[Werewolf]

Futo Inu claims that:
Ruger the COMPANY actively urged Congress to pass Clinton's 1994 Homeland Defense Rifle and Standard Capacity Magazine Ban, in order to help its products compete in the marketplace. Ruger the COMPANY has done absolutely NOTHING to atone for this incredibly anti-freedom, anti-gun act since that time; nor do they show any indication that they intend to redress this act. If you buy a Ruger product, you are a traitor to the RKBA cause (either knowingly or unknowingly). Any questions? If you have one, or think buying from Ruger is okey-dokey, then please post a thread asking to be informed, or defending your actions.

News to me. Go for it...

[Lone_Gunman]

It is widely quoted of Bill Ruger that "no honest man needs more than 10 rounds" or something to that effect.

[George Hill]

That's pretty much it.

[gun-fucious]

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

Aside from his million dollar donation to the NRA Museum, William B. Ruger, Senior, should be remembered as the man who embraced the investment casting process very early on, and whose Pine Tree is one of the most respected investment casting enterprises in the world, the man who gave us the Mini-14, the 10/22 and the first American-made production firearm chambered in 7.62 X 39mm... and the man who told NBC News' Tom Brokaw that:


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

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

* "I see nothing wrong with waiting periods."

And, sadly, that too must be part of the Ruger legacy.

[SodaPop]

.............And Bill Ruger is dead........

There is hope........

I hope..............:cuss:

[MonkeyMan]

Seems to me that the recently departed Mr. Ruger was reported to have said, "No honest man needs a gun smaller than a canned ham", or something to that effect.:fire:

[Travis McGee]

Well I have plenty of 30 round mags for my Mini-14, and I ain't going to throw it away just because Bill Ruger had some stupid anti RKBA ideas.

http://matthewbracken.web.aplus.net/snakelogo.jpg

[MPFreeman]

"No honest man needs to buy a Ruger"

[4v50 Gary]

The issue went around Ruger for a while as to what a 20-30 plus capacity magazine was needed for. The real issue isn't about need. It's about want. It's the same "want" as for the red sportscar, Harley-Davidson, speedboat, new pick-up truck, DVD player, Snap-on tool in lieu of Craftsman. No, short of self defense (and the LAPD riots come to mind), there really isn't a need, but who cares about need?

[kumma]

guess im a dishonest man then. as for the rest of you well thats another story...

[Futo Inu]

Look here:

http://web.ask.com/redir?bpg=http%3a%2f%2fweb.ask.com%2fweb%3fq%3dneal%2bknox%2bbill%2bruger%2b1994%2bassault%2bweapon%2bban%26o%3d0%26page%3d1&q=neal+knox+bill+ruger+1994+assault+weapon+ban&u=http%3a%2f%2ftm.wc.ask.com%2fr%3ft%3dan%26s%3da%26uid%3d2440cc03c440cc03c%26sid%3d3440cc03c440cc03c%26qid%3dE4F4C25DAFA41442A53AF51071FEA2F6%26io%3d2%26sv%3dza5cb0dba%26ask%3dneal%2bknox%2bbill%2bruger%2b1994%2bassault%2bweapon%2bban%26uip%3d440cc03c%26en%3dte%26eo%3d-100%26pt%3dWHY%2bI%2bWOULD%2bBUY%2bSMITH%2b%2526%2bWESSON%2bGUNS%2bAND%2bBOYCOTT%2bRUGER%26ac%3d24%26qs%3d1%26pg%3d1%26ep%3d1%26te_par%3d206%26u%3dhttp%3a%2f%2ffreerepublic.com%2ffocus%2fnews%2f706432%2fposts&s=a&bu=http%3a%2f%2ffreerepublic.com%2ffocus%2fnews%2f706432%2fposts

But hey, even some mods here buy S&W and/or Ruger products, so I guess it's OK. They're strangely silent on the issue. :barf: Some people love their own desires more than what's good for the whole. I cannot blame them - after all, only a small percentage of the population is actually altruistic. But for those with kids who'll have to live in this country/world, you oughtta care.

And of course, once again, as is obviousl to anyone who's not stretching to try to justify buying from the traitors, it ain't got nuttin' to do with the late Bill Ruger, Sr., any more than the 2A has to do with hunting. The fact that he's deceased and gone is irrelevant. At the time he was acting on behalf of the Company Sturm Ruger, not in an individual capacity - big difference. Therefore, his successors at Sturm Ruger must redress the greivance for their past president's (management's) stupid acts, or pay the price. Write them and let them know that you won't buy their products unless and until they are *instrumental* in actively crusading/lobbying AGAINST the re-enactment of the ban for which they are responsible.

[FPrice]

I would imagine that if you search hard enough that you will find almost every firearms manufacturer "guilty" of something that one of us does not like and can truthfully say was "anti-second" in some fashion.

Perhaps this means that none of us should ever buy a firearm, any firearm, again because it would support some anti-second feeling or action.

To paraphrase the Bard, "I come to bury Ruger, not to praise him. The evil that men do lives on after them, the good is oft interred with their bones. So let it be with Mighty Bill Ruger, Sr."

[sw442642]

Other nuances. Ruger refuse to make civilian 10 round mags for the Mini-14 now, even though that would be legal.

Ruger has not made a small concealable handgun. Somewhere, can't find, it - they stated that they are not interested in that market. With their technology and pricing, they certainly good make a small 9mm or 40 and have a large market share. I shot a friend's P-89 last week and it was fine. A small gun would sell if in the lower price range.

In fact, Ruger designed a small 22 LR. It was photographed for a Guns and Ammo annual. The story stated that it was not produced as Ruger thought it was too concealable .

