Don't buy a Cooper


PDA






pacecars
October 28, 2008, 08:36 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-10-27-prez-money_N.htm

This pretty much says it all. I used to lust after their .22s and a new repeater .25-06 but forget it now.

If you enjoyed reading about "Don't buy a Cooper" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Stephen A. Camp
October 28, 2008, 09:00 AM
Hello and thanks. Don't worry. I won't now and I'll do my best to see that others I know don't, either.

Best.

hags
October 28, 2008, 09:01 AM
Real nice! I had an order placed with the factory but canceled it when I heard of this.
Coopers are a hard sell in my area and this won't help any.
I find it funny and ironic that they support a candidate that if he had his way they'd be out of business.


I think maybe he sees an Obama presidency as inevitable and is hoping to throw his master a bone so he and his company are looked upon favorably.
That's pretty WEAK and cowardly.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
October 28, 2008, 09:06 AM
They'll never get a dime from me as long as I live. Thank you. Good, makes my high-end rifles choices much simpler. :)

Make sure you let them know how you feel.

goldie
October 28, 2008, 09:09 AM
cooper better hope obama does not implement his plans on closing 90% of the gun stores,or banning ammo used for hunting,he will have no place to distribute his guns,or no ammo to shoot them.....

ImARugerFan
October 28, 2008, 09:10 AM
Who cares? McCain is no pro-gunner that's for sure. You guys have been watching too many NRA commercials.

pacecars
October 28, 2008, 09:11 AM
I really think he has lost his mind. How can anyone other than an extreme leftist think that the Republican party has moved too far to the right?

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
October 28, 2008, 09:20 AM
Here's their email:

info@cooperfirearms.com

:)

1 old 0311
October 28, 2008, 09:23 AM
Heck Bill Ruger sold out gun owners to put money in HIS OWN POSKET and people still buy them..................Me? Never been real big on the 'Turn the other cheek' thing.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
October 28, 2008, 09:23 AM
Heck Bill Ruger sold out gun owners to put money in HIS OWN POCKET and people still buy them

Not me.

hags
October 28, 2008, 09:25 AM
Who cares? McCain is no pro-gunner that's for sure. You guys have been watching too many NRA commercials.

Sure, I'll bite. Neither is he proactively anti-gun like the other one.

ImARugerFan
October 28, 2008, 09:27 AM
Neither is he proactively anti-gun like the other one.

Sure he is, he went out of his way to try and create legislation closing the 'gun show loophole'. http://www.campaignadvantage.com/services/websites/archive/ags/ad_mccain.html

He has an F- rating as a Senator by Gun Owners of America.

IndianaBoy
October 28, 2008, 09:28 AM
RugerFan...

As a state senator in Illinois, Obama has supported some of the most draconian gun laws imagineable. Ban on ALL concealed carry, ban on all centerfire rifle ammunition, ban on all semi-automatics. The revolvers will be next. Then the rimfires, if they had their way. The only question is whether or not they have the political traction to get it done. I suspect they will tie it to their healthcare bill, as a 'safety' measure.

Vern Humphrey
October 28, 2008, 09:31 AM
I say we picket him at the next SHOT show.

And keep spreading the word -- don't buy Cooper.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
October 28, 2008, 09:34 AM
I say we picket him at the next SHOT show.

I like this idea a LOT.

ImARugerFan
October 28, 2008, 09:37 AM
You guys are so dramatic. As president the *only* thing that Obama could possibly do, or not do, is veto an AWB that congress passes. Yes Obama will sign this bill, we don't know for sure if McCain will sign the bill. Other than that there is nothing that will happen with gun control. Vote how you want, I personally give McCain the edge in gun control, but I'm looking at a much much bigger picture this election year.

hags
October 28, 2008, 09:38 AM
He voted against the AWB and will probably do so again shortly.

You wanna talk about federal judge selection in a possible Obama presidency?

If McCain has his way things will stay the same, if Obama has his way we won't have much to talk about.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
October 28, 2008, 09:40 AM
As president the *only* thing that Obama could possibly do, or not do, is veto an AWB that congress passes

Are you kidding? Wrong does not even begin to describe that sentence. This election is for all the marbles.

We came within ONE vote, in a 5-4 decision, of not having ANY right to keep and bear arms, AT ALL, in US v. Heller. 4 SCOTUS justices, 3 of whom were Dem appointees (2 Clinton appointees) could not read the plain English text of the 2nd amendment. The next POTUS will likely appoint 1-2 justices if he's a one-termer, and 2-3 justices who are retiring if he's a two-termer, not to mention dozens of other federal judges who decide gun rights cases. We go from having a right (barely) to not having a right at all with Obama appointees - there is simply no question about that fact. This has ZERO to do with legislative and executive politics and 100% to do with SCOTUS and other judicial appointments.

TexasRifleman
October 28, 2008, 09:44 AM
As president the *only* thing that Obama could possibly do, or not do, is veto an AWB that congress passes

Nah, Presidents don't pick Supreme Court Judges or anything like that. There's no danger, nothing to see here, move along.

Vern Humphrey
October 28, 2008, 09:45 AM
I like this idea a LOT.
Perhaps we could start a fund to send pickets to the next SHOT show. I nominate Oleg as our treasurer.

hags
October 28, 2008, 09:54 AM
Quote:
As president the *only* thing that Obama could possibly do, or not do, is veto an AWB that congress passes

Are you kidding? Wrong does not even begin to describe that sentence. This election is for all the marbles.

We came within ONE vote, in a 5-4 decision, of not having ANY right to keep and bear arms, AT ALL, in US v. Heller. The next POTUS will likely appoint 1-2 justices if he's a one-termer, and 2-3 justices who are retiring if he's a two-termer, not to mention dozens of other federal judges who decide gun rights cases. We go from having a right to not having a right with Obama appointees - there is simply no question about that fact. This has ZERO to do with legislative and executive politics and 100% to do with SCOTUS and other judicial appointments.

Yep, yep, yep. You know what happens when you assume most people know this?
I would think posters to/on a firearms forum would be a little more "up" on things.
Ass-u-me.
My bad.

Vern Humphrey
October 28, 2008, 10:09 AM
The next thing we need to do is contact all the gun magazines and tell them to get with the program -- no more Cooper articles.

taliv
October 28, 2008, 10:19 AM
You guys are so dramatic. As president the *only* thing that Obama could possibly do, or not do, is veto an AWB that congress passes.

not only the supreme court picks, but also the president appoints people to the BATFE and basically runs it. he writes executive orders as well.


something's fishy about this though. surely cooper knew he would get zumboed when word of this got out. why would he let USAToday do an article on him like that?

jbech123
October 28, 2008, 10:31 AM
Who cares? McCain is no pro-gunner that's for sure. You guys have been watching too many NRA commercials.
Who cares? My 2nd amendment rights are important to me, so I for one care a lot. We can all do as we like with our one vote. While I'm no fan of McCain, I'll take my chances with him and Palin, esp. in light of my other option on the table.

You guys are so dramatic. As president the *only* thing that Obama could possibly do, or not do, is veto an AWB that congress passes. I'm not being dramatic at all, I just don't think Obama in the white house will do anything good for my second amendment rights(nor my wallet, but that is another issue.) As a gun owner and hunter if you think he's the man, then by all means vote for him.

As far as Cooper, I guess it's good to stand up for what you believe, but if he is still in business in a year I'd be surprised. Ruger or S&W selling us out is bad enough, but a small specialty firm like cooper will not weather the storm as well in my opinion.

Justin
October 28, 2008, 10:37 AM
Who cares? McCain is no pro-gunner that's for sure. You guys have been watching too many NRA commercials.

This is, quite frankly, the stupidest thing I've read all week.

McCain certainly may not be as pro-gun as we'd like, but to try and make the claim that he's just as bad as Obama is hyperbole that bears practically no resemblance to reality in any way, shape, or form.

Might I suggest that you take a few minutes of time to go to Google and run a few searches to compare and contrast the legislation and rhetoric employed by both candidates before they started running for president?

3sixbits
October 28, 2008, 11:31 AM
Any one that has ever spoken to Dan Cooper for more than just 30 seconds, knows Dan ain't the smartest cookie in the jar.

Vern Humphrey
October 28, 2008, 11:36 AM
He sure proved that with this dumb act. I mean, there was the carcass of Jim Zumbo lying right at his feet, and he didn't get the message.

taliv
October 28, 2008, 11:53 AM
well, zumbo's still up and walkin around thanks mostly to redemption by the likes of The Nuge.

still... you can't take money back from obama. i suppose he could recant and beg forgiveness, but i don't see it happening.

Omaha-BeenGlockin
October 28, 2008, 11:58 AM
Nice rifles---too bad there's an idiot running the company.

jbech123
October 28, 2008, 12:07 PM
well, zumbo's still up and walkin around thanks mostly to redemption by the likes of The Nuge.

True, but making a mostly uninformed statement about AR's is a lot different than donating to and going out of your way to endorse obama.

cat9x
October 28, 2008, 12:13 PM
if you believe it was a bad move, then email Cooper and let them know your opinions. You are his customer base and he would probably like to know what his potential (or not potential after this) customers think.

skinewmexico
October 28, 2008, 12:48 PM
[QUOTE][You guys are so dramatic. As president the *only* thing that Obama could possibly do, or not do, is veto an AWB that congress passes. /QUOTE]

Yep. The next challenge to SCOTUS will be what are "reasonable restrictions" as mentioned in Heller. And when the Obamessiah appoints a few more justices along the Souter caliber, a reasonable restriction will be complete confiscation.

goldie
October 28, 2008, 01:29 PM
the owner of robinson armament supported mit romney,no the greatest pro gunner either.anyone in charge of any gun companies are better off staying quiet....

Olympus
October 28, 2008, 01:30 PM
Having a degree in political science myself I try not to get sucked into things like this. I don't buy the "hurry up and buy up all the ARs and AKs" nonsense either. I'm a die hard conservative through and through so don't think I'm an Obama supporter.

This fact, and it's a huge fact, is too often overlooked. A president, either democrat or republican, can only suggest legislation. They are not the deciding factors on what happens or doesn't. Obama can propose a ban on assault weapons, high cap mags, etc, but he can't just simply put it into effect.

It is up to Congress on what becomes law. They can take a president's proposal and begin working on it as a bill or they can simply ignore it altogether. I understand that the nation elects a Democrat president to go along with the Democrat Congress we have currently, then they'll be more likely to go along with is proposals and since they have a majority then they'll likely succeed.

If you want to make your voices heard the loudest, stop spending so much time worrying about the president and spend more time looking at your senators and representatives' voting record. Get a petition going or write a letter of concern to your Congressmen and women. People today are forgetting how important it is to work with their congresspeople from their particular state.

Just become a congressperson is a Democrat doesn't mean they'll automatically vote in favor of everything a Democrat president proposes. In the end, the congressperson is accountable to his/her constituancy and if they know how voting in favor of a certain bill will make them unpopular then they'll think twice before voting...because after all, the people of the state give them their power and the people of the state can take that power and give it to someone else in the next election.

I'm as concerned for the nation as everyone else is. I'm frankly a little scared at the possibilities of electing Obama. But let's all use our heads here and think rationally. The sky isn't falling....yet!



