Say Uncle is staying on top of the ATF raid on Sabre Defence in Nashville. Today Sabre issued their own
press release:
NASHVILLE, Tenn., February 17, 2010 – Sabre Defence Industries LLC, an established manufacturer of firearms and weapon systems to the United States military, state and local law enforcement, and worldwide commercial markets, is fully cooperating with federal agents in an ongoing investigation into potential criminal misuse of certain non-saleable firearms produced by Sabre and purchased by some its employees. Sabre has received information that employee(s) involved in inventory control may have obtained and re-sold some items without appropriate licenses. Sabre is and has been cooperating with federal agents in this investigation.
Sabre has more than 120 employees in its Nashville plant. Sabre’s biggest customer is the United States military. Sabre products used by United States armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan include .50 caliber barrels and components of the M2 Browning machine gun, 7.62 mm mini-gun barrels, and M-16A3 and A4 rifles. Sabre is the only non-public company in the world ever to be awarded a contract for a military spec M-16 rifle. Sabre is dedicated to continuing to provide high quality firearms to the United States military, state and local law enforcement, and Sabre's commercial customers.
The Sabre raid comes just after Cavalry Arms, after months and months of fighting an ATF raid, announced they were getting out of the firearms business:
As you may be aware, we have been engaged in an ongoing dispute with the ATF for the past two years. While Cavalry Arms has at all times tried its best to run a lawful and honest shop, unfortunately, some regulatory compliance mistakes were made. We have now come to the point where we feel it is in our best interest to close our FFL and to cease all firearms operations. The owner of Cavalry Arms, Shawn Nealon, has elected to leave the firearms business and concentrate on firearms accessories instead. We are currently in negotiations with another company for that company to purchase the CAV-15 product line. Rest assured that any resulting purchase agreement will address the issue of providing service and support with regard to existing CAV-15 firearm products. We will continue to manufacture quality plastic components, grow our Medical products line, and work to bring new innovations to the relevant markets. Over the next several weeks we will be conducting a wind-down of our firearms manufacturing and FFL operations. Accordingly, please do not send us any firearms for repair or replacement. Instead, such issues should be addressed to the ultimate purchaser of our assets. Due to our limited personnel resources, during this transition/operation wind-down period, the final processing and shipping of firearm receivers already in our inventory will be our first priority.
We deeply appreciate your patience and understanding and anticipate that the relevant asset purchaser will begin operations in March of 2010. We sincerely thank you for your prior and ongoing support during these troubled times and look forward to better years ahead.
Finally, I made the mistake of listening to Bill O'Reilly this afternoon...what an ass...
Michael,
ReplyDeletePlease fill us in on the O'Reilly radio show. We don't receive his show here where I live.
I watched him on this evening's cable TV show though and he was also off the mark on whether the government can suspend Constituional Rights during "emergencies", such as bad weather. He was engaged in a discussion with a guest who founded an organization of current, or former military, law enforcement, or fire-fighting individuuals. The organization was labled as a "dangerous right-wing group" by a rep' from the Southern Poverty Law Center who was yesterday's guest. The subject was this organization's "oath" that each member takes to not enforce unconstituional "orders". SPLC must think that's bad(?). Bill seemed to think that gun confiscation was a fairy tale and it could never happen in the US, or if it did happen, then it is warranted. This individual reminded him of post-Katrina New Orleans and the gun confiscation ordered by the mayor, where obviously law abiding citizens had their guns confiscated. Since Bill controls the mike and the discourse during any interview, he also controls the "information" presented and the final outcome of the discussion. Bill did the same here and did not let the gentleman give his rational explanation of those events. There, the courts "found" in favor of those whose guns were unlawfully taken.
Often, Bill shows his ignorance on many subjects. I think that he really believes that if he doesn't know something, then no one else does. How wrong he usually is.
Incidently, Bill also thought that the gov' can ban "assembly", during similar situations.
Soon, Glenn Beck "will be eating Bill's lunch"!
Life Member
Bill O'Reilly is, and always has been, an ignorant populist blowhard. His popularity has always been a mystery to me.
ReplyDeleteI agree that O'reilly was a jerk on his show tonite. But what surprised me also was Glenn Beck on his radio show chortling about a candidate for gov of Texas Debra Medina on his show the prior day. Posing a gotcha question on being a 9/11 "truther". Made me sick to see both these guys who are positioned as "right wing" folks stabbing the conservative cause in the back. Shame on them. Just cause they appear to be conservatives doesn't mean they are, or that they don't have their own agenda.
ReplyDelete"But what surprised me also was Glenn Beck on his radio show chortling about a candidate for gov of Texas Debra Medina on his show the prior day. Posing a gotcha question on being a 9/11 "truther". Made me sick to see both these guys who are positioned as "right wing" folks stabbing the conservative cause in the back."
ReplyDeleteAre you serious?
Being a truther is a conservative position?
I consider myself fairly conservative. Since when does conservative = batsh*t crazy?
Glenn's kind of loopy sometimes, but outing a truther is a public service. It's not "backstabbing."
Right and wrong are independent. They don't take sides.
nj_larry,
ReplyDeleteYour comments are usaually spot on. But a 9/11 Truther is certainly NOT qualified to hold public office.
