Guns Company Leaves Connecticut, Calls For Industry To ‘Abandon This State’


PTR (Precision Target Rifle) Industries, makers of the PTR-91 series of rifles, released a statement on its website last week announcing its principled departure from its corporate home in Bristol, Conn.

You know why: Connecticut, site of the Nation’s latest media murder sensation, became an innovator in the recent liberal-State gun-grab disarmament race, passing a 2nd Amendment-abrogating bill on April 4 that creates the country’s first law enforcement registry of dangerous “gun” offenders.

The entire post is worth reading, but this excerpt stands as one of the best indictments of the State Legislature’s wrongheaded subservience to the utopian goal of public safety, and of the secretive and mendacious tactics it used to get the hurried bill before the governor:

What emerged was a bill fraught with ambiguous definitions, insufficient considerations for the trade, conflicting mandates, and disastrous consequences for the fundamental rights of the people of CT.

The magnitude of the constitutional and economic importance of this bill is such that the disregard for public input (in the final version), and the haphazard production of the legislation should be insulting to any citizen or business in CT. It should be a shock to us all that such landmark legislation could be written in one week, and seen by no one (including the rank-and-file legislators) prior to its emergency certification. Having been present in the deliberations in both legislative chambers, it was clear that a majority of our legislators had not even read the bill — and those that had read it had only a cursory understanding.

The process with which this legislation proceeded, along with the language that resulted gives us no confidence that this will be the last violation of our rights in our beloved home state, and we only hope that this does not set a precedent at a national level.

The rights of the citizens of CT have been trampled upon. The safety of its children is at best questionably improved from the day of the tragedy that triggered the events that lead us here. Finally, due to an improperly drafted bill, manufacturing of modern sporting rifles in the State of CT has been effectively outlawed. With a heavy heart but a clear mind, we have been forced to decide that our business can no longer survive in Connecticut — the former Constitution state.

The company hasn’t selected its next home (certainly, it will have its pick of suitors), but it has secured agreements from “a majority” of employees, including gunsmiths, to relocate and continue working for PTR.

PTR is also asking other Connecticut-based firearms manufacturers to “abandon this state as its leaders have abandoned the proud heritage that forged our freedom.”

If those companies heed that call, it would mean Colt (a Connecticut original since 1847) as well as shotgun giant Mossberg (founded in New Haven since 1919) and Stag Arms (2003), which makes AR-15s that Connecticut residents no longer can buy, would all wave goodbye to a State whose history, as much as the Nation’s itself, has been bound since Colonial times to the manufacture and accessibility of firearms for residents, law enforcement and the military.

Personal Liberty

Ben Bullard

Reconciling the concept of individual sovereignty with conscientious participation in the modern American political process is a continuing preoccupation for staff writer Ben Bullard. A former community newspaper writer, Bullard has closely observed the manner in which well-meaning small-town politicians and policy makers often accept, unthinkingly, their increasingly marginal role in shaping the quality of their own lives, as well as those of the people whom they serve. He argues that American public policy is plagued by inscrutable and corrupt motives on a national scale, a fundamental problem which individuals, families and communities must strive to solve. This, he argues, can be achieved only as Americans rediscover the principal role each citizen plays in enriching the welfare of our Republic.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • Thomas-Bonnie Sherman

    It’s to bad that they are forced to leave & end the tradition of being in Connecticut. I always bought guns that were made in CT. But we have a dictator in the White House so I support their move.
    Tom Sherman
    Milton, WI

  • TIME

    Dear Ben,

    Colt is leaving, as well many others ~ I strongly feel that by this years end they all will have left this state of mass delusion.

    Saddly again this only hurts the people who live in that state, Oh wait, many of the people who live in Connecticut voted for the very problems they will face, not unlike New York, or {New Jersey,} BTW ~ a state that makes you pay to leave.

    Then we also have the other C states, Like Colorado, used to be a nice place until the special people from California moved there, of what by the way is the other C state.

    Oh well people ~ and to think the fun is just getting started.

    To Conquer, first divide,~ then divide again and again until you get the disired / coveted effects.

    Peace and Love Shalom

    • Warrior

      And you get to “keep” your doctor. Well except for doc kermit!


