Colorado Loses $85 Million a Year Over Dem Gun Control Jihad

Josh Westerlund

I hope that Bloomberg money was worth it. Unlike Magpul, Bloomberg isn’t going to be opening up shop in Colorado.

Democrats came under heavy criticism Friday for driving Magpul Industries out of Colorado by pushing an aggressive gun-control agenda, a move that could cost the state more than $80 million annually.

Officials at Magpul, which makes polymer firearms accessories, announced Thursday that the company will move its corporate headquarters to Texas and its manufacturing facility to Wyoming. Both are now based in Erie, Colo.

The relocation comes as a result of a measure signed by Gov. John Hickenlooper in March that limits ammunition-magazine capacity to 15 rounds. Magpul is among the plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against the law.

Prior to the signing, Magpul officials told state officials that the company contributes more than $85 million annually to Colorado’s economy. The company employs 200 people and supports another 400 supply-chain jobs.

Colorado has a 6.8% unemployment rate. Texas has a 6.2% unemployment rate. Wyoming has a 4.2% unemployment rate. I wonder why that is.

The civilian labor force in Colorado has kept on falling. So clearly this is the time to dump more people out of the workforce over a liberal values issue.

  • dave burke

    I’ve noticed in your wonderful country (no sarcasm, I love the USA) that you are able to put a price on everything. What price do you place on the lives of your children? I’m Australian. We had a massacre in the mid 90s and immediately removed 90% of the guns in our society. No more massacres and extremely few gun-killings since then. Why are your guns more valuable than your children? I’m not being a smart-arse, its a genuine question.

    • radicalrepublican

      It’s a Constitutional right to own firearms. Criminals will always exist and will always attack and maim or kill innocent people some way. Liberty-loving decent people have the responsibility to protect themselves. If all fireams could be taken away from everybody, you would still have killers attacking people with knives etc.
      We also believe that governments can become tyrannical and destroy our society, a la Nazi Germany. No thanks.

    • Phil Ossiferz Stone

      LOL. You didn’t get rid of any more than a small fraction of your firearms, and your gun crime rate has gone up — not down. You don’t even know what’s going on in your own society, much less ours.

    • A Z

      The person responsible for the last massacre was a mental patient and your society did jack.

      It is surmised that he kiIIed other people before simply by taking the the wheel of car and throwing it. He did that to people who befriended him several times. They were lucky that his antics did not kiII them.

      The people, who were not crazy but were mass murders, kiIIed because people had not sufficiently stood up to them before.

    • A Z

      You got rid of guns and knife crime starts to tick up. In Britain some doctors want to ban knives.

      People will have to march down to the police station and turn in their kitchen knives and by new improved kitchen knives that cost more, a less efficient. Professional butchers at the supermarket will have to get a Federal Knives Arms License. They’ll have to store knives when not in use in a safe.

      Crime will tick up again and then some wag will get the ideal of genetic testing for something like the “warrior” gene. You going to euthanize those people?

    • A Z
    • A Z

      Have you considered public execution of criminals of heinous acts of violence.

      One reason we halted them in America was not only some people were anti-d_ath penalty, but because authorities were upset with the onlookers.

      They treated it like a picnic. The lesson was lost on them. They were there not to see justice done put to see gore-porn, gorn. there is truth to that.

      But by not having public execution we cannot teach or impress on young minds that criminals will come to a bad end.

      It would not hurt to see someone like John Wayne Gacy walk to a noose all ashen faced or weeping.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Could you prevent the occasional murder of people if you outlawed freedom of religion and freedom of speech?

      What if you implemented a full police state?

      What price do you place on the lives of your children? Why are your freedoms more valuable than your children.

      • Troy Scott

        Move to China. They do not have gun killings except by the police and military. These are excluded from statistics

    • 08hayabusa

      Nice play with words. Your murder rate with guns have been replaced with a higher murder rate with knives and various other implements.

      And your overall crime rate has increased.

      • tickletik

        But it was for the children! What price do you place on the lives of the childrennnn????

    • J Galt

      That’s pure crap. Your criminals all kept their guns, and your home invasions exploded. Liar. Fool.

    • William Baker

      Actually except for the ultra libtards that close their eyes in the australian cities and pretend things have gotten better, according to your own government home invasions went up 70% after your gun ban. Almost like criminals don’t think people can fight back anymore… So you must not care about children when they are at home…

    • tickletik



      It’s not a case of our guns vs. our children; America’s problems are gangs who aren’t in prison and lunatics who aren’t in the asylum. Guns have nothing to do with it. As to why we have guns, it’s because we are a free people – free men have arms, and armed men are free. When those who govern have guns and those who are governed do not, the first class become the rulers and the second class their servants. In America, we have always believed (until recently) that government is the servant, not the master.

