Your thoughts on Ruger.....

You may want to do a little research on the subject before you post.

No, I dont consider an SP101 with a 2-inch barrel to large to conceal, thats not the point.

Glock cant import the 28 because the BATF wont allow it, not because Glock doesn't want to. The Glock 23 is a compact. Show me a SUB-compact Ruger pistol, like the 26.

I dont see any other companies besides Ruger and S&W making anti-RKBA public statements, regardless of the "legal ramifications".

Ruger LOBBIED for the mag ban before it was even thought of. 10 rounds or 15, it wasn't even a concept until Bill wrote his letter to every member of congress.

Bill owns the majority of the private stock in Strum Ruger, so just because he isn't CEO that doesn't mean he isn't running the show. Ruger makes a low-cost, low-performance guns anyway, so I'm not worried that I'm missing out on anything.

As for "beliefs", lets look at the record:

Bill Ruger is THE PERSON who dreamed up the "10 round mag" idea. He was filmed with Tom Brokaw as Bill said "No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun" and "I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20 or 30 round mags or my folding stock" and "I see nothing wrong with waiting periods".

This interview was used (with Bill Rugers permission) over and over again to rub our faces in the fact that "even a gun manufacture thinks gun control is good".

Following is an excerpt from the March 30, 1989 letter Bill Ruger sent to every member of Congress:

"The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines.
By a simple, complete and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining 'assault rifle' and 'semi-automatic rifles' is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item.
A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could effectively implement these objectives."
This letter was taken from the American Handgunner mag, dated Sept 1992 (pg. 18)
This self-serving degenerate was only kissing-ass to the Democrats to save his own butt, his government contracts and the Ruger Mini 14. He is a traitor in all sense of the word.

If you check EVERY gun ban, the Ruger Mini-14 is either not named, or specifically name as exempt.

Bill Ruger said (on national tv) "I see nothing wrong with a 15, or even a 30 day wait to buy a gun". He also said "No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun."

He than wrote a letter to EVERY member of congres, promoting the "10 round maximum" on mags.

Everything I say can be, and has been, verified. So you see, Bill Ruger, to save his own pocket-book, committed treason, not only on EVERY American, but every man, woman and child on this planet.

The following is from Neal Knox:

"Steve Sanetti says 'I know better' than to ascribe Bill Ruger's magazine ban proposal to business considerations. Maybe so; I don't think Bill is by any means 'anti-gun,' nor do I think he really _wants_ a ban on either guns or magazines (after all, he got his start as a machine gun designer). But I do think Bill Ruger is pushing a plan that would protect his business while affecting only his competitors, and I think he's damaging the efforts of those of us attempting to stop all proposed bans. Further, I don't think his actions on this issue, and other issues in the past, allows him to be described as 'the strongest supporter of our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.'

"What I _know_ is that about 9 p.m. the night before Bill sent a letter to certain members of Congress calling for a ban on high-capacity magazines he called me, wanting me to push such a ban. His opening words, after citing the many federal, state and local bills to ban detachable magazine semi-autos, were 'I want to save our little gun' -- which he later defined as the Mini-14 and the Mini-30. I'm not ascribing Bill's motives as 'expedient from a business standpoint;' Bill did.

"While I agree that a ban on over-15 magazines would be 'indefinitely preferable' to a ban on the guns that use them, that's not the question. Neither I, nor the other gun groups have ever believed that we were faced with such an either/or choice. Early last year the NRA legislative Policy committee discussed various alternatives to the proposed 'assault weapons' ban, and wisely decided that magazine restrictions wouldn't satisfy our foes, but would make it more difficult to stop a gun ban.

"I was particularly shocked when I realized Bill was talking about a ban on possession of over-15-round magazines, rather than a ban on sales (which is bad enough). I told him that such a law would make me a felon, for not only did I have standard over-15 magazines for my Glock pistol (a high-capacity which has sharply cut into Ruger's police business), I have many high-cap mags for guns I don't even own, and don't even know where they all are. As I told Bill, after a lifetime of accumulating miscellaneous gun parts and accessories, there's no way I could clean out all my old parts drawers and boxes, then swear -- subject to a five or ten-year Federal prison term -- that I absolutely didn't have an M3 grease gun mag or 30-round M-2 magazine lying in some forgotten drawer.

