Officials feared firearms would be used on U.S. soldiers
Perhaps the federal government could take a lesson from a little company in the
"backward" State of Utah. Perhaps then "fast and furious" would
not be a black spot on the current administration's record.
While l applaud their decision to back out due to "moral" reasons, l
cannot help but wonder where this morality was when they made the initial
decision to enter into the bidding process in the first place.
I will looking to buy my next gun from Desert Tech. I support those who do the
right thing for the right reason. Congratulations!
Look at some of the gun manufactures history and why they began. Some were made
to protect us from our own Government.what I am saying is most of the Gun
manufactures are pro American. My favourite is Browning for that reason
Re: "He survived getting shot down . . . only to die at the hands of a
fellow American with a gun and a temper."Too bad he was unarmed
at what turned out to be the most important time in his life. Liberals should be
ashamed if it was because of some deranged, liberal, people-control law
[it's crazy to call them "gun-control laws, since they exert, not the
slightest control over the 100 million or so American guns].As we
all know, no gun control measure would have saved your uncle.So, why
do liberals insist on sacrificing ALL Americans on the altar they've
erected to enforced victimhood?
Longfellow said, "Conversely, most US gun owners are responsible individuals
who are guaranteed the right to own firearms by the US constitution." Tell
that to the parents of the kids who died at Sandy Hook or the parents of the
kids in the school system where we live who have to go through the third degree
just to go have lunch with their kid at school or visit the classroom of their
child any more because of Sandy Hook. You can have a thousand good gun owners
and one bad one ruins it all for them. I am sure the people that were in the
Aurora, CO. theater have a different perspective than you do, too. How many
people have to die in mass shootings before this the morals of the gun
manufacturers get to the point that they stand care about our soldiers after
they come home. My uncle did three tours though Viet Nam and was gunned down
right here in the USA by a nutcase with a a semi-automatic. He survived getting
shot down in his chopper twice only to die at the hands of a fellow American
with a gun and a temper.
"I don't approve of young people bying guns, or getting their hands on
them, but that is not the problem of this or any gun manufacturer." It
should be! plain and simple It should be!
1. Thank you Desert Tactical. 2. Thank you Desert Tactical. 3. Again, Thank
you Desert Tactical. Please help spread your story further. This is an amazing
example of integrity.
Now that is a shock! Here we have an actual moral and ethical business in an out
of control capitalist business climate, which is protective of its own
nation's troops far, far more than the government of the nation itself. The
US government thinks nothing of providing weapons to every hot spot on the
planet, weapons which inevitably fall into the hands of enemies to be used
Re: "It is Pak army who getting these weapons n not the civilians . . .
."The problem is that too many Pakistanis, even military
officers that you'd think would know better, have been radicalized by
Wahab-leaning imams, and have come to identify more closely with their Taleban
enemies, than with their closest allies. We've seen too many instances of
Taleban terrorists killing Americans with weapons supplied by the Pakistani
military and security forces.If you really lived in Pakistan,
you'd already know that.
" I'm surprised that Pakistan needs to shop for military
weapons."Jim:Pakistan can get all the full-auto,
run-of-the-mill AK-47's it wants from their own stone-age gunmakers that
can create copies of them over an open fire. However, these rifles
are precision, modular bolt guns costing several thousand dollars each. The sort
of accuracy and reliability these guns have comes from advanced engineering and
technology Pakistan does not have.
Worf,It is not the government's job to spend money on poverty.
That is the job of individual Americans. We have spent trillions on poverty
programs and yet the poverty rate is about where it was 40 years ago. Churches
and other charities get far more bang for the buck than does the Federal
Government. Even foreign food aid often simply ends up in the hands of corrupt
forign governments and not in the stomachs of the poor.
Curmudgeon stated "So it's morally wrong to sell arms to froeigners who
might use them to harm U.S. troops who may be in their country without
permission, but it's OK to sell them to U.S. citizens who might use them to
harm other U.S. citizens within our own country. Got it. Selective
morality."Not selective morality, consistent and coherent
morality. A substantial portion of the people of Pakistan have a demonstrated
hostility towards the US and manifest that hostility by violent actions in the
Afghanistan border region. Conversely, most US gun owners are responsible
individuals who are guaranteed the right to own firearms by the US constitution.
Therefore, even though a small minority of criminals in the US may use firearms
to do harm to other citizens, it is quite moral to uphold the constitutional
rights of the majority.
From the Great White North I say BRAVO to Desert Arms for withdrawing their
proposal. If all the companies in North America had these strong ethics we
wouldn't have had Worldcom, Lehmann Brothers and et al nor would we have
the economic and political difficulties we are faced with today. Thank you
I applaud the decision, but I have a question for Desert Tech: If this was an
ethical decision, why were you bidding in the first place? It feels like you got
involved in the bidding process, felt some backlash, and decided to get out.