    Since they are forced to leave the state because of the new gun laws enacted, none of these companies should in the future supply, sell to, or donate it’s products to any state or local government within that state or with anyone does. No Guns, No Ammo, No Service. Lrt them go back to rock chuckin’…..

    • Right Brain Thinker

      So you’re saying that the gun owners in CT and other states should be punished because they were in the minority and couldn’t keep some laws from being passed? Are you suggesting that they also need to move out of CT or those other states and go to a “gun friendly” state or they won’t be able to get ammo and parts? Sounds like you want to deprive them of both their gun rights and god given right to live where they choose and as they choose.

      And I hope all these moving companies are privately owned and don’t have stockholders to answer to. If I owned stock in a company that was cutting into the bottom line and my dividends in order to finance a move for purely political purposes like this, I would be most upset. It’s one thing to skim a little off to bribe legislators—-that might get some return—-this is money down a rat hole that will never be recovered. The increase in the number of PTR rifles that will be sold because of this “principled” move will never generate enough profit to pay for the move. I guess it is good for the overall economy, though—-kind of a “stimulus” for realtors, moving companies, whoever constructs the new factory, etc.

      (And I sympathize with the workers that have to uproot their lives for no good reason in order to follow their jobs).

      • CatGman

        RBT, I don’t think that this will be punishing the gun owners. It will be punishing the gun grabbers. Laws were passed that are detrimental to these businesses. They are simply moving to a state that is not hostile toward them. The gun owners will still be able to purchase what ever is still legal to purchase in CT.

        • Right Brain Thinker

          Maybe I misread what DD said?

          “No Guns, No Ammo, No Service. Let them go back to rock chuckin’…..”

          Sounds to me like he wants to punish those who own guns, not the “grabbers”. Again, I will say that this “principled” business is just political horsepucky and is likely to backfire—-“take your bat and ball and go home” has never been a very intelligent strategy.

          • BeFreeIL

            RBT – Don’t know if you misread but you’re misrepresenting what he said. Also, I don’t know if you’re a lefty but that’s a typical leftist tactic. What he said was to not sell to Connecticut state or local GOVERNMENT agencies or anyone working for them. It has nothing to do with private citizens. The State has already emasculated them.
            BTW, if you answer, cool it with the keyboard diarrhea.

          • Right Brain Thinker

            You’re right, I did misread it a bit….apologies with no excuse except that the “or with anyone does” may have confused me.

            I haven’t read the law, and this whole article is based on one source—-a PRESS RELEASE from a gun company that says that the law “effectively” outlaws the manufacture of sporting rifles in CT. I find that hard to believe. Can anyone cite the part of the law that says that or is the “effectively outlaws” just “political opinion” from a company with an axe to grind?

            DD’s “No Guns, No Ammo, No Service. Let them go back to rock chuckin’…..”, even when directed at only the government is STILL depriving CT citizens in general (and gun owners) of the right to full protection by their law enforcement agencies and is inflammatory, divisive, and counterproductive..

            BTW, I will be happy to attempt to “cool it with the keyboard diarrhea” if you explain what that means..

          • Lisa Wiese

            DD is not depriving you, that was your elected politicians who did that!

        • harley

          I wouldn’t have even given the jerk an answer to what he stated.I praise the company leaving that kind of state.IF A GUN OWNER COULD LEAVE THAT TYPE OF STATE<THEY SHOULD.Those states that go against gun owners will lose lots of income from taxes on things needed by people leaving.

      • Maebe

        No good reason? did you not read the article? CT made it illegal for them to make the guns…if you can’t buy it you can’t make it to sell stupid…they even said that it would be illegal to make the guns there…of course they have to move to continue their work…and the folks that are loyal to the company…good for them…I’d go too

        • Right Brain Thinker

          As I just said to Tim, “the law “effectively” outlaws the manufacture of sporting rifles in CT? I find that hard to believe. Can anyone cite the part of the law that says that”?

          What this article says the gun manufacturer says the law says is proof of nothing.
          And the folks who are “loyal” to the company? The article says “The company has secured agreements from “a majority” of
          employees, including gunsmiths, to relocate”. That “majority” means “one more than half” and I’ll bet a lot of them would rather stay but need the job. It’s easy for you to say “I’d go too”, but you have no skin in the game—talk is cheap.