Ruger is not a self-defense or RKBA (outside of service or sports) oriented company.

[Futo Inu]

"I would imagine that if you search hard enough that you will find almost every firearms manufacturer "guilty" of something that one of us does not like and can truthfully say was "anti-second" in some fashion."

No, you're wrong. Name one thing any company has done that can hold a candle to actively encouraging our already-morally-and-logically-challenged congresscritters to pass a BAN on certain guns and magazines, directly infringing our 2A rights, and while doing it purporting to represent the gun industry no less. Just admit it; you're rationalizing.

So if a maker of .22 rifles only urged the ban of all guns other than .22s, and this happened, then the chief manager of that company died, you would then just forgive the company and move on happily with your .22s, after all your centerfires and handguns were confiscated? No real difference. You're right, however, that Bill Ruger's evil lives on after him, and that is precisely the point, and why Sturm Ruger must be boycotted - we may never get the rights back that that ol gun-grabbing codger helped to take away. How this fails to infuriate freedom-lovers I just don't get.

[AUTIGER04]

At least Ruger didnt "SELL OUT" to "BIG BROTHER"!!!!!!!!!!!!:what:Oh Yes, I forgot S&W apologized for selling out.:rolleyes:

[George Hill]

No honest man needs a car that can go over 65MPH, either.

[Nightcrawler]

Some people love their own desires more than what's good for the whole.

Yeah, they're called libertarians. Believe Ayn Rand herself said something about there not being any virtue in doing for others.

:neener: :evil:

[Mark Tyson]

It knocked me on my tush when I found out too. I'm never buying another Ruger unless the company gets bought by Oleg.

[MrAcheson]

Yeah, because all non-2A absolutists are pure evil... :rolleyes:

Ruger "supported" magazine capacity limits and doesn't particularly support CCW (except for the SP101s oops). That makes them evil... If I was a weapon-maker I might lose some sleep about how my tools were being used/misused as well. Ruger's conscience lead him to do things that we don't appreciate, but it doesn't make Ruger evil. It might make him mistaken, but thats a very different beast entirely.

Ruger is definitely a mixed bag but so is every other major manufacturer. S&W had the HUD agreement. Jennings and the like are dangerous crap. Colt and Rohrbaugh are/were into smart gun research. I'm betting the european companies have similar records or worse on gun control legislation on their side of the Atlantic. Nobody is perfect.

[TallPine]

Don't buy any guns from anybody - that'll teach em !

:rolleyes:

[Aces]

...post a thread defending your actions
Yeah, comin' right up.
Excuse me, who exactly are you?

[bountyhunter]

I feel like such an idiot for trading away all my evil Smith and Wessons for Rugers...... They are all so evil, we need to get a list going of the makers who we are NOT supposed to be boycotting so we won't make the same mistake.

[USGuns]

Despite what the deceased Bill Ruger "said", I have a 3rd party 17rd magazine for my incredibly reliable KP95...

[Futo Inu]

Wow - you guys created lotsa work for me.

I'm a patriot, and who the hell are you? I take it by your silence that you have no defense.

Tallpines, what is that supposed to mean?

So Ayn Rand is the end all, be all spokesperson for all issues? Idonthinso.

It's not complicated folks. If you believe in the 2A seriously AND are altruistic OR have kids, you will boycott readily-demonstrable traitors such as Ruger and S&W. As I already said, most people are NOT altruistic, and that's understandable (why should you be?). But if you have kids (who are going to have kids), then you needn't be altruistic, just have a natural inclination to want the best life (and that includes freedom) for your progeny. If you have a brain (check - well, ok, most people here are not dimwits), are informed on the issue (check - now you are), and care about the RKBA more than your own wants and desires, OR have kids (check for most people, but admittedly not all), then you boycott those who actively campaign for the destruction of our gun rights. Once again, no one can point out where I went wrong. Simply admit you're NOT altruistic (understandable, but it still makes you a traitor to the RKBA cause, if you're informed). Or change your behavior. Or explain why giving your hard earned money to a company that seeks to destroy your rights is helping the cause, INSTEAD of one of their competitors who didn't - who stood tall against the bogus suits and legislation - those on our side. It's pretty simple. You've got 3 choices. Go!

[Mark Tyson]

Yeah, because all non-2A absolutists are pure evil...

Ruger "supported" magazine capacity limits

He didn't just support them, he came up with the idea and pushed for them.

[Nightcrawler]

Futo, I don't even LIKE Ayn Rand. I think the woman was a sociopath. However, I always find it ironic when people accuse each other of being selfish on a libertarian board like this. If you're a libertarian, you can't complain about others being selfish; this goes doubly true if you, say, have an Ayn Rand quote in your sigline. Well, you CAN, but not if you want to be consistent. After all, crying that "it's for the children" or "the good of everyone" is Liberal Arugmentation 101 (four credits, but ironically enough does NOT count towards your liberal studies requirement :D ).

Either way, typing long paragraphs and calling people "traitor" isn't likely to bring a lot of people over to your point of view.