Your sales manager puts a nice spin on your decision, making you look like the
hero, but the question remains.
Pakistani guns are far, far more likely to be used against other Pakistanis
and/or Indians. It's not like we have a military presence in Pakistan for
them to take shots at Americans. Kudos to the company, but I
suspect some Chinese company is more than happy to step in and sell more of the
cheap Russian knock-offs that have proliferated the region.
They are holding out for the Homeland Security contract, that will push them
over the top.
To Desert Tactical Arms,Thank you! You guys showed a ton of
integrity in doing this.
" 'At the end of the day, we feel our ethics are worth more than the
bottom line,' said Mike Davis, sales manager for the Salt Lake City-based
company."-Rare in a business! KUDOS and MUCH RESPECT to this
company and its managing officers!
Back in the mid 1900's Taylor Caldwell wrote novels about the arms
manufacturers being behind wars , I think the book was Captains and Kings?
Interesting premise.Glad the Utah company chose to keep its
expertise at home.
I suppose that it is realized that the guns they are manufacturing are intended
and designed for the sole purpose of killing humans. I guess we are supposed to
be pleased that they discriminate as to which humans.
Thumbs up to this company for refusing to sell arms to those who intend our
troops harm. Wonderful that someone at the top had the ethics to do what is
right instead of what will make him the most money. They will be blessed for it.
I think this story shows the quality of the owners of this company. It would be
interesting to know who the other bidders were?
i am pleasantly surprised that there is at least something that a gun company
will not do to get money. If only they had a conscience to urge the NRA to stop
their unreasonable objections to back ground checks and registration.
it's not 1st time Pak army bought usa weapons...infact from ground to Air
Force ...Pak army weapons r based majorly on American technology... ( Wont go
into details ..gosh!! just go n search so that it open people eyes n would help
them to learn whats going on in the world exactly) N I am amazed that from where
company got idea that Pak army will kill US ally soldier??? R they so naive???
Or is it really a publicity stunt??? Is it how 1 should treat their allies in
war??? Infact it's so wrong decision if talking about saving US army
soldiers lives...as It is Pak army who getting these weapons n not the
civilians..n these weapons will b used against terrorist who kill both American
as well as Pak army soldiers n civilians...n 1 more thing..it is Pak army who is
fighting against terrorists at border of Afghanistan in Pakistan territory n not
US army, so that, these terrorist dont spread in country n don't go to
Afghanistan to kill ally forces n innocent civilians
Its Only for publicity n nothing than that...for people's information
..Pakistan army is a major non NATO ally of USA in war of terrorism....give 1
article or link with proof since when an American soldier got shot by Pakistani
soldier?? Yet there r times when pak army took part in mutual operations.. Look
at history while being unbiased...Forgot Russian war in Afghanistan?? It shows
how naive few ppl r... N what 1 can expect from an arms dealer ...they just
tried to spark racism between 2 nations for cheap publicity of their company...n
now look!!! They r getting praised by ppl how patriotic they r...kudos!! etc
they succeeded while dividing people in 2... Typical arms dealer thinking to
divide people in 2, starting wars n then sitting comfortably while they get
fortunes when their arms get sold, no matter nations shoot at each other in
process...also it is quite possible That it was money of USA ...that got
approved by USA congress few months back to support Pak army against terrorism,(
terrorists r common enemies to US army as well as Pak army n civilians) which
they offered to the company...continue..
Eliyahu, I saw Captain Phillips as well. The reason the crew of
the Maersk Alabama had a problem in the first place is that they did not have
guns which would ahve allowed them to prevent the hi-jacking of the ship in the
This was a wise and responsible decision by this gun maker. In world war II
much of the steel that was used to make Japanese weapons including their
AirCraft Carriers came from the U.S. That being said, we still need
rational gun control regulation in this country, and gun manufacturer bear some
responsibilty for producing and selling in country weapons capable of mass
slaughter. It's laudible to keep such weaponry out of the hands of
potential foreign foes, but then why is it not just as laudible to keep mass
kill weapons out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill?
"At the end of the day, we feel our ethics are worth more than the bottom
line," said Mike DavisThis guy sells sniper rifles. Sniper
rifles have no other practical use than to kill human beings. I suppose his
ethics are worth something if he feels the shooter will kill a human being that
deserves to be dead.
I am both gladdened and saddened at this story. Gladdened that they took this
step, and that they allowed ethics to override their bottom line profit margin.
Saddened because I fear they are the exception among corporate America. I would
encourage more American companies to look very hard at who they are doing
business with (including China in this) and think more about America's
security, both militarily and economically.
