I apologize for going off-topic.
Ron is correct.
Please excuse my somewhat sarcastic reply to Daniel. I get a little annoyed when someone makes a very slanted statement without having the facts straight or even without any supporting data at all.
Bill Ruger intended from the beginning to make firearms for law-abiding citizens and those have been the firearms he designed and built. While a few of them, notably the select-fire version of the Mini-14, were designed specifically for the law enforcement market, Ruger's other designs were made for ownership by private citizens and were, in some cases, adopted by law enforcement agencies (the Mini-14, some of the DA revolvers and some of the semi-auto pistols in a few law enforcement agencies). A large share of the business of S&W, Glock and Sig has been devoted to law enforcement and military application, with sales to citizens essentially incidental to the main part of the business. Several companies, including S&W and Glock, have relied on their law enforcement contracts to keep them alive at the expense of their sales to private citizens and have made some pretty unpopular marketing and business decisions over the last 5-10 years. S&W is just now coming out of its sales slump which directly resulted from private gun owners avoiding the brand after the Clinton HUD agreement, which is now essentially dead in the water. Glock is just starting to have its own problems, primarily related to its slide rail difficulties and its apparent disinterest in taking care of private Glock owners, relying instead on taking care of the law enforcement contracts in order to maintain its business status.
By comparison, Ruger has very few major law enforcement contracts. Officers who carry Rugers do so primarily because they buy them themselves. Ruger is, and always has been, the gun for the common man and the private citizen. To think otherwise is simply ignorant.
With regard to Bill Ruger's statement about magazines, I will be the first to state that his comments were ill-advised, if not outright stupid. Mr. Ruger later realized he stuck his foot in his mouth and tried to make amends. His comments were bad and uncalled-for, but that's ALL they were. They did not result in the imposition of the 10-round magazine law. The politicians were going to do that no matter what Bill Ruger said and I suspect that most of them did not even know what Ruger said. What Bill Ruger said or did PALES IN COMPARISON to what Smith & Wesson did. Moreover, it should be clearly noted that Ruger has stood fast in the face of the civil liability lawsuits brought forth by the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence (or whatever its current name is) and the municipalities involved. Ruger has put its money where its mouth is and has used its legal department to deal with these lawsuits. S&W's agreement was merely a dodge to avoid the lawsuits, but it didn't work.
I'd be interested to know if there's anyone here who has never made a stupid statement or two which affected others. I think we need to be careful how we judge Ruger, his company and his firearms. I also think that if we are going to make statements like Daniel did, we better back them up with some facts and some common sense and not just spout the latest hyperbole we've heard someone say.
OK, rant off. I'll take my heat, if I have to, but that's the way I feel about it.
Back on topic, the Ruger autopistols are topnotch and I recommend them highly, as I previously stated.
Respectfully,
Bob
TFL# 8032
Ron is correct.
Please excuse my somewhat sarcastic reply to Daniel. I get a little annoyed when someone makes a very slanted statement without having the facts straight or even without any supporting data at all.
Bill Ruger intended from the beginning to make firearms for law-abiding citizens and those have been the firearms he designed and built. While a few of them, notably the select-fire version of the Mini-14, were designed specifically for the law enforcement market, Ruger's other designs were made for ownership by private citizens and were, in some cases, adopted by law enforcement agencies (the Mini-14, some of the DA revolvers and some of the semi-auto pistols in a few law enforcement agencies). A large share of the business of S&W, Glock and Sig has been devoted to law enforcement and military application, with sales to citizens essentially incidental to the main part of the business. Several companies, including S&W and Glock, have relied on their law enforcement contracts to keep them alive at the expense of their sales to private citizens and have made some pretty unpopular marketing and business decisions over the last 5-10 years. S&W is just now coming out of its sales slump which directly resulted from private gun owners avoiding the brand after the Clinton HUD agreement, which is now essentially dead in the water. Glock is just starting to have its own problems, primarily related to its slide rail difficulties and its apparent disinterest in taking care of private Glock owners, relying instead on taking care of the law enforcement contracts in order to maintain its business status.
By comparison, Ruger has very few major law enforcement contracts. Officers who carry Rugers do so primarily because they buy them themselves. Ruger is, and always has been, the gun for the common man and the private citizen. To think otherwise is simply ignorant.
With regard to Bill Ruger's statement about magazines, I will be the first to state that his comments were ill-advised, if not outright stupid. Mr. Ruger later realized he stuck his foot in his mouth and tried to make amends. His comments were bad and uncalled-for, but that's ALL they were. They did not result in the imposition of the 10-round magazine law. The politicians were going to do that no matter what Bill Ruger said and I suspect that most of them did not even know what Ruger said. What Bill Ruger said or did PALES IN COMPARISON to what Smith & Wesson did. Moreover, it should be clearly noted that Ruger has stood fast in the face of the civil liability lawsuits brought forth by the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence (or whatever its current name is) and the municipalities involved. Ruger has put its money where its mouth is and has used its legal department to deal with these lawsuits. S&W's agreement was merely a dodge to avoid the lawsuits, but it didn't work.
I'd be interested to know if there's anyone here who has never made a stupid statement or two which affected others. I think we need to be careful how we judge Ruger, his company and his firearms. I also think that if we are going to make statements like Daniel did, we better back them up with some facts and some common sense and not just spout the latest hyperbole we've heard someone say.
OK, rant off. I'll take my heat, if I have to, but that's the way I feel about it.
Back on topic, the Ruger autopistols are topnotch and I recommend them highly, as I previously stated.
Respectfully,
Bob
TFL# 8032