I'M Getting Mine, Who Cares About You
- Thread starter AR-10
- Start date
What's really amusing is that at first, nobody needed to read the Slick$Willie agreement. It was sufficient to know that a Cuomo had a hand in its birth to know that it was a demon-child.
Only after people started to read it, did they realized that even a Cuomo didn't have enough power to propose what was included, to wit: the code of conduct for non-parties of the agreement (i.e. dealers), the creation of an oversite body with a 4:1 anti-gun rights profile, the mandatory-realocation of profits directed by entities other that the owners/financial officers/stock holders, the "Most-Favored-Gunmaker" treatment. No, it soon became quite clear that the S$W agreement could only be the product of a willing participant on both sides.
Is it any wonder why every single other gun manufacturer was against the agreement? It shouldn't be.
AR-10, i don't think you should appologize for your thread. I think its good that we continually rehash this. Everytime we go around this mullberry bush, another patriot realizes that we must let S$W die because of their actions. Everytime we go around and around on this one, the anti-boycot crew needs to stretch thinner their reasons to support the enemy.
Doing the right thing is never easy and is sometimes quite ugly, never-the-less we should still do it.
Only after people started to read it, did they realized that even a Cuomo didn't have enough power to propose what was included, to wit: the code of conduct for non-parties of the agreement (i.e. dealers), the creation of an oversite body with a 4:1 anti-gun rights profile, the mandatory-realocation of profits directed by entities other that the owners/financial officers/stock holders, the "Most-Favored-Gunmaker" treatment. No, it soon became quite clear that the S$W agreement could only be the product of a willing participant on both sides.
Is it any wonder why every single other gun manufacturer was against the agreement? It shouldn't be.
AR-10, i don't think you should appologize for your thread. I think its good that we continually rehash this. Everytime we go around this mullberry bush, another patriot realizes that we must let S$W die because of their actions. Everytime we go around and around on this one, the anti-boycot crew needs to stretch thinner their reasons to support the enemy.
Doing the right thing is never easy and is sometimes quite ugly, never-the-less we should still do it.
Where's my apology?
"If there is one of you who was a serious lover of S&W and actually forbore from buying any, I'd be surprised, but I would also apologize to THAT individual." -- BigG
The problem with generalizations like yours is that they can be refuted so easily. At least you aren't encumbered with the tortured logic some have displayed here.
I don't buy *anything* from *&*...not even the sight assembly I need for my 629-1. [is anybody going to help me find one of those?
]
Ed Shultz and his British overlords made a calculated decision to cooperate in a fascist scheme to destroy the American firearms market, hoping against hope that it would buy them a little time to unload a company that manufactures those eeeeeeeeeeeeevil firearms. It backfired...and it's going to ruin the company if they don't sell it.
Tompkins PLC have made it plain that they are willing to let the company go for less than they paid for it [around $110 million] after asking $160 million for it this time last year.
So, the gamble to save their own bacon has cost them tens of millions in profit from the sale of the company and made them a pariah in the American market.
The sooner the company is sold to an entity that understands the political and financial ramifications of dealing with the enemy [i.e., the sociofascists of the Clinton Administration] the sooner a fine old name can be restored [if possible] to its earlier glory.
In the meantime, to any one of you: If it makes your head hurt to contemplate anything about this mess, stick it back in the sand. The rest of us will fix it.
"If there is one of you who was a serious lover of S&W and actually forbore from buying any, I'd be surprised, but I would also apologize to THAT individual." -- BigG
The problem with generalizations like yours is that they can be refuted so easily. At least you aren't encumbered with the tortured logic some have displayed here.
I don't buy *anything* from *&*...not even the sight assembly I need for my 629-1. [is anybody going to help me find one of those?
]Ed Shultz and his British overlords made a calculated decision to cooperate in a fascist scheme to destroy the American firearms market, hoping against hope that it would buy them a little time to unload a company that manufactures those eeeeeeeeeeeeevil firearms. It backfired...and it's going to ruin the company if they don't sell it.
Tompkins PLC have made it plain that they are willing to let the company go for less than they paid for it [around $110 million] after asking $160 million for it this time last year.
So, the gamble to save their own bacon has cost them tens of millions in profit from the sale of the company and made them a pariah in the American market.
The sooner the company is sold to an entity that understands the political and financial ramifications of dealing with the enemy [i.e., the sociofascists of the Clinton Administration] the sooner a fine old name can be restored [if possible] to its earlier glory.
In the meantime, to any one of you: If it makes your head hurt to contemplate anything about this mess, stick it back in the sand. The rest of us will fix it.