[Balog]

I saw this article the other day that got me thinking. http://www.john-ross.net/betrayal.htm . The basic point is that S&W have redeemed themselves after the HUD deal. That they have ignored the deal, other than the addition of those wanky little locks. An interesting point. However, I have heard that they are once again bowing to the victim disarmament crowd. The problem is that I have no info beyond that. Does anyone know if they have done anything lately to further their anti-gun stance? Or was the comment I heard regarding further capitulation without merit?

Also, what about Ruger? I know there was some furor over their supposed support of the AWB, but I have no idea if that accusation is true. I wasn't pollitically active back then. Does anyone have solid, reliable info on what happened then; and what's going on now?

While it is fairly irrelevant to me at the moment (I can't afford any guns right now), I'd like to know where they stand. I will eventually be in the market, and I'd like to know who would be misusing my money. The only maker I'll never under any circumstances buy (even from a private seller who wouldn't be giving them any profit) is Colt.

[BTR]

Ruger supported the mag ban actively. Rumor is now that they will not be selling mini-14 hicaps to civilians if the ban ends. You will be able to find plenty of posts on this topic.

[AJ Dual]

.It's kind of a .45 vs. 9mm or M-16 vs. AK debate.

It goes round and round, Mr. Ross' points in his article are valid, but so are the criticisms of others who point out that the anti-gun agreements could be re-used against S&W and others at a later date.

What S&W tried to do under previous ownership could have been disastrous for the gun community.

But S&W is now under new ownership.

We can’t let anti's "divide and conquer" gun community, if we boycott every maker who does such a deal, or settles a lawsuit, there'll be no gun makers left.

We can't let any other gun makers think they can ever do these deals and "get away with it" by ever letting up on our S&W boycott...

And it goes on point, counterpoint like that forever.

Personally, I still feel a bit uneasy about S&W, but combining the new ownership and un-PC new products like the .500 magnums is enough for me that I'd now be willing to buy something from S&W if I wanted it.

But everyone has to make up their own mind, and there's enough evidence on both sides that I think both sides are entitled to their opinion.

I'm personally more hacked off at Ruger because of Bill Ruger's despise for high-cap mags, and paramilitary/self defense type of arms. The company has a sort of a " The 2nd Ammendment is about duck huntin' " attitude. We're still living with the results of that treachery, and Ruger Inc. has done nothing to reverse it, even after Bill "no honest man needs more than 15 rounds" Ruger's death.

[Mark Tyson]

I agree that Ruger's sell out was worse. Ruger actively pushed the magazine limitation through. It was an unforgivable stab in the back, and I for one will never send any money to Ruger, especially since they've recently announced that they aren't going to sell "high capacity"(normal capacity) mags to civilians. This shows that the initiative was not merely the brainchild of Bill Ruger himself, and indicates a company wide mentality that lives on.

Smith? I'd be uncomfortable buying from them, but what are we going to? Are we going to boycott everyone? Between Smith, Ruger and Colt - that's most of the revolver market right there, isn't it? I had my ear to the ground, and I haven't heard anything about a "new" S&W sell out. Could be wrong.

Balog, check out this link for more on Ruger:

http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/papabill.html

[C.R.Sam]

Magazine limitations did go through the legal system.

Smith agreement didn't.
Smith not alone in being pressured to sign the agreement, but they the only ones that didn't resist.

Slight change in folks in power, and agreement gets enforced.

Evil ignored, is still evil.

Sam

[Standing Wolf]

Evil ignored, is still evil.

Yep. I don't do business with anti-Second Amendment bigots.

[feedthehogs]

The paper work is still in place waiting for an administration to enforce it.

It would be different if S&W got rid of the agreement but ignoring it doesn't make it go away.

Its this type of thinking that has sold us out over the years. Anyone who believes different is a fool.

Besides if you look at anything that's come out of S&W lately you would think that the quality control guys are asleep at the wheel.

A lot of people think that gunmakers are part of some sort of brotherhood that would never betray us.

Think again. They are in business to make money and most would sell out their grandmother to stay in business.

Ruger's motivation was simple business economics. He was afraid the ban would eliminate the sales of the mini 14 and 30 which were big sellers.

These are private businesses which can and will do what ever they want to make money. You or I don't matter to them except as a consumer.

They certainly don't owe anybody any allegance.

[jsalcedo]

I have several old gun rags from the 70's and 80's that advertise the
Ruger Mini 14 along with 20 round mags.

When did they get their collective panties in a knot? As soon as the proposed assault weapons ban was announced and they were afraid
for their business?

What about the "no honest man needs more than 10 rounds" comment from Bill ruger Sr?

[semf]

Deleted OT