Colt Firearms Threatens to Leave Connecticut Over Strict Gun Laws

Continuing the trend of firearms related companies that have been contemplating moving their businesses out of states instituting strict gun control laws, Colt Manufacturing is now considering a move out of Connecticut after 175 years in business. This is due to the new gun bans being mulled by the state legislature and Democrat Governor Dannel Malloy.

Colt President and CEO Dennis Veilleux published an op ed in the Hartford Currant asking why it makes any sense that Colt Manufacturing stay in Connecticut.

Veilleux says that the “economic advantage” his company has brought to Hartford for the last 175 years “is in grave danger.”

“What’s most astounding.” Veilleux wrote, “is our advantage is not being taken away–it’s being given away.”

Veilleux notes that much of his business today is centered on the AR-15 rifle platform, in both military-only and civilian models, and that this rifle model has widespread use all across the firearms community from target shooting to hunting. But Governor Malloy is putting Colt’s business at risk.

“Now Gov. Dannel P. Malloy says that with or without bipartisan consensus, he intends to ban this rifle. But a ban of the most popular semiautomatic rifle in the United States for what are essentially cosmetic reasons would make no one safer and punish a vital Connecticut industry.”

Veilleux then points out that other states often query Colt about moving trying to lure the company away from its 175-year-old home. Veilleux has never considered the move until now because if Malloy successfully bans Colt’s rifle, it will “irreparably damage–if not destroy–the brand” of his company and that of the several other high profile firearms companies in the state.

So, Veilleux has a warning:

“As a result Colt, as well as other Connecticut manufacturers such as Mossberg and Stag Arms will see immediate erosion in brand strength and market share as customers migrate to manufacturers in more supportive states. This will have consequences for dozens of Connecticut companies and thousands of workers. Connecticut will have put its firearms manufacturing industry in jeopardy: one that contributes $1.7 billion annually to the state’s economy.”

As Fox News reports, Hartford’s unemployment is already a bit higher than the national average. If Colt shuts down production and moves out of state, that will only make matters worse.

Earlier, Elizabeth Sheld alerted Breitbart readers to a concerted effort to put an end to Gov. Malloy’s unilateral gun ban efforts sponsored by several firearms companies in Connecticut.

Colt, Mossurg, and Stag Arms recently launched an ad campaign to alert CT residents to the danger to the state’s economy if Malloy is successful in his anti-Second Amendment efforts.

Further making gun manufacturers feel unwelcome in the Nutmeg State, the Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development (DECD) recently pulled an offer it had open to induce Bushmaster Firearms to move its headquarters from North Carolina to Stamford..

Congress is currently considering a variety of gun control measures introduced by Democratic lawmakers. To stem that tide, Senator Mike Lee (R, UT) is planning on introducing an amendment in the Senate that would make it more difficult to pass gun control bills in Congress.

All aboard the gay marriage express!
Office of Congressional Ethics Investigating Michele Bachmann
  • LiberalNightmare

    funny how democracy works sometimes.

    I wonder how all of those out of work gunsmiths will vote in the next election.

    • Guest

      They aren’t out of work, they are in the middle of relocating, to a
      Republican state.

  • herddog505

    Colt and all the firearms companies should follow the same path:

    You pass gun control, and we’re not only pulling out, we will absolutely refuse to sell to any state, county or city agency in your state.
    You can try to uphold your law with sticks and stones as far as we’re concerned.
    F*ck off.
    The American Firearms and Ammunition Industry

    • Magpul’s moving out of Colorado. There’s quite a few manufacturers moving out of states with bans – and a lot of out of state manufacturers are telling LEOs in the state with bans – “Tough luck. Your leaders didn’t want the people to have these things – you’re people, therefore we’re not going to sell them to you.”

      • Guest

        Colt should have stood with Magpul in the beginning and perhaps this would not have happened.

        • Conn. officials would have voted in gun control, no matter. They are politically correct and there’s no changing that until the voters change the officeholders from D to R.

          • Guest

            No, not really. This idea that officials will go against the will of the people no matter what is defeatist and untrue. They will go against us as long as we lie down and take it.

            Colt supplies our military, you really think if Colt had said no more M4’s until you take gun control off the table that nothing would have happened? Of course it would have, but Colt was not looking out for us, they were looking out for Colt.

            No matter, now Colt sees that they are not exempt and now they have to act. Too bad for their home state that they did not act sooner, but at least they are awake now.

  • 914

    How will all these dummycrats survive in areas they have disarmed and economically destroyed when the sharia comes for them? Answer: They will become dhimmicrats!

