Springfield Armory & Rock River Arms - No More for Me

Status
Not open for further replies.
Interlocking directorships make that sound awful unlikely to me.
They might as well say "We didn't know our production line was making Hi-Points on the side."
 
jrmiddleton425 said:
Take this for what you will. Flame away...doesn't matter to me at all.

Approximately 1990, Gaston Glock stated, in a telephone conversation recounted to me by the other party, that "Americans ought not be allowed to own guns, because they are too stupid [to know to store them unloaded]."

I don't see anybody boycotting Glock or their products, and the Americans he thinks are too stupid to own guns have made him a centi-millionaire.
Click to expand...
While this is really an insulting statement from Gaston, it hardly compares to signing a bill like sb-1657 which could do a lot more damage than a single phone call from some guy in Austria. There are better ways to defend SA than bringing up old phone call statements from close to 30 years ago. Springfield hoped to be a silent partner in this attack on the second amendment to make their road a little easier for themselves in their state, while saying screw the rest of Illinois gun owners and shops. People have to realize that government isn't going to just up and take our guns one day, there's too many guns and too many gun owners to do that. The only way is to systematically implement gun laws that slowly and surely make us less armed, whether that be making less guns available, legal to own or legal to sell. Bills like this inch away at the 2nd amendment until it is completely gone. Springfield knew this was not in the benefit of the 2nd amendment and nobody can tell me otherwise. They are a business with lawyers and intelligent people who know exactly what they are doing, so signing a bill and not fully understanding the verbiage of it would be completely out of character for them. Not flaming, just saying
 
I have one question about all of this. Why is 'thetruthaboutguns' the only site reporting this? It's almost like it's click bait or something...
 
Yo Mama said:
Both springfield and rra have updated their statements. They are both reversing course and standing against the proposed law.
Click to expand...
It's called a trial balloon, and it's standard practice in politics. "Leak" an idea or plan to the press and watch public reaction; if it's negative, deny the whole thing, but if it's positive, take all the credit for it.

I have no doubt of their malicious intent.
 
Funnily enough I just got a spam email from Springfield Armory a few minutes ago asking me to donate to NRA-ILA to fight this. Of course I did send an email the other day saying their support would be reason enough to no longer by their products, which never got an answer.
 
browningguy said:
Funnily enough I just got a spam email from Springfield Armory a few minutes ago asking me to donate to NRA-ILA to fight this. Of course I did send an email the other day saying their support would be reason enough to no longer by their products, which never got an answer.
Click to expand...

Same spam bs email received here!

Capture+_2017-05-03-19-35-20.png
 
I guess everyone on SA's email subscriber list got it. They are trying to undo the damage they caused themselves by making us believe they've changed course!
 
JR24 said:
Did Gaston donate to anti-gun politicians multiple times?

Apparently SA and RRA did. Keeps getting worse and worse.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...contributions-to-anti-gun-rights-politicians/
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing that link. The tale of their anti-2nd Amendment style political contributions feels even more troubling to me than the original 'sin' of going 'neutral' on the passing of Senate Bill 1657.

SA and RRA can now issue all the statements they want - it just looks like desperate attempts to offset the damage they already inflicted on many of their customers' trust.
 
Dill said:
I have one question about all of this. Why is 'thetruthaboutguns' the only site reporting this? ...
Click to expand...

I guess other sites may be worried about upsetting an advertiser like Springfield Armory. Sort of like a "Move along folks. Nothing to see here." situation.

I was actually surprised when I originally posted about this with the original TTAG links that there was nothing here on THR about it at the time.
 
il.bill said:
I guess other sites may be worried about upsetting an advertiser like Springfield Armory. Sort of like a "Move along folks. Nothing to see here." situation.

I was actually surprised when I originally posted about this with the original TTAG links that there was nothing here on THR about it at the time.
Click to expand...


Actually, my news homepage (which knows my preferences) had articles written by other sources that were defending SA and RRA. I believe they were from bearingarms and others that were claiming TTAG was being libelous.
 
jrmiddleton425 said:
Take this for what you will. Flame away...doesn't matter to me at all.

Approximately 1990, Gaston Glock stated, in a telephone conversation recounted to me by the other party, that "Americans ought not be allowed to own guns, because they are too stupid [to know to store them unloaded]."

