[dropcap]M[/dropcap]agpul, the controversial gun-accessory maker still based for now in Erie, Colorado, is dead-set against a state law requiring criminal background checks for gun purchases. Yet Magpul is all for criminal background checks when it comes to screening applicants for its graphic design department.
“Any offer made is contingent on the applicant passing a background check that will include a restricted party screening and, for prospective employees who are Foreign Persons, on the Company obtaining all necessary export licenses,” reads the Magpul job ad placed at Monster.com. “In addition the applicant will be required to pass a criminal background check and drug screening.”
Any top company like Magpul is naturally serious about giving all potential employees a thorough vetting.
What about vetting gun buyers? That’s unconstitutional, according to the high-decibel movement the company has been associated with over the last year in Colorado.
Indeed, although Magpul is moving out of the state to Wyoming and Texas mainly — according to the company’s press shop — as a reaction to the passage of gun laws last year in Denver, the company is party to an ongoing Colorado lawsuit against the background check law and a ban on 16-rounds-and-more-ammunition-magazine sales that passed last year, reported the Daily Caller.
“Extreme gun control interests have forced the passage of these unconstitutional laws in Colorado, and as a company, we are resolved to restore those rights to the people,” Duane Liptak, director of product management and marketing, reportedly wrote about the lawsuits on the company’s Facebook page.
So why is the company hiring graphic designers in Colorado if it’s moving its manufacturing and its headquarters away?
According to the Colorado Observer, it’s keeping “a toehold in Colorado in order to fight the state Democrats’ gun-control agenda.”
“We made a commitment publicly that we would not abandon the law-abiding gun owners in our own state, and we want to honor that,” Liptak explained.
A good graphic designer, after all, can make election campaign flyers as well as he or she can make Magpul tee-shirts.
The ad:
Magpul doesn’t sell guns. They sell firearms accessories that don’t require background checks anywhere. Even if they did sell guns they could only legally do so through federal firearms licensees that all have background checks. They were against the Colorado legislation based on the Magazine bans, which is a HUGE part of their business.
If your goal was to try to link them to some sort of hypocritical stance, you failed.
Magpul deems Colorado’s gun control legislation “unconstitutional”? They are “resolved to work to restore gun rights to the people”? The Bill of Rights includes far more than Magpul’s sacrosanct “2nd amendment”.
Isn’t it amusing to hear the gun zealots try to paint themselves victims. Everything is “unconstitutional” that effects their precious right to bear arms.
The rest of us have rights as well and with that right comes freedom of expression. Go away Magpul! Just leave our state and leave the legalities of the gun control legislation to the courts to decide whether or not Colorado’s gun laws are “unconstitutional”.
[…] […]
Maybe the Colorado Independent should start doing background checks on its employees, as they are clearly hiring mentally challenged pajama boys to do their writing.
“Ryecatcher” doesn’t like that an entire company has spoken out for AND acted upon their beliefs. What if your precious 1st Amendment was repealed and you weren’t allowed to comment?! You don’t believe in gun ownership, that’s fine, but you have no right to dictate anyone else’s choices. And please don’t start with “but guns are for killing”. Think about it, if every single gun owner was as bloodthirsty as you would like to believe, this entire country would have killed itself off a long time ago. How do you explain why it hasn’t happened? Oh yeah, law abiding…
I think Ryecatcher lacks a basic understanding of the constitution and the rule of law.
“Rule of law and understanding the Constitution”. It’s the usual provincial hogwash from the gun nut crowd. They always pretend to have the inside track on understanding the Constitution, the Founding Fathers intent, patriotism, ect ect when they have nothing of substance to offer.
It’s like the sad sack Charlton Heston of “cold dead hands” fame firing up the NRA hordes with their 2nd amendment fantasies. It gets more laughable everytime you watch the video.
I don’t oppose gun ownership. It’s not my thing. I’m not interested in hunting, competitive shooting or home protection at the point of a gun. I support reasonable gun control laws and am pleased Magpul is relocating.
Comprehensive background checks and limiting the sale of high capacity mags and weapons capable of delivering 30 or 40 rounds in seconds is something we all need to consider.
I support the laws passed by our state legislature. Those of you who disagree go for it. Let the Constitutional process take it’s course as all of us votes our views and exercises our rights as citizens.
I’m hardly a Constitutional scholar but know enough about our history to understand how gun zealots of the NRA distort and twist the truth to further the sale and profits of gun manufacturers.
There’s more to the Bill of Rights than the holy grail 2nd amendment for those of you who like to think you know all about the Constitution and you’re precious gun rights.
Those of you gun zealots who are angered by the opposition are simply another political faction exercising your Constitutional rights. You have to remember that we are an opposing faction exercising ours. If you read James Madison’s Federalist #10 you will understand what I’m talking about. Have a good day all of you gun toting Constitutional experts.
[…] Read the entire article at The Colorado Independent […]
[…] Magpul still hiring in Colorado, background check required Magpul, the controversial gun-accessory maker still based for now in Erie, Colorado, is dead-set against a state law requiring criminal background checks for gun purchases. Yet Magpul is all for criminal background checks when it comes to screening … Read more on The Colorado Independent […]
Criminal records should be visible only to law forces