[1911JMB]

I got the chance to bump dump a 50 round magazine from a Mini 14, and the rifles owner explained to me that the mag is an aftermarket piece because Ruger only sells Mini mags that hold more than 5 shots to cops. Why would they do that? They have high capacity pistols, and they don't seem to be against civilians having those. I am puzzled by this one.

[ArmedBear]

A lot of people are really down on Ruger for this.

However, I see this a bit differently.

Ruger sells a 5-shot semiautomatic ranch gun with a detachable magazine for convenience and safe loading/unloading. Clearly this isn't an "assault rifle."

Their finesse may well be the reason that the gun wasn't banned by the Feds, and is even still legal in California. The Saiga, which is functionally identical to the Mini-30, is banned in California.

Ruger sells followers, so you can fix up an aftermarket mag with a factory follower, BTW.

[cane]

There are Ruger "police only" 20 round mini-14 magazines available, just have to look for them. Ruger never made a magazine larger than 5 rounds for the Mini-30.

[itgoesboom]

A lot of people are really down on Ruger for this.

However, I see this a bit differently.

Ruger sells a 5-shot semiautomatic ranch gun with a detachable magazine for convenience and safe loading/unloading. Clearly this isn't an "assault rifle."


Yet they still sell Law Enforcment Officers and agencies hi-cap rifle magazines for those very same non-"assault rifles". :barf:

Once again, we are merely peasants, subject to different rules.

Their finesse may well be the reason that the gun wasn't banned by the Feds, and is even still legal in California. The Saiga, which is functionally identical to the Mini-30, is banned in California.

What saved the Mini-14 during the AWB wasn't finesse. It was being a traitor to the 2nd amendment.

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 rifles" 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 prohibit their possession or sale and would effectively implement these objectives.

That is what Bill Ruger wrote to several members of congress in 1989, 5 years before the AWB.

Here are other fun quotes from Bill Ruger.

No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun.
I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20 or 30 round magazines or my folding stock.
I see nothing wrong with waiting periods.

While Bill Ruger is dead and gone, no doubt he has had an influence on the current policy of his company.

The Saiga, which is functionally identical to the Mini-30, is banned in California.

It is not functionally identical to the Mini-30. The Saiga is functionally an AK-47 action, therefor automatically banned in California. The Mini-30/14 are not AK-47 actions, therefore, not automatically banned in California.

I.G.B.

[Rockstar]

They don't produce "real cap" mags for the general public because they're jackasses. That's the only reason. Period.

[itgoesboom]

They don't produce "real cap" mags for the general public because they're jackasses. That's the only reason. Period.

Exactly.

Anyone still believe that Ruger cares about our gun rights?

I.G.B.

[ArmedBear]

It is not functionally identical to the Mini-30. The Saiga is functionally an AK-47 action, therefor automatically banned in California. The Mini-30/14 are not AK-47 actions, therefore, not automatically banned in California.

So wait...

A removable-box-magazine-fed gas-operated semiautomatic centerfire rifle with a traditional pistol grip "sporter" wood stock, in caliber 7.62x39 is different functionally in exactly what way from a removable-box-magazine-fed gas-operated semiautomatic centerfire rifle with a traditional pistol grip "sporter" wood stock, in caliber 7.62x39?

:rolleyes:

Okay, let me guess... the Kalashnikov doesn't have last shot hold open?

You're missing the point about assault weapon legislation.

As far as Bill Ruger, hey, I don't like that about him, either, nor do I particularly care for much of his firearm aesthetic. But the fact remains that Ruger the company treads lightly around the assault weapon thing, so it can avoid bans on its products, and because of that I have a Mini-14 Ranch Rifle I could buy in California, while many rifles with identical function were banned.

[railroader]

http://www.deltaforce.com/catalog/riflemagazines.html PMI 40 rounders here. Mark

[Dmack_901]

Let's not bicker over the specifics of the Mini30 v. Sagai actions. They provide the same function through different implementation.

Getting back to the point; Ruger is French at heart. If it wern't for the fact that they sell guns, they'd support banning them.

[hkmp5g17]

Here we go again!:rolleyes:

[Don't Tread On Me]

Ruger is pretty bad, they might just be the worst of the worst in terms of our RKBA. Most of the hate against Colt is just nonsense, most of it revolves around why Colt won't sell their main AR lines with "evil features". I don't know, they aren't even a major player in the civilian AR market compared to Bushmaster and others. They do sell their "evil" LE rifles to civilians though.

S&W cut that sell-out deal with the Klintonistas, but that is gone, and the new ownership is making up with us. Ruger is the worst. It was they who profited from the magazine capacity ban. 10rds was a convenient number for them. They have actively worked against our RKBA. I have not heard any apologies or seen any changes in their policies regarding the sale of EFFECTIVE arms and magazines. Thus, in my mind, they're just another bunch of anti-gunners who only see the 2nd Amendment as a sporting use.


This is why I will never buy a Ruger firearm. Their arms are for sportsmen. I buy military-style arms for PATRIOTS.

