From the company press release:
Cessation of California Firearm Sales
As a company, STI adhered to California’s drop test certification and DOJ listing process in 1998 for the
people in competition shooting and for those who desired self-protection DESPITE the financial strain
placed on a small company such as ours. Listing our two most popular firearm models was not an
inexpensive undertaking. We even redesigned our compensator systems to adhere to the CA “no
threaded barrel” law. Then CA’s onerous liability laws were enacted and we chose at that time not to
renew certification nor to sell to LEO and governmental agencies in CA, regardless of their exempt
status, because there was no exemption from liability or legal fees which could bankrupt this company.
When federal law overrode CA’s liability laws, we resumed LE sales because we felt our product could be
used to LE’s advantage. With the micro stamping bill, we as a company have decided enough is enough.
While our sales to Law Enforcement agencies are not huge, all revenue sources are important to a
company of our size and it hurts us to turn our backs on those revenues.
While we truly feel badly for the law-abiding citizens of California, we feel it is necessary to take a stand
against irresponsible legislation designed solely to inhibit the American citizen’s right to keep arms. We
are fierce proponents of the Second Amendment, and it is our hope that other manufacturers will follow
our lead. It is time for the gun industry as a whole to take a stand against the insanity of the anti-2nd
Amendment activists. We simply believe that some things are more important than profit.
In all honesty, when we made this decision we had no idea of the responses, both positive and negative,
it would evoke. We just did what we thought was right and, because of our size, didn’t really expect
much notice. Since we announced this new policy however, we have been deluged by customers
contacting us to show their support and by others who consider it a “stunt” of some type. We greatly
appreciate all of the supporting comments and would like to thank everyone who has taken the time to
express, even contrary, opinions. We do understand that this action on our part will have little effect on
California’s criminal or political element.
To our loyal supporters in California, we sincerely regret the measures we feel we must take and will
continue to honor all warrantee obligations. We hope for a speedy resolution of this ill-conceived
violation of the Second Amendment.
Seems like it addresses all the points, pro and con raised in this thread. I do have one thought - even if the company is doing this for purely economic reasons and it is a so called "stunt"; does their decision to state that it is also a matter of principle related to freedom and the second amendment hurt or help the cause of liberty? I seem to vaguely recall that some of the organizers and participants in the Boston Tea Party had a vested interest in seeing that tea go in the harbor.