If “social enlightenment” means thinking that guns kill people while ignoring the shooters, then consider me unenlightened.
The mayor says the idea is to restart the gun safety conversation that occurs after every mass shooting. Good idea, but Jersey City ultimately must buy from one of the bidders. If they all give the same answers, price and product suitability will still determine who wins the contract.
You mean a gun CONTROL conversation? Because that’s what this is really about. Frankly, gun companies don’t need your dirty money. You hate guns? Then go ahead and fight crime with crossbows and swords, you damn fools.
[…] Go to this article […]
A large number of companys already took a stand against anti-2A agencies. Wouldn’t they follow that policy here? This is one city, not an entire state police department, such has already been put on notice for their actions. Companys have nothing to fear here. They just need to continue their policies. Civlians will continue to support those that support them. A well educated client base with positive blog reviews determines sales, not an endorsement from a bunch of jackboots who see their firearms as accessories.
If the people in that city don’t stand up to their police department, don’t tell them to simply buy the best guns for the lowest price without insulting those companies with idiotic questions, then those companies deserve to boycott the city. Of course, some will submit to whatever idiotic requirements they have, but I personally wouldn’t. To me it’s like those jobs that demand you answer stupid questions in writing such as, “where do you see in 10 years” and to add insult to injury, then they demand you actually write an article for them, without them even paying you. Some writers put up with that BS, I don’t.