For Those Of You Who Have Forgotten...

Gunslinger

How could Ruger have been reacting to pending legislation when that SOB helped promulgate the legislation? He was one of those who came up with the idea and sold it to Congress! As for what would have happened without him, I seriously doubt there would have been any outright bans. In fact, I doubt that the legislation would have passed at all, given that the gun grabbers wouldn't have had a turncoat to trot out and talk about how "reasonable" their proposals are and how everyone should agree with them.
 
Gunslinger, there was no "pending legislation" at the time Ruger wrote his letter to congress. None. HE HELPED WRITE the legislation!!!

Correia, the Ruger boycott was formed years ago. It's just that they paid their blood-money to the NRA, so the NRA doesn't mention it anymore, so not alot of the younger gunowners know the story or about the boycott.

[This message has been edited by BB (edited October 13, 2000).]
 
I'd like to add my two cents worth. Since the S&W agreement, I sold a sequentially numbered pair of SS Lew Horton 625-4 Mountain guns that were Springfield Armory 200 year commemoratives that were NIB that I had kept in my safe for more than 5 years. As a gunsmith, I no longer work on new S&W's and will only work on a used on if the customer is an old valued friend. Regarding Bill Ruger. I dropped his line of firearms from my collection back about '95 or so. The reason had nothing to do with firearms. As a motorcyclyist, Mr. Ruger did something that I abhorred. If you work for Ruger and ride a motorcycle YOU MUST wear a helment or your insurance issued to you by Ruger will not cover you in an accident. In Arizona, they don't have a helmet law, so even if you legally didn't wear a helment (freedom of choice) and got in an accident, too bad for you! It was at that point that I realized that Bill Ruger is only for the freedoms he thinks are necessary, not what is legal, moral or right when it comes to individual freedoms. I also dropped my American Motorcycle Association membership (cut card up into little tiny pieces and mailed it to them with the cancelation of my membership) for supporting Bill Rugers decision, saying it's his company and he could do what he wanted (like discriminate against those that don't agree with him - if you worked for him). I no longer accept Ruger firearms for work, even from valued customers. When they ask why, I tell them about the insurance issue and Rugers betrayal as a right to keep and bear arms opponent. Don't you find it interesting that a manufacturer of firearms is so ANTI-GUN?? If he didn't manufacture firearms, I would expect to see him at the MMM alongside Rosie O'D!!
 
BB, your right. As a younger gunowner (25) I didn't know anything about Ruger & the mag legislation until I joined TFL a couple of years ago.

Thats why TFL is the best source of firearms info on the planet.
 
My local gun store only has a few new Smith pistols left, couple of Sigma's, a SW99, and a Cheif's Special. They dont have any more new Smith revolvers, and the owner said he isn't going to get any more. But he says he will be getting Taurus's. And, he almost always has a used Smith or two, but they aren't there for long.
 
I'm one of those opposed to the S&W boycott. While I generally disagree with the contract, I understand it as a business decision to curb the lawsuits. S&W is on the edge and these lawsuits could well break them.

That's not why I'm not against the boycott. How many large American gun companies are left? Despite being owned by the Brits, S&W is one of the few remaining large US-based gun companies. It provides jobs for Americans and has introduced some important innovations.

Please think about whether we can really afford to sacrifice S&W. S&W is on the brink and Colt is almost in Chapter 11. That leaves Ruger, and according to some on this board, it should also be boycotted. Can we really afford to lose another large U.S. gun maker like S&W? Smaller companies like Kimber, Wilson, Baer, and Springfield (who asssembles not produces guns in the U.S.) will never be big enough to meet the demands of the American gun market. Nor are they large enough to defend themselves against the anti-gun lawsuits.

With large US gunmakers gone, Congress would find it easy to ban "cheap imported guns" like Taurus, Glock, Steyr, CZ, etc. With the large U.S. gunmakers gone and with a ban on foreign gun imports, you can kiss your gun rights goodbye.

Where does this boycott strategy end? We boycott S&W, Colt (for cutting back on its civilan production), and Ruger for Bill Ruger's support of the 10 round ban. In a time when gun rights are being threatened at every junction, the last thing we need to do is turn on ourselves. We are falling into the strategy of divide and conquer--we're being divided and conquered.

This is a time to think clearly and deliberately. Fanaticism will only hurt our cause.
 
i agree with HowardK.

i will never again buy a new smith and wesson firearm.
i will however buy a ruger. why i dont know, maybe its the fact that IMO ruger makes a finer gun than smith. and also smith really sold us out, the whole company did.
ruger didnt quite do what smith has done.

also isnt bill ruger dead now?
i really dont know if he is or not.
 
Bill Ruger alive, grandson runin the daily operations.

Smith did not dodge the lawsuit problem by signing the agreement.

Smith is no longer an American company, they are a foreign company with a few hundred American employees.

Sam.....Darn, this gas station used to be open at night.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by C.R.Sam:
Smith is no longer an American company, they are a foreign company with a few hundred American employees.[/quote]

That sums them up perfectly. A bunch of foreigners conspiring to supplant the Second Ammendment. We already know how much respect the British have for our Constitution and Man's right to self defense. NONE!



------------------
Just one of the Good Guys

And yes, S&W MUST DIE!
 
Rugers have never been represented in my battery. Can't recall the circumstances surrounding my knowledge of Bill's antics, but I did know just as I came of age and started out my gun collection. Never bought one, new or used. Will not by a new S&W. As for Wilson, Kimber, Springfield, etc., not being able to step up the plate, I have three words: supply and DEMAND. All ECONOMIC factors being equal, these firms would really ratchet up their supply. Unfortunately those who would have to lay their money on the line would feel they were rolling the dice on the legal future of the private possesion of firearms.

If Ruger "died" because of his antics, I think the whole firearms industry would take note. Too late for them, but I find great merit in making an example of S&W. I think the solid, eastern U.S. "union" men concerned about a few hundred jobs in a state that has villified the private possesion of firearms are going to have to decide how important freedom really is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top