Beretta Guns Pistol
Introduced in 2010, the Model 92A1 and 96A1 represent Beretta’s evolution of the world famous 92FS pistol.
Combining the best elements of the 92FS and the 90-Two, these pistols feature:
A. Higher capacity magazines: 17 rounds in 9mm. completely interchangeable with other 92 family magazines. Three magazines are included with each pistol.
B. Features a removable front sight: Allowing the user to easily replace a damaged sight or with an accessory sight.
C. Accessory rail: The frame of the A1’s have an integral MIL-STD-1913 rail for fast attachment of tactical lights and laser aiming devices.
D. Internal recoil buffer: Increases service life by reducing stress on the receiver created by the more powerful .40 S&W caliber ammunition.
E. Captive recoil spring assembly: The single-piece design simplifies the assembly and disassembly process and minimizes the possibility of spring loss.
F. There is no doubt that the Beretta 92A1 and 96A1 are fantastic guns with many desirable features. For more than 500 years Beretta has been manufacturing what many consider the best gun. Beretta, like many gun manufacturers today, is facing hard decisions and a great deal of inconvenience due to those who would disarm the people of their Second Amendment right.
In business since 1526, Beretta is the oldest firearm manufacturing company in the world. Beretta remains the U.S. Armed Forces supplier of the M9 Combat Pistol. Today, the Beretta family still owns and operates the company.
Beretta focuses on its broad range of modern firearms including side-by-side shotguns, over-and-under shotguns, assault rifles, express rifles, hunting rifles, lever and bolt-action rifles, submachine guns, single and double action revolvers and semi-automatic pistols. The parent company, Beretta Holding, also owns Beretta USA, Benelli, Franchi, SAKO, Stoeger, Tikka, Uberti, and the Burris Optics company.
The Beretta USA factory, in Accokeek, Maryland, manufactures military, police, and civilian pistols.
Beretta, like other prominent gun manufacturers, evidently intends to stand by its principles. Beretta promised that, if Maryland passed its strict post-Sandy Hook gun control laws, they would leave the state.
On Friday, Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley signed into law the state’s extensive gun control laws. The new laws, the stated purpose of which is to “save lives,” bans some “assault weapons”, limits magazine capacity to ten rounds, and requires mandatory fingerprinting for gun purchase.
The first prohibition proves definitely that Maryland is ignorant of the facts-or chooses to ignore them. If otherwise, Maryland would have paid attention to the fact that the Department of Justice has issued a report conceding that crime goes down when legal gun ownership goes up.
Based on the survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, U. S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times each year.
Distorted facts are often presented to sway public opinion to the democratic ideal of disarming the people period. A classic example is Rep. Donna Edwards who said that “since Columbine, there have been 181 of these school shootings.” That’s an exaggerated figure supplied by a Brady Campaign list that included incidents that were neither shootings nor at schools. According to factcheck.org the list shows 130 school shootings since Columbine that have resulted in at least one student or school official being killed or injured — certainly unacceptably high, but almost a third lower than claimed by Rep. Edwards or the Brady Campaign.
For Beretta, the Governor’s signature signaled that it was time for Beretta manufacturing to relocate. The move isn’t just about the symbolism of the governmental erosion of Second Amendment rights. It is also occurring because the legislation would make illegal the company’s newly issued ARX 100, the civilian version of the ARX-160, a tactical rifle used in Italy.
The magazine size limit also places Beretta in a legal dilemma. Beretta would no longer be able to stock appropriate, standard capacity magazines for numerous guns in its product line including the 92A1 and the 96A1.
While Beretta hasn't yet announced where it will move to, it is plain it will find many states that will welcome it. States that are supportive of Second Amendment rights are courting weapons manufacturers being driven from the blue states. Most recently, Texas has made headlines for its open invitations, as have Arizona, and many southern states. Certainly Maryland will suffer repercussions from the move with the loss of 400 jobs as well as the loss of taxes. Beretta has paid Maryland $31 million in taxes over an unspecified number of years. In the face of its need to relocate, Beretta’s plans to expand its Maryland plant are now off the table, creating a further loss of taxes and more jobs in Maryland. Jeffrey Reh, Beretta's general counsel stated it best when he asked, "Why expand in a place where the people who built the gun couldn't buy it?"