  • jim_m

    Mike Lee’s amendment failed last Friday. it needed 60 votes but failed getting a 50-49 majority.

    What the left needs to understand is that there is a big industry that provides a lot of jobs that is going to take those jobs somewhere that appreciates them. So the left can try to ban guns, all they will do is succeed in banning employment from their states.

    • stan25

      The left does not care about how many jobs that are lost. All they want is a whole crop of dependent people to vote for them. What better way to make people dependent on the government than shutting down the evil companies that provide those jobs. The main thing the left wants is control by any means necessary. Even if they have to kill to get it.

      • jim_m

        The left doesn’t mind if the right people are dieing.

    • Conservachef


      Hey, don’t forget what Pelosi said- “unemployment benefits are the biggest stimulus for the economy.”

      Probably figure it’s a win-win: folks no longer working for the eeeeevil gun company, and going onto unemployment..

  • Than Maynard

    Colt (and any other gun manufacturer): Feel free to move to Oklahoma. Heck, we even have an open carry law!
    Bring all your employees (except the liberals and democrats), we have plenty of open space and would love to have your economic impact! BTW, we are also a right to work state!

    • herddog505

      Than MaynardBring all your employees (except the liberals and democrats)

      That’s a good point. Even if they are pro-gun (or pro-life, or any other specific position counter to democrat orthodoxy), they’ll vote democrats into office just like back home, then be shocked when things go to sh*t… just like back home.

      • Than Maynard

        Yep, it amazes me the number of people who move here from liberal states because of high taxes, regulations, etc and then want to start passing similar laws here!

        • herddog505

          Oh, we have the same thing in No. Carolina, and all through the South.

          • Brucehenry

            Sign in auto repair shop in South Daytona, where I lived in the 70s:

            Oil Changes
            $29.95 if you watch
            $49.95 if you help
            $199.95 if you tell me how much cheaper it was in New York

          • Brucehenry

            tough room

          • herddog505

            *I* thought it was funny. It’s so true, too: I recall, during the Great Recount of 2000, all these elderly people in Florida being interviewed about voting and why they were so SURE that they’d accidentally voted for Buchanan:

            “We didn’t have these problems in Brooklyn.”

            It was at that moment that I truly understood the phrase, “Yankee go home!”

  • Paul Hooson

    A business can either close up shop or just ride out a hysteria wave until things settle down. It’s better to hang tough and stay with it in most cases. But, lawyers should advise a business what’s best.
    But, my biggest argument with all these gun posts is that a guy needs to be able to defend himself in a situation gun or no gun. You can’t rely on some gun always being around when you have a crazy situation go down. Yesterday, my brother and I attended a public auction and a very disturbed foreign guy disrupted the event, and was asked by the auctioneer and the owners to leave. A few minutes later he comes back with his arm in a suspicious looking sling that my brother wondered if he was concealing a gun. My brother prepared himself to give this guy a real beat-down if he pulled a gun and take it away from him. He was more observant than me of this guy. I told him good deal you watched him more closely. I’m glad nothing went down.
    The fact of the matter is that guns often back up cowards, especially when it comes to crimes. And guns are only good for these bad guys until some tougher good guy beats the shit out of these guys and takes their gun away in a fight.
    I know, a few pencil-pushing office worker types would rather spend time calling on their Sprint cellphone the police. But, that doesn’t do you a heck of a lot of good when some screwball-type is pulling a situation in an unexpected place. You can’t always bring some gun everywhere, so you need to bring two good fists, or you’re screwed. That’s the bottom line.

    • Conservachef

      The fact of the matter is that guns often back up cowards, especially when it comes to crimes.

      They also back up victims way more often. Just sayin’

      There is some debate about “gun free zones.” If a location declares it gun free, and a nut goes there for their shooting spree, should the location be liable? By enforcing a gun free zone on law-abiding people, they effectively accepted the responsibility for their safety, didn’t they?

      I don’t know that that’s actually how it works, but I’ve heard people opine that perhaps it should.

    • Than Maynard

      With concealed carry there are very few places I cannot carry my gun. Am I going to pull it out and start shooting at a nutball with a gun? Heck no. I am going to try and get away, but you can’t always get away. Colorado movie theater anyone?
      You talk about fists: You expect my wife to fight her way out of a similar situation? There is a reason women are called the weaker sex and it has nothing to do with brain power. It is all about muscle mass and body structure. But, she has her CC and that evens the fight considerably.

      • jim_m

        You expect my wife to fight her way out of a similar situation?

