There’s a region in the east known as New England’s Gun Valley where gun manufacturers have been make hunting rifles, shotguns and weapons for the military. Gun Valley has been under fire in recent years and anti-gun politicians are trying to put the clamps on manufacturers and access to the products they manufacture.
Brainerd has just experienced the closing of its Wausau Paper mill. Hundreds have lost their jobs. Many of these local folks will either scramble to find other work or leave the area in pursuit of employment elsewhere in the state or nation.
Perhaps it’s time to roll out the red carpet for these gun manufacturers in New England and suggest they come to the Brainerd lakes area where we are not hostile toward the manufacture of hunting rifles, shotguns or even assault rifles and pistols used by our military.
Manufacturers such as Colt, Charter Arms, Ruger, Kimber, Smith & Wesson, Henry Rifles, Remington Arms Company, Mossberg, Stag Arms, and Ithaca are just a few of the companies that might find this neck of the woods a bit more friendly than New York, Connecticut or New Jersey.
There are a host of other manufacturers that could join the few that make guns in our area.
How do we go about getting these companies to consider relocating to the friendlier confines of the lakes region? Ask them to consider us. Yes, it is most traditional for our elected leaders to begin contacting such candidates, but there’s nothing that says a letter campaign from those folks who’ve been laid off at Wausau Paper mill can’t appeal to these companies. Who knows, perhaps our leaders will take note and lead.
This area has talented individuals such as engineers, machinists and others who are more than willing to fill support positions in any company that might choose to locate in the industrial parks that dot our countryside or, perhaps take over an idle paper mill.
We can decide to do nothing, or we can initiate the contact with some or all of the gun manufacturers who are facing a negative environment in New England.
Keith Hansen
Comments (36)
Add commentGood Idea Keith !
Maybe Brainerd could contact the buggy whip industry as well....
At HOME?
At HOME¿¡¿¡¿¡
Poll
If you have a permit to carry, in what place do you most often exercise your right?
At home
23%
At work
0%
In your vehicle
38%
In public places
38%
Total votes: 13
Seriously¿¡¿¡¿¡
23% of you MOST OFTEN carry a concealed weapon at HOME¿¡¿¡¿¡
I'm afraid to imagine the family gathered 'round watching "Gunfight At The OK Corral"
I don't know what cup you're sipping from, Cap...
...the firearms industry has been thriving thanks to Obama's gun-grabbing policies. But even if Obama weren't the gun salesman of the century, to my knowledge, nothing has been developed that would replace a firearm for hunting so your analogy that guns are obsolete makes no sense.
Do they still
Make Weatherby's here?? Darn good idea Keith but I fear that our left politicans wont have anything to do with it. That includes the City Council.
Cap just what were you doing on a door step in NE at 2:00am?? A little early to be out. You hungry?? (police blotter)
Hey Mule Lady , Do you have a clue about anything ?
About maybe the total number of firearms already in the hands of people in the country ?
Do you have any concept of how many unregistered guns are out there as well ?
Maybe your Faux News Network failed to carry the news story this week that said that currently based on the number of registered guns in this country , the associated cost per gun ( you will like part) to tax payers is about $ 35 each.
You claim to understand numbers & facts , therefore do the math.
Then really amaze yourself with the overall drop in the sale of nationwide hunting lics. over the last 20 years.
( Dick Cheney hunting his friends in TX ( w/o Lic. does not count.)
Disappointed
I refer you to the article on Texas and "statistics lie".
What is included in the so-called cost per gun?
I was hoping that Cap could get through a post without mentioning Cheney or Fox. He is addicted to those two.
Cap understands nothing, SML...
...he doesn't even understand that the bad guys already having guns is one good reason that good guys should have an unassailable right to guns--not that that was the main reason behind the Second Amendment, but it certainly isn't something that any sane person would argue against (which is precisely why Cap is arguing against it!).
Oh, and I presume you are talking about the cost to taxpayers...
...for the criminal use of guns. Explain to us again how grabbing guns from law-abiding citizens is going to cut those costs...
Stats
Thats the problem with numbers, one does not need a permit to carry at home. If memory serves me firearms manufacturing was tried here.
WOW scary lady....13 votes.
WOW scary lady....13 votes. Now there's a representative sample. Atta girl, way to base your entire argument on unscientific poll of 13 votes.
I guess if those are the best and only stats you have.....good luck.
gun makers
Why would gun makers want to relocate to a state that is ranked #6 on the " worst states to live in because of taxes" list?
You know what else is funny, GetaGrip?
That the Brainerd Dispatch offered "at home" as a radio button response to that survey question.
Muehlbau
You know exactly who the good guys are and the bad guys right?
This whole "don't keep guns from the good guys" argument is completely flawed. Note: I'm a second amendment SUPPORTER. But tired of hearing arguments that make second amendment people sound dumb.
In most cases, you don't know who the bad guy is until it's too late. And what category would you put police, teachers, and daycare providers in? Newsflash, they aren't all good guys.
"Explain to us again how grabbing guns from law-abiding citizens is going to cut those costs..." No one is taking guns from any law abiding citizens. Settle down.
The gun control debate is a very complicated one, to make a blanket statement like that (dems doing it too) is completely irresponsible.
In addition
We also know that not every mentally troubled person will kill someone if they have a gun.
*Edited 12:05 p.m. - added the word "person" to the sentence.
