The other poster may be considering this:
>The extra burden of Californias regulations could drive even more businesses away and possibly make it more difficult for law enforcement to obtain their necessary arms. Some gun manufacturers are refusing to even deal with California. STI International has already halted all shipments of firearms to California. The company will no longer sell any firearms to civilians or law enforcement in this state. Barrett Firearms is following suit. This was in response to the micro stamping fiasco.<
However, I won’t do as he suggested because I wouldn’t want to be an unwitting tool of the gun grabbers, as you stated.
I fully support Barrett's decision, as it impacts government, those trying to disarm us, more than it does the average citizen. I can't afford a Barrett .50 and have no need of one other than for the sheer pleasure of shooting it.
I shoot a minimum of 100 rounds of .45 ACP and an equal amount of 9x18 Makarov a month, more if possible. Remove my ability to replenish what I use and you have turned my guns into pretty clubs. There are the bayonets for my Mausers and Enfields, but I'm just too old for that.
This is a tough one, but I believe fully that we must use the soapbox and ballot box on this, at least until the other box becomes necessary. I guess recognizing when that time has arrived is the hard part.
Buy ammo, while you can.