Challenge for Kel-Tec - Got the Goods?

sholling

New member
There are currently 453 (and growing daily) handguns that have passed California's handgun safety tests. I challenge Kel-Tec to get the P32 approved for sale in California. All you have to do is pass a couple of fairly straight forward safety and reliability test. Come on guys, even Davis and Phoenix Arms made the grade!

Got the goods?
 
Good to see another Californian here.

I hope so too, but the reality is a lot of companies may choose to make guns instead of jump through hoops. I say this comfortable in the knowledge that I snagged one last year.

Regards and good luck to us all.

Ledbetter
 
I bought two P32s, a P11 (9mm) and a P40 last year because Kel-tec e-mailed me stating that they didn't intend to submit guns for California testing. I'm glad I got them while I could. Since then, many guns that I had thought couldn't pass (due to lack of a manual safety, etc.) have been added to the list. I guess the law either is interpreted VERY loosely, or the manually operated safety requirement has been modified or dropped. Whatever the reason, I'm glad to see so many guns added to the list. This is one of the most pointless, money-wasting laws I can imagine, but even though "I've got mine" I'd like to see Kel-tecs sold in California again.

Doug
 
Aside from the obvious question of why these stupid tests, what have you got against the P32?
 
ak9,

Why the tests? Because the Democrats say so, and they run the state. New handguns can only be sold in California if they pass a drop test and a reliability test at an independent lab of their choice. In other words it must not go off when dropped, and it must be able to fire 600 rounds without falling apart and with no more that three failures. Good thing? Bad thing? Who knows, but we're stuck with it.

Anyway, in answer to your question, I don't have anything against the P32 - I want one. But, so far Kel-Tec is one of the very, very few manufacturers that refuses to qualify their products so that we can buy them. I'm just hoping to wake them up.
 
Well, playing devil's advocate (or perhaps K-T CEO :o)):

If I am selling everything I can build, and Kali wants me to GIVE them 3 hadguns plus PROVIDE the ammo so I can have more back-orders, am I interested?

Let me think... NO!

Perhaps you should try and wake up all those non-voting gun owners who have to live under such ridiculous "laws". Naw, dumb idea...
 
I understand that the law requires the testing. I have trouble with the idea of destroying any fine firearms trying to get them to self destruct. I have trouble with any law that is designed to keep inexpensive firearms from the people who need them the most and can't afford the Wilsons and the Baers. I have trouble with a state that has set its goal to extort money out of the manufacturers on a regular basis so as to keep their weapons on the "approved list" even after they have "passed" the tests. Wilson just blew about 20 grand getting their pistols approved. Maybe if the rest of the industry refused to give into this extortion, the populace would rise up and force the repeal of these "laws". Frankly, I am glad there are a few folks out there not willing to give in. This is socialism at its worst because it relies on the all encompassing "for the good of the public safety" to cover this infringement of the second ammendment and a willing populace to agree to it. Just a rant. Nothing personal intended.
 
It won't happen anytime soon.

Last time I contacted Kel Tec, they flat out told me that they have no interest in making their handguns available in the California market in the foreseeable future. :(
 
I don't blame Kel-Tec for not pampering Kalifornia. Some gun manufacturers choose to make guns for free states.
Kel-Tec has pretty much thumbed its nose at Kalifornia. Hooray for Kel-Tec! I am proud to be a Kel-Tec owner!
Jim Hall
 
Why we can't win - stupid people!

Remind me to give a rat's tail when you snivel about gun control proposals in your states. Not likely any more! Myself, along with tens of thousands of Californians (yes, it's spelled with a C) hammered the media for their bias on a regular basis with more than a little success, but we've still fought a media campaign worth billions (yes, with a B - you did get as far as B in school?) to keep what rights we have left. Just remember one thing when you are bashing us, the loony left that passed our state's gun control laws are mostly unwelcome imports from YOUR home states and not native Californians (yes, it' still spelled with a C) . We'd be more than happy to send them home to do the same things there that they've done for us.

BTW: Is Kel-tec afraid that they can't pass the drop test, or just that they can't pass the reliability test?

Oh, and for those flamers - F you very much, you've blown an ally and are obviously want to blow 33,000,000 more potential allies. What more could Handgun Control ask for than friends like you! Please continue to disparage (for those that flamed me - that means 'put-down') your friends rather than do something positive - Sara Brady will LOVE you for it. For the rest of you - best regards, but I think I've had enough of this forum for a while.

FYI: Myself and more like me bombarded the media with the following email with spectacular results. It wasn't enough but they did lighten up their rhetoric by at least 75%.

