Olympic Arms, Inc. bans all sales to the State of New York Government

[bigrebnc1775]

I read it.
Why don't you splain to us exactly which part forbids NY state from buying police weapons and such from a foreign source.

Either that or STFU.

Google it and I will not type "or STFU" I will plainly tell you to shut the **** up.

 

[uscitizen]

I did google it and read it.
And you just Shut The **** Up about it or explain it to us.

 

[Borillar]

Read it.

Thanks for the complete lack of an answer!

I have read it. Where does it say anything about no state shall buy things from a foreign source? Or do you think buying from a foreign source equates to a treaty?

Read Article. I. section 10.
You do know where to locate Article. I. section 10 don't you?

What are you alluding to? The Constitution of the United States? The New York State Constitution? A local municipal code What?

If it is the US Constitution, I don't see where it applies at all.

"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."

They wouldn't be entering a treaty or alliance or confederation by purchasing weapons from a foreign source. In fact, I believe Sig Sauer, and Glock are two major suppliers of handguns that are both foreign.

They also wouldn't be granting Letters of Marque and Reprisal, coining Money, or emitting Bills of Credit, passing any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or granting any Title of Nobility. Unless it is your position that they have to pay for the weapons with gold or silver coins, I really don't see what applies here.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Thanks for the complete lack of an answer!

I have read it. Where does it say anything about no state shall buy things from a foreign source? Or do you think buying from a foreign source equates to a treaty?

Read Article. I. section 10.
You do know where to locate Article. I. section 10 don't you?

What are you alluding to? The Constitution of the United States? The New York State Constitution? A local municipal code What?

If it is the US Constitution, I don't see where it applies at all.

"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."

They wouldn't be entering a treaty or alliance or confederation by purchasing weapons from a foreign source. In fact, I believe Sig Sauer, and Glock are two major suppliers of handguns that are both foreign.

They also wouldn't be granting Letters of Marque and Reprisal, coining Money, or emitting Bills of Credit, passing any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or granting any Title of Nobility. Unless it is your position that they have to pay for the weapons with gold or silver coins, I really don't see what applies here.

That isn't all of Section. 10. but do keep trying.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I did google it and read it.
And you just Shut The **** Up about it or explain it to us.

Post it. or shut the **** up.

 

[uscitizen]

Big reb on ignore.
I can shut him up from my perspective at least.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Big reb on ignore.
I can shut him up from my perspective at least.

Guess that means you have nothing.
Yeah I know you have me on ignore.

 

[Borillar]

Read Article. I. section 10.
You do know where to locate Article. I. section 10 don't you?

What are you alluding to? The Constitution of the United States? The New York State Constitution? A local municipal code What?

If it is the US Constitution, I don't see where it applies at all.

"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."

They wouldn't be entering a treaty or alliance or confederation by purchasing weapons from a foreign source. In fact, I believe Sig Sauer, and Glock are two major suppliers of handguns that are both foreign.

They also wouldn't be granting Letters of Marque and Reprisal, coining Money, or emitting Bills of Credit, passing any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or granting any Title of Nobility. Unless it is your position that they have to pay for the weapons with gold or silver coins, I really don't see what applies here.

That isn't all of Section. 10. but do keep trying.

OK, here is the rest:

"No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress."

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

2nd paragraph deals with duties and imports. Nothing applies there.

3rd paragraph, more about duties, no troops or ships of war in time of peace, agreements or compacts with other States or foreign powers, engaging in war unless invaded... Still not seeing anything preventing a State from purchasing weapons from any supplier that suits its needs, so long as they are complying with federal import laws.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What are you alluding to? The Constitution of the United States? The New York State Constitution? A local municipal code What?

If it is the US Constitution, I don't see where it applies at all.

"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."

They wouldn't be entering a treaty or alliance or confederation by purchasing weapons from a foreign source. In fact, I believe Sig Sauer, and Glock are two major suppliers of handguns that are both foreign.

They also wouldn't be granting Letters of Marque and Reprisal, coining Money, or emitting Bills of Credit, passing any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or granting any Title of Nobility. Unless it is your position that they have to pay for the weapons with gold or silver coins, I really don't see what applies here.

That isn't all of Section. 10. but do keep trying.

OK, here is the rest:

"No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress."

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

2nd paragraph deals with duties and imports. Nothing applies there.

3rd paragraph, more about duties, no troops or ships of war in time of peace, agreements or compacts with other States or foreign powers, engaging in war unless invaded... Still not seeing anything preventing a State from purchasing weapons from any supplier that suits its needs, so long as they are complying with federal import laws.

<sigh>
You aren't seeing it because you don't want too see it

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

The city of Buffalo or for that matters any city, would have to do an agreement (CONTRACT) to make a purchase for the firearms.
AND the original disagreement was going too a foreign country to get arms.

 

[Borillar]

That isn't all of Section. 10. but do keep trying.

OK, here is the rest:

"No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress."

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

2nd paragraph deals with duties and imports. Nothing applies there.

3rd paragraph, more about duties, no troops or ships of war in time of peace, agreements or compacts with other States or foreign powers, engaging in war unless invaded... Still not seeing anything preventing a State from purchasing weapons from any supplier that suits its needs, so long as they are complying with federal import laws.

<sigh>
You aren't seeing it because you don't want too see it

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

The city of Buffalo or for that matters any city, would have to do an agreement (CONTRACT) to make a purchase for the firearms.
AND the original disagreement was going too a foreign country to get arms.