        No. They expect her to be raped and/or murdered thus providing additional reason to take more rights away from the law abiding. The beauty of the leftist position is hat when they take our rights away and there is still crime, that crime just provides an excuse to take away more rights. The obvious answer to the left is that they just were not oppressive enough

  • disqus_qYIaQyw8pS

    It is about time Colt grew a pair. The ruined the 1911A1 with the 80 series for the express purpose of kissing lib ta rd butt, and here, even after doing that to arguably the most classic and iconic pistol of all times, they still are getting bitten by them. I hope that Colt has finally decided “ENOUGH!” . . . I still will not buy a 1911A1 later than a 70 series, but I just might buy a LE901

  • Constitution First

    The New Hampshire border is less than 60 miles away and awaits Colt with open arms, pun intended. With millions of square feet of empty textile mills in Nashua, Manchester and Concord, easy access to Interstate 93 & 3, not to mention our Low Taxes, Colt could name their price.

    • Guest

      Well that’s a nice offer, but we kind of hope they’ll be coming to Kentucky, bluegrass, world famous horses, world class bourbon and the Wildcats….here colt..colt, colt….
      Wait a minute, Colt, horse Country? I’m a genius!

  • BER

    You all come to West Virginia , we have room for all of ya…

  • Pingback: Connecticut to rape gun owners....... - Gun & Game - Gun Forum Community()

  • Berzrkr50

    The saddest thing about Colt, etc. pulling out is that the state probably uses a big chunk of that revenue to pay off the flakes that sit home in Mommy’s basement and play video games all day. Now they’re gonna have to make it up somehow, and that means raising taxes. Wait, I forgot, they’re a BLUE STATE and the citizens of blue states love politicians that raise taxes. Never mind…

  • road2change

    Good! Let them leave. We have no need for them

    • jim_m

      Moron. So you have no need for a historic industry that has been one of the most significant suppliers of guns to the US armed forces since the 19th century? I suppose you have no need for a national defense? Traitorous bastard. Go live somewhere else.

      • You insult morons everywhere by including road2change amongst their number.

  • Pingback: Will Colt Leave Connecticut? | Unhommedeveritas' Blog()

  • go4it

    Colt has the primary (largest by volume) contract for M-16 *ASSAULT* rifles for the U.S. military – via the Department of Defense. I think they have ALL of the business for the short-barreled variant, the M-4. This is THE “Middle East” rifle …

    If Colt stays in CT, the latest legislation from Commie-neticut in Fart-ford apparently leaves them unable to fulfill any more business with “da Gummint “. Not sure if they could gather piece-parts and assemble them elsewhere. Ruger & Stag Arms – also CT-based players in the consumer firearms game – would be in the same mess. Even if Colt or anyone else in CT possibly COULD be exempt from these useless new laws in order to sell to the Pentagon … the loss of the profitable consumer side of the business woud either mean slashing employment – or jacking prices.

    To be clear: NO firearms manufacturer makes every single, teeny-weeny part of anything they sell. Sub-contractors – highly-specialised engineers and manufacturers of barrels, springs, etc. – all the way down to metal treatment, plating, raw materials – create a massive “hand-shake” relationship with the firearms industry that has a historical “home” in the greater Hartford, CT area.

    Autoloading (semi-automatic; one trigger pull for each shot) firearms have been around longer that any living person in 2013. Different ways to “skin the cat” as far as actual mechanical operation but – basically – they all accomplish the same thing – ejecting a spent cartridge, reloading a new one and re-cocking the trigger (firing “hammer”) – in the same general manner.

    They – rifles, shotguns and handguns – are NO more dangerous today than they’ve ever been. ONLY the mentally-deranged people procuring them for criminal purposes have. And the fools who make and interpret thevstupd laws we already have that ENCOURAGE and practically REWARD crime and criminals!!!!

  • Guest

    Well, well..when the little gun manufactures stood up and said enough was enough, where were you Colt? Now it’s your back yard? You are all in now aren’t you?

    The fact is we need industries leaders to help fight this gun grab, now that you are fully awake Colt, welcome to our world!

  • I have always liked Colt firearms and now have more reason than ever. I hope they do pull out. Connecticut is a third-rate state, anyway.

  • disqus_fKRvwoqEKq

    leave that dem state and watch all that tax money go with it come to iowa colt where the 2nd amen is strong


    Without firearms things that made the United States what they are would be dissolved.The few that use what has forged America’s strength to produce fear and grief should never triumph over what makes good men secure.To those concerned please consider Tennessee as a future for a provider of what makes so many secure as appose to what makes some suffer as a result of mental illness and a desire of what is evil in men.