[Cosmoline]

Around and around we go. The anti-Ruger brigade will never forgive the modern company for the dead founder's political stance decades ago. I've finished trying to pound sense into their thick skulls. It's more Rugers for me.

[Don't Tread On Me]

It's called supply and demand. There are many people that own Rugers and would like larger capacity magazines. Ruger does not produce despite the obvious demand.

That is the "modern" policy also.

It is their right to not manufacture or sell anything they don't want to. Perhaps they would like to steer clear of anything they perceive of as "assault" or "military" style. It is also my right to not buy anything from them for whatever reason I choose. I don't know their rationale 100%. Perhaps they'd like to avoid having their products banned? Perhaps they are one of those "feel-good" type companies that gets in good with law-enforcment and thinks that not selling a 20rd magazine saves officers lives? Maybe they are just the epitome of those types who believe that the 2nd Amendment is about duck-hunting, and not about blowing holes through tyrannical politicians? Maybe it was for money? Why not ban competition? You know, all those cheap imports and evil-assault rifles that accept large magazines that everyone was buying instead of Billy's rifles. Sure. Make it 10rds, that won't affect ANY of Ruger's products, but it will surely damage the competition.


Bottom line. Bill Ruger had his little conference with Bill Clinton, and we ALL know what became of that!


Thanks a lot Ruger.

[Bigfoot]

Bill Ruger had his little conference with Bill Clinton, and we ALL know what became of that!

He saw Clinton getting um, favors and it gave him a heart attack?

[itgoesboom]

Around and around we go. The anti-Ruger brigade will never forgive the modern company for the dead founder's political stance decades ago. I've finished trying to pound sense into their thick skulls. It's more Rugers for me.

I have said previously that if Ruger distanced themselves from Bill Ruger and the way that he shafted gun owners, I would have no problem with the company. Bill is dead.

But, his policies live on in the company today. That is why I choose not to support them.

As for the Saiga vs. the Mini, the point I was trying to make is that it doesn't matter how innocent looking the Saiga is, it is still an AK and therefore banned by name in the AWB.

The mini isn't banned because it doesn't have all the evil features, and isn't banned by name.

I.G.B.

[22/22mag]

I have a Bushmaster .223 with a load of 30 rd mags from Colt,Bushmaster, and a few other AR companys.Funny how they don't worry about high cap mags going to us dirty nasty gun buyers.
I have a Mini-30 with 10, 20, +30 rd aftermarket mags that work
......Out of the big box of aftermarket mags that did not Work..
My Mini-30 dosen't like Wolf ammo but shoot WWB or other rounds without a hitch .Even though it shoots well I am still pissed I had to go to the trouble and expence for more then a 5 rd mag.When I find a 7,62x39 to replace it it will be sold.Thank you ruger!

[1911JMB]

Well, I love ruger guns, but I suppose you guys have in effect talked me out of ever buying another new one.

One minor point. They did for a long time sell the AC-556 to civilians. Does anybody know if they would only sell 5 rounders to you if you bought one? That would seem absolutely idiotic.

[KaceCoyote]

Anyone notice how only their 9mm pistols had to be altered under the AWB? Coincidence?

[bakert]

Say what you will about Bill Ruger's stance on high cap magazines, he armed one helluva lot of civilians with absolutely reliable and affordable guns!!

[AZ Jeff]

But, his policies live on in the company today. That is why I choose not to support them.
I assume that, to prevent being seen as hypocritical, you avoid Colt for the same reason. Am I correct?

[itgoesboom]

Don't own a single colt. Have no desire to.

I.G.B.

[AZ Jeff]

Don't own a single colt. Have no desire to.
I congratulate you on being a man of your word. So now I will ask the corollary question--IF (hypothetically) Colt were to introduce a product that you found attractive (and was NOT a copy of something produced by others), would you buy it?

If the answer is "NO way, no how", then you are a man of your word. If the answer is anything else, you become like so many others who villify Sturm, Ruger, & Co., but not other companies with similar policies.

[Master Blaster]

Personally I think that this is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

If we put all of the american companies under by not buying their products, who willmake guns for us and support our RKBA??????

Glock, Berretta, HK, SIG

Not a chance.

Good luck

[KaceCoyote]

Glock, Beretta, Sig, marlin, Bushmaster, armalite, DS arms, remmington, H&K, CZ...... want me to go on?

[Lambo]

I'll never purchase another Ruger Product because of this Policy! The same for S&W!

[itgoesboom]

I congratulate you on being a man of your word. So now I will ask the corollary question--IF (hypothetically) Colt were to introduce a product that you found attractive (and was NOT a copy of something produced by others), would you buy it?

Colt makes several firearms that I currently would like to purchase. My lack of desire is not based on what they currently offer, it is based on other factors, including the factor we are discussing now.

Fortunatly, in the firearm industry, we have plenty of options as to which companies to support.

If the answer is "NO way, no how", then you are a man of your word. If the answer is anything else, you become like so many others who villify Sturm, Ruger, & Co., but not other companies with similar policies.

There is a difference between Colt and Ruger though, and it really needs to be noted.