Sent to as many TV news editors and anchors as I could find:

I picked this up on the Internet, and after reading it I would like to congratulate your news organization for scoring a perfect 100% compliance with these guidelines. What, you don't believe me? Please, you shouldn't be so modest, just review your coverage for the last twelve months - you'll see for yourself that you have consistently earned a perfect score. Of course you aren't alone in achieving a perfect score - ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, and Time-Warner's CNN have all done their part, as have many local newspapers and television stations. I think you should take the time to publicly congratulate yourself for your efforts, after all the public has a right to know - including a right to know what you've been up to.

"The Journalist's Guide to Gun Violence Coverage."
By Dr. Michael Brown.

Guns are a sad fact of life in American culture and are a major topic in modern journalism. A good Journalist has a duty to get involved and make a difference in this important societal debate. By following certain guidelines, the concerned Journalist can be assured of having the maximum impact on this shameful problem.

The first principle to remember is that subtle use of terminology can covertly influence the reader. Adjectives should be chosen for maximum anti-gun effect. When describing a gun, attach terms like "automatic," "semi-automatic," "large caliber," "deadly," "high powered," or "powerful." Almost any gun can be described by one or more of these terms. More than two guns should be called an "arsenal."

Try to include the term "assault weapon" if at all possible. This can be combined with any of the terms above for best results. Nobody actually knows what an assault weapon is, so you cannot be criticized for this usage. Your local anti-gun organization can provide you with a list of the latest buzz words like "junk guns," "Saturday Night Specials," and "the criminal's weapon of choice."

Don't worry about getting technical details right. Many a reporter has accidentally written about semi-automatic revolvers or committed other minor errors. Since most people know little about guns, this is not a problem. Only the gun nuts will complain and they don't count. The emotional content of your article is much more important than the factual details, since people are more easily influenced through their emotions than through logic.

Broadcast Journalists should have a file tape showing a machine gun firing on full automatic. Run this video while describing "automatic" weapons used in a crime or confiscated by police. At the least, a large graphic of a handgun should be displayed behind the on-air personality when reading any crime story.

Do not waste words describing criminals who use guns to commit crimes. Instead of calling them burglar, rapist, murderer, or repeat offender, simply use the term "gunman." This helps the public associate all forms of crime and violence with the possession of guns.

Whenever drug dealers are arrested, guns are usually confiscated by the police. Mention the type and number of guns more prominently than the type and quantity of drugs. Include the number of rounds of ammunition seized, since the number will seem large to those who know little about guns. Obviously, the drug dealers who had the guns should now be called "gunmen."

Political discussions on gun control legislation usually involve pro-gun organizations. Always refer to these organizations as "the gun lobby." If space permits, mention how much money the gun lobby has spent to influence political campaigns and describe their legislative lobbying efforts as "arm twisting" or "threats."

Gun owners must never be seen in a positive light. Do not mention that these misguided individuals may actually be well educated, or have respectable jobs and healthy families. They should be called "gun nuts" if possible or simply gun owners at best. Mention details about their clothing, especially if they are wearing hunting clothes or hats. Mention the simplistic slogans on their bumper stickers t show that their intelligence level is low. Many gun owners drive pickup trucks, hunt and live in rural areas. Use these details to help portray them as ignorant rednecks. Don't use the word "hunt." Always say that they "kill" animals.

Don't be afraid to interview these people, they are harmless even though we don't portray them that way. Try to solicit comments that can be taken out of context to show them in the worst possible light.

Never question the effectiveness of gun control laws or proposals. Guns are evil and kill people. Removing guns from society can only be good. Nobody really uses guns for legitimate self-defense, especially women or children. Any stories about armed self-defense must be minimized or suppressed.

Be careful about criticizing the police for responding slowly to 911 calls for help. It is best if the public feels like the police can be relied upon to protect them at all times. If people are buying guns to protect their families, you are not doing your job.

Emphasize stories where people kill family members and/or themselves with guns. It is important to make the public feel like they could lose control and start killing at any moment if they have a gun in the house. Any story where a child misuses a gun is front page material.

View every shooting as an event to be exploited. Always include emotional quotes from the victim's family if possible. If they are not available, the perpetrator's family will do nicely. The quote must blame the tragedy on the availability of guns. Photos or video of grieving family members are worth a thousand facts. Most people will accept the assertion that guns cause crime. It is much easier than believing that some people deliberately choose to harm others.

Your story should include terms like "tragic" or "preventable" and mention the current toll of gun violence in your city or state. Good reporters always know exactly how many gun deaths have occurred in their area since the first of the year. List two or three previous incidents of gun violence to give the impression of a continuing crime wave.