[Futo Inu]

the "nobody's perfect" line of reasoning is a bunch of bogus, rationalizing horse hockey! There's many many gun companies that are a LOT more perfect (better) than the far and away two biggest infringers/sellouts to our rights. Everything's a matter of degree, and each individual has to decide where to draw the line, to be sure. But for anyone who's studied it and followed it, there's no question but that S&W and Ruger have done more to destroy your gun rights before 9 am than all other gun companies combined have done all day. They are the bare MINIMUM of boycott targets. In fact, Ruger has done more to destroy your gun rights than most any non-gun-related company, and more than the average Democrat congressperson. How can we even be having this argument, unless you're truly just uninformed. Sturm Ruger was in bed with Wm J. Clinton, Feinstein, and Schumer, et al, not to mention the sellout repubs led by Gingrich, in passing this bill in 1994, the first bill to ban the manufacture of certain firearms. I understand if you agree that "no honest man needs 10 rounds." But if you don't, and I don't, there's no escaping the conclusion. Is time a reason to forgive? Nope. Is the fact that Bill Sr. is dead a reason? Nope. Nothing but putting a hurt on them will - this will drive out the old management and instill new management with a new philosophy. When sales start sucking, the board instills new management, or better yet, Ruger files for bankrupcty, someone buys the Ruger name, products/tooling/factories, and starts cranking out their excellent products, with money going to patriot owners/managers. There are quite a few American manufacturers that I'd like to see own Ruger's IP and factories, and a few foreign ones come to mind as well, who have done NOTHING to help take away our rights.

Nightcrawler, I see your point. I'm not a Libertarian in the true sense. However, I'm generally in line with those who are. In any event, I'm not here to make friends. I'm here to learn about guns, and to contribute to WIN the WAR that we're engaged in. I will call a spade a spade, and as I say, if you're not informed, then you've got a ready "out" of the accusation until you become informed. But if you're a traitor, then you should be labeled as such. To win this war, we need true friends, not supposed allies that are no better than our enemies. If Oleg and others here can't bear to hear truth, and have people be labeled what they are, then they will close down the L&P section (or kick me off one). But until then, I will only become more vocal about the truth, not less. We won't win our gun rights back by appeasement and giving money to companies that laugh their fool heads off all the way to the bank at how stupid Joe Gunowner was when they pulled the fast one in 94 that boosted their P pistol sales, and saved the Mini14 and 30 from a manufacture ban, and no one batted an eye. It's high time they paid - and it's a perfect opportunity for them to right the wrong. Sturm Ruger needs to take another million, but instead of giving it to Never Repeal Anything (NRA), they need to do a direct campaign to defeat Carolyn Macarthy's and Shumer's new homeland defense rifle ban. Then they'll have my enduring patronage.

[Joe Demko]

When "Mr. Canned Ham" made his famous comment regarding honest men not needing more than 10 rounds, in the context of the conversation he was referring specifically to the Mini-14.

[Aces]

Mr. Patriot I'd give you a forth choice but board rules prohibit me from posting it.
S&W = new ownership. 629 is my next purchase. Deal with it. I own a couple Rugers, bought before I even really knew what the mag limit was all about. I'm not really a big fan of their products, but with your kind permission, I think I will hang on to them.
How to be a patriot:
Don't buy ruger
Don't buy S&W
Don't buy Glock
Quit the NRA
Vote for Henry Browne
Utopia ensues

[Futo Inu]

"Mr. Patriot I'd give you a forth choice but board rules prohibit me from posting it."

OK. Personal attack= lack of substance to argument, as we all know.

"S&W = new ownership. 629 is my next purchase. Deal with it." I don't need to deal with it, because I don't care WHAT you and others who don't care about gun rights do. I care about informing and changing the behavior of those who DO sincerely care about gun rights. You obviously don't. And what's new ownership got to do with an agreement which still exists between S&W and the gov't?

"I own a couple Rugers, bought before I even really knew what the mag limit was all about. I'm not really a big fan of their products, but with your kind permission, I think I will hang on to them."

As I say, what makes a traitor is buying a new one from them - putting $$ in their pocket, which in turns allows and indirectly encourages them to engage in more infringements of our rights.


"How to be a patriot:
Don't buy ruger
Don't buy S&W
Don't buy Glock
Quit the NRA
Vote for Henry Browne
Utopia ensues"

Hmm, not sure where you got that logic, but whatever works for ya. Steps 1 and 2 are definitely good, on that anyone with half a modicum of logical ability can agree. Step 3 - don't buy Glock - I personally don't boycott them. All they did was mark some brass and send to LEOAs - that is nowhere near a clear-cut must-boycott scenario, in stark contrast to Ruger and S&W. Step 4 - Quit the NRA. Hmm, not sure how that is gonna help. I'm a life member, and I want their numbers behind them when they lobby Congress, myself. I'd think you'd be better off JOINING the NRA. Have you? They sell us out occasionally, and all my extra money goes to the no-compromise GOA instead, but on the whole, NRA still does good work. Step 5. Vote for Henry Browne. Yes, I did vote for Harry Browne, even though I think Libs are whack on some issues.

Any other nonsensical nonsequitors you or others would like to throw out?

[Aces]

Calling people traitors isn't a personal attack? Since you started the attacks, I'll tell you the 4th choice. Pound sand. Bush admin. won't enforce Clinton agreement. Could a future admn.? Maybe, I'm no lawyer. So what? The current owners had nothing to do with it, I for one won't hold it agaist them or their employees. Hard working Americans, earning an honest living in an honorable industry. God Bless them.
Didnt hear about Glock's VP on 60 minutes saying ballistic fingerprinting being a good idea? Better get more informed.
Quitting the NRA would imply that I am a member. Get it? BTW the list I made was sarcastic. I thought that much was evident, but one never knows.
Good luck with your one man crusade , fella, might have more success tilting at windmills. :neener:

[Werewolf]

Since I started this thread wondering why anyone would consider Ruger Anti-Gun I think it only right that I jump in and give my opinion:

Based on the numerous replies to Mr Inu and his responses FWIW I don't believe that Ruger is a traitor to the RKBA (though I'm not sure I consider them a friend). I believe that Ruger made a marketing decision - not one that I agree with and probably was doing what the company believed necessary to protect it's market position. As a long time business guy and financial analyst I can't fault them for that.