As for Cooper, that's horrible to hear! I'm sure they will see an effect in their sales because of this. What they did was a VERY poor business decision. For businesses to make a good profit, they need to stay out of the political arena and keep their views to themselves for fear of alienating a portion of their customers. In this case, it was an absolutely STUPID decision for Cooper because they are a relatively small company where a loss in sales will have much greater effect and the portion of their customers that they chose to alienate was by far their largest group of customers. Their choice could not have been more blatantly DUMB. Whatever consequences come from their decision, they've done more than enough to earn them.

Vern Humphrey
October 28, 2008, 01:35 PM
This fact, and it's a huge fact, is too often overlooked. A president, either democrat or republican, can only suggest legislation. They are not the deciding factors on what happens or doesn't.

Actually, it's judges who are the key. And who appoints judges?

The President! And if you have an anti-gun President with an anti-gun majority in congress, guess what sort of judges get appointed?

Read the dissent on the Heller decision, and see what kind of judges we can expect.

rbernie
October 28, 2008, 01:47 PM
Anyone who sells short the RKBA movement does not deserve to profit from it.

Cooper is allowed his politics. He should NOT expect that I will ignore his political statements while he tries to take cash from my wallet.

Olympus
October 28, 2008, 01:55 PM
Actually, it's judges who are the key.

You are correct. But the judges only come into play when a bill becomes a law and when the law is challenged. You take the judges out of the equation by never allowing such bills to become laws.

An ounce of prevention is worth of a pound of cure.

Eightball
October 28, 2008, 02:01 PM
Alrighty then. I used to want a cooper, but now I will never buy one, and I'll make damned sure every pro-gunner I know hears about this.

Maybe we should all write him and flood his business with mail detailing his "little" mistake to him, and how it instantly cost him our business?

jmorganal
October 28, 2008, 02:03 PM
Thanks for the heads up, duly noted.

PS: I just sent Cooper Arms an e-mail saying they should get in the automobile business.

MikePGS
October 28, 2008, 02:10 PM
I say we picket him at the next SHOT show.

And keep spreading the word -- don't buy Cooper.
Mr Humphrey, I like the way you think.

Eyesac
October 28, 2008, 02:20 PM
I say we picket him at the next SHOT show.

And keep spreading the word -- don't buy Cooper.

His rifles are a little too rich for my blood, so I wasn't really familiar w/ them, but I am now!

ps: I haven't forgotten about Ruger (and S&W), I will never forget.:fire:

Olympus
October 28, 2008, 02:38 PM
Maybe we should all write him and flood his business with mail detailing his "little" mistake to him, and how it instantly cost him our business?

I think this is a great idea. I didn't want to be the first to suggest it. But I've already taken the liberty personally. I think everyone should do the same as well. It only takes a couple mintues to shoot a quick email. We can only hope that they'll keep count of how many they get. I'll keep everyone informed if they send a reply to mine.

Richard.Howe
October 28, 2008, 02:39 PM
Wow, maybe Mr. Cooper got too busy and needed a way to slow down business.

Richard.Howe
October 28, 2008, 02:41 PM
Having a degree in political science myself I try not to get sucked into things like this. I don't buy the "hurry up and buy up all the ARs and AKs" nonsense either. I'm a die hard conservative through and through so don't think I'm an Obama supporter.

This fact, and it's a huge fact, is too often overlooked. A president, either democrat or republican, can only suggest legislation. They are not the deciding factors on what happens or doesn't. Obama can propose a ban on assault weapons, high cap mags, etc, but he can't just simply put it into effect.

Having a degree in simple math, I observe that a radical Dem in the Executive, and heavily Dem majorities in the Senate and HoR, adds up to a significantly negative number.

Vern Humphrey
October 28, 2008, 02:43 PM
the judges only come into play when a bill becomes a law and when the law is challenged. You take the judges out of the equation by never allowing such bills to become laws.
You don't prevent such bills from becoming law by supporting gun-grabbing politicians.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
October 28, 2008, 03:13 PM
Olympus, did you read my post on page 1? It already answered your line of reasoning thoroughly - here is the relevant part again:

We came within ONE vote, in a 5-4 decision, of not having ANY right to keep and bear arms, AT ALL, in US v. Heller. 4 SCOTUS justices, 3 of whom were Dem appointees (2 Clinton appointees) could not read the plain English text of the 2nd amendment. The next POTUS will likely appoint 1-2 justices if he's a one-termer, and 2-3 justices who are retiring if he's a two-termer, not to mention dozens of other federal judges who decide gun rights cases. We go from having a right (barely) to not having a right at all with Obama appointees - there is simply no question about that fact. This has ZERO to do with legislative and executive politics and 100% to do with SCOTUS and other judicial appointments.

Please note the bolded part. What you say is very true. EXCEPT THAT NONE OF THAT MATTERS!!!! AT ALL. What matters is judicial appointments. Legislation can be repealed or undone. A strong SCOTUS precedent, OTOH, is very hard if not impossible to overcome, no matter how incorrect. On a scale of 1 to 10, which president for the sake of legislation is a 1, which senator/congressperson is a 4, and which president for the sake of judicial appointments is a 10. You have to go with the least common denominator. The Prez matters 1 and 10. So that's a 10 in importance.


the judges only come into play when a bill becomes a law and when the law is challenged. You take the judges out of the equation by never allowing such bills to become laws.

Dude. Why fight the hard good fight over and over and over and over again, year after year after year with legislative races, which probably still won't prevent anti-gun legislation when the political climate is just right (just wrong), when you can simply get ONE good strong SCOTUS case (not a super weak one like Heller) which will shut these idgits down forever and for good? Heller has opened the pandora's box to exploration of the parameters of the right established. So the high court will be granting cert and fleshing out this right very soon (soon in judicial terms, the next 10-30 years). Since any Obama appts - even 1 - will reverse the 5-4 belief system, the court as a whole will find any and every way to undermine Heller in the coming years if Obama is elected. I don't think there's ever been a more important election, except for the 00 and 04 elections of George Bush, which replaced Rehnquist and O'Conner with Roberts and Alito. Hard to say for sure what Rehnquist and O'Conner would have done (i.e. hard to say for sure whether Bush II was dispositive as to the 5-4 outcome of Heller), but it's very easy to see that if Obama is elected and one of those 4 in the Heller minority retire as some probably will in the next 8 years, that our rights are GONE effectively if Obama is elected.

But our Senator elections are also very VERY important because the Senate ratifies the POTUS nominee for SCOTUS.

jmorganal
October 28, 2008, 03:23 PM
I hope Mr. Cooper can make a living off of the people supporting his view off of them, because he certainly will not see a penny of mine and anyone I know who is pro gun. So you guys, supporting him, need to buck up and help a brother out.

Olympus
October 28, 2008, 03:36 PM
it's very easy to see that if Obama is elected and one of those 4 in the Heller minority retire as some probably will in the next 8 years, that our rights are GONE effectively if Obama is elected.


Then let's only home he's elected for one term instead of two. Maybe they can hold out for at least 4 more years.

I understand what you're saying about the judges and it is very important. But I still think people need to be more active in writing their congresspeople. I think we're both saying the same thing, we're just go through different methods. For me, I hate to see gun control become law then have its constitutionality drug out in the legal system and hope that it makes its way to the Supreme Court and hope that they even decide to hear the case. That's years and years of having to abide by the law while it's debated and taken to higher and higher courts. I know how hard it is to overcome a precedent, but that doesn't mean that people won't still try, wasting tax dollars and time.

I think we both want the same outcome we just have different methods of getting their. And maybe I'm a little too naive, but I believe that if gun owners nationwide ban together and write our congresspeople enough times it will eventually get left alone. It may keep getting brought up and brought up but I think if enough of us make our voices heard loud enough and often enough, Washington will finally decide to leave us alone.

You don't prevent such bills from becoming law by supporting gun-grabbing politicians.

Don't think anyone is arguing with that.

Having a degree in simple math, I observe that a radical Dem in the Executive, and heavily Dem majorities in the Senate and HoR, adds up to a significantly negative number.

Don't think anyone is arguing that point either. That's why I made the point that not all Dems in Congress have to go along 100% with a Dem in the White House. If enough of their constituency opposes something, the Dem in Congress is wise to pay attention if he/she wants to get re-elected.

hags
October 28, 2008, 05:41 PM
What about Republicans such as Mark Kirk?
You don't need all democrats to go along. They will likely have a filibuster proof democratic majority after the election anyway.

With the cult of personality and the media The One can introduce bill after bill through his party and make his agenda the country's agenda.
If anyone is buying or posting in preparation for a ban then each and everyone of them and you should vote. If there was more voting and less lip service there wouldn't be anything to worry about.

You know what a political science degree is good for?

You can get into law school with it. ;)

I dont' know what any of this has to do with a firearms manufacturer supporting an anti gun candidate.

Gottahaveone
October 28, 2008, 05:43 PM
Heck Bill Ruger sold out gun owners to put money in HIS OWN POSKET and people still buy them..................Me? Never been real big on the 'Turn the other cheek' thing.

Bingo. Quit buying Rugers and I haven't bought a S&W from the date they signed their little agreement with clinton. I don't care if the ownership HAS changed. I hadn't planned on buying a cooper anyway and will be honest enough to mention that when I email to complain, but I'll also let them know that I'll be talking bad about them to everybody that will listen. Sure it's his company and his right to do as he wishes, but I feel no compunction to help someone who's actions are in direct conflict with my own self interest.

Vern Humphrey
October 28, 2008, 05:52 PM
You know what a political science degree is good for?

You can get into law school with it.
If you can pass the LSAT.

But how hard can that be? We had one lawyer president who thought "Of the people, by the people and for the people" was from the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.

And we have a lawyer candidate for president who says he's been to "all 57 states."

FMJMIKE
October 28, 2008, 07:09 PM
If I wanted a Cooper and could afford it I would buy it. I don't blame inanimate objects for the actions of the owner. I think politics is going a bit too far. We should be working together and not making enemies of fellow Americans. Bin Laden must be laughing at us now.
:scrutiny:

Vern Humphrey
October 28, 2008, 07:17 PM
Bin Laden must be laughing at us now.
Especially when he learns a gun owner is willing to give his money to a candidate of whom Bin Laden approves.

FMJMIKE
October 28, 2008, 07:24 PM
Especially when he learns a gun owner is willing to give his money to a candidate of whom Bin Laden approves.
The **** is getting deep now!!! I am impressed you know who Bin Laden is endorsing.
:banghead:

spuscg
October 28, 2008, 07:27 PM
not another gun maker going the way of bill ruger....

rbernie
October 28, 2008, 07:28 PM
I don't blame inanimate objects for the actions of the owner. Nor do I. But I will not enrich the pockets of those who work, directly or indirectly thru funding, to destroy that which I hold dear. When Cooper funded a candidate that has actively professed for his entire career to want to limit the RKBA movement, he crossed that Rubicon.

And that's not hyperbole - that's the basics of the issue without any political colorations.

TT
October 28, 2008, 07:29 PM
We should be working together and not making enemies of fellow Americans.

