"Any attempt to try to link the two is disingenuous at best," Doba said.
The gunmakers in Connecticut say the law is very much linked to operations here, as customers might punish them for staying put. Bartozzi, at Mossberg, said that moving local operations elsewhere is a possibility.
"We've got great employees in Connecticut, we've got skilled people in Connecticut. We don't want to do that, but to do what's right for the business we have to consider the options," he said.
The Mossberg family would like to stay where it's been since 1919, Bartozzi said, but Malloy is making that difficult. "Every time he opens his mouth or Murphy says something, our customers take it out on us," he said.
For now, business remains strong enough that the effects of the bans in Connecticut, New York and elsewhere, and the backlash, are mitigated.
And for now, the dance with governors of more gun-friendly states becomes more intense, the inevitable result of a Connecticut ban that was legislated based on emotion. It was clear from the start that the ban would cost jobs at a critical time for the state's economy, whether or not it saves lives.
It's unclear where else the two governors will visit in Connecticut. Perry's website said he's going after firearms, finance and pharmaceutical companies on the trip to New York and Connecticut, but his staff has not confirmed details of the visit, aside from a speech that he will give at the Ferguson Library in Stamford on Monday at 6 p.m. Daugaard's spokesperson did not return a call Friday.
And both visiting governors will have a chance to use the firearms at the indoor test ranges of Colt's and Mossberg, if they want to do so. I asked Bartozzi which firearm that would be at Mossberg — perhaps the smaller, .22-caliber version of the AR-15, a big seller that's still legal in Connecticut?
No, Bartozzi said. "The modern sporting rifle. The one that's too dangerous for the folks in Connecticut to shoot."
Follow The Haar Report blog at http://www.courant.com/haar.