With that said I own two Rugers and based on what I've learned from this thread I probably will not be buying anymore until Ruger changes it's position and starts making 10 round mags (and if the AWB expires and stays expired then 20 or 30 round mags) for it's products.

Regarding the vitriolic attitude towards Smith & Wesson - well - it was well deserved right up until the company changed hands. Now S&W is a new company and the new owners are doing what they can to distance themselves from the old owners. The below link explains the new company and why we shouldn't be boycotting it much better than I can:

The Betrayal and Redemption of an American Icon (http://www.john-ross.net/betrayal.htm)

[Aces]

Werewolf; Good post. If S&W were to die, as some want, who would win?
This is one of the most well known brand names in the world of any product. Not to mention probably the best DA revolvers made.
Sacrificing the company if Tompkins hadn't sold out is one thing. But the new owners (American) seem to be dedicated to making the company better than ever. Go S&W !!!!

[George Hill]

"I don't believe that Ruger is a traitor to the RKBA"
Maybe not, but he was a gigantic git.

[FPrice]

"I'm a patriot, and who the hell are you?"

WOW! Why didn't you say so in the first place. I mean, you are an honest-to-gosh patriot and the rest of us just can't hold a candle to that, now can we?

Friend, give it a rest. If you believe what you spout, that's fine. But don't assume a holier-than-thou attitude and think that you are the only one who knows the universal truth and the rest of us must be educated by you.

Bill Ruger Sr has almost undoubtedly done more for firearms owners than you have in your life. He built a company that makes and sells some of the best firearms in the world. Next to him, your contributions probably pale in comparison.

One mistaken stand does NOT an enemy of the RKBA make. More likely it makes him a man, one with good points and bad points. You know...kinda like all the rest of us. YOU included. Unless you are the reincarnation of a Jewish carpenter.from Galilee.

You have a bone to pick with Ruger? Fine, pick it and gnaw on it, and fill yer gut with acid till yer heart's content. Just don't be hurt when the rest of us dismiss your vitriol with the lack of praise it has earned.

Think I'll take my Ruger Vacquero out to the range tomorrow and bust a few caps in memory.

[twoblink]

I think with ol' man ruger 6 feet under, it's time to make it known how bad some of ruger's policies are..

I love Rugers.. but hate the policy. You can go boycotting all you want, great idea.. But I'd hate to have another gun company go under..

So I'd skip the "silent boycott" method, and just email them.. Tell them they face the wraith of gun owners for their stupid policies..

Capitalism is the end all be all. Not Ayn Rand..

[Jeff OTMG]

I have not been a fan of Bill Ruger nor his politics. At least S&W is trying to correct the wrongs done by its' former owners and management. Not so with Ruger. This is what I wrote from the SHOT Show earlier this year:
http://www.shotshowreports.com/2003pg1.html

Ruger – Speaking of Ruger, I thought that I would go ahead and get this out of the way. It is no great secret to those who know me that I don’t think much of Ruger, more precisely I don’t think much of Ruger’s politics. I wanted to use the SHOT Show to give Ruger an opportunity to make things right from a pro-gun, as opposed to a pro-hunter or pro-shooter, standpoint. Now that Bill Ruger has died, they have an opportunity get back on the right course and correct some of the anti-gun political mistakes Bill made while he is in control. Well, it ain’t happening. I placed questions to members of Ruger management to see if they would be changing their policy should the restricted capacity magazine law expire, and not be continued, on September 14, 2004. This is at least a possibility after the result of the elections in November 2002 with pro-gun Republicans in pretty solid control of the House of Representatives, the Office of President, and with a narrow margin in the Senate. With Ruger not even producing a currently legal 10 round magazine for the Mini-14 I didn’t hold out much hope. I was right. Although Ruger currently produces a 20 round Mini-14 magazine for law enforcement, even if it was no longer restricted, Ruger would not allow anything beyond the current 5 round magazine for us mere civilians. With concealed carry legislation sweeping the country and small autos from nearly every manufacture popping up to fill that need, Ruger is not interested tapping a market geared toward concealed carry self-defense. When it comes to self-defense, Ruger is only interested in the law enforcement community, and when it comes to our rights, they are carrying on the tradition of Bill Ruger in his letter to a Congress in March 1989 urging them to pass restrictive 15 round limits to handgun magazines. For the rest of us Ruger would have us call 911. I was hoping that the politics would die with the man, no such luck, he has left his company as his legacy and we all suffer as a result.

[Stevie-Ray]

Ruger is not a self-defense or RKBA (outside of service or sports) oriented company. Ain't it peculiar how the 3 Rugers I have would never be on my short list for carrying anyway? I'll keep em, they were bought long ago, but Ruger don't make anything I'd seriously consider carrying.

[PawDaddy]

I don't really want to get in on this argument/discussion. I own two Rugers; a P95 and a GP100. I have owned 4 idfferent Smiths in the past, but sold/traded them all. I don't really know that I would buy any more of either brand. I have been hoping that Ruger would bring out a truly compact polymer auto, but it looks like it won't happen.

But, to my question.

Which gun manufacturers are pro RKBA?

[Double Maduro]

I have been reading this, sad to say, and have come to the conclusion that some of you haven't thought this out.

If you believe that Bill Ruger was anti RKBA (why is that always capitalized?) then he was too stupid to have made enough money to give a million bucks to the NRA.

Why would a man be anti something (rkba) that needs to be in place in order for his company to sell any product at all?

Think

If the RKBA wasn't in place then who would he sell his guns too.