So Cooper was working with gun owners when he donated money to a Presidential candidate who wants to ban self-defense firearms?

wingman
October 28, 2008, 07:31 PM
If I wanted a Cooper and could afford it I would buy it. I don't blame inanimate objects for the actions of the owner.


Let me understand, guns have feelings??, and the gun would receive the money paid for it, quite a stretch in thinking.:D

Olympus
October 28, 2008, 07:38 PM
You know what a political science degree is good for?


It makes for some nice decorations for the office wall. I tell people it's a B.S. in B.S.

But back to the Cooper scandal. I still haven't gotten a reply from the email I sent them.

FMJMIKE
October 28, 2008, 07:42 PM
Everyone does not vote based on one single issue. The economy is more important to me at this point.

Rembrandt
October 28, 2008, 07:44 PM
Like the Dixie Chicks, Mr Cooper's personal political views will have a profound affect on his business future.

Seems we went through this with S&W.....does it mean we'll be seeing "pre-Obama Cooper's and post Obama Coopers"?

rbernie
October 28, 2008, 07:45 PM
Everyone does not vote based on one single issue. The economy is more important to me at this pointThe economy (or pick your social ill of the day) will fix itself one way or another regardless of who's president (especially since Congress controls the actual funding that does the fixin'). The loss of RKBA is much more permanent, and the president has a very real chance to impact that through SCOTUS nominations.

Y'all vote the way you want. I know my priorities, and the RKBA is always tops.

Period.

Just ask our friends in the UK how that's all worked out for them.

.38 Special
October 28, 2008, 07:46 PM
The **** is getting deep now!!!

New here, eh? Lol.

IndianaBoy
October 28, 2008, 07:58 PM
The **** is getting deep now!!! I am impressed you know who Bin Laden is endorsing.


I presume that Bin Laden will have similar desires to Hamas. If you'd like a reference to the member of Hamas who supports a certain presidential candidate... pm me.

TexasRifleman
October 28, 2008, 08:07 PM
The **** is getting deep now!!! I am impressed you know who Bin Laden is endorsing.

Actually we do know who Bin Laden and AQ are endorsing, but it's not Obama.

http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/22/the-al-qaeda-endorsement/

The idea is that Al Qaeda would be hurt by the election of Obama, because he doesn’t fit Arab or Muslim images of white colonial oppressors, and thus isn’t so useful in recruiting suicide bombers.

That being said, you were a bit out of line saying it was "getting deep" to say we knew who Osama would endorse since it took me maybe 12 seconds on google to find the article.

HC_Jack
October 28, 2008, 08:12 PM
Those who don't think Obama would be so bad should try living in Chicago for a little while. You can't legally own a handgun. Carrying a loaded handgun is a felony anywhere in the state. All guns must be registered under a system designed to be frustrating to navigate and reregistered every year. If you miss the deadline for re-registration once, your gun becomes forever unregisterable. No magazines over 10 rounds, no carbines with the mag well in the pistol grip, no evil black rifles, no mini-14's (county ban, not city), no semi-auto shotguns that can hold over 5 rounds, and the list goes on. That's what he thinks "common sense" restrictions are. And the kids here keep killing each other with these guns that were banned before they were born.

When he was a state senator, he had ample opportunity to do something about it, but instead chose to vote for more restrictions, remain silent while his mentor Emil Jones sent most pro gun legislation to die in committee and stood by his ally, mayor Daley, while he ranted and continues to rant about these guns that are causing all the violence in his great city. If he can't see the folly in that, how can he lead a nation?

Those who think his policies will be better for the economy are fooling themselves as well. Increasing taxes on the people who invest, hire and take risks does not encourage any of those activities. Raising the bar on their contributions to health care will cause them to think twice about adding someone else to the payroll. Additional trade restrictions will limit our ability to profit from industries where we have a competitive advantage and cause us to expend efforts in industries where we don't. Removing the right to have a secret ballot in unionizing will open the door to heavy handed tactics from those who would take advantage of members rather than working for them.

McCain isn't who I had hoped for, but for those projecting their idealized notions of what Obama's "hope" and "change" mean, be prepared to be disappointed when your free pony (or whatever he's pushing nowadays) doesn't arrive on time if he gets elected.

hags
October 28, 2008, 08:56 PM
So Cooper was working with gun owners when he donated money to a Presidential candidate who wants to ban self-defense firearms?

Ban self defense firearms........hell, that guy's against self defense period.


Everyone does not vote based on one single issue. The economy is more important to me at this point.

You mean your economy is more important to you right now. Perfect, you sound like the opposition, you dont' care what is taken from you, or if your fellow Americans are subject to a world court or if your country owes China trillions, you just vote for what's good for your wallet.
Who cares about guns so long as I have a BMW or Hummer in the drive and my portfolio looks good.
Fool.

hags
October 28, 2008, 08:58 PM
The economy (or pick your social ill of the day) will fix itself one way or another regardless of who's president (especially since Congress controls the actual funding that does the fixin'). The loss of RKBA is much more permanent, and the president has a very real chance to impact that through SCOTUS nominations.

Y'all vote the way you want. I know my priorities, and the RKBA is always tops.

Period.

Just ask our friends in the UK how that's all worked out for them.

Right on brother!!!!!

ECVMatt
October 28, 2008, 09:04 PM
I need to look into this more...

Matt

Rembrandt
October 28, 2008, 09:06 PM
From the Cooper web site......

http://www.cooperfirearms.com/

Regarding the USA Today Article. Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc. did not contribute and does not support in any fashion the campaign of Senator Obama.

Nine months ago Dan Cooper (personally) made an online donation to the campaign in an effort to help defeat Hillary Clinton and in protest of American plant closures and the shipping of jobs overseas. Three months ago he made yet another donation to the McCain campaign and the RNC totaling over twice that given to Obama campaign.

There is no doubt that the article in USA Today has caused a considerable response. To this end we are encouraged and stand with our fellow NRA members and supporters of the Second Amendment and against those who oppose it.

22-rimfire
October 28, 2008, 09:20 PM
Words. Lies. You don't know what to believe anymore. I think Dan Cooper probably supports Obama. Sorry, my house will own NO cooper firearms. You may have just doomed your company with a few words in USA Today. Get USA Today to print an retraction or explanation.

spuscg
October 28, 2008, 09:20 PM
if obama wins i might as well stock up for when blue helmeted soldiers show up to rid the world of evil killing devices....

_N4Z_
October 28, 2008, 09:32 PM
lot of hot topic here, but should not the thread be moved to the activism forum???

reading thru this there is very little discussion about "rifles", and very much rant-ola about politics.

this thr member is in this forum to read/discuss rifles and such. just saying... :rolleyes:

SteelyNirvana
October 28, 2008, 09:33 PM
Dear Mr. Cooper,



I want to let you know that I will never be an owner of one of your firearms because of your donation to the Obama campaign. I will make sure that all and my friends and family know about this so they will be sure never to purchase a Cooper made firearm again. How can you do this,sir? You know Obama is anti-gun as it can get. In my opinion you have turned your back on the NRA and millions of gun owners across the country.



Sincerely Yours,



Brian Craig

TexasRifleman
October 28, 2008, 10:02 PM
So the article from USA Today says:

That's on top of the $1,000 check he wrote to Obama's U.S. Senate campaign in 2004, after he was dazzled by Obama's speech at that year's Democratic National Convention.


The story that he just gave to beat Hillary appears to not wash with the facts. Cooper was giving to Obama long before the presidential race.

I would like to see the explanation for that donation.

Girodin
October 28, 2008, 10:10 PM
You guys are so dramatic. As president the *only* thing that Obama could possibly do, or not do, is veto an AWB that congress passes.

I will spare you what could be a very long post, in fact books are written on the topic, but ever since Jefferson the president has been exercising legislative prerogatives beyond his constitutionally enumerated powers. Woodrow Wilson really shifted the balance. The long and short of it is that the President has considerable influence over the domestic policy agenda. The framers perhaps intended the president to only have a negative check on legislation in the form of a veto but that is a far cry from the situation as it exists today.

hags
October 28, 2008, 10:39 PM
Does anybody buy the reason posted on the Cooper website? To defeat Hillary?
Hillary would have been an easier candidate for McCain to run against IMO, so how does that help?
It's funny how things work out isn't it?

Some people will say and do anything. My guess is if the response would've been positive then he'd probably post a statement saying he's contributing more.

:fire:

hags
October 28, 2008, 10:54 PM
I gotta hand it to the moderators here. At least they've allowed people, presumably shooters, to express their opinion both pro and con.
Certain other forums won't allow opposing opinion. I've seen at least two complete threads deleted today regarding this very subject, most opinions expressed mirror those shared here.
I realize these are not publicly run forums and politics is frowned upon. However if you post Cooper's response and then lock the thread that's chicken**** nonsense.
If you're gonna allow one side you need to allow the other.

Ratshooter
October 28, 2008, 11:16 PM
Does anybody buy the reason posted on the Cooper website? To defeat Hillary?

That sounds like supporting a Demon so he can defeat Satan.

And yes hats off to the moderators for not shutting this down. Thankfully it han't gotten as nasty as it could have.

The bottom line is this. Betrayal hurts weather its real or just percieved.

RockyMtnTactical
October 29, 2008, 12:50 AM
Won't be buying anything of theirs. They have betrayed themselves as well as us...

Tarvis
October 29, 2008, 12:59 AM
He said he's gonna call them tomorrow, he didn't believe me at first. I'll let you know what they told him, assuming they are going to answer the phone. :fire:

hags
October 29, 2008, 01:00 AM
It's not so much betrayal as knowing where your money goes. I wouldn't support what Cooper has and I won't provide the money for them to do so.
They don't manufacture evil black rifles or handguns so maybe they think they're immune. Whatever the case, they're using my money from my purchase to endorse ideas and behavior I deem offensive, counterproductive and un-American.

22-rimfire
October 29, 2008, 07:12 AM
I will say that unless Cooper Firearms made a public statement, I feel legititimate donations to political candidates should not be public news. However, given the leanings, I can not support Dan Cooper's company with my money in the future.

Mark K. C.
October 29, 2008, 07:33 AM
Just goes to show what can happen to you when you get "dazzeled".

BigG
October 29, 2008, 08:09 AM
Cooper? Who is that? ;)

nero45acp
October 29, 2008, 08:39 AM
When I was stationed in Japan, late one night on a side street I saw a well dressed, and obviously successful Japanese businessman so blind drunk that he was pissing on his own shoes. That sorry, pitiful image was the first thing that popped into my head when I read about Cooper's foolishness....


I just left them an email, telling them what I thought of this foolishness.



nero(can live without a Cooper rifle....)

Matt-J2
October 29, 2008, 08:50 AM
How involved is Cooper the man with cooper the company? How many people work for the company? Anybody know, or have a decent estimate?

Vern Humphrey
October 29, 2008, 08:59 AM
The **** is getting deep now!!! I am impressed you know who Bin Laden is endorsing.
Both he and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have stated that Obama would be the best President for the United States.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
October 29, 2008, 09:06 AM
Well said, rbernie & hags! And Vern.