      I haven’t looked carefully at Australian crime figures, but I have every reason to doubt your gun control produced lower crime – there’s no reason why it should. The “useful idiot” type of gun control advocate (I don’t mean that as a personal insult) believes that passing a law changes the facts of reality, in this case, the fact that guns exist and will always exist in criminal hands no matter what kind of laws you pass. I can tell you that here in Chicago, where guns are illegal, you can get a gun on the street (illegally, of course) in a very short time.

      To see why this is, consider illegal drugs – we have all kinds of drug laws in the U.S. I believe heroin is illegal everywhere – and yet it’s easy to get if you want it. The same is true of guns. In fact, I could build you a gun in my garage from wood and automobile parts to show you how easy it is.

      So don’t think gun control makes anyone safer – it just takes guns away from good people and leaves them in the hands of the bad. Common sense should tell you how foolish such an approach is.

      • Troy Scott

        If you did away with gang, racial, and drug killings in the US we would be at or below the countries such as Japan and the UK as such people like to compare. The fact they fail to realize is that these are all Islands. They don’t have a problem with millions of pounds of drugs walking across their border. Nor have they ever just opened their doors to immigrants. China on the other hand is not an island however if you are caught talking bad about the government they just kill you. Go and download the Brady scorecard for 2013. They list Hawaii as the safest state to live??? That is because they score high on the Brady score card. Fact is that Vermont is the safest state! Vermont also has well above the national per-capita average gun ownership and scores at the very bottom of the Brady scorecard with a flat F. Washington DC is not included because they would score the highest grade of all but has 5 times the national average gun murders and the least of all gun ownership. Before you actually believe any statistics from these guys just look for yourself!

    • 191145

      It truly was a waste to sacrifice all those fine young AMERICANS to save your a$$es from the japs ! Should have let them have the lot of you ! They died and we spent our treasure to preserve your freedom, only for all you swagman and buskers to give it all away without even a shot ! Freedom isn’t free ! Your crime is up and your government joggles the books and releases lies ! Yup, should have let the japs take your freedom.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        But if the leftists of the day had some really big gun control marches I’m sure the Japanese would have gladly returned everything to the pre-war status quo.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      What makes you think that guns are more valuable than children?

      It sounds like you’re using flawed accounting methods.

    • dad1927
    • Drakken

      I am a free citizen, because we have arms to make it and keep it so, you are a subject unarmed and at the mercy of a fickle govt and criminal. Good luck with that, for I am all out of sympathy for folks like you who go like sheep to the slaughter.

    • Notalibfool

      Dave, you should be ashamed of yourself for using children as a pawn in your jihad against guns. No one ever said that guns were more valuable than children. I suggest you do some in-depth research into US history to find out why we have gun rights, and why some wish to take those rights away.

      I have two young children and am a proud supporter of the Second Amendment.


    You have to love Magpul, who also responded to some state’s (Colorado or NY) 10-round magazine limit by builidng a new 40-round capacity magazine for the M16/AR-15! It’s like giving the raised middle-finger to gun-grabbing Democrats!

    This also points one way to fight the Left – deprive them of tax money by moving to low-tax jurisdictions. If we still had a proper Federal system, without so much power in Washington, we could beat them this way. As it is, we’re going to have to fight to strip Washington of its centralized power before our Good States can defeat their Bad States, and then “force” them to accept freedom.

  • 191145

    Lack of employment = crime, add to that loss of more jobs = more crime, add to that loss of revenue on 85 million = loss of state and local services to fight crime ! Wanna bet the first things hit will be EDUCATION, POLICE AND FIREMEN ! Turning into a really blue liberal “gimmie” paradise ! WAY TO GO DEMOCRAT LIBERAL SWINE ! All over passing laws that don’t do a damn thing to stop criminals or mass shootings ! Makes a lot of sense don’t it ! LMAOROF ! Stupid is as stupid does !

  • dad1927

    Working their way to a Detroit environment courtesy of the democrats. Another failed experiment coming up!

  • freedomfighterx

    commie CA now commie controlled CO – amerika’s finished, you just don’t know it, yet.

  • Mgh999

    It is an innate right, the Second Amendment is a rule limiting Government: “shall not be infringed.” Government does not grant what is not theirs to give.

    When a drunk kills someone with their car they don’t take away cars from law abiding drivers…why do we think disarming law abiding citizens will stop criminals (74% of murderers have prior records)?