It's strange that gun manufacturers and pro-gun organizations can forget who is paying their bills (the customers) when they give in to or compromise with the government in order to gain something. Gun owners have long memories, so when they slap us around, it is firmly ingrained in our memories. Those that betray us lose our business.
As it should be. We, the Armed Citizens need to realize that not all manufacturers and dealers are solidly pro 2A. Its up to us to call them out with our purchasing decisions when they betray us over their own self-interest.
I think the whole problem can be traced back to that lobbyist. He was hired by Springfield and RR to represent them. The two company CEOs have a lot on thier plate and they are not legal experts. A smart CEO hires people to do for him what he is not capable of doing. That lobbyist had a lot of leeway to make decisions and not even most decisions were related to the CEOs on the spot. Rather a summary was compiled every 3-6 months to keep SA and RR informed. Neither of those two CEOs were aware of what the lobbyist even did until after the fact, and they immediately fired the lobbyist (who publicly assumed all responsibility).
Bad decision on his part? Yes. Blame the individual CEOs? Not sure that would be fair. Punish each company into oblivion - a horrible thing to do.
But, at least the other companies, seeing the reaction and knowing the potential consequences...now have thier eyes wide open and fear making any such mistakes
Hey Cheryl, great question, no nothing is happening now (that I know of) and there is no reason to post, other than 'shining light' on things in our history some of us remember very well, and others have never known about. I've done a series here on similar issues from S&W and Ruger as well. Part of this will fill gaps in the Minuteman University project as well
I believe both Ruger and S&W both got in hot water with owners for statements and actions during the AWB years. That said I was all of 5 when that happened.
to give a bit more than just hearsay: Bill (Ruger) had said during an interview that no honest man needed a magazine larger than ten rounds, which became the standard for the AWB.
S&W agreed to sell the infamous internal locks on their guns in 2000 and include ballistic fingerprints for all firearms. i was incorrect on the date for that one.
I think the whole problem can be traced back to that lobbyist. He was hired by Springfield and RR to represent them. The two company CEOs have a lot on thier plate and they are not legal experts. A smart CEO hires people to do for him what he is not capable of doing. That lobbyist had a lot of leeway to make decisions and not even most decisions were related to the CEOs on the spot. Rather a summary was compiled every 3-6 months to keep SA and RR informed. Neither of those two CEOs were aware of what the lobbyist even did until after the fact, and they immediately fired the lobbyist (who publicly assumed all responsibility).
Bad decision on his part? Yes. Blame the individual CEOs? Not sure that would be fair. Punish each company into oblivion - a horrible thing to do.
But, at least the other companies, seeing the reaction and knowing the potential consequences...now have thier eyes wide open and fear making any such mistakes
It's strange that gun manufacturers and pro-gun organizations can forget who is paying their bills (the customers) when they give in to or compromise with the government in order to gain something. Gun owners have long memories, so when they slap us around, it is firmly ingrained in our memories. Those that betray us lose our business.
As it should be. We, the Armed Citizens need to realize that not all manufacturers and dealers are solidly pro 2A. Its up to us to call them out with our purchasing decisions when they betray us over their own self-interest.
FYI, they dont like it one bit!
I think the whole problem can be traced back to that lobbyist. He was hired by Springfield and RR to represent them. The two company CEOs have a lot on thier plate and they are not legal experts. A smart CEO hires people to do for him what he is not capable of doing. That lobbyist had a lot of leeway to make decisions and not even most decisions were related to the CEOs on the spot. Rather a summary was compiled every 3-6 months to keep SA and RR informed. Neither of those two CEOs were aware of what the lobbyist even did until after the fact, and they immediately fired the lobbyist (who publicly assumed all responsibility).
Bad decision on his part? Yes. Blame the individual CEOs? Not sure that would be fair. Punish each company into oblivion - a horrible thing to do.
But, at least the other companies, seeing the reaction and knowing the potential consequences...now have thier eyes wide open and fear making any such mistakes
I think this is the first I’ve heard about this! What prompted you to post it today? Is something similar brewing nowadays?
Hey Cheryl, great question, no nothing is happening now (that I know of) and there is no reason to post, other than 'shining light' on things in our history some of us remember very well, and others have never known about. I've done a series here on similar issues from S&W and Ruger as well. Part of this will fill gaps in the Minuteman University project as well
I believe both Ruger and S&W both got in hot water with owners for statements and actions during the AWB years. That said I was all of 5 when that happened.
they depend on us forgetting our history
to give a bit more than just hearsay: Bill (Ruger) had said during an interview that no honest man needed a magazine larger than ten rounds, which became the standard for the AWB.
S&W agreed to sell the infamous internal locks on their guns in 2000 and include ballistic fingerprints for all firearms. i was incorrect on the date for that one.
Springfield makes shit guns anyway. Fuck those guys.
I think the whole problem can be traced back to that lobbyist. He was hired by Springfield and RR to represent them. The two company CEOs have a lot on thier plate and they are not legal experts. A smart CEO hires people to do for him what he is not capable of doing. That lobbyist had a lot of leeway to make decisions and not even most decisions were related to the CEOs on the spot. Rather a summary was compiled every 3-6 months to keep SA and RR informed. Neither of those two CEOs were aware of what the lobbyist even did until after the fact, and they immediately fired the lobbyist (who publicly assumed all responsibility).
Bad decision on his part? Yes. Blame the individual CEOs? Not sure that would be fair. Punish each company into oblivion - a horrible thing to do.
But, at least the other companies, seeing the reaction and knowing the potential consequences...now have thier eyes wide open and fear making any such mistakes