I'm glad to see that we're well on the way to zumbo'ing them but good. Let the retribution commence!

Ohen Cepel
October 29, 2008, 09:33 AM
I sent them a polite email.

I'll have nothing to do with them every again. Plus, to make it worse, it doesn't look as if the claim on their website is honest or accurate.

Sucks to be the poor dealer with his stuff on the shelves now!

Johnny Guest
October 29, 2008, 09:37 AM
I'll yield to the judgement of others as to whether this thread is proper fodder elsewhere. It is definitely off topic for Rifle Forum, which is a technical venue.

Moderator Art Eatman is out of pocket for brief time, and I take this action in his stead.

Johnny Guest
THR Staff

cracked butt
October 29, 2008, 10:20 AM
In a weird way I can defend Ruger's stance on the AWB and selling out gun owners- it was a business decision. Cheaper and more durable surplus SKSs and AKs were far superior to one of his biggest sellers: the Mini-14/30. Banning or restricting their import would put more money in his pocket. I can't see any advantage to Cooper's position and therefore cannot figure out even a devil's advocate defense of his political preferences.

spuscg
October 29, 2008, 10:31 AM
bill ruger kind of lost my respect for that whole deal "no honest man needs more than 10 rounds." ill buy from ruger. bill's dead and his successors started selling high capacity mags again

bdickens
October 29, 2008, 10:46 AM
My letter, going out today by snailmail for maximum impact:

Byron Dickens
[address]

Dan Cooper,
Cooper Firearms of Montana
P.O. Box 114,
Stevensville, MT 59870

Mr. Cooper:
I am sorely disappointed to discover that you, as a firearms manufacturer and NRA member, would support Barack Obama for President. That is a slap in the face to your fellow NRA members.

A gun owner voting for Obama is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders. Obama supports every onerous and punitive gun control measure ever proposed. He opposes concealed carry laws and thinks that the draconian bans of Washington DC and Chicago should be the model for the rest of the country. He has supported bans on commonly available sporting ammunition and bans on commonly available sporting arms. In Obama's perfect world, only a select few (meaning the wealthy and politically connected) would ever be allowed access to firearms for any purpose at all, whether hunting, self-defense or target shooting.

You, sir, are what Lenin termed a “useful idiot.” You have been taken with your disenchantment with current US policy and Obama's empty promises and portrayal as the Second Coming and failed to see that his is the pathway to socialism, the destruction of the Second Amendment and the destruction of the Constitution in general. His writings, his associations, and his voting record make that clear. Your support of Obama would eventually lead to your own destruction.

When I am shopping for my next rifle, I will most assuredly not buy one of yours. And I will urge everyone I know not to buy one either. Smith & Wesson and Ruger were both hurt by their actions in the past to throw gun owners under the bus. They are both large companies. I doubt yours will survive. May your competition prosper.

Respectfully,


Byron Dickens.

contender
October 29, 2008, 10:51 AM
something is missing here and an angle that no one has pointed out----yet.

of all the people in this Country, and of all the businnesses in this Country, just how did mr. cooper of cooper firearms wind up as the lead in the article---with what appears to be direct quotes as well from mr. cooper?

did usatoday root around and found a gun business that supports obama? or did cooper shoot-off his mouth about being an obama supporter and word got back to the liberal press? did usatoday seek out cooper for an interview or did cooper seek out usatoday?

if the cooper firearms name received little exposure before, it certainly has received it now.

cooper has a right to vote however he wants to and make any public statements he wants to---just like the dixie clucks.........if folks want to buy his product--so be it, it's still a free Country. If folks want to boycott his product--so be it, it's still a free Country.

will cooper survive?----hopefully they will under different ownership as i hate to see another gun maker go down the tubes-----but if they go down the tubes on cooper's watch---then so be it......he is done and only selling of the business to a pro-2A supporter might save it----maybe.

As far as still boycotting ruger and smith and wesson, this is my opinion. I can still see boycotting ruger and smith---if ruger was still owned by bill ruger and smith was still owned by the plumbing outfit--but this is not the case today. Ruger is basicly under different ownership and management from the Bill Ruger days----the company as far as i know does not have any ruger family members left on the board and the ruger family no longer has controling interests in the company, it is a new company with a new direction. S&W----same thing goes, the company was boycotted and punished enough for their clinton era actions that the company was sold off to new owners with a totally different stand---and it is pro-2A.

i do not believe in punishing the sons for the crimes of the fathers----that reminds me of a certain religion we are fighting now. This line of thinking is similar to----for example--hating the U.S. today for something that was done under the Clinton reign of terror. Clinton was in charge and the AWB came to pass------should we hate and not support our Country for something that happened years ago under the clinton watch--after all, was not clinton in effect the CEO of the Country? NO, we put the blame squarely where it belongs. In effect, we "boycotted" the democrats out of office and put republicans in to be in charge----made a change in the company (Country), made our Country better, and continue to support her---not hate her because of clinton.

So blame Bill Ruger all you want, or blame the british outfit that previously owned s&w all you want----but to keep harboring blame and hate for these two companies today is doing nothing more than putting the son to death for the crimes of the father. And in this case, the "sons" have been working their tails off trying to do right..........

Highland Ranger
October 29, 2008, 10:59 AM
Seems to me that people whose public face is as a business person should just keep it to themselves. And especially when their personal views conflict with the interests of the business.

That includes everyone in Hollywood and guys like this.

Seems like he's almost daring his customers to not buy his product.

I accept the challenge!

Sav .250
October 29, 2008, 11:05 AM
Saw this same subject posted on another forum site. Lots of discussion, mostly negative.
Cooper Rifles may well suffer in the long run as you can`t trample your customer base.
They can support whom ever they want but consumers don`t forget.

Vern Humphrey
October 29, 2008, 11:18 AM
This from Brownells website:
www.brownells.com
A Gun Owner's Political Backup Plan

It's barely a week before the election that determines the direction of our country for the next four years. If you believe the polls, the presidential race appears to favor an anti-gun candidate, and gun owners have good reason to be concerned. What's our backup plan? As head of the federal government, the President has a lot of power, but remember that Congress actually makes the laws we live by.

The outcomes of critical U.S. House and Senate races on Nov. 4 will be as important for the future of our Second Amendment rights as who wins the White House. Our votes-and our dollars-make a much larger impact in these races than the run for President. Even if the Presidential race doesn't go the way you want, you can still have plenty of influence on how our country is governed in the coming years. This also means that a crucial Congressional race in a different state may also have a huge impact on your Second Amendment rights.

A great example of a candidate who will vigorously represent gun owners everywhere is Jim Gilmore, running for U.S. Senate from Virginia. From his deep commitment to the NRA and fantastic service on its Board, we can tell you Jim will be a strong Second Amendment Senator. If Jim gets elected, we all win, regardless of where we live. We need people like Jim Gilmore in Congress - regardless of who wins the White House.

Many other good pro-gun House and Senate candidates are fighting tough races, as they put on a full-court press this week into the late hours of next Monday. They need our help. Something you can do today is make small donations to some of these Senate and House candidates (up to $2,300 for federal races). Pick the ones that represent your values and the way of life you want protected. They can accept donations from anyone anywhere in the country, and all of them have websites, like Jim Gilmore's www.jimgilmoreforsenate.com, where you can make your donation today. This is how we do it:

1. Review the Electoral Vote website to find close races.
a. Senate Races
b. House Races

2. Check the NRA's ranking of the candidates at www.NRAPVF.org

3. Find Senate and House candidates who will represent our firearms rights, and donate to their campaigns.

Please join us in taking positive action right now, while there's still time, before next Tuesday. Support pro-gun candidates for Congress, and help defend our gun-owning rights against possible negative fallout from the Presidential election.

Frank & Pete Brownell

We know who are our friends and we know who aren't.

Rem700SD
October 29, 2008, 11:29 AM
Do you think Cooper can maybe get a representative on Tom's Guntalk? That would help clear the air on this...

Vern Humphrey
October 29, 2008, 11:34 AM
Do you think Cooper can maybe get a representative on Tom's Guntalk? That would help clear the air on this...
He's already had a representative on USA Today -- himself.

Read what he said. It seems pretty clear to me.

taliv
October 29, 2008, 11:41 AM
fwiw, to a man, everyone i know who has been featured in a newspaper feels their words were twisted out of context and feels misrepresented. so i don't totally trust USAToday to get him right, given their obvious bias and the chaos they probably think they'd cause by having a well-respected gun mfg supporting obama.
i'd put more weight on what he said on his website

Vern Humphrey
October 29, 2008, 11:42 AM
For those who missed it, here's an excerpt. Or you can read the whole thing at http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...ez-money_N.htm

WASHINGTON — Dan Cooper, a proud member of the National Rifle Association, has backed Republicans for most of his life. He's the chief executive of Cooper Arms, a small Montana company that makes hunting rifles.

Cooper said he voted for George W. Bush in 2000, having voted in past elections for every Republican presidential nominee back to Richard Nixon. In October 1992, he presented a specially made rifle to the first President. Bush during a Billings campaign event.

This year, Cooper has given $3,300 to the campaign of Democrat Barack Obama. That's on top of the $1,000 check he wrote to Obama's U.S. Senate campaign in 2004, after he was dazzled by Obama's speech at that year's Democratic National Convention.

Cooper is a player in one of the little-told dramas of the 2008 presidential campaign: how Obama has been able to out-raise Republican John McCain among swaths of the business community, outperforming previous Democratic presidential nominees in drawing business support.

Cooper changed sides, he said, "probably because of the war. And also because the Republican Party has moved so far right in recent years."

He also likes Obama's message about "the retooling of America, which involves the building of middle-class jobs and helping American small business be competitive with those overseas."

What could he say on the radio or on his website that would change this statement?

Husker1911
October 29, 2008, 12:06 PM
A certain Colonel Jeff Cooper bristles from his eternal reward. Sad the Montana Coopers aren't up to the example Jeff Cooper displayed his entire life.

Dan Cooper wouldn't be qualified to wipe Jeff Cooper's boots.

cracked butt
October 29, 2008, 12:16 PM
Another thought on this:

Maybe Cooper doesn't care...

Maybe a lot of his customers are of the same crowd that buy $20,000 shotguns to shoot skeet but who will vote democrat every time and really don't care if the 'average' Joe American can own a pistol or a semi-auto rifle or shotgun. There are plenty of Obama supporters amongst hunters for whatever twisted reason as well.

jerkface11
October 29, 2008, 12:28 PM
And just think in another thread people were explaining how a gunstore can't possibly be owned by an anti. Yet here is a GUN MAKER.

ArfinGreebly
October 29, 2008, 12:31 PM
Has anyone heard from Jim Zumbo on this?

Any word from other high profile gunnies -- like, say, Ted Nugent -- on this matter?

+1 on having Tom Gresham shine a little light on this.

I would be willing to bet that Tom knows Dan (and that Jim does, too).

I'm well acquainted with how the press distorts things, and I'd like to hear Dan's own words from Dan's own lips.

Tom? You out there?

I don't trust the press here.

It's too easy for us to be stampeded against our own.

Jim Zumbo took the heat because of something he, himself, wrote and which he, himself, published. There was no "distortion by the press" in that case. It was his own words by his own hand.