""Bill said (and all these direct quotes are approximate). 'No, there'd be amnesty for people like you. We have to propose a ban on possession before they could take us seriously.' He contended that the public's problem was with 'firepower,' which could be resolved by eliminating high capacity mags.

"I told him Metzenbaum and Co. would gladly use whatever he offered, but they weren't about to willingly agree to eliminate high-cap magazines as a substitute for banning guns; that their intention isn't to eliminate 'firepower' but 'firearms.'

"Bill finally said, 'Neal, you're being very negative about it.' He got angry, then said 'Well somebody's got to do it; by God I will.' And the next day he sent his letter to the Hill; the evidence indicates a few weeks later he talked SAAMI into supporting undefined 'regulation' of magazines over-15-rounds -- a vote that might have gone a little differently if any produced high-capacity magazines as standard for either rifles or pistols.

"I suspect that Ruger and SAAMI's actions are responsible, directly or indirectly, for the Bush administration's proposal to ban high-cap mags, but that proposal has been ignored -- except as evidence that 'the Bush administration and the American firearms industry recognize there's a problem -- that Americans shouldn't be allowed to have such guns.'

"Of course, that isn't what Bill Ruger and SAAMI are saying, but that's the message they're sending. Perhaps it isn't business expediency to propose banning only that which they don't make, in an effort to protect what they do make; but it sure can't be claimed to be in defense of the Second Amendment."
Click to expand...

Bill Ruger, OWNER of Strum Ruger, is a traitor to the American people. He can rot in hell as far as I am concerned, as can anyone who takes his side.


[Edited by BB on 04-25-2001 at 09:04 PM]
 
Boy Ruger's Sure are better then most

I sure do like the ruger line of guns. They out perform many of the leading guns. That said I have my 6th one on order.

Tony Z

BTW BB its old news.
 
Oh, so it has to be a current act of treason for you?

Please list what Ruger makes that is better than anything else on the market. Ruger is mediocre at best. A cheap gun for cheapskates with no conscience and no character. Enjoy your little chip at the 2nd ammendment, I'm sure it was a "bargain".
 
I have a P95 and love it.Reliable,accurate and a BARGAIN.[not CHEAP!]
Ruger screwed up with the mag limit thing but they have also donated major $$$ to the NRA and other RKBA organizations since then.
Let us not forget the SAAMI also supported magazine capacity limits.Who are members of the SAAMI? Just about every U.S. gun and ammunition manufacturer!
So if anyone out there needs to clear their conscience EMPTY your gun safe of all those EVIL guns and ammo...and send them to me!
 
Follow up

Glock has also voluntarily been cooperating with BATF on creating ballistic fingerprints of their guns. Taurus, Springfield, and Remington are cooperating with the antis by putting locking devices into their guns. We can find fault with any company if we try hard enough! My GP100 or SP101 can outshoot any comperable gun made. Likewise, I have heard people who own both the well regarded Sig 220 and the P97 state that the p97 will shoot with it all day long accuracy wise.
 
"A cheap gun for cheapskates with no conscience and no character"

I like the fact that TFL posts are usually on the high road :) .

I looked at all available brands of concealable revolvers. I chose the Ruger SP101 2" and paid between 7 and 8 hundred dollars for it (I have misplaced the invoice, but I do remember the first figure being 7). Hardly cheap.

As to character, one of the most valuable of all characteristics is freedom from hatred and resentment. I'd rather be without a gun than to be full of that stuff.
 
BB well said

Who said "united we stand divided we fall"? To bad old bill ruger never heard that one. And with all these people willing to look the other way it seems that you and I will go down fighting beside each other. Keep the faith. Never surrender! Let them buy Rugers, That is almost punishment enough, but I kinda like the rot in hell scenerio too.:)

I'm honest and I think guns with big mags are fun and useful.

Yeah and that's another reason not to buy glock. Like I needed another. -ddt
 
BB said (sorry, I couldn't find the 'reply w/quote' link)

"If you check EVERY gun ban, the Ruger Mini-14 is either not named, or specifically name as exempt. "

The Mini-14, and Mini-30 do not fall under the definition of an "assault rifle". No bayonet lug, no pistol grip, no forward pistol grip, there are a few others. They only thing that it has that would make people think it is an "assault rifle" is that it is a center-fire semiautomatic with a detachable magazine.