Bill Ruger, while speaking as the head of Ruger, wrote a letter to congress, advocating a ban on standard capacity magazines. He then went on TV and made other statements like: I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20 or 30 round magazines or my folding stock.

Bill Ruger, as the head of Ruger, spoke out against our rights to own firearms, something that is unacceptable from a firearm maker.

Colt hasn't done that, as far as I know. If they have, I would love to see it, so that I can start seriously bashing them like I do Ruger.

Now, I should also mention here, that before I knew this about Ruger, I purchased a .357 Blackhawk, something I regret, not because of the quality, obviously that is very high. But I unknowingly supported Ruger when I wish I hadn't.

After Bill Ruger Sr. died in 2002, I figured his policies had died with him, so I figured I could once again support the company. So I bought a 22/45. Unfortunatly, I was wrong, and after the '94 AWB sunset, and Ruger still refused to sell the same mags to civilains that they sold to Police and Government agencies.

So at this point, even though I would love to pick up a 10/22, as well as one of their new scout style rifles, I will hold off, soley based on that company's position.

I should also mention that I don't want Ruger to go out of business. Quite the opposite. But I would prefer that Ruger learns to support the rights of those who support their company. If they won't do that, then they should go out of business.

I.G.B.

[KaceCoyote]

^ what he said^


Hurting our rights to make business aint cool. We're customers, if we want them to change we have to talk with our money not our keyboard. Ruger will NEVER change as long as they continue to make money, why should they?

[seeker_two]

Ruger CEO's: Repeat after me...

No man needs a magazine smaller than a canned ham....


:D

[George S.]

Now that Bill Jr. (CEO) has left the company along with Joe Strasser (Director), it might be interesting to see if Ruger will take a new direction.

The new CEO is Vice Admiral James E Service (ret) named on the 24th of February.

[Carl N. Brown]

If ruger does not want to sale high cap rifle mags, I dont care.
The shell ejection on my son's FAL is much more civilized than
being right side of a Mini14 anyway.
Just kidding.
I have high cap mags for my M1 Tompson, M1 carbine, etc.
I would not mind a Mini-14 either (even with a five shot
integral mauser type mag.) I never get more than three
shots at game anyway.

[blackhawk2000]

Bill is dead. May he rot in hell. Ruger the company could be forgiven, yet they still mantain the same policy. May they also rot in hell.

[AZ Jeff]

Bill is dead. May he rot in hell. Ruger the company could be forgiven, yet they still mantain the same policy. May they also rot in hell.
This has been discussed before, and as usual, people get Ruger the man and Ruger the company blended into one entity, and villify both equally.

While Ruger Sr. the man should be villified for his comments, the fact is that there is no CURRENT OFFICIAL POLICY at Ruger the company to prohibit sales of "high capacity" magazines for their rifles. They may be doing so in action, and as such, that's a "bad thing".

However, if we are going to jump on Ruger the company for not offering 30 and 30 round magazines for their self-loading rifles, you had best jump on Colt as well, as they have an almost identical policy that is WRITTEN, unlike the one at Ruger that is NOT written.

People are all PO'd a Ruger the man, and still are punishing the company, but they seem to give a "pass" to other companies that act almost identically. That's hipocracy, (or ignorance) plain and simple.

[itgoesboom]

This has been discussed before, and as usual, people get Ruger the man and Ruger the company blended into one entity, and villify both equally.

I am not mistaking them. I was upset at Bill Ruger for stabbing us in the back. I am mad at Sturm, Ruger & Co. because they treat civilians differently then LEOs by not selling high-cap magazines to civilians.

While Ruger Sr. the man should be villified for his comments, the fact is that there is no CURRENT OFFICIAL POLICY at Ruger the company to prohibit sales of "high capacity" magazines for their rifles. They may be doing so in action, and as such, that's a "bad thing".

That current action that Ruger is taking to prevent sales of high-cap magazines to civilians is the current issue. But what we are seeing is a pattern, and it is a disturbing pattern. Bill Ruger fights against our firearms rights and claims that "no honest man needs more than 10 rounds" and now Sturm Ruger & Co. refuse to sell high-cap rifle magazines to civilains.

That is a pattern, and we are just connecting the dots for those who didn't know the history.

However, if we are going to jump on Ruger the company for not offering 30 and 30 round magazines for their self-loading rifles, you had best jump on Colt as well, as they have an almost identical policy that is WRITTEN, unlike the one at Ruger that is NOT written.

That's intresting. That is actually the first I have ever heard of Colt's policy not to sell high-cap magazines.

I knew that they were marketing their rifles differently based on LEO vs. Civilian (although they all can be purchased by civilians), but hadn't heard about that policy.

People are all PO'd a Ruger the man, and still are punishing the company, but they seem to give a "pass" to other companies that act almost identically. That's hipocracy, (or ignorance) plain and simple.

As I said before, after Ruger the man died, I gave the company another chance, a fresh clean slate. Only after that, when they refused to sell high-cap rifle mags to civilians have I really given up on the company.