Here we have a liberal paper with a huge anti-gun bias, who absolutely delight in seeing fracture lines in the gun-owning community, gleefully publishing the most damaging portions of what quotes they have from a respected gun maker.

Am I willing to go into lemming mode and charge over the cliff about this? Not until Dan Cooper has had a chance to tell us his side of the story, in his own words.

Yes, I know, I may have to "listen between the lines" a bit, but I still want to hear from him.

I want to hear what Jim Zumbo has to say when Jim talks to him. I want to hear what Ted has to say.

Think I'll send a PM to Tom.

This needs an actual follow-up.

HGUNHNTR
October 29, 2008, 12:31 PM
Geez.....this is why the "average Joe American" never escapes his mediocrity.

Makes me glad I am a "Non-Average Joe"

Tarvis
October 29, 2008, 12:31 PM
Can someone PM me what a "Zumbo" is? I tried google with no luck...
Nevermind, found it ;).

Horsemany
October 29, 2008, 12:32 PM
Hey Jerkface,

He's not necessarily anti-gun is he? Let's not go overboard. Let's not be one issue voters especially with everything that's wrong in this country right now. Flame away!

HGUNHNTR
October 29, 2008, 12:33 PM
Jim Zumbo dared to have his own opinion, bad boy! Shame on excercising your First Amendment Right!

Jolly Rogers
October 29, 2008, 12:43 PM
All I have to say is someone that uses the first ammendment better be prepared for the reaction. Particularly if it is a polarizing statment. Nuff said.
Joe

rbernie
October 29, 2008, 12:48 PM
Jim Zumbo dared to have his own opinion, bad boy! Shame on excercising your First Amendment Right!HGUNHNTR, once again you display that you clearly do not comprehend the issue at hand, and prefer to limit your contribution to shallow pokes.

Zumbo was allowed his opinion. Cooper is allowed his opinion. Angry rhetoric aside at their perceived betrayal, very few people will deny these two (and anyone else) their basic right to speak their minds. We *do* object to them trying to take money from us while also denigrating us or otherwise selling our rights down the river.

Lots of people contribute to all sorts of political compaigns, and lots of people express their political views in public. For example, you didn't see a lot of screaming and yelling when Colin Powell came out in favor of one presidential candidate or t'other. It's his right to hold that opinion, and it's his right to express that opinion.

But if Colin Powell were to try to profit by selling products that could only exist in the market due to the presence of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, I would expect that he would be mindful of that dependancy. I would also expect his customers to remind him of that if he were ever to forget it.

Cooper can hold his opinion. Cooper can try to sell me a firearm of his making while telling me that he directly or indirectly supports radical and sweeping gun control. I can tell him NO THANKS.

And that's what this thread is all about - all of us telling Cooper, NO THANKS.

TT
October 29, 2008, 12:48 PM
No one is trying to infringe on Cooper’s First Amendment rights- but with the right to speak your mind comes corresponding responsibility. If Cooper believes it worth sacrificing the right to own firearms for self-defense in order to end US military operations overseas, then he needs to accept that a lot of gun owners are going to hold that against him. The First Amendment does not require that citizens do business with people who are their political opponents- in fact, not associating with your political enemies is a protected act itself.

ArmedBear
October 29, 2008, 12:50 PM
Maybe a lot of his customers are of the same crowd that buy $20,000 shotguns to shoot skeet but who will vote democrat every time

"Crowd?"

Funny, but if there were a "crowd," you'd think I'd have met a few. As it stands, I can't say I've met even one.

I've been a member of the Board of Directors of the last open-to-the-public shotgun range in San Diego County for the past year. So it's likely I'd have met a few, if there were a "crowd."

Yeah, there are Zumbos out there. But a "crowd"? Not where I've been.

Furthermore, it's stupid for RKBA advocates to alienate our allies due to class envy.

I am all for keeping my money out of the hands of Cooper, Zumbo, et al. by not buying products, magazines, etc. However, assuming that someone who owns some AAA walnut is anti-RKBA is silly, and it's usually wrong -- I've gotten to know some of these guys a bit better, and I have a bit of a clue about what's in their closets, and what their politics are.

hksw
October 29, 2008, 12:53 PM
Jim Zumbo dared to have his own opinion, bad boy! Shame on excercising your First Amendment Right!

Zumbo certainly has his right to free speech, just like every other EBR owner.

How involved is Cooper the man with cooper the company?

cooper is still quite active in the company making the meet-and-greet rounds around the country as the head.

ArmedBear
October 29, 2008, 12:57 PM
BTW the First Amendment means, or should mean, that the government can't stop you from expressing your opinion.

It doesn't mean I have any obligation to like what you express, or to continue to support beliefs or politics I abhor. It would be wrong to use government to try to shut someone up (as Obama has tried with the NRA recently), but once I've heard what someone has to say, I have every right to object, and act on those objections using whatever legal and moral means I have at my disposal.

Gaffer
October 29, 2008, 01:04 PM
From The Shooting Wire:
Did He or Didn't He?
Internet chat rooms and discussion boards are boiling over after a report by Ken Dilanian of USA Today said Dan Cooper, "chief executive of Cooper Arms, a small Montana company that makes hunting rifles" was a supporter and donor to- the Obama for President campaign. According to the USA Today story, Cooper donated $3,300 to Senator Obama's current campaign and had donated to his 2004 Senate campaign after he was "dazzled by Obama's speech at that year's Democratic National Convention." As you can imagine, this hasn't gone down well with gun owners.

But is the report true? This statement posted on the Cooper Firearms website would seem to indicate otherwise:

"Regarding the USA Today Article. Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc. did not contribute and does not support in any fashion the campaign of Senator Obama. Nine months ago Dan Cooper (personally) made an online donation to the campaign in an effort to help defeat Hillary Clinton and in protest of American plant closures and the shipping of jobs overseas. Three months ago he made yet another donation to the McCain campaign and the RNC totaling over twice that given to Obama campaign. There is no doubt that the article in USA Today has caused a considerable response. To this end we are encouraged and stand with our fellow NRA members and supporters of the Second Amendment and against those who oppose it."

The end of this story is far from written, but were Cooper's actions were not inaccurately reported in order to fit inside the "More executives sold on Obama" headline, Mr. Cooper is only beginning to feel the ire of already angry gun owners. When your name is on the sign, there is precious little discrimination between your personal actions and those of your company. We'll keep you posted.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
October 29, 2008, 01:09 PM
Well, I want to see the open letter from him to USA today demanding a retraction then, for the alleged blatent lies attributed to Mr. Cooper by this rogue USA today reporter. Sure is easy to backpaddle, but I'm willing to keep an open mind....if he didn't contribute the larger amount of $3,300 more recently, then that should be easily verifiable whether he did or not, make a contribution AFTER the primary.

If you pick that apart and look at it closely, it seems to be a dexterious dance and dodge:

"Regarding the USA Today Article. Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc. did not contribute and does not support in any fashion the campaign of Senator Obama.

OK, the company doesn't support the Obama Campaign, but what about Mr. Cooper personally?

Nine months ago Dan Cooper (personally) made an online donation to the campaign in an effort to help defeat Hillary Clinton and in protest of American plant closures and the shipping of jobs overseas.

This does NOT specifically say that in addition to this disclosed contribution during the primaries, that he did NOT ALSO give more later (personally). Why not?

Three months ago he made yet another donation to the McCain campaign and the RNC totaling over twice that given to Obama campaign.

Twice that amount given originally to the Obama campaign, or twice the TOTAL amount given to the Obama campaign, from the first one admitted in the primaries, AND the (possible, alleged) second one which is not specifically denied by this statement, but which is claimed by the USA Today reporter?

There is no doubt that the article in USA Today has caused a considerable response.

Yeah....

To this end we are encouraged and stand with our fellow NRA members and supporters of the Second Amendment and against those who oppose it."

Right, but according to Mr. Obama, he himself supports the 2nd amendment, too, allegedly, so since you ARE (evidently) an Obama supporter, then by this quoted statement you *could very well* mean to be saying: "we are encouraged and stand with our fellow NRA members and supporters of the Second Amendment (like Obama) and against those who oppose it."

Again, WHY no specific endorsement of the McCain campaign? Why no specific unequivocal statement denying support of the Obama campaign for Dan Cooper himself personally, in addition to the company?

Again, I'm willing to keep an open mind, and I certainly don't want to harm the company at all if it's not deserved, but that is far from an ironclad, non-weasal statement.

HGUNHNTR
October 29, 2008, 01:11 PM
Thanks rbernie, once again you have set me straight.

I guess we all owe you a debt of gratitude.

Carry on peasants.

contender
October 29, 2008, 01:13 PM
where is the truth indeed.........
Three months ago he made yet another donation to the McCain campaign and the RNC totaling over twice that given to Obama campaign.

this is from the Federal Election Commission website and is free for all to use
http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/norindsea.shtml

i just merely typed cooper dan and got a list of possibilities and low and behold from Montana this is what i found to the obama camp.....


COOPER, DAN
STEVENSVILLE, MT 59870
COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO

OBAMA, BARACK
VIA OBAMA FOR AMERICA
01/17/2007 2100.00 27930594621
02/06/2008 -900.00 28930926481
02/06/2008 900.00 28930926482
02/06/2008 1000.00 28930926481


this is the only listed donations from cooper of cooper arms.

THERE WERE NO OTHER DONATIONS FROM HIM LISTED.

so where is the donations to the republicans that he has now publicly stated he made????????

i have yet to find the "1st" donation to mcain.....more or less the stated "another" donation to mcain......

cracked butt
October 29, 2008, 01:14 PM
Funny, but if there were a "crowd," you'd think I'd have met a few. As it stands, I can't say I've met even one.

I've been a member of the Board of Directors of the last open-to-the-public shotgun range in San Diego County for the past year. So it's likely I'd have met a few, if there were a "crowd."

Yeah, there are Zumbos out there. But a "crowd"? Not where I've been.

Furthermore, it's stupid for RKBA advocates to alienate our allies due to class envy.


I grew up with that type, and no this wasn't public ranges, but private conservation/trap clubs. I used to shoot in a trap league at the very range where members called the authorities for Mr. Olafson having the audacity of shooting his evil black rifle at their range. Some of the people I was around when growing up were as hard core gun nuts as anyone here, others really didn't care so long as they could show up on sunday in their mid-life-crisis-mobile and show off their new Perazzi shotgun.

When I moved away from the area to work my first job out of college, I showed up at a conservation club to shoot bullseye pistol league. The talk afterward turned toward RKBA- and one of the comments I heard was that they wished some of the shotgunners would get on board and help protect the right to own black guns as well. That statement was kind of shocking to me at the time and was the first time I ever heard the word 'black guns' - this was in the year 1997 or so....

I agree that it doesn't help us to divide ourselves, but don't kid yourself, there are plenty of gun owners out there that really don't care if you can own an AK clone or not and will vote against that right every time. I live in a state that probably has a higher per capita of hunters than any other, yet somehow we can't get concealed carry passed, we have an anti-gun extremist in his second term as governor.

torpid
October 29, 2008, 01:19 PM
Jim Zumbo dared to have his own opinion, bad boy! Shame on excercising your First Amendment Right!