Gun manufacturers headquartered in anti-gun states have decided that they were no longer welcome – despite the multi-million dollars in taxes their presence has brought to these states – many have announced that they were going to pull out. After 175 years Colt Manufacturing has announced it is leaving Connecticut; PTR Industries announced in April that it would be taking its jobs to a new state; Stag Arms and Mossberg & Sons also located in Connecticut, may soon follow suit. This amounts to a loss for that state of 3,000 jobs and $1.75 billion in annual taxable revenues. Magpul Industries, which manufactures firearms accessories and ammunition magazines, has indicated it will leave Colorado after the passage of stricter gun control in Colorado. Magpul employs more than 200 employees and pays approximately $85 million in annual taxable revenues.
In the face of the governmental trend of blue states toward tighter gun control many gun manufacturers are taking their jobs and money and moving on to the Second Amendment supportive states.
Very few gun rights advocates in Congress were initially willing to speak publicly in the wake of the mass shootings in Newtown. Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas publicly opposed that trend and took a stand in stating that the answer to these tragedies was not fewer guns, but more guns. Had the principal been armed, he said, she might have killed shooter Adam Lanza before the rampage developed.
On Dec. 16, Gohmert stated "The facts are that every time guns conceal-carry (gun laws) has been allowed-the crime rate has gone down".
Another example of the manipulation of the facts occurred on Dec. 16, 2012 on "Face the Nation". Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign, used the number of murders occurring daily with firearms as evidence that "gun violence rates are not" going down. Yet the facts state that the rate of firearms homicides committed with the intent to kill or injure is at its lowest point since 1981: 3.6 per 100,000 persons in 2010. The highest rate was in 1993 when the highest point reached 7 per 100,000 persons. Gross stated that "...every day in our country, 32 people are murdered by guns. So while violence rates may be going down, gun violence rates are not".
Here again the Brady Campaign is manipulating the facts to achieve their goal-disarm the citizens. The Brady campaign is using figures from 2008 statistics that comes from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control data.
In comparison, preliminary CDC data for 2011 indicate that deaths due to motor vehicle accidents versus homicide by firearms are 23 to 1.5 respectively. The current federal environmental policies have caused many automobile manufacturers to sacrifice safety in order to improve gas mileage by reducing the weight of vehicles. Simply put, human lives are being sacrificed to save gasoline and reduce emissions. If the government were wise it would have mandated that mandatory improvements resulting in better in gas mileage must be restricted to improvements in carburation and engine efficiency, and not by reducing body weight and safety. This brings into question that if governments are truly so dedicated to saving lives why are they attacking the Second Amendment rather than automotive engineering?
The answer would appear to be all about control of U. S. citizens and the erosion of the U. S. Constitution. In the past, as recent as 2008, the U. S. Supreme court affirmed the Constitutional right for the citizen to keep and bear arms. On April 13, 2013 the Court declined to hear a gun rights case by a grass roots challenge to New York law that strictly limits whom can legally carry a weapon outside their homes. Under current law, the individual must provide proof that someone is attempting to murder them in order to obtain a permit to carry. Criminals appear to have the advantage in New York under this law, and you can bet the criminals don't request a permit.
It is apparent that the differences in political parties are widening and intensifying, including especially those of gun control. Simply put, the Constitution protects our Second Amendment rights, and liberals aim to change it, while conservatives intend to keep it and the Constitution intact.
Certainly, citizens and gun manufacturers alike are in a battle to preserve the Second Amendment against those who would erode or eradicate it. There is no doubt that many gun manufacturers will migrate to states who are Second Amendment friendly, or that these states will continue to invite their business, jobs and tax revenues.
Finally, this brings into question the authority of States Rights. As a growing number of states reaffirm their rights upon many issues including guns with new legislation barring federal intervention, State Rights will become another growing political issue. One thing seems apparent; gun manufacturers will not shut their doors without a fight that is backed by Second Amendment advocates nationwide.