I just want to add two things. One, I hate the term "assault rifle", I think it is antigun garbage. And, I think that any law abiding citizen should be able to own whatever kind of gun they want, as long as the keep obeying the laws, obviously this would not mean "assault rifle" laws, this is a hypothetical situation in which those don't exist. Going on, as long as they obey the laws, why shouldn't they own what they want?

Second. I love Rugers, and will buy them as long as they keep making them. And if that means rotting in hell with Bill Ruger, I will be glad. Because that will give me a chance to tell him what great products he made, and how good of a business he ran.
 
Boy! Some of the posts on this thread are starting to sound like the dialogue from a B-grade action movie!
Maybe it's time to put this topic to rest.

[I still LOVE my RUGER]
 
Danno-
Donations to the NRA? Bloodmoney, pure and simple.

ED2000-
As for the Glock, Remington, springfield, etc statement, thats a straw man arguement. There is a very big difference between options and law, I would think most people would know that?
So, your GP100 or SP101 will out shoot "any comperable gun made"? Makes sense- that would be a Taurus, Rossi, Uberti, etc, since Ruger isn't comparable in fit, finish or performance to S&W, Colt or Dan Wesson. Maybe your right!

tyro-
$700+ for an SP101? Not cheap is right, I'd call that robbery. SP101s run in the very low $300 range. So you got ripped off. If I paid $700 for a Bryco, does that mean it ain't a cheap gun of mediocre quality?

MrBlonde-
I don't know if you are aware, but there a whole heck of a lot more gun bans in this country than the Brady Law.


For the record, I don't hate Ruger guns. I don't hate any gun, nor do I love any gun. Guns are inanimate objects, tools, and I find it difficult to produce significant emotional ties to such things. However, I will not forgive those who would attempt to infringe on my rights and my ability to protect those that I DO love. Folks like Sarah Brady, Bill Clinton, Charles Schumer, Diane Feinstein, and BILL RUGER. I will not support them, and I find it disgusting and sickening that gunowners who are aware of what Ruger has done continue to support him, especially since Ruger doesn't make anything that is superior to any product made by another company.
 
"tyro-
$700+ for an SP101? Not cheap is right, I'd call that robbery. SP101s run in the very low $300 range. So you got ripped off. If I paid $700 for a Bryco, does that mean it ain't a cheap gun of mediocre quality?"

The SP101 in question was customized to perfection (Ashley Outdoors Big Dot Tritium front sight, combat precision trigger job, ported barrel, etc.). There was not another gun made by any manufacturer that fit my criteria, and I was happy to pay for superb gunsmithing. Price was NOT a criterion, nor was it in any way at all considered as a factor in the decisions I made regarding the purchase of the gun or the gunsmithing that was applied to it.

I was responding to the charge that I am a "cheapskate" lacking in "character". The facts belie the charge.




[Edited by tyro on 04-27-2001 at 09:43 AM]
 
Funny, you seem to have left the "facts" out in your first post. An obvious deceptive act on your part, therefore confirming my statement on "character" (or lack of).
 
Well, let any and all readers review the above posts and see if the latest charge impugning my character is warrented by anything that is written in any post above (other than in the mind of the person who has impugned my character).

BB wrote: "Funny, you seem to have left the "facts" out in your first post. An obvious deceptive act on your part, therefore confirming my statement on "character" (or lack of)."

Note the difference between the referent in my use of the word "facts" in a prior post above, and the referent in BB's use of the word "facts" in response to that post.

I had posted the "facts" (BB's referent) on so many other threads on the current TFL fora that it seemed redundant to repeat them in this thread. That information was not consciously or purposely withheld. Nor is it even relevant to the discussion. The fact is, I paid a price for the Ruger (regardless of reasons for the price) that belies the accusation that I am a "cheapskate".

I really do not take the ad hominem attacks to heart. 'Just interested in accuracy and truth :) ...

[Edited by tyro on 04-27-2001 at 03:23 PM]
 
Gentlemen Please!

We are all brothers under the gun.

These personal attacks get us no where. We, who care for our respective causes, should try to make our points intelligently. These issues of politics can easily rile because they are pretty damned important. If we get too bitchy we might as well be on Oprah for pete's sake. I am not casting stones as I have been guilty of it myself.

It's funny how this country had to bind together several times to succede against great odds. In times of peace we turn on each other like hungry dogs.(how we stay tough) But fellas, that's just what "the man" wants. Us divided. When "the man" doesn't like the way things are going, "he" instigates in fighting, breeding mistrust, creating enemies where there used to be none, etc.