Here is the ironic part. This all comes down to their position regarding the Mini-14.

I don't own a Mini-14. I think it is a great design in concept, but let down in actuallity, so I probably will never own one. So their policy has no real direct effect on me. I want a 10/22, but since they don't market high-caps to LEOs, it doesn't bother me that they aren't available. But I still won't buy the 10/22 because of the way their company is acting.

I feel that their policy is an affront to gun owners. Especially since it can be argued that Bill Ruger gave the anti's the idea for a magazine ban. It is kinda like Sturm Ruger & Co saying, "well, we still believe that Bill was right".

That is what pisses me off, and why I go off on Ruger fairly often.

I.G.B.

[cracked butt]

I think that Old Bill wa cranked off that imported SKSs and AK-47 clones were not only better guns than his mini-14/30 but were cheaper to purchase. The only way he could compete with them is to get on the magazine banning bandwagon. The mini is a neat/attractive gun but I'll never own one if for only this reason alone (beside the fact that they group like shotguns out of the box). I hope the Ruger Co. is listening to their potential customers, but somehow I doubt that they will.

[Shell Shucker]

Rugers policies on the mini's magazine capacity has baffled me from the beginining, way before the crime bill. They sold/sell pistols with 15 round mags yet only sell 5 round (10 round rimfire) rifle mags. What gives? If they were truely taking THR towards EVIL guns they would have not made the mini in the first place! They could have made it to use 8 round clips like an M-1 Garand..... But NO, they are counting on the after market to make hi-cap mags that make thier guns SALEABLE while they hide behind some sort of PC company policy. True HIPOCRACY in my mind.

[beerslurpy]

The Saiga is functionally an AK-47 action, therefor automatically banned in California.

Stop saying stuff like this. It isnt true. You are polluting the forum with your ignorance. Either do proper research or remain silent.

The Kalashnikov USA Saiga is banned. (no longer imported)
The EAA Saiga is not. (no longer imported)
The RAAC Saiga/IZH-xxx series is not. (currently imported)


Harrott v. County of Kings (25 P.3d 649 (Cal. 2001)
“Our construction of the statute, holding that a trial court may not find a semiautomatic firearm to be a series assault weapon under section 12276, subdivision (e), unless the firearm has first been included in the list of series assault weapons promulgated by the Attorney General pursuant to section 12276.5, subdivision (h), best serves the legislative goal we have just described. A contrary interpretation would be inconsistent with the legislative goal because owners of unlisted weapons would still be unsure whether they had to comply with the registration requirement.”


The attorney general actually has to announce which guns are banned or not because of the above case, in which the concept of a "AK/AR series assault weapon" was essentially abolished as being so vague that it violated due process. The series exists, but the AG has to specifically name all guns in the series, at which point the manufacturers just go and change the names and all the owners of those weapons register them and add all the evil features back.

“A law failing to give a person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited violates due process under both the federal and California Constitutions. (Grayned v. City of Rockford (1972) 408 U.S. 104, 108; People v. Heitzman (1994) 9 Cal. 4th 189, 199.)” (Kasler, supra, 23 Cal.4th at pp. 498-499.)”

[Logan5]

When I bought my Mini 14, it came from the factory with scope rings and two 20 round magazines. I'm not going to pay $45 a pop for more factory mags, but I'm not selling off the whole bundle either. I'm not sure why they've gone crazy, but my guess would be that they were gambling on selling the Mini to agencies that wanted AR capabilities in a package with the ignorant friendly image of a Winchester 94, and it didn't work out. Now they wish they'd never rolled the dice and lost, and try to lump the "civillian" Mini in with the Single Six and 10/22 as a marketing matter, "hey hey, All American shooting hunting heritage, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain..."
It's essentially a product placement and marketing flop on a massive scale; they don't care if we, as individuals buy one or not. The idea was that governmental agencies would buy in bulk, and the only notable success in selling AC556's was to the A-team. Result: what we see now.

[AZ Jeff]

That's intresting. That is actually the first I have ever heard of Colt's policy not to sell high-cap magazines.

I knew that they were marketing their rifles differently based on LEO vs. Civilian (although they all can be purchased by civilians), but hadn't heard about that policy.

Colt has a stated policy that they segregate the sales of AR-15's into two categories: law enforcement and "civilian".

One cannot buy 20 round magazines (and certain AR-15 variants) through the "civilian" commerical channels of Colt. They do not offer them as a matter of corporate policy.

There ARE distributors and retailers that circumvent that Colt corporate policy, either overtly or covertly, but the fact is, Colt engages in practices almost identical (if not more egregious) than those Ruger practices.

In spite of this, most persons who rant and rave about Ruger don't raise a peep about this practice at Colt. This, I believe, is because all anyone remembers is the utterances of Ruger, the man.

The fact is that Ruger, the company, is not the only ones who have engaged in such onerous practices.

[AZ Jeff]

It's essentially a product placement and marketing flop on a massive scale;
While the Mini-14 may not be a military and law enforcement sucess, it's pretty difficult to say that product has been a marketing flop.