Little space should be devoted to shootings where criminals kill each other. Although these deaths greatly inflate the annual gun violence numbers, they distract from the basic mission of urging law abiding citizens to give up their guns. Do not dig too deeply into the reasons behind shootings. The fact that a gun was involved is the major point, unless someone under 18 is affected, in which case the child angle is now of equal importance.

Any article about gun violence should include quotes from anti-gun organizations or politicians. One quote should say that we must do something "for the children." Anti-gun spokespersons should be called "activists" or "advocates." If your employer wishes to appear unbiased, you can include one token quote from a gun lobby group to show that you are being fair. The anti-gun statements should be accepted as fact. The gun lobby statement can be denigrated by including text like, "according to gun lobbyist Jones."

Fortunately, statements from anti-gun organizations come in short sound bites that are perfect for generating an emotional response in the reader or viewer. Gun lobby statements usually contain boring facts that are easy to ignore.

Feel secure in your advocacy journalism. The vast majority of your fellow Journalists support your activism. The nation will be a better place when only the police and military have guns. Remember that you are doing it for the children so the end justifies the means.

Eventually, the government will have a monopoly on power. Don't worry about the right to freedom of the press, just contact me then for more helpful hints.

Professor Michael Brown
School of Journalism, Brady Chair
Vancouver College of Liberal Arts

Political Satire, copyright 1999, Michael Brown. May be reproduced freely in its full and complete form. The author may be contacted at mb@e-z.net
 
Keltec do not make the wonderful little P-32 available to those goof balls in Kalifornia. There is a shortage of P-32s here in the free parts of the USA, to waste your time on those kooks. Send us, your loyal customers our favorite little gun, we are tired of having to get on lists to get one.

7th
 
I hope that Kel Tec does submit a pistol for testing. Although I disagree with the current political atmosphere and laws of California, I do believe that every gun in the state means one more gun to help the cause of the gun owners.

California isn't stupid. They know an outright ban would enrage all the owners and some non owners causing them to fight, possibly overturning all the gun control activists have sought for. California also knows how much the gun industry brings revenues into their state. Take the time someday and do an internet search on gunsmiths and related companies. You would be surprised on how many you find.

To boycott the gunowners of the state only serves to stregthen the position of the Anti's.

Although I sympathize with your cause and hope that one day the laws will be overturned, I'm glad I live in Florida!

Good Shooting
RED
 
Hmmmmmmmmmm

Seventh Fleet,

Goofballs? Kooks? So that's what you call the shooting fraternity in California. TFL rules of ettiquette and a proper upbringing prevent me from commenting on the likes of you. I suggest you "lighten up" on your brothers in arms in California

No wonder we can't get our collective s*** together, with divisive dribble like this posted. Rather than taking cheap shots at progun TFLers in California, how about a little positive input for a change. You might make a difference with RKBA issues that way.

Have A Nice Day!
 
You want positive input? Try being more proactive and dumping those idiots that are passing all the laws in CA! The plain facts are that people outside of CA can't affect your state politics to any significant degree. While I don't like what is going on in CA on a number of fronts, I'm not picking the idiots that are making the policies that you're complaining about. Target the real problem, and you'll be closer to a solution.
 
Just remember one thing when you are bashing us, the loony left that passed our state's gun control laws are mostly unwelcome imports from YOUR home states and not native Californians (yes, it' still spelled with a C) . We'd be more than happy to send them home to do the same things there that they've done for us.


Ok...I tried to bite my tongue on this one, and since the original poster has had enough of the forum for a while, I doubt that this remark will reach him..but anyway.

I agree with JohnW. The last time I checked, the majority of states required that the individuals who ran for public office be residents of the State. That means they reside there and are Californians, not imports that some gun control group somehow planted. They were put into office by the voters, supported by the voters, and continue to serve in their capacity as elected officials because that's what the majority of the voters want. Unfortunately , gun owners are either a minority in that part, or they don't vote.

As for special interest groups that are in your state, they can only influence elected officials because they want to be influenced. Special interest groups cannot do the job of the legislature of your state nor do they have any official powers. If your Pro Gun legislators are so weak as to be influenced by these groups, payback is when elections come again.

I refer back to my previous posts, where I do support you guys in California, but don't blame it on the rest of the country because your state has problems- only you can change that. Unfortunately you have a large voting base that is composed of people in major metropolitan areas that have no idea of what gun ownership means, other than what the media and entertainers brainwash them to believe.

Good Shooting
RED
 
Back
Top