Just a quick follow up. My comment above about Beck was not intended to be supportive of lunatic fringe ideas. If you listened to the original interview all Medina said in response to his question was that there seemed to be questions out there and they should be answered. If that makes her a tin foil hat "truther" boy have we lowered the bar.
ReplyDeleteSometimes you get a little window into the soul of a person. Just out of the blue. Becks display yesterday was such a window for me. I didn't recognize the guy. It was different and disturbing. I don't live in Texas. I don't give a crap who gets elected there. What I was concerned about is "blindly" following some guy who has rapidly come up in the media world and who has millions of viewers worshiping at his feet. Who puts out how much of a Christian he is, how he "prays" on all his decisions. Well I saw more of the Jimmy Swaggart and Ted Haggard yesterday than an "Imitation of Christ". More of Larry 'Lonesome' Rhodes from A Face in the Crowd than I wanted to see.
P.S. I still luv ya guys...
I, too saw the O'Reilly episode and my lovely wife finally grabbed the clicker and hit the mute button so my rant at the TV could go on 'uninterrupted'. LOL...ASS doesn't accurately describe the difference between courage and cowardice.
ReplyDeleteIMHO O'Reilly deserves todays "YELLOW STRIPE" award for cowardice in the face of a crisis. It's a coward that is willing to trade off his security for his Constitutional rights and the same rights of all others just when they need them the most.
It's time that all Americans recognize these people as talking heads who only pose as leaders until the SHTF.
I suppose that you may delete this post, too, Michael. ;>} Your audience may not be quite ready for my brand of direct, unabashed "huffiness". But, I wonder why those of us who choose to defend the Constitution and refuse to be 'in the closet' about our 2nd Amendment rights continue to be silenced by our peers in the hopes that we're not branded as loons by those who misguidedly trust in the mercies of tyrants.
For those who missed the O'reilly segment here is the link...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/v/_Po8LLjIlDw&hl=en_US&fs=1&
I think Michael was talking the usually overlooked radio version of the "factor".. He must have been in one of those rare areas of the country where the EIB mike of the great one does not shine... No shades of gray here! O'reille is one of those guys who is so full of himself he starts to think that he IS the news story. In his quest for "fairness" and "no spin", about 50% of the time he is on board with the "living document" constitutional model crowd.. I usually cant stand to hear him "opine". I dont understand his high ratings either!
ReplyDelete"But, I wonder why those of us who choose to defend the Constitution and refuse to be 'in the closet' about our 2nd Amendment rights continue to be silenced by our peers"
ReplyDeleteSounds like some rigorous self-examination might be in order. It's been my experience with people who have chronic problems with others that it's not the others who are the problem.
I have a sister-in-law who complains about other drivers' "road rage" on a weekly basis. I have never witnessed road rage. I wonder what the difference is?
I posted the video of the O'reilly thing here:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=11336.msg148400;topicseen#msg148400
@ Dave S.: So sorry you can't get along with your family. Perhaps some counseling and that self examination you prescribe for everyone else might be in order. In three comments you've attacked four people; O'Reilly, Beck, me and your sister. Hmmmm.....better not fly any private planes for a while, OK?
ReplyDeleteAn accurate observation of someone doesn't automatically suggest "an attack", you King Cavalier, prefaced your statement that you thought Michael might delete your comment because "Your audience may not be quite ready for my brand of direct, unabashed "huffiness". Usually forums and blogs, such as these are exactly the format we need to make our opinions known, I saw no attacks, I saw personal opinions. In MY opinion, O'Reilly and Glenn Beck aren't so far from one another in ego and using their spotlight to highlight themselves, rather than the issues.
ReplyDelete"So sorry you can't get along with your family."
ReplyDeleteKC, your problem is obvious to all but you. Again, some self-reflection would benefit you.
OK, so what was the issue on the O'Reilly radio show?
ReplyDeleteLife Member
the problem with Bill O is he wants to play both sides of the street...he wants to be liberal, but also conservative.
ReplyDeleteYou cant do both.
The problem is that O'Reilly is NOT a conservative of any stripe.
ReplyDeleteHe's a populist, through and through.
Like a "reform politician", a populist can be made to geek on any issue, once he's convinced it's for "the good of the people" (HT to Heinlein).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi All, On Friday Bill O indicated that the Federal Government can confiscate firearms during an "Emergency". He is, of course, completely wrong. http://www.iaem.com/committees/GovernmentAffairs/documents/PL109-295DHSAppropFY07andFEMAReform.pdf
ReplyDeleteSee section 706(Bottom of page 36) for details. By my reading and understanding I believe that any agency that receives Federal funds (likely including all States and most forms of local Law enforcement) are prohibited from confiscating firearms during a "major disaster or emergency". See for yourself and let me know what you think. O
P.S. Sorry for the above deletion I had to fix the link.
Hello, all right, I completely agree. Thanks for the interesting article.
ReplyDeleteI think so too. A post is really interesting. Thanks to the author.
ReplyDeleteThe thing you're writing is a big blunder.
ReplyDeleteWell, I do not really believe this will have success.
ReplyDelete