Ruger has been offering that rifle since 1974, and I would venture to guess that Ruger does not think of it as a marketing failure.

[Justin]

If we put all of the american companies under by not buying their products, who willmake guns for us and support our RKBA??????

Standard economics. Even if every US gunmaker went under tomorrow, there'd be at least half-a-dozen new startups manufacturing firearms by about lunchtime, next Thursday. If there's a market for something, somebody will step up and fill it.

As for the attempt to divine some difference from the philosophy of "Ruger, the man" from "Ruger, the company" that's hogwash. Ruger set the policy, and advocated the passage of laws prohibiting so-called "high capacity" magazines in an attempt to do two things:

1) Hamstring Glock, whose sales had been eating into Ruger's.
2) Protect the mini-14 (and possibly 10/22) from being outlawed.

Now, Ruger could probably be forgiven for #2. The political winds were exceedingly anti-gun at the time, and I can understand why Ruger would try to make a deal with the devil in order to save his product. But that doesn't mean I have to like it.

Bill Ruger, was, at the time, not only employed by Ruger, but the freaking chief executive! For crying out loud, he had people within the company draft model legislation for the magazine ban!

If Steve Forbes started making public appearances wherein he praised Joseph Stalin and Marxism, and then went out and hired Ward Churchill to write for his magazine, I guess that'd be ok? I mean, hey, that's just, like, Steve Forbes' opinion, man.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=29698&stc=1

Bill Ruger's misguided attempts to assuage the anti-gun lobby were, in hindsight a bad idea. The political climate with regard to guns is much, much better now than it was fifteen or twenty years ago, and I can understand, to some extent, why a tired old man would be pessimistic. That Ruger still acts like the ban is in effect is, quite frankly, stupid and pig headed. If they were smart, they would have quietly done away with the infantile corporate policy of refusing sale of non-neutered magazines to the public.

Full disclosure:
I bought one of these (http://www.gunbroker.com/rep/USARuger/USARuger.asp) yesterday.

[AZ Jeff]

Justin,

My points in separating Ruger, the man, and Ruger, the company, was this:

1. We all know that Ruger, the man, made proclamations about magazine restrictions being acceptable. That was, and is, a "bad thing". No doubt his personal beliefs were instrumental in creating the policy that is in place.

2. Since the death of the AWB, the Ruger policy appears to have been somewhat rescinded in so far as Ruger is again selling high-cap magazines for their centerfire pistols, but not their Mini-14 rifle.

3. Everyone is jumping up and down about Ruger's lack of willingness to sell magazines of over 5 rounds for the Min-14, and while that's warranted, why is no one giving Colt (and others) similar attention? It would seem warranted.

4. It's my contention that the main reason Sturm, Ruger & Co. gets tarred and feathered over this policy is because the now-deceased founder opened his mouth and alienated a bunch of his customer base. In contrast, Colt did NOT have a spokesman who was vociferous in the same way. Consequently, Colt's policy, which is just as onerous, has not attracted the same amount of attention, although IT SHOULD.

[itgoesboom]

Stop saying stuff like this. It isnt true. You are polluting the forum with your ignorance. Either do proper research or remain silent.

The Kalashnikov USA Saiga is banned. (no longer imported)
The EAA Saiga is not. (no longer imported)
The RAAC Saiga/IZH-xxx series is not. (currently imported)

Nice attack there Slurpy. The rest of us have been playing nice and you start hurling insults.

Anyways, that appears to be a change due more to what names is stamped on the side based on importation, and the fact that the AG now has to ID every single manufacturer or importer (?). A couple years ago, when I was there, and active in the politics and dealing with it on a daily basis, that wasn't the case.

A few years ago, any and all AK actions were deemed "Assault Weapons" and not allowed to be purchased.

A simple "Things have changed and now you can buy certain Saigas (according to Calguns atleast)" would have sufficed.

Sorry I haven't kept up on all the recent changes :rolleyes:

Ofcourse, good luck finding anyone who will import the Saiga into California due to one of it's names being listed on the DOJ list.

Do you have anything to add regarding the Ruger issue?


I.G.B.

[Justin]

4. It's my contention that the main reason Sturm, Ruger & Co. gets tarred and feathered over this policy is because the now-deceased founder opened his mouth and alienated a bunch of his customer base. In contrast, Colt did NOT have a spokesman who was vociferous in the same way. Consequently, Colt's policy, which is just as onerous, has not attracted the same amount of attention, although IT SHOULD.

Bingo.

[1 old 0311]

Ruger can sink into the dust of history:cuss: :cuss: :cuss:

Kevin

[JohnBT]

I'm boycotting Marlin and Remington because they refuse to make handguns. It's my right to own a handgun and I demand that they act like true Americans and make some.

John

[AZ Jeff]

Ruger can sink into the dust of history
I assume you feel the same way about Colt, for the reasons I cited earlier in this thread. Am I correct?

[itgoesboom]

I'm boycotting Marlin and Remington because they refuse to make handguns. It's my right to own a handgun and I demand that they act like true Americans and make some.