Maybe he was trying to keep the anti's from getting too much from the government.

I like Ruger firearms and will continue to buy the ones I want. You see, along with the RKBA I also inherrited the right to not listen to bullies that think they are the only ones with the answers and the only ones who know how to protect my rights and even what those rights should be. Not listening to them makes them mad, and they will go away. Arguing with them just encourages them.

I think Ruger did what he thought was necessary to save his industry. Period.

By the way, saying that Ruger is anti RKBA because they don't make a concealable handgun, I don't have any problem concealing my P90, is like saying that General Motors is unpatriotic because they don't make flags.

So there,

DM

[fallingblock]

"I like Ruger firearms and will continue to buy the ones I want. You see, along with the RKBA I also inherrited the right to not listen to bullies that think they are the only ones with the answers and the only ones who know how to protect my rights and even what those rights should be. Not listening to them makes them mad, and they will go away. Arguing with them just encourages them."
************************************************************



BOYCOTT BIGOTS?:D



************************************************************
"I think Ruger did what he thought was necessary to save his industry. Period."
************************************************************



I also believe this to be the case....not to excuse old Bill for his transgressions, but the man did do more for providing the American shooter with innovative and affordable firearms than most other firearms companies have;) .

Bill Ruger was indeed a firearms design genius and a superb businessman.
He just couldn't resist the urge to do some politickin'.:mad:

[BluesBear]

Ruger has ALWAYS limited the sale of their 20 & 30 round Mini-14 magazines to Law Enforcement DISTRIBUTORS only. By doing this Bill Ruger made sure that LEO would buy his guns since they were cheaper than Colt's AR-15.

Anti-RKBA or shrewd businessman?
WHO CARES?!
We all knew where to go to get quality hi-cap mags for our Mini-14s.

Ruger wouldn't make a mag larger than 10 for the 10-22.
WHO CARED?!
RamLine was there with their excellent 15round bananaclips. Complete with studs for "jungle clipping" two together.

Ruger has always made a quality product. Usually at a good price too.
Wouldn't it be akin to thumbing your nose at his/their politics by continuing to buy their products and THEN also buying the accessories that they don't offer from SOMEBODY ELSE?


WELCOME TO AMERICA Y'all.
This is the American way!!!!! :rolleyes:

Y'all buy a S&W and don't like the grips? Buy some from someone else!

Buy a Colt/Kimber/SA/etc/etc and don't like the mainspring housing/extractor/hammer/etc/etc? Buy some from someone else!

Buy a Glock and don't like the polygonal rifling? Buy a barrel from someone else!

Buy any kind of gun and don't like the sights?
You guessed it... Buy some from someone else!

You don't like the "new" S&W? Then buy an OLD one.

If YOU don't want to buy something, THEN DON'T BUY IT!
You are entitled to your opinion just don't try to force it down my throat.
:fire:

If you don't like what I buy, FINE. But SHUT UP about it.


See I told you it was simple. :neener:

[gun-fucious]

Whats a valuable lession for all involved is that
Ruger compromised and cooperated to keep his rifle from being named as an AW

and in 2003 the Bradyites still named the Mini 14 an Assault Weapon

[mtnbkr]

If Ruger were truly anti-RKBA, then they would be known only for their casting biz and not their firearms.

Chris

[pale horse]

I have read about all I can take on this issue.

I own 3 rugers and two of them have been 100% and the other needed some work. If all I can afford for a self defense pistol is a ruger, guess what whatever your preference is in the political views of a dead man are I dont care. I need a gun and thats all there is to it.

10/22 over 18,000 rounds and counting
mark II over 1500 rounds with some problems
P97 400 or 500 no problems with factory ammo

Based on my experience with ruger pistols, p series, they are a good product. I would have no problems selling one to my buddy or buying one myself. They are stone cold reliable and thats all there is to it.

For all of you who are on the forum some people, honest people need to have the means to defend themselves. So you spouting off you intelectual research and opinions about the firearms industry stow it. If you dont like it dont buy it. Its that simple. Ruger, S&W, Glock, H&K, CZ or anyother company dont have to consult you to run their business, it is there busniess for a reason. They owe you nothing, at all, they are in business to make money.

I will not state what I think of a specific business because it makes no difference in the way they do business. If I like the product I let my wallet speak and then the company knows how they are doing.

There is more I can say but I will refrain from doing so.

[Ivanimal]

Does that mean I should sell the 15 or so Rugers that I love so well? FO! I wont be told what to do. I have my own opinion on what he said and how he said it. The fact is a quality gun at a decent price is still what makes rkba affordable. God bless him for that.

[Werewolf]

Gun-Fucious correctly pointed out:
Whats a valuable lession for all involved is that
Ruger compromised and cooperated to keep his rifle from being named as an AW

and in 2003 the Bradyites still named the Mini 14 an Assault Weapon

That is one of the more astute and important observations made in this thread yet.

The ramifications are undeniable and at the heart of the liberal gun-grabber strategy.

If you chip away at a mountain long enough eventually there's no mountain left to chip away.

[J Miller]

:mad: I tried to get on THR this morning only to get a notice that it was down. Something about the data base being unable to find itself.

Now finally I get on the forum and have just wasted 10-15 minutes of my life reading this rant.

S&W haters, Ruger haters. Boycott this, boycott that.

~FINE~

Does it do any good? No, just creates a flame and causes hard feelings.

Were I a moderator this thread wouldn't have made it past the half way point of the first page. I would have locked it down. Not because of its content, but becasue of the personal attacks it contains.