I guess I must have missed the part where the United States Government attempted to suppress Jim Zumbo's freedom of speech.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
October 29, 2008, 01:25 PM
Point of fact: When, exactly, were the D party primaries over?

Olympus
October 29, 2008, 01:35 PM
I will say that unless Cooper Firearms made a public statement, I feel legititimate donations to political candidates should not be public news. However, given the leanings, I can not support Dan Cooper's company with my money in the future.

I think we all agree on that. Excellent point to keep bringing up though!

And as for the comment made on the Cooper website, it looks like none of us are buying into this damage control spin they're putting on it. I think the fact that the statement was placed on the website is a good indication that the emails that I and apparently others members have sent to the company are starting to have their effect. I'm proud that other people have taken the time to email the company make their opinion heard. And I personally liked the post from the member who copied the email they sent to Cooper and posted it here. Short and sweet and very professional.

I still haven't received any reply from the email I sent them.

jerkface11
October 29, 2008, 01:51 PM
He's not necessarily anti-gun is he? Let's not go overboard. Let's not be one issue voters especially with everything that's wrong in this country right now. Flame away!

A man is known by the company that he keeps. If you vote for a gun banner you support gun bans. If you vote for a communist you support communism. If you vote for a certain presidential candidate you support both.

cracked butt
October 29, 2008, 02:00 PM
A man is known by the company that he keeps. If you vote for a gun banner you support gun bans. If you vote for a communist you support communism. If you vote for a certain presidential candidate you support both.

That's signature material:cool:

.

Olympus
October 29, 2008, 02:09 PM
Quote:
A man is known by the company that he keeps. If you vote for a gun banner you support gun bans. If you vote for a communist you support communism. If you vote for a certain presidential candidate you support both.

That's signature material


Very nice!

BullfrogKen
October 29, 2008, 02:35 PM
jerkface11 said: A man is known by the company that he keeps. If you vote for a gun banner you support gun bans. If you vote for a communist you support communism. If you vote for a certain presidential candidate you support both.

You know, that's a nice, simple statement to make. In a simple world, its easy to draw simple conclusions about why people do what they do.


Anyone remember "Operation Chaos"? I can remember just this summer Rush Limbaugh was encouraging his audience, Republicans, to vote for Hillary Clinton in the primaries. And lots of them did. There's a strong argument to be made that the reason Obama lost that last string of primaries was because thousands and thousands of Republicans switched parties and voted for Hillary Clinton. Are they all gun ban supporters, too?


Simple conclusions for simple worlds.


I have no idea what Mr. Cooper's political affiliation is. I really don't care. I do know that the press often gets things wrong. Sometimes its by accident. Sometimes its by ignorance. Sometimes its by intent. I'm not making a conclusion about this by what USA Today reports on it.


Remember to that time back to before the primaries, and during them this summer? Obama wasn't viewed as the stronger candidate. In fact, the collective wisdom held this was Hillary's election to lose, and an Obama candidacy was seen as laughable and dismissed with a hand wave. No one knew who was going to be the Republican candidate. But everyone was scared as hell of Hillary. At the beginning of the year she looked like a sure winner. Remember?


These donations were made at the beginning of the year. Before the primaries. Back when everyone thought Hillary was the frontrunner, because she was. And no one knew who in the Republican party was strong enough to stand up against her.


You all can busy yourself building the gallows if you'd like. I know better than to trust the press. And the "truth" found on internet discussion boards. I'm reserving my judgment on this one until I hear more from him, directly from him, unfiltered and unedited, and see what he comes up with as evidence to challenge what's being said about him.

Vern Humphrey
October 29, 2008, 02:50 PM
Here's what Cooper said, as quoted in USA Today:
Cooper changed sides, he said, "probably because of the war. And also because the Republican Party has moved so far right in recent years."
As another poster said, despite the claim on the Cooper Arms website, the Federal Election Commission has no record of any contributions to the McCain campaign. It would appear then, that the Cooper website is wrong.

As the saying goes, "Oh what a tangled web weave when first we practice to deceive." Cooper should remember that.

Handgunner
October 29, 2008, 02:55 PM
As the saying goes, "Oh what a tangled web weave when first we practice to deceive." Cooper should remember that.

Something tells me he will. ;)

Olympus
October 29, 2008, 02:56 PM
I agree that the media tends to twist things. But in this case, it's hard to twist a financial campaign contribution made to a candidate. There's always a papertrail. What his intentions were will probably never be understood by us. We just have to make decisions based on the facts.

If he donated to the Obama senatorial campaign in 2004 then that pretty much blows the theory that he was trying to get someone to defeat Hillary. That's a pretty feable excuse if you've donated to Obama before he decided to run for president.

Maybe it's just my line of thinking, but if I was Cooper and unless I had money just to throw away, I think I would have donated that money to a Republican candidate instead of trying to shift the balance of the Dem primary. And looking at campaign costs in general, the donation by Cooper was barely a drop in the bucket. Not even close to an amount that could cause one candidate to move ahead of another. Hasn't anyone thought about that yet?

BullfrogKen
October 29, 2008, 03:02 PM
Vern Humphrey said: Here's what Cooper said, as quoted in USA Today:

And you believe USA Today? You believe them enough to know they didn't make a mistake? Didn't misrepresent something he said? Misunderstand something he said? Or just plain used something out of context to twist what he said?


Yeah, that never happens.


I'm upset with the Republican party, too. But I'd never go on record with the press saying it. When the press calls my house to ask me to make statements, I know better. I'm short with my answers, and take great effort to make sure I don't say anything that can be used out of context. It still happens.


I'll wait and see how he responds, and make my own decision on what Mr. Cooper's political views are based upon all the evidence available, not just what USA Today tells me they are.

aloharover
October 29, 2008, 03:03 PM
There are no records of the FEC website of contributions to McCain from him, only Obama:

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $2,100 1/17/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $50 6/6/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $50 7/26/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-900 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $900 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $1,000 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-200 4/15/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $200 4/15/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $200 4/15/2008

http://fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/mapApp.do

FLA2760
October 29, 2008, 03:03 PM
ImaRugerFan wrote, "Who cares? McCain is no pro-gunner that's for sure. You guys have been watching too many NRA commercials"
And YOU have been drinking too much Obama Kool Aid. Snap out of it!

Ruger also wrote,"You guys are so dramatic. As president the *only* thing that Obama could possibly do, or not do, is veto an AWB that congress passes".

And appoint anti gun Supreme Court justices. We only won Heller by One vote.

Lone_Gunman
October 29, 2008, 03:12 PM
If he was misquoted in the USA today, why didn't he indicate that on his website.

I think the FEC records say all that needs to be said.

Cooper can vote for whoever he wants. I can buy guns from whomever I want, and it won't be him.

Olympus
October 29, 2008, 03:12 PM
There are no records of the FEC website of contributions to McCain from him, only Obama:

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $2,100 1/17/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $50 6/6/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $50 7/26/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-900 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $900 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $1,000 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-200 4/15/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $200 4/15/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $200 4/15/2008

http://fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/mapApp.do

LMAO! Kinda hard to argue with that! Straight from the Federal Election Commission!

If he was misquoted in the USA today, why didn't he indicate that on his website.

I think everyone here knows the answer to that, whether they admit it or not.

Vern Humphrey
October 29, 2008, 03:13 PM
Vern Humphrey said: Here's what Cooper said, as quoted in USA Today:

And Bullfrogken said: And you believe USA Today? You believe them enough to know they didn't make a mistake? Didn't misrepresent something he said? Misunderstand something he said? Or just plain used something out of context to twist what he said?

Show me where Cooper claims he was misquoted. He doesn't -- because they probably have him on tape.

But I can show you where his website claims he gave more money to McCain -- and as you see in a couple of posts ahead of this one, the Federal Election Commission has no record of those "donations."

cracked butt
October 29, 2008, 03:16 PM
If it were a conspiracy to get Obama nominated over Hillary, would expect to see similar contribution patterns from some people like Ronnie Barret, Les Baer, and Walt Kuleck not to mention from companies like Bushmaster, DPMS, Springfield Armory, and Kimber.

Olympus
October 29, 2008, 03:20 PM
A few thousand dollars from one donor is hardly what I call a conspiracy to get one candidate elected over another. You'd be pretty stupid to think that insignificant of an amount would do much at all.

A man is known by the company that he keeps. If you vote for a gun banner you support gun bans. If you vote for a communist you support communism. If you vote for a certain presidential candidate you support both.

Don't forget socialist!

Vern Humphrey
October 29, 2008, 03:23 PM
It may not get Obama elected, but it will sure put a crimp in Cooper Arms' business.

Olympus
October 29, 2008, 03:27 PM
I'd say from their damage control statement they released on the website that that's exactly what they're afraid of.

Vern Humphrey
October 29, 2008, 03:34 PM
They should be -- especially after posting a lie, claiming he gave more more money to McCain -- a lie that is refuted by the Federal Election Commission.

Olympus
October 29, 2008, 03:41 PM
I guess in their haste to "staunch the bleeding" they forgot that those are matter of public record and easily tracked.

MikePGS
October 29, 2008, 04:00 PM
Curiously the letter that was on the website talking about how it was all a misunderstanding is now gone.

Vern Humphrey
October 29, 2008, 04:05 PM
I wonder why?

Olympus
October 29, 2008, 04:15 PM
Maybe they decided lying to their customers was just as bad!

STRIKE TWO!

hags
October 29, 2008, 04:26 PM
There are no records of the FEC website of contributions to McCain from him, only Obama:

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $2,100 1/17/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $50 6/6/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $50 7/26/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-900 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $900 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $1,000 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-200 4/15/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $200 4/15/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $200 4/15/2008

http://fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/mapApp.do

Wow, I'm not sure what to make of that. Doesn't speak well for Dan Cooper's allegiance to his industry, his customers or their interests.
Strikes me as kind of arrogant.

MikePGS
October 29, 2008, 04:28 PM
Maybe they were shocked to find that we common folk who don't feel like spending thousands of dollars on a bolt action rifle were able to suss out the truth.

Olympus
October 29, 2008, 04:36 PM
Dang hillbillies with too much time on their hands!

Vern Humphrey
October 29, 2008, 04:40 PM
Dang hillbillies with too much time on their hands!
The liberals just haven't dumbed down the schools enough. There are still people who can read and write!:barf:

CRITGIT
October 29, 2008, 04:44 PM
Hopefully this thread will continue long enough for the price of a quality Cooper firearm to be reduced substantially. I'm considering a new.17 tackdriver and Coopers are some of the finest.
By all means boycott the guy!:D
In a week it'll all be over but the tantrums! :neener:

CRITGIT

contender
October 29, 2008, 07:03 PM
the cooper firearms website response ha now changed to this. they have ased cooper to resign------just wondering now if his wife is on the board.........

In response to the recent article highlighting Dan Cooper’s personal political donations, the board of directors, shareholders and employees of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc would like to issue the following statement.

The employees, shareholders and board of directors of Cooper Firearms of Montana do not share the personal political views of Dan Cooper.