John

Have Marlin and Remington actively participated in trying to prevent you from being able to own handguns?

Didn't think so.

Have Marlin and Remington made handguns available for Law Enforcement that they haven't made available for "simple civilians"?

Didn't think so.

Let's keep the comparisons here logical, even if you are trying to be satirical.

I.G.B.

[itgoesboom]

Ruger can sink into the dust of history

Kevin

I assume you feel the same way about Colt, for the reasons I cited earlier in this thread. Am I correct?

Personally I would prefer to not see either company fade away. I would prefer both companies to prosper, while at the same time supporting our rights.

BTW, thank you Jeff for pointing out the Colt issue, and claryifing that for me. Some of that I hadn't heard before, and it definatly makes Colt stick on the "won't buy" list for me.

I.G.B.

[AZ Jeff]

Have Marlin and Remington made handguns available for Law Enforcement that they haven't made available for "simple civilians"?
If I am not mistaken, Remington currently makes models of the M700 rifle that are intended for sales to LE only, and they attempt to restrict those models from "civilian" customers. If that's true, that's behaving like Colt does with the AR-15 sales.

[blackhawk2000]

Colt can rot in hell too, as far as I am concerned.

People aren't mentioning colt because the discussion was about ruger.


ETA: Remington can KMA too for putting dimples in 870's to limit mag capacity.

[AZ Jeff]

People aren't mentioning colt because the discussion was about ruger.
People virtually NEVER mention this fact about Colt, even when the discussion topic IS Colt.

I am not saying what Colt or Ruger does is right, but the fact is, people single out Ruger, when there are other companies that deserve equal derision. That's just hypocritical.

[1 old 0311]

Hi AZ Jeff,

You are correct about Colt. Both them, and Ruger, turned their backs on the people who built their companies. My money does not go to those who sell us out, when the going gets tough. When they both go into chapter 13 I will buy the beer.

Kevin

[Carl N. Brown]

Ruger does not make high cap revolvers either.
No honest man needs more that six shots.;)
Heck, NEF aka H&R 1871 makes nothing but single shots.

Maybe Ruger not marketing high capacity magazines, and Bill Ruger's
odd ball attitude, helps show how pointless the 1994 AWB was.

Bill Ruger's attitude also helped make the after-market suppliers
market healthier.

[itgoesboom]

People virtually NEVER mention this fact about Colt, even when the discussion topic IS Colt.

I am not saying what Colt or Ruger does is right, but the fact is, people single out Ruger, when there are other companies that deserve equal derision. That's just hypocritical.

You actually hit it on the head earlier when you said this:

4. It's my contention that the main reason Sturm, Ruger & Co. gets tarred and feathered over this policy is because the now-deceased founder opened his mouth and alienated a bunch of his customer base. In contrast, Colt did NOT have a spokesman who was vociferous in the same way. Consequently, Colt's policy, which is just as onerous, has not attracted the same amount of attention, although IT SHOULD.

Colt hasn't attracted the attention because they didn't specifically fight against our rights.

Because of that, much of what they have done has gone under the radar, and many of us haven't heard about it.

Ruger on the other hand, through Bill Ruger's actions and words has attracted our attention. It's bad enough treating civilains and LEOs differently, when there is no law preventing equal sales and treatment, but Bill Ruger specifically stabbed us in the back.

Ofcourse, now that he is dead, that would be forgiven by many of us. In fact it was forgiven at one time by me.

But their current policy, which is bad enough on it's own, just reminds us of Bill's old position, and makes us look at the company in the same light as Bill Ruger.

I.G.B.

[itgoesboom]

Ruger does not make high cap revolvers either.
No honest man needs more that six shots.
Heck, NEF aka H&R 1871 makes nothing but single shots.

Maybe Ruger not marketing high capacity magazines, and Bill Ruger's
odd ball attitude, helps show how pointless the 1994 AWB was.


Carl,

We are not attacking companies for not making high-cap magazines. That isn't the issue.

The issue is that Ruger (and apparantly Colt) have a policy against selling high-cap magazines to "simple civilains" while at the same time selling those same magazines to Law Enforcement officers.

I have no issue with companies who don't make high-cap rifles or magazines. I just don't want companies to treat us differently than they do LEOs when it comes down to it. Especially when the former head of that company helped pass the magazine ban in the first place.

That is the issue here.

I.G.B.

[trbon8r]

Ruger electing to not sell me one of their products is analogous to Fiat or Citroen refusing to sell me one of their cars. :evil:

[MechAg94]

If Ruger started selling 20 and 30 round mini-14 mags, would AWB states put them on the assault weapon list?

It seems to me that Ruger is gambling that more people in AWB states will buy their guns because they are not banned over RKBA crusaders that will stop buying their guns in other states.

[itgoesboom]

If Ruger started selling 20 and 30 round mini-14 mags, would AWB states put them on the assault weapon list?

It seems to me that Ruger is gambling that more people in AWB states will buy their guns because they are not banned over RKBA crusaders that will stop buying their guns in other states.

Doubt it.