I mean really, do you want to give some anonymous voice in cyberspace enough power to piss you off. You can never tell if the guy on the other end is a teenage kid or "the man".

That said, it would sure be nice if Ruger and Ruger fans could support RKBA a little more fervently but I guess it's like crack to em. As long as they can get their fix, they don't give a rat's ass for the rest of us. I guess I'm just not impressed that easily. I like Ruger but much prefered S&W(here is where I spit...ptui) for the triggers. It hurts me not to buy a 686 .357 but hey man, they pissed on the bill of rights. -ddt
 
I am not just talking about the Brady Law, I am using those examples, because most "assault rifle" laws list those as definitions of "assault rifles".

About comparing Rugers to Brycos, that is like comparing a Chevy Caprice to a Geo Metro(not a very good analogy, because Chevy owns Geo, but I will still use it). About comparing Bill Ruger to Diane Feinstein, does Diane Feinstein make guns? Does she own stock in her own gun company? Has she ever said that she is wrong about what she has said?

What I said earlier still stands. If what BB said will happen, then I hope to see you in hell, Bill. Give me a chance to tell you "thanks" for the fine Ruger products I have been fortunate enough to use.
 
Follow up

FYI, my Rugers can shoot with or outshoot any S&W. The fit and finish are equal or better too. There have been numerous articles in the gun rags comparing things such as accuract of the 686 and GP100 - results showed them as equal in every article. My best GP100 has a factory trigger that is better than my fathers S&W.

I never intended any of my remarks to be personal. I appologize if they were. I know my Rugers are quality. I also realize some of their models are less than perfect, but they are the exception to their lineup.

I for one am not happy with Ruger's actions on the 2nd amendment. But there aren't any other companies making the guns I desire. For example, I can get a Ruger P97, but Glock want make a comperable gun. Taurus is very rough in general. S&W, well, I am boycotting them and I don't think they are all they are cracked up to be anyway. I had to many problems with their 3rd generation autos.

Anyway, I'll keep buying Rugers and will buy other brands that make what I want. I encourage you to do what your conscience leads you to. And, I wish you well.

Incidently, regarding another post. I think the Ruger family only owns about 25% of the company, but I am having trouble finding the details on it. I think the majority of their stock is owned by institutions. I'm curious, so I'll keep looking.
 
BB-
I see from one of your posts on another thread that you own a Makarov,would that be a BULGARIAN,EAST GERMAN,RUSSIAN or CHINESE?
Now,I understand there have been various degrees of "reform" in most of these countries but to quote you -

"Oh,so it has to be a CURRENT act of treason for you?"

I would rank my MAKAROV right up there on the top of favorites with my RUGER P95.

Yes sir, that Makarov is one fine double standard...uh...
double ACTION pistol!
 
Danno-
Please explain how owning a relic produced in a former communist country by slave labor and not supporting an american in a free market who wishes to restrict my right to protect my family is a double standard?

ED2000-
Just so I have this straight, you are boycotting S&W for controlling their product (strictly voluntary controls I might add), yet you support a company that LOBBIED FOR LEGISLATION that restricts not only their own product, but every other manufacturers product, as well as every gun owner? Just wanted to get that clear.

[Edited by BB on 04-28-2001 at 03:16 PM]
 
BB-
I'll try to explain it as simply as possible.
You will notice the word "REFORM" used in my last post.

REFORM v. - To reconstruct,make over,or change something for the better;improve;to abandon or give up evil ways.
[Thank you Webster!]

In MY opinion that is exactly what RUGER and many of the former COMMUNIST COUNTRIES have done.

I am willing to FORGIVE anyone if I feel they have REFORMED.

FORGIVE v. - To pardon;to cease to feel resentment against.

BB,I think we have reached the point where we will have to agree that we disagree!

I wish all the best to you friend.Good shooting!

Danno
 
BB, you have some of it right. I am sure you know the S&W agreement was more than what your statement suggested it was. Ruger has at least tried to make amends. For example, they gave the NRA $1 million. However, there is nothing they can do to redeem themselves in the eyes of some people. As I am sure you know, S&W has continued to antagonize their customers. Ruger seems the lesser of two evils to me. And, as I stated before, you can find fault with the policies of virtually any current firearms maker if you look closely enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top