***I'm sick of threads like this, it does us no good at all. We gun owners are out own worst enemies!***

[1badmagnum]

ruger is known for revolvers,I happen to enjoy them because they are priced great and are great shooters.
their pistols and long guns arent so hot and their market is mainly revolvers,so the comment about high capacity mags doesnt bother me.
three ten rounders are just as good as a 30 in my book.
at least the prices aren"t inflated like smith and wesson!

[FPrice]

"***I'm sick of threads like this, it does us no good at all. We gun owners are out own worst enemies!***"

Walt Kelley (?) who did Pogo said it best, "We have met the enemy and they is us.".

[Ed]

I own 3 ruger revolvers, no pistols. I think it would look kinda funny to have a redhawk that holds more than 10 rounds. Cool, but funny. Just had to throw that bit of intellect in.

[Zundfolge]

I believe Bill Ruger was cut from the same cloth as clay shooters and bird hunters who are against CCW and support the AWB because it doesn't prevent them from shooting birds with their little 3 shot pumpers. Its what I've often called "Elitist Sportsmen". Bill Ruger was more interested in supplying fellow elitist sportsmen with their gear then providing tools of self defense and "liberty tree refreshment". I don't hold that against him in so far as how he conducts his business, but when he helps lawmakers pass laws to restrict what I can buy because of what he wants to sell ... thats crossing over the line.

I don't believe Ruger was an all out Trator to RKBA, but I do believe Bill Ruger gave aid and comfort to the enemy.

As long as he was alive I wouldn't buy a Ruger ... which frankly isn't much of a sacrifice because the only Ruger I want is a MkII .22 pistol.

Now that Ruger is out from under Bill Ruger's control, we'll have to see what happens. I have a feeling that Ruger as it stands now is back on "our side".


As for S&W, I think the new ownership is headed in the right direction, but I won't be completely happy until "the agreement" is publicly shreded by S&W.

[Jeff OTMG]

Two very pro gun companies are Beretta, Taurus, and now Colt as Don Zilkha has seen the error of his ways. The boycott against both Colt and S&W were very successful. SWD was also very pro-gun, Wayne Daniel spent a BUNCH of money in court just to piss off BATF and won.

[Tamara]

Ruger has not made a small concealable handgun.

Of course, neither have Remington, Winchester, Hammerli, Benelli, Perazzi, Savage...

[CZ52GUY]

...I believe that for the 2nd to survive, those who support it need to vote with their wallets as well as their ballots.

I regret that so many personal attacks have invaded such an important topic.

I was an active participant over at GTALK when Jannuzzo "pulled a Ruger" by providing support to the Ballistic Fingerprinting legislation that was pending in Congress at the time (still pending, thankfully, with dim prospects).

Similar emotions were expressed there as here, basically falling into a few categories:

1) I don't have the time or inclination to keep track of who is pro or anti, and no one's gonna' make me, so there...

2) Why can't we all just get along

3) We should boycott, boycott, boycott

4) I'm selling all my Glocks

5) The XD is beginning to look pretty good

6) unrepeatable...hey, it's GTALK...


I guess what I learned from that experience was...

1) I believe strongly enough in the 2nd to vote with my wallet, and my time

2) Not everyone is willing to stand strong with their time and money, including those who are gun owners, and would normally vote pro-gun with their ballot

3) Boycotting Rosie O'Donnell is much less painfull then boycotting Charlie's Angels for some...when it comes to the 2nd, some other issues take priority

4) Calling Schumer names is much easier then questioning the 2nd Amendment credentials of the manufacturer of the shiny new gun they just bought, or have been eyeing.


Bottom line, we aren't going to reach consensus on this. Some just don't see the value of standing strong on the 2nd, especially when it means holding a gun manufacturer accountable. That willingness to compromise gave us the '68 infringements, the '94 infringements, and every infringement which has occurred before, between, and since...it will also allow future infringements to be imposed upon us.

To my board brethren, the 2nd is precious, more precious then anything shiney, or anything that glitters, or slinks across a screen. I urge you not to sell yourselves short. Don't compromise. Do what is right.

The final decision is obviously, up to you...

CZ52'

[Double Maduro]

OK 'fess up now.

How many of you, especially the boycott crowd, have a concealed handgun permit?

How many have one in more than one state?

Voting with the ballot and with your wallet is all well and good but I think it is more important to show the politicians how many people are out there that have guns and want to carry them.

DM

[CZ52GUY]

...that one can carry their piece and then plunk down money to support those who oppose RKBA and feel like they have done what is "more important".

http://www.nraila.org/FactSheets.asp?FormMode=Detail&ID=15

Every time a lawful gun owner, whether or not they choose to carry provides tangible financial endorsement to organizations like these, they are funding the demise of the 2nd Amendment.

The money trail is clear, the information is available, the decision is up to each THR member as to whether or not they want to make their money talk and their voices heard.

Best wishes,

CZ52'

[JohnBT]

Imagine that, Bill Ruger thought for himself and did what he liked.

Ain't America great?

John...I haven't bought a Ruger since 1986 and have hated 10/22s since 1964.

[JohnBT]

Tamara - Doesn't the Savage Model 1910 Automatic Pistol count?

.32 Auto, 3.75" bbl., 6.5" overall, 23 oz.

;)

John

[Tamara]

Obviously Savage once cared about the RKBA and the CCW movement, but have since sold us out by discontinuing their handgun line. Boycott Savage!





;)

[Double Maduro]

I'm with Tamara, I will not buy any Savage handguns.

DM

[MicroBalrog]

Believe Ayn Rand herself said something about there not being any virtue in doing for others.

And since when has Ayn Rand become an universal beacon of morality?