Most states with assault weapons bans already have bans against new high-capacity magazines, so it wouldn't really affect them at all. Plus, there are high-capacity magazines already on the market, most just don't work well, and it is really just the manufacturer that won't supply them.

I think it is still a case of them holding on to Bill Ruger's old ideas, which can be summed up in two quotes:

1. No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun.

2. I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20 or 30 round magazines or my folding stock.


I.G.B.

[rallyhound]

Cdnn has factory ruger 20 rounders on their website for sale, so they are available now.
Didn't Ruger donate 1 million to the NRA?

[P. Plainsman]

Bill Ruger Sr. had some deeply wrongheaded ideas about arms rights -- something that is doubly reprehensible in a gun maker. I can see why people refuse to buy Rugers on principle, and I respect their stance.

Frankly, are there any current Ruger semi-autos (other than the 10/22) that anyone really wants to buy in the first place? I admit the old Mk-II rimfires and P-series pistols were functional guns at a fair price. But these new Mk-III rimfires, and that P345 centerfire pistol are so hilariously, egregiously oversafetied that you could hardly give one away to me. Yuck.

I wouldn't buy a Mini-14 either. Why not save up for a Bushmaster AR-15?

To me Ruger is a revolver company. My three Ruger wheelguns are excellent firearms that give me great service and came at a fair price. I will keep buying more. There just aren't enough quality revolver makers left for me to abandon Ruger.

PS: Since Mr. Ruger died, we have seen a few hints of glacial change at the company. The AWB sunsetted, and Ruger has started selling high-cap 9mm mags to private citizens again. It's a start. And they have given us the sawed-off, flamethrowing .454 SRH "Alaskan" revolver with a 2.5" barrel. OK, that's not exactly a SPAS-12, but it's a pretty un-PC firearm by historical Ruger standards.

[GunnySkox]

Cdnn has factory ruger 20 rounders on their website for sale, so they are available now.

I'm looking at CDNN this instant and the only Mini-14 magazines explicitly mentioned as "ruger factory" or something to that effect are those chintzy 5-rounders

~GnSx

[itgoesboom]

Cdnn has factory ruger 20 rounders on their website for sale, so they are available now.


The only 20 round magazines for Mini-14s are either aftermarket, or factory "Law Enforcment" marked magazines. Legal to own, sure. But it only further proves the point on my side.

Ruger sells the magazines to civilians, but doesn't want us to have them.


Didn't Ruger donate 1 million to the NRA?

:rolleyes: Even John Kerry tried to court the Pro-Gun voters. Donating to the NRA means nothing, especially after stabbing gun owners in the back. Bill Ruger had tried to make ammends for his mistake, and even acknowledged that compromising with gun-grabbers is futile, but it doesn't undo the damage.

Donating to the NRA is only smart business if you are a firearm manufacturer.

Frankly, are there any current Ruger semi-autos (other than the 10/22) that anyone really wants to buy in the first place? I admit the old Mk-II rimfires and P-series pistols were functional guns at a fair price. But these new Mk-III rimfires, and that P345 centerfire pistol are so hilariously, egregiously oversafetied that you could hardly give one away to me. Yuck.


I don't know, I have a family member that the Mini-14 would be perfect for. I even think with some tinkering, and 20rnd magazines, it would be a fun little rifle.

But I know I want a Vaquero in .45LC and a Redhawk in .44mag, and wouldn't mind a Frontier either.

Hopefully they will change their policy so that I can order from them in the future.

I.G.B.

[Dean Speir]

.

It was they who profited from the magazine capacity ban. 10rds was a convenient number for them. Not sure how you can make an argument that Sturm Ruger "profited," but Papa Bill didn't select the ten round limitation, Congress did. Ruger's plan called for 15 rounds maximum. Like Casey Stebgel used to say, "You can look it up."
Bill Ruger had his little conference with Bill Clinton, and we ALL know what became of that! What are you talking about?!? Please enlighten me as to what everyone else knows and which seems to have escaped my notice.

The anti-Ruger brigade will never forgive the modern company for the dead founder's political stance decades ago. Decades ago? 1989 isn't quite the distant past you're attempting to suggest, and what amends have you seen which might mitigate that political stance?

[AZ Jeff]

So let me see........based on the criteria of some persons posting here, the following companies are no longer considered "good to buy products from", due to restrictions these companies have placed on their products availability:

1. Ruger (which started this thread)
2. Colt
3. Remington

How many more do we need to add? (And are all of you who advocate this practice following this with ALL the aforementioned companies?)

[benEzra]

Not sure how you can make an argument that Sturm Ruger "profited," but Papa Bill didn't select the ten round limitation, Congress did. Ruger's plan called for 15 rounds maximum. Like Casey Stebgel used to say, "You can look it up."
And by striking coincidence, the magazine capacity of the Ruger P-89 was 15 rounds...but that of its main competitor was 17 rounds... :scrutiny:

[BTR]

Note Bill Ruger's suggested magazine ban would NOT have had a grandfather clause and make it illegal for people own +15 round hicaps at all...