Although we all believe everyone has a right to vote and donate as they see fit, it has become apparent that the fallout may affect more than just Mr. Cooper. It may also affect the employees and the shareholders of Cooper Firearms.

The board of directors has asked Mr. Cooper to resign as President of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc.

Daily operations will continue with the competent staff currently in place in Stevensville, MT producing the finest, most accurate rifles money can buy.

Dan Cooper has spent all of his working life producing the highest quality rifles built here in the USA. He started with nothing but the American Dream and built that into firearms company anyone would be proud of. We firmly believe Dan stands by the 2nd amendment.
We wish him all of the best in his future pursuits.

Vern Humphrey
October 29, 2008, 07:11 PM
So they kicked him out. Wonder how high he'll bounce when he lands?

mgregg85
October 29, 2008, 07:28 PM
Wow, I'm no fan of the republican party by any means(the only freedom they seem to support is the second amendment) but Obama is the worst candidate(as far as RKBA is concerned) the democrats have ever chosen.

I didn't plan on buying a cooper but now I never will. I'm still not crazy about buying smith and wesson stuff since they sold out to the clinton goon squad in 2000.

Good for the cooper board for tossing him out of the company, hopefully its more than just an act.

TT
October 29, 2008, 07:31 PM
We firmly believe Dan stands by the 2nd amendment.

Oh brother.

contender
October 29, 2008, 07:33 PM
they appeared to had lied with their first statement about the donations...........wonder if there are any more lies in this statement..........

i for one am interested to know who isleft on the board of directors but i can't find that info..........

and i don't know how to look it up to see if cooper firearms is listed in any stock markets and issues stocks..........

can you really trust what ever they say after the questionable first response out of them?

or is this just paranoia and a big miss understanding......

or

to borrow a famous movie line, "what we have here is a failure to communicate"......................

22-rimfire
October 29, 2008, 07:35 PM
He can blame USA Today. These papers really care about you.

ArfinGreebly
October 29, 2008, 07:51 PM
I wonder if USA Today will print a correction . . . ?

I mean, after all, he's no longer head of the company . . .

hso
October 29, 2008, 08:04 PM
AG,

There's a story here for them to print, but it ain't going to be a correction. Mr. Cooper just got zumboed.

hksw
October 29, 2008, 08:37 PM
Right, but according to Mr. Obama, he himself supports the 2nd amendment, too, allegedly, so since you ARE (evidently) an Obama supporter, then by this quoted statement you *could very well* mean to be saying: "we are encouraged and stand with our fellow NRA members and supporters of the Second Amendment (like Obama) and against those who oppose it."


From what I have heard from obama, this is not entirely accurate. From what I have heard from himself is that he agrees that the 2ndA as it is worded does refer to individuals (as what all pro-gunners believe). He has not said, however, that he supports it. In fact, his actions and statements are quite the opposite.

MikePGS
October 29, 2008, 09:13 PM
I see that they have asked him to step down, but depending on how much stock he owns in the company that request could be essentially worthless.
"Step down, eh? Well I actually own 60 percent of the company, so I'm voting against it".

ForrestJr
October 29, 2008, 10:07 PM
"Resign as President" does not mean the same thing as SEVER ALL TIES - which is what is required. So long as Dan Cooper remains involved with Cooper Firearms and reaps monetary benefit from the sale of it's products, 2nd Amendment supporters are not going to be satisfied.

No Fear
October 29, 2008, 10:16 PM
Getting fired because one supported the wrong candidate for president? Anyone else find that unamerican and very chilling.

JWarren
October 29, 2008, 10:29 PM
Getting fired because one supported the wrong candidate for president? Anyone else find that unamerican and very chilling.


Getting fired because of dumb choices that impact your INVESTORS by turning public opinion against your company is practically the definition of "American.'


What is "un-American" is the recent notion that actions do not have consequences.


-- John

Handgunner
October 29, 2008, 10:29 PM
What I find chilling is a rifle manufacturer selling out to a gun grabbing politician. :banghead:

tmajors
October 29, 2008, 10:30 PM
Getting fired because one supported the wrong candidate for president?

If he was just a low level employee at any other company maybe. But in this case supporting Obama publicly is a direct conflict of interest to his company and to his shareholders. His shareholders spoke and the board of directors listened.

Obama is bad for the gun business in pretty much every way...well except the marked increase in gun sales from people buying while they still can.

contender
October 29, 2008, 11:06 PM
What is "un-American" is the recent notion that actions do not have consequences.




priceless............and well said.................

Horsemany
October 29, 2008, 11:10 PM
I'm in agreement it's unAmerican to lose one's job and business because of political beliefs. They used to do things like that in Germany and Russia about 60 years ago. Look at the big picture folks. Dan Cooper will be a wealthy man with or without the extremists buying his guns. You're not all as important as you think you are.

rbernie
October 29, 2008, 11:14 PM
I'm in agreement it's unAmerican to lose one's job and business because of political beliefs.He didn't lose his job because of his beliefs. He lost his job because he willingly pissed the well from which his company drank.

There's a world of difference.

They used to do things like that in Germany and Russia about 60 years ago. Actually, you have it backwards. In Russia, you had ZERO accountability towards your job, and when you screwed up you'd just be assigned a new job. The free market pretty much establishes, however, that each employee is accountable to his/her employer. In fact, in my 25+ years in the workplace I've ALWAYS had to sign a Code of Conduct type of contract that stipulated that I was expected to support my company in the marketplace and refrain from behavior that would harm their reputation, standing, or competitiveness.

olyeller
October 29, 2008, 11:17 PM
How big is the company?
Im thinking that he sold his interest to his wife or kid, and will still be a part of the co.

I cant see they are that big of a company to have a real board of directors.

Horsemany
October 29, 2008, 11:24 PM
Quote:
I'm in agreement it's unAmerican to lose one's job and business because of political beliefs.

He didn't lose his job because of his beliefs. He lost his job because he willingly pissed the well from which his company drank.

There's a world of difference.

rbernie,

That's really the same thing just phrased a different way IMO. The reason he is viewed as "pissing in the well from which his company drank", is because of his political beliefs. Everyone's got a right to a public opinion but let's not forget the big picture. In 4 or 8 years we can compile a list of all the guns Obama has taken away from you. It ain't gonna happen.

Gord
October 29, 2008, 11:27 PM
You're not all as important as you think you are.

Congratulations, you fail America 101.

Treo
October 29, 2008, 11:29 PM
Dan Cooper will be a wealthy man with or without the extremists buying his guns. You're not all as important as you think you are.

it has become apparent that the fallout may affect more than just Mr. Cooper. It may also affect the employees and the shareholders of Cooper Firearms.

The board of directors has asked Mr. Cooper to resign as President of Cooper Firearms of Montana

Apparently ( at least in Mr. Cooper's world] we are.

SpeedAKL
October 29, 2008, 11:33 PM
Wow. Not sure what to think of all this. I'm HIGHLY skeptical of the logic behind any gun manufacturer donating to Barack Obama, who is the most anti-gun presidential candidate ever run by a mainstream political party. OTOH, the company has taken action to remove him....and they build such beautiful rifles! What a mess....

Horsemany
October 29, 2008, 11:38 PM
Apparently ( at least in Mr. Cooper's world] we are.

I have several friends that have shot with Dan and I know a few odd facts about him. He's done more for shooting than any other gun mfg. I've ever heard about. He invites hundreds of salesman and customers out to his ranch for a week of shooting every summer. They shoot aspirins and Dan has his personal 223 floating around with 30,000 plus rounds through it.

I'm surprised how quickly the shooting folks will zone in like vultures over something like this. I'm actually a little dissapointed in my THR brethren. I guess everyone sticks together til there's a hint of disagreement about something like politics.

ArfinGreebly
October 29, 2008, 11:39 PM
I'm in agreement it's unAmerican to lose one's job and business because of political beliefs. They used to do things like that in Germany and Russia about 60 years ago. Look at the big picture folks. Dan Cooper will be a wealthy man with or without the extremists buying his guns. You're not all as important as you think you are.

UnAmerican to have your customers cheesed off because you publicly endorsed someone your customers don't like?

No, the customers have every right to be cheesed off. He has the right to speak his mind, and his customers have the right to turn their backs on him.

Not as important as we think?

You may be onto something there. When a company or the company's executives convince themselves that their customers are "not as important as they think" often that little bit of arrogance will show through in some publicly visible way, and the customers, who have their own ideas about their importance, and how they want to be treated, can be counted on to take their custom down the street.

The Dixie Chicks forgot who their customers were. They said something -- aloud and on tape -- that cheesed off their customers. They lost a lot of those customers.

Nobody's rights got trampled. The Chicks spoke their minds, and the customers spoke theirs.

So it is with Dan Cooper. He's free to speak his mind. His customers are free to abandon him.

His board of directors, however, having a financial stake in the continued prosperity of the company, might take a dim view of his doing -- in public -- something that harms their revenues.

They are free to pull their funding. Nobody's rights are being trampled. He's free to mouth off. They're free to stop financing him.

You're free to say whatever you please.

If you cheese someone off in the process, don't start whining about the First Amendment. Your customers are not the US government. Your customers won't pass laws limiting your freedom of speech.

Your customers will simply leave.

He gambled that his customers would a) agree with him, b) not find out, or c) not care.

He was wrong.

Horsemany
October 29, 2008, 11:44 PM
His customers are like anybody else I've ever met who buys guns..................Driven by cost. I'd like to see how many of us wouldn't buy a Cooper if the price was right. I'd bet most gun buyers morals take a back seat to the pocket book. I don't like whining. There are legitimate ways to spend our thoughts/time if we want to promote gun rights, but this ain't one of them IMO.

Gord
October 29, 2008, 11:46 PM
He's done more for shooting than any other gun mfg. I've ever heard about. He invites hundreds of salesman and customers out to his ranch for a week of shooting every summer. They shoot aspirins and Dan has his personal 223 floating around with 30,000 plus rounds through it.

No offense - but how is having a yearly shooting party doing anything for the 2A? It's a gunny version of the family BBQ. Look to Barrett if you want an example of putting your money where your mouth is.

Sounds like you have a dog in this fight...

Horsemany
October 29, 2008, 11:50 PM
Sounds like you have a dog in this fight.

Yeah. I think attacking gun mfg's right now is stupid. You want to make sure your 2a rights are safe? Let's be *&^ssed at Ruger for not giving us high cap mags, Cooper for donating to Obama, Smith & Wesson for giving into the Clinton's, etc.etc.

SEE THE BIGGER PICTURE. It doesn't help the cause to attack companies that make guns or gun related products even if they disagree with you sometimes. That's my dog in the fight. Flame away.

TexasRifleman
October 29, 2008, 11:52 PM
Let's be *&^ssed at Ruger for not giving us high cap mags, Cooper for donating to Obama, Smith & Wesson for giving into the Clinton's, etc.etc.


Yes let's. Let's also buy guns from Ronnie Barrett and others like him.

Sounds like a good plan to me, glad you are finally on board.

Gord
October 29, 2008, 11:56 PM
Yeah. I think attacking gun mfg's right now is stupid.

