What handguns are left?

S

Spyderman

New member
I'm feeling more than a little disappointed in the firearms manufacturers right now. Okay, lets see... Ruger has a history of buddying up to the gun control folks, colt is eliminating sales to (non-LEO) consumers, H&K has been bought by Colt and will be eliminating consumer sales as well, Glock is volunteering to start this "fingerprinting" system, what is left? I haven't heard much about Smith & Wesson through this whole lawsuit thing, and Sig seems to be ignoring the consumer market since they have all of those gov contracts going. What's left!?!? I can't believe that some of these companies are throwing in the towel. I feel betrayed. I know each of these companies are in it for the $$$, but for so many of them to just shut the door on the US consumer market seems so cowardly. What companies are left, and how many of them will still be around in 1,2,5,10 years? Now, not only do we have to fight the HCI/gun control crowd, AND the medias brainwashing of the general public, but now we have to worry about there even being gun makers left to buy from if/when we win. Is there a company we as consumers can stand behind that wont desert us?
-Spyderman
 
There still is Beretta, Walther and Smith.
How about CZ,Tauras and Bersa. I think there are still a lot of flavors for a lot of tastes.


Happy New Year To One and All :)

------------------
Help Stamp Out Gun Ignorance.
 
Thank you JJR. Beretta is right on the mark. I may have to look at Beretta in a new light, but they still do not make a pistol that feels good in my hand.
 
No, S&W must be boycotted since they are owned by a British firm and the British support UN backed disarmament of all civilians in the world. Prime supporters of this are Canada and Japan. So we must boycott the DAC-394 and all Para-Ordinance products, along with all Japanese made Weatherby, Browning, and any other firearms from there. We must boycott Browning anyway since they are no longer going to import any of their handguns, especially the HP. Interarms sold out to S&W and with it went Walther so we need to boycott Walther. Kahr is owned by Justin Moon, son of the founder of the Moonies organization so boycott them. Boycott any firearms of the Kalashnikov action type, because the companies who produce them support people who wish to commimt terroristic acts against U.S. citizens. Kimber parts are manufactured in a plant in New York state. Wilson uses these parts also. New York may have Hillary Clinton as a Senator and she supports stripping us of our rights so we can meld with the ideal one world govt and let us not forget that New York state has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the U.S. Remington and Ithaca are also in New York and should be boycotted for the same reason. Beretta does not get off easily because in Maryland they passed a law requiring all guns sold after 2004 to incorporate smart gun technology. Beretta supports this by keeping their production and jobs in Maryland, they should make a statement and leave the state. SIG is in bed with Ruger, all of the stainless steel slides on the P229, P239, and P226 are castings from Ruger and we must not support Ruger so we must boycott SIG. Still working on Taurus and EAA. Anybody got any ideas?

[This message has been edited by Jeff OTMG (edited December 30, 1999).]
 
As long as there is demand, there will be a supply. I've never bought a Colt or H&K gun, so I am not too depressed.
 
Jeff,
Not sure if your post was for real or a joke. If it was for real, are you willing to donate all your firearms made by said manufacturers to a good cause (me)? I personally don't give much of a rat's a$$ for most of those mentioned, but you picked on S&W. Now you are on thin ice fella! Tompkins did buy Smith, but they continue to let it run as an independent company (pretty much), in fact the CEO of S&W is the Group President of all of Tompkins holdings in the US. Ed Shultz is a fine individual, an American, and a firearms rights supporter, as is S&W - the company. I think we as gun owners should show a bit of support for S&W and all other manufacturers that are left. Instead, let's try to make the lunacy in Washington the battle cry and get this "anti-gun" train derailed. How about this, let's get YOU elected so you can push our agenda in general. Can I do a write-in vote from Washington (state) for you down there in Texas????? ......SmithNut

[This message has been edited by SmithNut (edited December 30, 1999).]
 
Well, as long as there are companies like Wilson Combat, Springfield Armory, Rock River Arms, Les Baer, King's etc.... we will always have the 1911.

A good honest 1911 in .45ACP... you cant get any more American than that.

Screw foreign gun manufacturers!
 