[neo-con]

As soon as it comes with a factory 30 round magazine:evil:

[M.E.Eldridge]

Personally, I have no intentions of buying a Ruger anytime soon. Part way because of Ruger's comments and partly because they have nothing I like. Nearly all of their centerfire huting rifles, which are otherwise fine, have no iron sights, something I consider extremely important for a centerfire rifle(ironically enough, I don't care whether my varmint guns have irons or not). They are also a little more than I want to spend on a firearm that has no real value to me when compared to Savage rifles(some of my personal favorites).

That said, I have no problem with the desire that is possesed by some to purchase Ruger firearms. I myself will stick to Savage, H&R/NEF and maybe CZ(for the .375 H&H Mag that will be waiting for me when I get my bonus in a couple of months).

Then again, I prefer mil-surps. Cheap, reliable, accurate enough and a blast to shoot.

[CarbineKid]

Ruger has probably lost alot of sales due to the fact they don't believe the average citizen "deserves" a mag that holds more then 5 rounds. For the life of me I don't understand why Meg-Gar doesnt make them. That would be a best seller for them.

[Bigfoot]

Maybe because they don't have the tooling anymore. I have a factory mag and I have a Pro-Mag magazine. They are IDENTICAL down to the bends, steel, followers, even the welds are identical and in the exact same locations, the magazine bottoms are identical moldings except the Pro-Mags dont have the Ruger trademark stamped on them. And I have a very good eye for details like this. Now I don't know if Ruger sold the tooling or if they farmed out thier magazine production to Pro-Mag from the start, I suspect the former.

But please don't let this stop the bash Bill Ruger fest.:D I'm absolutely sure this thread has the potential to go several more pages.

[PinnedAndRecessed]

Their finesse may well be the reason that the gun wasn't banned by the Feds, and is even still legal in California.

It wasn't banned because it didn't have the dreaded pistol grip. Also, it didn't have the infamous flash suppressor.

The Springfield M1A is also available, and I saw numerous examples of this with ten round clips. Only, the Kalifornia legal M1A had a muzzle brake. Not the standard flash suppressor.

[KaceCoyote]

I'd love a P945 or whatever its called, as would I dig a 10-22 or their .22 pistols.

Ruger the company thinks the same as Ruger the man once did, so..I spent my money on brands that give me what I -want- not what they believe I deserve.

[IllHunter]

Newby here, trying to follow the ruger bashing and thinking back to when S&W caved to Clinton and all the other political manuvers that got us to where we are, still openly discussing our guns! Personally I love my MK77 in .270 which by trading a Milwaukee right angle drill for, promoted the underground economy and did not (further) enrich Sturm Ruger etal. I also have a Super Red Hawk .44Mag I purchased from an FNRA auction. This was also a second market purchase, gave the cause a financial boost and gave me a write off for the price paid over market.

[ftierson]

As IllHunter mentions, and then there's Smith & Wesson...

:)

Forrest

[1911JMB]

While we're on the subject, does anybody make reliable high caps for the 10/22 that can be left loaded for a long time?

[Ghost]

:confused: You know, Ruger and Smith and Wesson are both publicly held and traded companies;on the NYSE, RGR and SWB respectively.

That being true, if you don't like the company policy, buy stock, pester other shareholders, and change the policy.

If we are going to start holding slights against manufacturers who commited the offense long ago, who are we going to buy from?

Winchester is dead (or, well, the name is owned by Olin), rumor has it that Colt is in serious trouble, HK doesn't really support civillian sales, FN appears to be wanting to court civillians but probably doesn't really care, Beretta could care less either way, General Dynamics is trying to branch out into small arms and they certainly won't care about civillian sales... the list just keeps on going.

So again, with publicly held companies there is something you can do if you so choose.

[mrmeval]

There is one that holds 50 rounds and is a rotary magazine. It can be left loaded as it doesn't have a compressed spring. I forget the brand name, there is only one.


1911JMB
Senior Member


Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 292

While we're on the subject, does anybody make reliable high caps for the 10/22 that can be left loaded for a long time?

[SirPorl]

"Ruger electing to not sell me one of their products is analogous to Fiat or Citroen refusing to sell me one of their cars."

[Hawkmoon]

So at this point, even though I would love to pick up a 10/22, as well as one of their new scout style rifles, I will hold off, soley based on that company's position.
So buy a low-mileage used one. That doesn't contribute one thin dime to Ruger, but gets you the gun you want.

[mrmeval]

So buy a low-mileage used one. That doesn't contribute one thin dime to Ruger, but gets you the gun you want.

It boosts the resale price of new ones.

[MSGT9410]

So I guess I should keep an eye on my two factory 20 rounders...

[blackhawk2000]

"Ruger electing to not sell me one of their products is analogous to Fiat or Citroen refusing to sell me one of their cars."



It is nothing like that. Fiat, or Citroen won't sell you a car, because they are in a different country. If they did indeed have dealerships here in the States, then them selling only to police officers, would be the accurate analogy. Ruger is an American company, that sells products in the U.S. But they will only sell you some products, because you are a common peasant, a serf, second class citizen, not worthy, etc.