They would be entering an agreement with a foreign company, not a foreign government. As long as they are in compliance with the export laws of the foreign country and the import laws of the US, where is the problem? If your argument is that purchasing something from another country = a treaty, agreement, or compact, then how would any state be able to import foodstuffs from other countries? Go to your local supermarket. You will see lettuce from Mexico, grapes from Peru, oranges from Australia. Do you have to sign a treaty to purchase these items?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

OK, here is the rest:

"No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress."

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

2nd paragraph deals with duties and imports. Nothing applies there.

3rd paragraph, more about duties, no troops or ships of war in time of peace, agreements or compacts with other States or foreign powers, engaging in war unless invaded... Still not seeing anything preventing a State from purchasing weapons from any supplier that suits its needs, so long as they are complying with federal import laws.

<sigh>
You aren't seeing it because you don't want too see it

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

The city of Buffalo or for that matters any city, would have to do an agreement (CONTRACT) to make a purchase for the firearms.
AND the original disagreement was going too a foreign country to get arms.

They would be entering an agreement with a foreign company, not a foreign government. As long as they are in compliance with the export laws of the foreign country and the import laws of the US, where is the problem? If your argument is that purchasing something from another country = a treaty, agreement, or compact, then how would any state be able to import foodstuffs from other countries? Go to your local supermarket. You will see lettuce from Mexico, grapes from Peru, oranges from Australia. Do you have to sign a treaty to purchase these items?

You think those companies are run on the free market? They aren't American companies.

 

[Montrovant]

<sigh>
You aren't seeing it because you don't want too see it


The city of Buffalo or for that matters any city, would have to do an agreement (CONTRACT) to make a purchase for the firearms.
AND the original disagreement was going too a foreign country to get arms.

They would be entering an agreement with a foreign company, not a foreign government. As long as they are in compliance with the export laws of the foreign country and the import laws of the US, where is the problem? If your argument is that purchasing something from another country = a treaty, agreement, or compact, then how would any state be able to import foodstuffs from other countries? Go to your local supermarket. You will see lettuce from Mexico, grapes from Peru, oranges from Australia. Do you have to sign a treaty to purchase these items?

You think those companies are run on the free market? They aren't American companies.

Have you ever read any of your own posts?

Have you ever posted sober?

Is your entire time on this message board just a joke?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

They would be entering an agreement with a foreign company, not a foreign government. As long as they are in compliance with the export laws of the foreign country and the import laws of the US, where is the problem? If your argument is that purchasing something from another country = a treaty, agreement, or compact, then how would any state be able to import foodstuffs from other countries? Go to your local supermarket. You will see lettuce from Mexico, grapes from Peru, oranges from Australia. Do you have to sign a treaty to purchase these items?

You think those companies are run on the free market? They aren't American companies.

Have you ever read any of your own posts?

Have you ever posted sober?

Is your entire time on this message board just a joke?

OH **** you're right I'm wrong all gun companies outside the united states are privately owned and not run by the government in the country they are based in. They are all run by private ownership.

 

[J.E.D]

Olympic Arms, Inc. bans all sales to the State of New York Government

Oh no. NY state gov must be shaking in their boots

 

[J.E.D]

Thanks for the neg, BigDerp

 

[Borillar]

<sigh>
You aren't seeing it because you don't want too see it


The city of Buffalo or for that matters any city, would have to do an agreement (CONTRACT) to make a purchase for the firearms.
AND the original disagreement was going too a foreign country to get arms.

They would be entering an agreement with a foreign company, not a foreign government. As long as they are in compliance with the export laws of the foreign country and the import laws of the US, where is the problem? If your argument is that purchasing something from another country = a treaty, agreement, or compact, then how would any state be able to import foodstuffs from other countries? Go to your local supermarket. You will see lettuce from Mexico, grapes from Peru, oranges from Australia. Do you have to sign a treaty to purchase these items?

You think those companies are run on the free market? They aren't American companies.

Doesn't really matter as long as the State is in compliance with federal import laws. If the Feds banned certain companies, like Bush did with Norinco, then the state couldn't purchase from them. Otherwise should be OK. Many foreign arms manufacturers are on the free market.

 

[J.E.D]

 

[bigrebnc1775]

They would be entering an agreement with a foreign company, not a foreign government. As long as they are in compliance with the export laws of the foreign country and the import laws of the US, where is the problem? If your argument is that purchasing something from another country = a treaty, agreement, or compact, then how would any state be able to import foodstuffs from other countries? Go to your local supermarket. You will see lettuce from Mexico, grapes from Peru, oranges from Australia. Do you have to sign a treaty to purchase these items?

You think those companies are run on the free market? They aren't American companies.

Doesn't really matter as long as the State is in compliance with federal import laws. If the Feds banned certain companies, like Bush did with Norinco, then the state couldn't purchase from them. Otherwise should be OK. Many foreign arms manufacturers are on the free market.

True, but they would have too get the ok from the fed's

 

[Borillar]

You think those companies are run on the free market? They aren't American companies.

Doesn't really matter as long as the State is in compliance with federal import laws. If the Feds banned certain companies, like Bush did with Norinco, then the state couldn't purchase from them. Otherwise should be OK. Many foreign arms manufacturers are on the free market.

True, but they would have too get the ok from the fed's

Of course. All imports have to go through Customs and comply with import regulations and restrictions.

 

[Montrovant]

You think those companies are run on the free market? They aren't American companies.

Doesn't really matter as long as the State is in compliance with federal import laws. If the Feds banned certain companies, like Bush did with Norinco, then the state couldn't purchase from them. Otherwise should be OK. Many foreign arms manufacturers are on the free market.

True, but they would have too get the ok from the fed's

Meaning your contention that the city of Buffalo can't go to a foreign source to buy arms is so much nonsense.....