I don't see anybody boycotting Glock or their products, and the Americans he thinks are too stupid to own guns have made him a centi-millionaire.
Click to expand...
A new reason to not own a glock. Other than they are supremely ugly, ruin cases and are only slightly more accurate than an eight-seventy Remington.
 
This isn't the only forum to take a negative view of SA/RRA. The continued push to demonize them is interesting, considering they were at the NRA convention with a new CCW pistol being offered for sale.

Those who insist they were plotting to deprive IL citizens of their 2A rights and being totally evil about it until they got caught are winding up a conspiracy theory with no facts. If anything the businesses were just doing business - hired a lobbyist who reported to them when something happened. It was just one item on their very full plate managing an ongoing business along with family.

Oh, but NOOoooooooo, they were really undermining the Constitution by employing some political operative to ruin gun sales in IL at the first opportunity. Yes, that's it, their evil anti gun side was exposed - the two faced illegitimate sons of perdition were really sellouts making it harder for guns to be sold in their home state. Has to be, it's all right there in the news!

You really sure about that?

I see it as being out of touch with a rogue lobbyist who was hired to make deals and got handed one to make the gun industry look bad. Seems like politics as usual in that state, why that can't be possible is obviously less attractive than beating on the victims in this case - SA and RRA. Or at least yet to be proven they deliberately were throwing their customers under the bus.

Goes to the bill - adding excessive financial penalties to gun dealers, and their response at worst makes the law look like special interests got a free pass. In that case future litigation may well deep six the bill after it gets passed. Which, it hasn't yet. And may not be simply because of the shenanigans. This thing isn't even law yet.

Who is being hurt by this and who benefits? "I won't buy SA/RRA ever again!" means it's definitely an attack on a gun manufacturer, and the people with the torches and pitchforks are their own customers. What better deal to pull off by anti gunners than that? Again, we are talking POLITICS in an anti gun state, same as the one which had it's former Governor incarcerated for selling the legislative seat left by WHO? Obama.

If you think they aren't capable of pulling off this kind of stunt to make SA/RRA look bad you aren't well informed. They grow up some pretty anti American politicians there - the previous POTUS, duh. But go ahead, blame the gun makers for something they didn't agree to nor were they previously informed about it until they got blindsided by this in the news.

If you can't see the tell tale marks of Alinsky politics in this you aren't capable of understanding what we are really up against in the future. There is more to the war on us as gun owners than hiring Poly Science teachers to beat protesters with bike locks. The cloak rooms of legislature are their real battle grounds and it would seem they are getting one over on you.

Tell me how this doesn't justify what Glock said.
 
Tirod said:
This isn't the only forum to take a negative view of SA/RRA. The continued push to demonize them is interesting, considering they were at the NRA convention with a new CCW pistol being offered for sale.

Those who insist they were plotting to deprive IL citizens of their 2A rights and being totally evil about it until they got caught are winding up a conspiracy theory with no facts. If anything the businesses were just doing business - hired a lobbyist who reported to them when something happened. It was just one item on their very full plate managing an ongoing business along with family.

Oh, but NOOoooooooo, they were really undermining the Constitution by employing some political operative to ruin gun sales in IL at the first opportunity. Yes, that's it, their evil anti gun side was exposed - the two faced illegitimate sons of perdition were really sellouts making it harder for guns to be sold in their home state. Has to be, it's all right there in the news!

You really sure about that?

I see it as being out of touch with a rogue lobbyist who was hired to make deals and got handed one to make the gun industry look bad. Seems like politics as usual in that state, why that can't be possible is obviously less attractive than beating on the victims in this case - SA and RRA. Or at least yet to be proven they deliberately were throwing their customers under the bus.

Goes to the bill - adding excessive financial penalties to gun dealers, and their response at worst makes the law look like special interests got a free pass. In that case future litigation may well deep six the bill after it gets passed. Which, it hasn't yet. And may not be simply because of the shenanigans. This thing isn't even law yet.