Jeff, I infer you mean we ought not boycott anyone because there's no real discernible difference - all are tainted in some way by anti-gun forces if you go to "six degrees of separation". I strongly disagree. Some taints of anti-gun are too tenuous to warrant a boycott. MANY ARE NOT! Certain boycotts are highly appropriate, IMO. The S&W situation you describe is an example of "too tenuous". How can S&W's parent co. control the policies of it's gov't? We can and should try to reach a (general) consensus on where the line should be drawn (and I think it should). Personally, I now buy into to the Ruger boycott due to direct influence on "gun control" legis. by Bill Ruger himself. That ain't too tenuous, and they will get no more of my money until such time Mr. Ruger is instrumental in a repeal of the horsecrap he pushed for (the 94 ban). We can and should debate (endlessly if necessary) exactly what is and what is not too tenuous, but we can't sit on our hands and let our cash go to support companies who support 2nd Am infringements. Like someone said, there will always be a market, so I couldn't care less if Ruger or Colt go completely defunct, because then more of the public's money will go to the "good" guys (good here a relative term), like S&W and others. agreee or disagree?
 
Oh yeah, and all other factors being equal, I agree we should support US companies to the detriment of foreign. I'd buy a foreign gun from a company who gives money to the US NRA any day over an offending domestic company, but if Brand A is American, and Brand B is foreign, I'll buy Brand A if the quality is there, esp. if I don't have the details about their policies re "gun control" legis., because being an American company, they will probably focus more on the American market as a percentage of their revenue, and therefore will have a stronger financial incentive to fight anti legis. and support pro-gun groups. Think about it - if the heat gets turned up too high, I can foresee Glock not thinking twice about dropping out of the US civilian market, but a smaller US company that caters mostly to civilians, can't do that - they will have to fight anti-gun crap. Can anyone name some American examples of this? Let's see, you've got the 1911 custom shops mentioned above...Aren't these all American: Kel-Tec, Kahr, Beretta USA, Autauga, which others?

[This message has been edited by Futo Inu (edited December 30, 1999).]
 
What I'd really like to see is for the NRA to provide financial backing to American arms manufacturers.

If the NRA would hold stock in gun companies, then they couldn't be bought out by anti-gun investment groups/organizations.

Just think about it... it would really piss Chuck Schumer off.

What would be even better is for the NRA to enter into the gun manfacturing business.

Say for instance a "RKBA" brand name with
the second amendment wording rollmarked on the firearm.

They'd do it for "non-profit" of course, all proceeds would go to fighting anti-gun legislation.

Man, if I only worked for the NRA...

[This message has been edited by dvc (edited December 30, 1999).]
 
That's an interesting idea - can the NRA
buy a company. If it gave all the members
the option of buying a share of HK at $40 -
if everyone bought one - you would have the
dough.

Then sell the guns at what it would wholesale them to members.

Of course, then many companies wouldn't buy ads in the American Rifleman anymore would they? Never Mind!
 
Smithnut - Yes, it's a joke.

dvc - If you knew the things I do about Les Baer he would not be on your list, although he has always been a good guy to me. Stick with Rock River, Mark and Chuck are good people as far as I am concerned.

Ala Dan - Can't say anything about Autauga either, I have one and bought my son one for Christmas this year.

Glenn - Good enough for me! Especially those horrible, sexist ads with that cute, adorable, rosie cheeked, big breasted, split tailed, matress thrasher, they use in those ads. I get to see her in person again in a few weeks. I am so happpy. Unfortunately she is just too young for me. Where are all those single babes who are over 30? All the ones I find are early 20's.

Futo - Actually the point I was trying to make was that we can find reasons to boycott just about any company out there if we look hard enough. Everyone will have to decide what is reason enough for them. I happen to refuse to buy new Ruger products since Bill Ruger did his thing back in the 80's. What Colt was doing was not knuckling under to the cities, it was a great business move to save a sizable investment. Colt has had problems and those are related to labor costs and the frequently piss poor product that labor produces. If you pay someone a bunch of money to make a product, it has to be of high enough quality to sell at a price high enough to justify the high labor cost. For the quality of the work Colt labor has been turning out, it would be more cost effective to fire the employees and buy CNC equipment. That is not a good enought reason for me to boycott a company. Unfortunately, and I do not understand it, many people out there got their news about Colt from the same media outlets that they question all other news from. Realize that 2000 is Bill Clintons last year in office and he intends on going out with a bang and do everything he can to cease the sale of firearms to the public.

[This message has been edited by Jeff OTMG (edited December 31, 1999).]
 
I thought Glock's civilian sales made up about 90% of their profits. Am I correct? If so, they would also be in trouble if they backed out on us...
 
Ok, so you wanna boycott Colt, HK, glock or whoever. Has it not occured to you that you can still buy good guns made by these companies "Used" without putting a penny in their bank account? There"s plenty of 'em out there.
Besides, the way QC has been slipping with alot of companies in the last few years, you'll probably end up with a better gun over a "new" one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top