      • Lisa Wiese

        Texas will buy plenty of their guns, don’t you worry your little soul about that, and what they save on state taxes, will make up for the move in about 5 years. And I hate to break it to you, but once those families get away from your nanny states, they will be much more free, safer, and less stressed. I know, because I was one of those families, and life is way better in the south western states, because you in the East SUCK! Now run along, and go ask Bloomberg’s permission to live, you damn weenees!

  • Warrior

    Ya know, it is becoming abundantly clear to me that there needs to be more taxes paid by “legal gun owners” to pay for “abortions”. We just can’t have anymore “kermits” plying their trade under such rudimentary conditions. Talk about having one’s priorities in order.

  • Bernie

    I would imagine that even CVA Connecticut Valley Arms would also have to move under the Nazi leadership they are now facing . So sad for the good people of Connecticut .

  • CatGman

    The particular state in which a gun is built has no bearing on which gun I will buy.
    It is the reputation of the gun and its maker that matters.
    It is business. If the state is hostile towards the sale of widgets, move to a state that loves widgets. Common sense.

  • Elizabeth Giermanski

    I have learned from the past, it starts at the top, and works it`s way down, TYRANNY
    has become a word I am hearing time, and time again as I pass through the different sites. Just another example of violating the people, and over riding, through deciptive ways. I fell strongly that if you asked the general public, they would tell you that this is not what they wont! We must remember whom we are dealing with, a lieing, and deciveing government, not because I say so, but because of what they have done. I for one am fed up with their out, and out lies, and deciption. A dictater rules with fear over the people, and as we have heard, ” O ” has his hit list, and he dosen`t mind letting it be made known. Why the purchase of 100 years of ammunition, or the thousands of armored vehicals, or the thousends of plastic caskets, can some one answer that ! And now the Drones, what next, we better stand togather, and put down our differentse, let our voises be heard as never befor, we can make a differance if we just stand togather We must fight for our secound amendent rite to bear arms, they are trying to take away something they do not have the rite too do. Do not be decived. The King of England tryed that, and rember what happend. It`s up to WE THE PEOPLE TO STAND AND FIGHT FOR OUR RITES. As it is written, ” ENEMIES, BOTH FORIGEN, AND DOMESTIC. ” It`s a must, and we can not forget it. Hitler had to cause civel unrest, then disarm the people, then, well we know the rest, The progressives/ comies know exactly what they are trying to do to this country. Johnny G.


      Powerful! I couldn’t agree with you more.

  • Ranger Hall

    when they move i will cheer them, one thing is for sure with all the inflated prices they sure could afford to move.

  • Jim Wolfe

    Another example of the current regimes not giving a care about jobs and the economy.They are sending this country into the depths of hell. As a country we are divided more then ever. Only time will tell what will happen in the future.It doesn’t look good for what we used to consider a good way of life anymore.My heart aches everyday.

  • Douglas Phillips

    Remington descides to stay in New York.. for $80 Million tax payers dollars.

  • Mike Failla

    Those manufacturers would be welcome in arizona. ruger is here. Our taxes and infrastructure would be advantageous to firearms manufacturers. We have transportation, land, and attitude which is positive and more importantly we have folks who dont mind working hard and producing quality products. We want you.
    Connecticut does not. Less snow and crappy weather too! Sun shines on us in arizona.

  • TheSilverRanger

    To quote Star Wars: Episode III, “So this is how liberty dies; with thunderous applause.”

  • Steve Wetzel

    What will happen is a civil separation of states will occur. Liberal states like Conn will force companies move out of state – thus making them more dependant on the government to bail them out. States like Texas will forced to pay more and more for the bail outs until they finally quit the Union. It’s time.

  • Jill Parish

    I’m proud of them. Who would want to produce guns in such an anti-gun state. How about coming to Michigan? We love our guns.

  • tns

    I wish all of the families who will lose their jobs over the poor decisions of their elected officials the best of lick but if this is the only way to send a clear message so be it

  • Rocketman

    I lived in Conn. while on a job assignment about 35 years ago. It was a totally screwed up bastion of socialist insanity and has gotten worse since then.