Why? Because they're valuable allies in the fight against the antis? Exactly - unless they support the antis themselves, whence they cease to be allies. Just because the guy happens to make guns, doesn't mean he doesn't subscribe to the notion that clays shotguns and expensive bolties (which he just so happens to make, lookie there) are A-OK, but uncouth things like handguns and EBRs have no place in civilian hands. This applies to any firearms manufacturer, not just Cooper, and has been proven in the past. Remember Ruger?

Your position makes no sense.

Treo
October 29, 2008, 11:58 PM
I'd like to see how many of us wouldn't buy a Cooper if the price was right. I'd bet most gun buyers morals take a back seat to the pocket book.

I wouldn't buy a Cooper at any price, niether would patrinize any gun dealer that sold them. And I would make sure ( as I did when I called Joe at cooper ) the dealer knew why I wasn't buying from him.

The Dixie Chicks analogy is appropriate, and to parphrase "W" " He shouldn't get upset if people don't want to buy his rifles" :D

If you know Cooper tell him bye bye for us

Horsemany
October 29, 2008, 11:59 PM
We'll have to agree to disagree Tactical Ninja. Right now I want anyone who mfg's firearms to do well. ESPECIALLY American companies. The fact that he designs and produces guns says more about him than who he supports for prez. IMO. Different way of seeing things I guess.

I don't know Cooper but from what I've heard he's wealthy enough to live through an attack even from THR. WHy not email him and tell him "bye" yourself.

Treo
October 30, 2008, 12:04 AM
Yeah. I think attacking gun mfg's right now is stupid.

No one is attacking Mr. Cooper's rights, we are simply exercising our rights in a free market economy not to purchase his rifles and to make it known why we're not

Gord
October 30, 2008, 12:05 AM
Different way of seeing things I guess.

Not really. All I'm saying is that the fact that he makes guns doesn't necessarily mean he supports gun ownership or the 2nd Amendment as a whole, outside of his own personal niche in the business.

So, while he's obviously A-OK with people buying his high dollar bolt-actions (he's not that stupid, at least) the fact that he contributed towards Obama's campaign proves his willingness to throw owners of other types of firearms under the bus.

Horsemany
October 30, 2008, 12:08 AM
No one is attacking Mr. Cooper's rights, we are simply exercising our rights in a free market economy not to purchase his rifles and to make it known why we're not

To attempt to hurt him financially could be seen as an attack don't you think?

Not that there's anything wrong with that if that's your perrogative. I'm simply saying that's not my opinion on the matter for the reason's I've already stated. Just remember the Zumbo fiasco. Remember infighting can be used by the anti's to drive a wedge. I'm not saying *&^* negative about an American gunmaker in these rocky times.

Treo
October 30, 2008, 12:11 AM
Just a Fudd defending a Fudd

Changed my mind, I will buy a Cooper ,the day he severs all ties W/ the company :D

Horsemany
October 30, 2008, 12:13 AM
Treo

I'm sure he's holding his breath. I appreciate the namecalling when someone here has a differing opinion. I guess when you run out of anything relevant..................?

gmofftarki
October 30, 2008, 12:16 AM
If the AWB went through, and Cooper hadn't done this, what do you think would have happened to his business overall?

Also, buddy at a different site tells me about all the people with Obama '08 stickers going into his local store and buying AR's and AK's... they'll probably be thrilled by this Cooper guy, sadly.

Think about the rich ******* who buys a cooper for the stock flame pattern and the engraving and whatnot, and then think about the firearms enthusiast who believes in function before form... which one do you think is more of Cooper's expected audience?

Matt-J2
October 30, 2008, 12:21 AM
I wouldn't buy a Cooper at any price, niether would patrinize any gun dealer that sold them. And I would make sure ( as I did when I called Joe at cooper ) the dealer knew why I wasn't buying from him.

I think you're getting a little ahead on that one. Why hurt a dealer because of the actions of a manufacturer(or more accurately, the CEO, who may well be gone real soon)?

Now, if the dealer continued to order Cooper rifles(or whatever, for that matter), that's one thing. But don't bust a guy's balls just because he has stock on hand he's now stuck with. Just the way I feel on it, anyhow.

ArfinGreebly
October 30, 2008, 12:22 AM
The fact that he designs and produces guns says more about him than who he supports for prez.

Uh, no.

"Who he supports for prez?"

It may have escaped your notice, but it's not really possible to "support someone for prez" without also supporting his agendas.

There are several agendas of this "prez" candidate with which I disagree, but which don't directly threaten my freedom and liberty.

There is, however, one agenda which directly does threaten my liberty -- and the free exercise of my rights.

And that agenda is the elimination of guns from the hands of the common man.

That "little" thing may not bother you.

For me, it tells me everything I need to know about the man, for it tells me what he thinks of me. It tells me that he believes I should be controlled and subjugated.

I'm not on board with that.

So -- all other agendas notwithstanding -- a desire to disarm the common man, that is, the public at large, is an absolute deal breaker.

There's nothing else important worth hearing from him.

So . . .

Along comes a gun maker, and supports this candidate publicly.

Well, what are the possible motives?

Gun maker is clueless? Doesn't know what this candidate's agendas are? Okay, that's fine, I'll just remind him, publicly, that I disagree with disarming the public and with anyone who has that in mind. That should help him get a clue.

Gun maker is out of touch? Doesn't know who his public is? Okay, that's fine, he'll be hearing from his public. Loudly. That should help him get back in touch.

Gun maker is arrogant? Doesn't care what anyone thinks? Okay, that's fine, those of us who are his customers or might become his customers are free not to care about him either.

Gun maker is greedy? Expects to be one of the few gun makers left standing, and therefore to become stinking wealthy? Okay, that's fine, but I'm free to disapprove of that attitude and take my business elsewhere.

The fact that he has forgotten his customer base and the principles upon which his business depends says more about him than the fact that he makes guns.

The candidate he supports hates me.

I could learn to take that personally, y'know?

There are other gun makers who know who I am and know what the principles are and who know how I'd feel if they supported someone who hates me.

If you support a hater, it won't matter what you make.

I won't be buying it.

Horsemany
October 30, 2008, 12:30 AM
Fair enough. I'm not in the majority of how I see this I knew that when I jumped in. Good luck to all whatever happens with Dan.

ArmedBear
October 30, 2008, 01:07 AM
<political snip>

BTW it's a customer's right not to buy from Dan Cooper, or from anyone else, for whatever reason he/she wants to. It's hardly "unAmerican." Buying stuff for political, enviro-trendy, or whatever reason is something people do EVERY DAY in America, and generally, the left encourages it.

Is that coffee Fair Trade, Shade Grown, Free Range coffee?

contender
October 30, 2008, 01:15 AM
cooper took the route of going public nation wide with his support for obama-----and that is his right.

Because he went public nation wide, many gun owners discovered his political stance

Many gun owners are upset and voicing our displeasure and taking boycott actions as it is our right.

So everyone is excersing their rights. Cooper had every right to make his public statement-----and we here on this board have every right to disagree with it.

Gun owners generally do not fall into some of this pc crap that we somehow must bite our lip and not voice our own 1A rights by respecting cooper.

i am still peeved about the aparent down-right LIE about cooper giving multiple donations to mcain. So how can the replacement post the cooper company put up about the 2A and cooper stepping down be accepted as truthfull and accurate?

Now instead of just a political issue, it appears that there is deliberate lies being told by the company---not the man--to the public/gun owners......

Big45
October 30, 2008, 01:26 AM
Wow, who cares about Cooper, what's he sell about 8 rifles a year? And four of them to Ray Schoenke? Go buy an AR15 .

contender
October 30, 2008, 01:39 AM
last atf record for 2006

2803 rifles

ArfinGreebly
October 30, 2008, 01:56 AM
I will not indulge political baiting.

You want to enage in political baiting and ranting, you know where to find APS (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/), where political discussion is welcomed.

Posting more blatantly political material in this thread won't get any traction.

357-8-times
October 30, 2008, 02:05 AM
Haha, they fired the 2nd-Amendment-backstabber!

In response to the recent article highlighting Dan Cooper’s personal political donations, the board of directors, shareholders and employees of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc would like to issue the following statement.

The employees, shareholders and board of directors of Cooper Firearms of Montana do not share the personal political views of Dan Cooper.
Although we all believe everyone has a right to vote and donate as they see fit, it has become apparent that the fallout may affect more than just Mr. Cooper. It may also affect the employees and the shareholders of Cooper Firearms.

The board of directors has asked Mr. Cooper to resign as President of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc.
Daily operations will continue with the competent staff currently in place in Stevensville, MT producing the finest, most accurate rifles money can buy.

Dan Cooper has spent all of his working life producing the highest quality rifles built here in the USA. He started with nothing but the American Dream and built that into firearms company anyone would be proud of. We firmly believe Dan stands by the 2nd amendment.
We wish him all of the best in his future pursuits.

From www.cooperfirearms.com/ (http://cooperfirearms.com/)

ArfinGreebly
October 30, 2008, 02:21 AM
I'm not sure this is cause for celebration.

I'm not sure what was going through his mind during his various individual acts on this, but I'm pretty sure what happened to him today falls under "unintended consequences."

I'm not happy he's being publicly pilloried.

I'm not happy he supported a gun-grabber.

We don't need this crap.

Yes, it sends a useful message to the manufacturing community, that the customers care about the 2nd Amendment and are willing to be loud about it.

Still.

I wouldn't call any of this "fun."

Jim Zumbo went through a redemption period and rehabilitated his public image.

I'm not sure what Dan Cooper can do to redeem himself.

This is seriously gonna leave a mark.

You know who I really feel for? The guys working there. The craftsmen who hitched their wagon to Cooper's star. For them, what now?

Gawd. You think any of them are gonna sleep tonight?

munk
October 30, 2008, 02:38 AM
The worst thing about the mess is Cooper posted a denial on his webpage- explaining he'd given a couple thousand to Obama during the primary to defeat Clinton. He said he does not support Obama and has given McCain more money. Well, some people looked into that- and because of transparency laws regarding contributions it was examined.

Cooper lied- he gave Obama much more and there is not record of him giving to McCain. There are no records of the FEC website of contributions to McCain from him, only Obama:

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $2,100 1/17/2007

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $50 6/6/2007

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $50 7/26/2007

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-900 2/6/2008

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $900 2/6/2008

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $1,000 2/6/2008

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-33 3/7/2008

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $61 3/7/2008

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $33 3/7/2008

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-61 3/7/2008

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $33 3/7/2008

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $61 3/7/2008

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-200 4/15/2008

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $200 4/15/2008

COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $200 4/15/2008

http://fec.gov/DisclosureSearch/mapApp.do


Does this hurt Cooper employees? Yes it does. It hurts the entire gun community, and it's just a damn shame.
I remember how long time Smith workers felt when the British concern bought them up and went anti gun.

But there's not a lot I can do to help Cooper Arms. I'll never buy one now.
That's a free market response. I respected his right for free speech. He stood up for his beliefs- but then he denied the extent of his contributions with Obama. That is a personal failing.


munk

Jeff White
October 30, 2008, 02:53 AM
I think this has gone far enough.

If you enjoyed reading about "Don't buy a Cooper" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!