[sw442642]

Tamara said:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ruger has not made a small concealable handgun.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Of course, neither have Remington, Winchester, Hammerli, Benelli, Perazzi, Savage...
----------------------

But they are not in the business of producing an extensive line of handguns and they have explicitly not done this as they don't want to produce a conceable gun. Ruger has explicitly been against such a product for ideological reasons. That's a different beast than a market decision.

[MrAcheson]

Ruger has not made a small concealable handgun.

Is the SP101 really that large? Or is it that they haven't made many small handguns....

[Brigrat]

An interesting link regarding what Bill Ruger actually said:

http://www.rugerforum.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/004622.html

[Orbital-Burn]

I don't know about y'all, but I don't consider the LA riots a good example of why you need to arm yourselves for self defense. However Waco TX is a perfect example of why everyone needs 50 bmgs with steel rounds and ACTUALLY USE THEM!!!!!!!!!

[Don Galt]

Ayn Rand said that you have to pursue your lifes interests.

If your calling is helping other people, then you have Ayn Rand's support.

Her, and Libertarians, oppose the state forcing people to help others.

[Mulliga]

I'll never buy a Ruger, and I'll never buy a S&W.

Makes me glad I picked a Marlin instead of a Ruger 10/22.

[geekWithA.45]

Bill Ruger was a smart bizguy, and worked things to his advantage.

One thing I've suspected, but never seen any evidence of, is complicity in the AWB and import bans.

For Ruger, the motive would be simple: His mini's cost twice as much as an AK clone, and fill the same ecological niche.

Why pay $600+ for a miniX, of dubious accuracy, when you could get an equivalent AK for $300ish?

[Cool Hand Luke 22:36]

Pale Horse:

For all of you who are on the forum some people, honest people need to have the means to defend themselves. So you spouting off you intelectual research and opinions about the firearms industry stow it. If you dont like it dont buy it. Its that simple. Ruger, S&W, Glock, H&K, CZ or anyother company dont have to consult you to run their business, it is there busniess for a reason. They owe you nothing, at all, they are in business to make money.


Good points. People need to have their ideal choice in personal defense weapons. And it's not like there are many alternate suppliers of lightweight pocket revolvers for example. Only Smith and Taurus make them in any wide selection of calibers. And both of these companies are on the wrong side of the RKBA. Once Taurus finishes their "smart-gun" that's a trip wire for a bunch of States to ban most handguns. Smith still has the "agreement." Given a choice between these two companies I'll go with the one not currently actively working against the RKBA. That'd be S&W unless someone can point me to an alternate source for a 12oz revolver.

[carpettbaggerr]

hat'd be S&W unless someone can point me to an alternate source for a 12oz revolver. How bout North American Arms? Or Casull Arms? :D

[glocksman]

Why pay $600+ for a miniX, of dubious accuracy, when you could get an equivalent AK for $300ish?

Or when you could buy a commercial Chinese SKS for under $150 that was more reliable than the $500 Ruger Mini 30?

I own 3 Rugers (GP100, 22/45 and a 10/22) because the price/value ratio justified their purchase.

The price/value ratio of a Mini 30 or Mini 14 versus that of an SKS or Saiga doesn't even come close.

It was more about Ruger trying to protect his business against foreign competition than anything else, although I'm sure the 'elitist sportsman' in him played a part as well.

[Boats]

I FORGIVE BILL RUGER!!!

At least next month I do. My Valentine is giving me a choice between a blue or stainless 4" GP-100 along with a card she picks. I am a lucky man.

And I am making that choice because I have decided to forgive Bill Ruger. It is my opinion that the AWB will die. The damage done will heal as everyone will have their mags and bayonets again. Bill is dead and he made begrudging amends for what he did. I sincerely believe that Ruger was an old timer enough that he never truly saw why a civilian would need anything more than a wheelgun or a bolt or lever rifle. He was not totally naive about mil-style weapons as the Mini-14 attests, but one has to admit that Ruger has never really sought that market, pre or post ban.

I think the wondernine craze and the then-beginning flood of primarily Egyptian and Chinese AK clones caught Wm B. Ruger by surprise and he didn't like the trend. His XM9 trial examples were poorly sorted jokes that eventually became the respectable P-89, the descendants of which are the only "hi-cap" capable weapons in the line-up other than the venerable Mini-14. When he started his naive political wheeling and dealing, only Vermont and Florida and at best a handful of other patchwork jurisdictions had "shall issue" CCW, so I do not think his statements on CCW were too out of the mainstream for that time. Admit to yourself, if you can, that a revolution on this issue has occurred, and that regrettably Ruger was never really a part of that. Ruger, the company, does make the excellent SP-101, and I am glad they don't sell a metrosexual revolver when no one who owns one currently really shoots more than two cylinders out of them anyways before never shooting them again.:evil:

Ruger realized late, perhaps too late for those who can really nurse a grudge, that one cannot feed his competitors or compatriots to the wolves and not have the wolves come back for himself at the last. I put off buying a Ruger revolver for about 9.5 years of the AWB. Maybe I am being premature, but I forgive Bill next month and am fully confident I will be celebrating this September by ordering myself magazines for pistols I don't even have and looking for a post-post-ban AK clone. I doubt very much that Ruger's current board of directors or senior management are going to be offering encouragement via letter to Schumer, Feinstein, et al for an extension of the ban. Oddly enough, Ruger is probably the financially strongest US firearm maker today. By a country mile.

Remaining on my boycott list:

Glock, for participating in a sotto voce national ballistic fingerprinting pilot project with the BATFE and coming close to jumping into HUD's bed with S&W. This doesn't really harm Glock as I already hate their products except for the continually intriguing G20.