Muehl - Exactly !!. I'm
Muehl - Exactly !!. I'm guessing that the BDD employee that set it up knows nothing about surveys, nor anything about firearms.
Natorade - "No one is taking
Natorade -
"No one is taking guns from any law abiding citizens..."
Wrong!! You certainly are not reading all the bills in the MN Leg, Fed Leg, or other states such as MO, NY, WA, OR, CA, and CO (all demecratically controlled).
Take it from Sen Feinstein herself
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3DKuN2ey80
Actually, Nator...
...we do have some idea who the bad guys are. They are the ones committing the crimes. Apparently you would prefer to strip innocent people of their right to self defense under the pretext that you will snag a few people who might commit a crime in the future. The fact is, you will disarm the innocent far more quickly than you disarm the lawbreakers, and in the process make law-abiding people even MORE vulnerable than they are with armed criminals.
Sorry, but you are sounding rather dumb for someone who claims to support the Second Amendment. My plan to limit gun violence would in part involve incarcerating anyone found guilty of a gun crime and throwing away the key rather than treating gun crimes as minor offenses. Further, I would send gun criminals to special prisons with no amenities and no family visits.
Only a fool or a power hungry
politician would take citizen's only means of protection away and tell them that it makes them safer.
Or, I might add, a foolish sheeple brainwashed by the Lefters.
Muehlbau
"...we do have some idea who the bad guys are. They are the ones committing the crimes."
So you're saying that if you've never committed a crime, you never will?
People commit first time offenses all the time.
Muehlbau, I will partially agree with the second part of your post. I think penalties against offenders do need to be a bit more severe. I like the idea of people being charged for giving a gun to someone that is not allowed to have one. I think that would help keep guns out of the hands of people that aren't supposed to have them (legally). Like I said before, it's much too complicated to lay a blanket statement (good guys/bad guys) across the subject. That's why I was so incredibly against the idea of training teachers to have guns in school. How do you think that would make the students feel?
GetaGrip:
A. I am not going to watch your YouTube video of cats dancing to music.
B. Have you read any of the bills?
C. Learn to spell before trying to correct me.
D. Read this: http://www.wdio.com/article/stories/S2953443.shtml?cat=10335
E. Where does it say in there that they are taking away all our guns?
F. GetaGrip, thanks for contributing.
And I will reiterate:
"the Legislature's best bet at passing some laws to prevent some gun violence while still respecting Minnesotans' right to own guns."
Isn't that the goal? We all want our guns and we all want less violence. The current MN gun control bill isn't that bad... for the lefties or the righties, IMO.
I'm saying Nator...
...that if you haven't committed a crime, you are not a criminal. You sound like someone who would prefer a "Minority Report" future where you attempt to prevent crimes by punishing people who haven't yet committed a crime. Innocent until proven guilty...does that ring a bell?
I don't have a problem with gun control legislation as
...long as they focus on controlling guns in the hands of criminals or those not of sound mind. You, Nator, sound like someone with Utopian aspirations who would rather disarm the vast majority in order to find a handful of criminals. Your approach to gun violence would be analogous to taking away everyone's car because some people use their cars to plow into crowds. You know, if we could just prevent ONE of these tragedies, it would be worth it to make us all permanent pedestrians! Am I right?
Muehlbau
Not sure how to address your last two posts. I'm not quite sure when I said I wanted to disarm everyone.
Again, I'm a second amendment supporter.
Punishing people who haven't committed a crime? Interesting interpretation.
If that's how you interpret my posts, good luck to you my friend. You have no hope.
For the lazy people:
Here's what the link said that I posted earlier. It has become obvious to me that people are too lazy to open the link and read for themselves. If I could read out loud so that you don't even have to read, I would do that for you.
ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) - A clear majority of the Minnesota House is backing a new plan to modestly revise the state's gun laws.
Rep. Debra Hilstrom, a Brooklyn Center Democrat, unveiled on Wednesday a bill with 73 cosponsors from both parties.
Her bill would tighten the state's current background check system, add to the parameters of who cannot legally own a gun and help county attorneys crack down on illegal gun owners. It won't impose universal background checks for gun purchases.
Hilstrom says her bill is the Legislature's best bet at passing some laws to prevent some gun violence while still respecting Minnesotans' right to own guns.
Advocates for tighter control say that Minnesotans overwhelmingly support expanding background checks, and that Hilstrom's bill ultimately won't have much of an impact on gun violence.
(Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)
Where does it say anything
Where does it say anything about taking away all of our guns?
And when did I say I wanted innocent people to be charged with crimes?
You people are so goofy.
You people are so goofy.
23% of you people are so goofy¡¡¡AT LEAST
二十三％你的人是如此愚蠢的
If they figure this one out, I'll probably be banned for life!!!¡¡¡
Scary
Emphasize "at least" 23%... we know it's a lot higher percentage that 23 around here.
Haha ;)
Hundreds have lost their jobs
Why are we fighting bringing jobs to the Area? Some people need to work for a living and do not rely on trust funds or an inheritance off someone who actually worked and or served in the military to provide you all the right to [filtered word] about the luxury of sitting and pontificating. As we see with our government now, nothing will happen unless we do something outside of the box, or are you just willing to watch the rest of the area keep slipping into the downward spiral.. Read, Think, then [filtered word]…Its not personal, our Government is counting on us to be split, it’s the only way the stupidity can survive..
Pry it from my....