@mohokatOgden, UT"I saw a movie once where only the Police
and Military had guns.It was called Schindlers List. Lesson?"And I recently saw a movie where everyone had guns. It was called
"Captain Phillips". Your point?
@Curmudgeon: What Pakistanis do to each other is one thing; what a paramilitary
force might do to our troops is another. Apples and Orangs, a favorite ploy of
gun haters.I think you should stop beating around the bush and tell us exactly
what you want in terms of gun control?
Wait a minute - it's not like they _had_ been selected by Pakistan and
decided to back out of a deal with them. They were merely a contender, one among
several finalists, and they chose not to continue applying for the contract.
Bully for them, but it's not like they walked away from a competitive
request-for-bids that they'd already secured.BTW, these are
very expensive, large and heavy rifles and I'd be amazed if they're
used either by criminals in the US or would become weapons of choice among
terrorists or anti-US militia in Pakistan. If you're worried
about US or US allies-made products being used against our own troops, I'd
pay more attention to ammunition.
At least someone has a brain and it's not all about business and money!
Thank You for making a good choice amoung so many who would not have done the
same. I would like to know who the other two gun makers are that he was
I am apalled at the two replys I just read in regard to selling guns to
Pakistan. If you are in my generation, you will realize that the decision by
this company, really is for the safety of America. I don't approve of
young people bying guns, or getting their hands on them, but that is not the
problem of this or any gun manufacturer. It comes down to example of others,
and lack of training from their parents. I agree there are far too many gun
incidents in these days, but let's face it the big problem is lack of
education on the part of American parents.
Worf:In applauding this company for being ethical rather than being
in business solely for to make money you know that you've suddenly plopped
yourself way to the left of a lot of gay right activists and ACLU types who want
wedding cake makers to keep their morality out of the public square.On behalf of all commie pinko liberals, I extend a hand of welcome.
I know where I am buying my next gun. I am glad that the Constitution gives me
this right. I express gratitude to Desert Tactical and have already checked
out their website.
CurmudgeonGreat post. I saw a movie once where only the Police and
Military had guns.It was called Schindlers List. Lesson?
War is hell and according to our Founding Fathers, a waste of resources. Thank
you Desert Tech for taking a strong pro-American stance and sacrificing for the
well-being of our soldiers, my son included. "Friendly fire" has a new
I would hope I am speaking for true Americans, THANK YOU!
They made the right decision to not sell to Pakistan. They also make the right
decision to sell to US citizens. If only the federal government would wisen up
and stop giving weapons/aid dollars to countries where the weapons/money could
end up going to those who would harm the USA.
@DN Subscriber 2Pakistan's murder rate is substantially higher
than the United States'. So by your logic, the moral thing to do should be
to flood Pakistan with guns to help them reduce their murder rate, and a
collateral benefit would be that our troops over there would be a lot safer, if
Pakistanis only had more guns. After all, as you astutely point out, more guns
means fewer murders, right?
I commend the owners of this Company for their decision not to sell. I hope
that karma brings them much more sales from law abiding US citizens. I'm
surprised that Pakistan needs to shop for military weapons. Most aide that the
US sends to foreign countries is in the form of weapons. It is great for the
profits of the military industrial complex corporations. Not so great for the
citizens of the countries that receive such aide.
Who are they manufacturing arms for and who will pay for them. The USA, Brazil
and Russia are arming the wold with arms enough to keep revolutions going for
@ Curmudgeon:"but it's OK to sell them to U.S. citizens who might
use them to harm other U.S. citizens within our own country."Really? Here are some facts:1. You obviously do not understand
that this maker is tightly controlled by BATFE and reams of federal and state
regulations and inspections.I hope you are not just arguing that law
abiding U.S. citizens should not be allowed to have firearms.2.
Perhaps it has not been reported in the Deseret News, but a recent Quinnipiac
University (hardly a NRA supporting outfit) concluded that gun control laws, gun
bans, assault weapons bans and restrictive concealed weapons laws "may cause
an increase in gun-related murders at the state level."3.
Today, Detroit's top cop formally encouraged law abiding citizen to carry
legal self defense weapons, which he believes will LOWER Detroit's
astronomical murder rate.In any case, I applaud Desert Tech's
decision and their willingness to sacrifice profit to protect American lives.
Great to hear this company pulled out. Now let's pull out our millions of
dollars in foreign aid to Pakistan.
Hmm?Our country gives billions in aid to Pakistan who than offers
millions to a gun conpany in Utah.What about the poor
So it's morally wrong to sell arms to froeigners who might use them to harm
U.S. troops who may be in their country without permission, but it's OK to
sell them to U.S. citizens who might use them to harm other U.S. citizens within
our own country. Got it. Selective morality.
Great!I'd rather see gun control in Pakistan than here.Too bad BO does'nt see it this way.