S&W, for not publically voiding its agreement. I will forgive them in a heartbeat if they even publically mouth off that they consider the agreement coercive or otherwise voidable and have no intention of ever honoring it. Again no harm here, as I do not like their cylinder latch or their autos.

Taurus, for engaging in development of the New Jersey smartgun. Again no harm, because they don't make anything I want.

If forgiving Ruger makes me a hypocrite, so be it, but I am betting Bill's damage, such as it is, is nearly over, and there are much more insidious transgressions that have taken place much more recently, as in the case of Taurus and Glock. However, what Taurus and Glock have been up to is way more dangerous to our future gun rights than anything Ruger or S&W ever did.

And those betrayals have not been nearly as public or the rage as lasting as what Ruger and S&W have gone through. I am nearly through punishing my fellow Americans for mistakes made by an old schooler and some traitorous Brits. I think both Ruger and S&W have absorbed some valuable lessons that Glock and Taurus have ignored but we shooters aren't exacting a price for.

Where's the outrage against those latter two companies? Or is it that I am the only hypocrite here.:evil:

[aquapong]

http://www.shotshowreports.com/2003pg1.html

JeffOTMG...a regular and respected member of many online firearm forums, talked to Ruger last year at the Shot Show. Read his commentary about 3/4 of the way down the page. I was quite interested in a P97 and an SP101 before I read this. Now, Ruger can go out of business for all I care.

Now people would criticize me for boycotting Ruger, and that's their choice. I suppose those $40 rebates are too much to ignore. It's only your principles you're giving away after all.

This company's founder testified before Congress for the assault weapons ban. Now that the ban is about to sunset, the company still holds its stance that they are willing to sell off the rights of their customers. Why should any of us want to support this company?:fire:

Remaining on my boycott list: Glock
Mr. Glock fired his top US exec, Paul Jannuzzo, only days after that 60 minutes interview. Apparently he got the message from the few thousand ticked off phone calls they got. It kind of gives you the impression that Jannuzzo was operating without the big cheese's ok. Of course he could have simply been the fall guy, but you'd think Jannuzzo would have come out about that. He could make more selling books about the "corruption of Glock Inc" than he ever could in some payoff to leave quietly.

[fallingblock]

I FORGIVE BILL RUGER!!!

Too!:D

My new GP-100 is the nicest revolver in terms of quality control and design that I've ever bought new....and that covers 35 years of revolver buying.

Old Bill was a design genius and he understood business perhaps better than he understood RKBA.

Rest in Peace, old guy. ;)

[Boats]

This company's founder testified before Congress for the assault weapons ban. Now that the ban is about to sunset, the company still holds its stance that they are willing to sell off the rights of their customers. Why should any of us want to support this company?

What evidence do you have for the second sentence? Is it that Ruger won't sell you a mag it refuses to make or will continue to refuse to make? The aftermarket will take care of that corporate quirk, which is probably only to honor the old man's sentiments.

Mr. Glock fired his top US exec, Paul Jannuzzo, only days after that 60 minutes interview. Apparently he got the message from the few thousand ticked off phone calls they got. It kind of gives you the impression that Jannuzzo was operating without the big cheese's ok. Of course he could have simply been the fall guy, but you'd think Jannuzzo would have come out about that. He could make more selling books about the "corruption of Glock Inc" than he ever could in some payoff to leave quietly.

Jannuzzo's firing may give you that impression, but I am not buying it. He remains a highly paid "consultant," therefore no dirt since he never really left. Hush money works. As an attorney I see it at work every day.

It remains then that no division executive in any business around as long as Glock has the authority to potentially jeopardize sales in their most important market without approval from world headquarters. Were I a betting man, I'd say that the BATFE project grew out of a similar desire for market promotion as did Ruger's flawed stance on the AWB. Feeling a little threatened by the late Clinton era lawsuits, Glock snuggled up with the enemy. They are more contemptible than Ruger IMO because at least Bill was open about his opinions while GG engineers a free pass by knifing Jannuzzo with a golden gag in his mouth. Suddenly, we are to believe that the Austrian master didn't know what his chief American lackey was up to in regards to the most dangerous governmental threat to their bottom line ever? Yeah, right. I am so absolutely convinced that Jannuzzo, as company spokesman, made it into the Congressional Record as supportive of ballistic fingerprinting without the Austrians ever chiming in on the issue.:rolleyes:

[Cool Hand Luke 22:36]

Boats:

Ruger was never really a part of that. Ruger, the company, does make the excellent SP-101, and I am glad they don't sell a metrosexual revolver when no one who owns one currently really shoots more than two cylinders out of them anyways before never shooting them again


Someone would have to be pretty damn-limp wristed not to be able to take more than 2 shots from a little hide-out revolver like the 12 oz. S&W 332. I've seen it described as "good for elderly women who suffer from osteoarthritis" :D

[Cool Hand Luke 22:36]

Double post deleted by CHL 22:36

[Cool Hand Luke 22:36]

Boats:

Ruger was never really a part of that. Ruger, the company, does make the excellent SP-101, and I am glad they don't sell a metrosexual revolver when no one who owns one currently really shoots more than two cylinders out of them anyways before never shooting them again


Dang, someone would have to be pretty damn-limp wristed not to be able to take more than 2 shots from a little hide-out revolver like the 12 oz. S&W 332. I've seen it described as "good for elderly women who suffer from osteoarthritis" :D

The Lady Smiths are S&W's metrosexual revolvers, and only when carried by men, unless it's just to hold it for their wife or GF. :D

[Art Eatman]

This old horse is dead, dead, dead...And thread drift ain't all that useful...

Art