Who is being hurt by this and who benefits? "I won't buy SA/RRA ever again!" means it's definitely an attack on a gun manufacturer, and the people with the torches and pitchforks are their own customers. What better deal to pull off by anti gunners than that? Again, we are talking POLITICS in an anti gun state, same as the one which had it's former Governor incarcerated for selling the legislative seat left by WHO? Obama.

If you think they aren't capable of pulling off this kind of stunt to make SA/RRA look bad you aren't well informed. They grow up some pretty anti American politicians there - the previous POTUS, duh. But go ahead, blame the gun makers for something they didn't agree to nor were they previously informed about it until they got blindsided by this in the news.

If you can't see the tell tale marks of Alinsky politics in this you aren't capable of understanding what we are really up against in the future. There is more to the war on us as gun owners than hiring Poly Science teachers to beat protesters with bike locks. The cloak rooms of legislature are their real battle grounds and it would seem they are getting one over on you.

Tell me how this doesn't justify what Glock said.
Click to expand...


So how do you explain SA having two of the four executives on the lobbyist's board, and (with RRA) fully supporting (i.e., 'owning') it? How do you explain the lobbyist's position IN MARCH that if they got a carve-out, they'd stop fighting the bill? Was SA management so out of touch with an organization they, in part, 'owned' that they didn't know what the organization was doing even after two months?

Frankly, accusing TTAG (not that I'm a fan) of being a tool of liberal groups is far less likely than believing SA put their self-interest before public good.

Larry
 
Demi-human said:
A new reason to not own a glock. Other than they are supremely ugly, ruin cases and are only slightly more accurate than an eight-seventy Remington.
Click to expand...

I have excellent accuracy with Glocks inside 25 yards and they have never ruined a case for me yet. Only reloaded a few thousand 9mm and 45 through them though.
 
Dill said:
I have one question about all of this. Why is 'thetruthaboutguns' the only site reporting this? It's almost like it's click bait or something...
Click to expand...

Maybe, and IDK, they are the only ones willing to lead the charge. Maybe they have decided enough of fake news about the 2nd is enough.

Maybe they are willing to take action, concrete action, to turn the tide.

Oh, by the way, Gaston called my Mom in 1995. He told her that I, for every Glock I bought, could get a second one (of equal, or greater, or lessor value) for 27 cents!
 
it's all conjecture at this point. Maybe the lobbyist took a payout from Bloomberg to sabotage IFMA. Who knows? Just keep building the gallows, find the witches, burn them at the stake! Let your blood pressure broil. Meanwhile, I'll be sitting here waiting for the truth.
 
This was a sellout by SA and RRA.
It has been stated before that the IMFA IS Springfield Armory and Rock River arms.
There are 4 officers in the IMFA
  • President: Dennis Reece (Springfield Armory)
  • Secretary: Tom Reece (Springfield Armory)
  • Treasurer: Chuck Larson (Rock River Arms)
  • Executive Director: Jay Keller (Lobbyist)
This wasn't a "going rogue" operation by Mr. Keller. This was a willful undermining of the 2A by these two companies. Had they maintained their opposition to the bill, it would have never made it out of the senate. Now they are putting on this email blitz to try and drum up grass roots opposition to SB1657. Give me a frickin' break. They are responsible for allowing this bill to pass the senate in the first place, now they want to kick it back to us and say....hey we just found out about this, we need your support. Likely when it passes and further restricts the rights of the citizens of Illinois they can sit back with their carve out and say...."that is a shame but we tried".

I am sorry but this level of selling out our rights needs to be met with swift and harsh actions. Both Reeces' and Larson need to sell their company and be gone from the firearms community. I will not purchase another product from either company until that is the case, nor will I purchase a firearm from any distributer or store that carries SA or RRA products.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C0untZer0
  • Locked
Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms drop their opposition to a gun control bill for a carve-out
2 3
Replies
61
Views
8K
everydefense
everydefense
Yo Mama
  • Locked
Rock River just took the poop prize
Replies
14
Views
1K
stoky
stoky
M
  • Locked
Illinois trying to become the next California...only worse
Replies
11
Views
670
55645
5
M
  • Locked
IL Rifle Assn Director speaks to Obama's legislative history on the 2A
Replies
4
Views
834
Audrey
A
A
  • Locked
Effects of IL Gun Control...
Replies
15
Views
941
Cellar Dweller
C
Back
Top