Springfield Armory & Rock River Arms - No More for Me

Status
Not open for further replies.
edwardware said:
Corporations make mistakes, whether innocently, or stupidly. Give them some grace.
Click to expand...

While I can agree wih this statment, the running dialog in society today is that many people(snowflakes) like to have opinions and make desicions on things. Then when they are discovered as mistakes they don't wish to deal with the consequences. They only wish that you see how good INTENTIONED they are. But don't we know where that paved road goes?
I don't mind someone, some company trying to get an upperhand in the market, until it hurts the market or me. Is that not the key to American success? As live in Michigan, RIGHT NOW it's only (potentionally) hurting my family in Joliet.
 
It is yet to be proven that the owner of SA/RRA deliberately chose for a carve out when the lobbying organization is the one who performed the act.

I'm getting the opinion a lot of gun owners are reacting to a media attack in exactly the way it's intended, to do harm to SA/RRA and ruin their business. If this was high school it would look exactly the same - we are bullying someone who wasn't in conversation with legislature directly and actually engaged in selling their wares at the primary gun rights convention at the time the deal was discovered.

Can you think of better timing to hurt their business as they launch a new conceal carry gun for public sale? Yet all I read on the net is "Dump SA/RRA for their backstabbing!"

Follow the money.

Politics is not a clean straightforward process and jumping to conclusions this early to say "I wont buy SA because they hurt muh feelz!" is no different that the screeching we hear from the leftists. It demonstrates an inability to deal with the reality of America and also how the media manipulates news to fit their agenda. If someone wants to not buy a product because a political salesman backstabbed the people he was supposed to represent to legislators then it goes to shooting the wounded, something we do very well.

You are being manipulated by the main stream media to react the way they want.
 
Tirod said:
It is yet to be proven that the owner of SA/RRA deliberately chose for a carve out when the lobbying organization is the one who performed the act.

...

Follow the money.

...
You are being manipulated by the main stream media to react the way they want.
Click to expand...

Follow the money - OK. Two companies provide the bulk of the funding for the Illinois Firearms Manufacturers Association (IFMA), and the IFMA lobbyist Jay Keller, traded that group’s opposition to the bill in exchange for a carve-out, removing Illinois firearms manufacturers and big box stores from the licensing requirements. You think he is an idiot, or should I "follow the money"?

Manipulated by main stream media - are you serious? 'The Truth About Guns' is "main stream media"? Hardly.
 
Both springfield and rra have updated their statements. They are both reversing course and standing against the proposed law.
Click to expand...
Oh, Good Grief.

In an effort to avoid doing such Stupid Things, I think that all big companies (especially) need to add one more senior executive level position to to go along with CEO, CFO, etc. ...

It would be something like CCSO ... Chief Common Sense Officer ... and every policy change like this would have to, first, be approved by him/her.

The requirement for the position would be that the candidate would have to display a natural talent for exercising Common Sense. It could even be a guy or gal who works most of their 9 to 5 on the company's assembly line.

Or, more simply, one of the big dogs could just run it by his Mommy before it goes to press ... so long as she is not a silver-spoon type ... ;)
 
GBExpat said:
Oh, Good Grief.

In an effort to avoid doing such Stupid Things, I think that all big companies (especially) need to add one more senior executive level position to to go along with CEO, CFO, etc. ...

It would be something like CCSO ... Chief Common Sense Officer ... and every policy change like this would have to, first, be approved by him/her.

The requirement for the position would be that the candidate would have to display a natural talent for exercising Common Sense. It could even be a guy or gal who works most of their 9 to 5 on the company's assembly line.

Or, more simply, one of the big dogs could just run it by his Mommy before it goes to press ... so long as she is not a silver-spoon type ... ;)
Click to expand...


I like that. Maybe part lawyer as well, so they can ask themselves "with this statement, what are ALL of the possible ways it could be spun?"
 
I sent them an email this morning asking for CEO Denise Reese to make a public statement in the newspaper and/or TV about the stance they are taking on this and on the IFMA and where they now stand with the IFMA . I do not want to read about this in a SA blog or facebook page .
 
The "don't buy Ruger or S&W" thing is just dumb. An awful lot of water under the bridge (not to mention a lot of soil over top of old Bill and for a long time). Free country however. Do as you wish and more power to you.
 
HoosierQ said:
The "don't buy Ruger or S&W" thing is just dumb. An awful lot of water under the bridge (not to mention a lot of soil over top of old Bill and for a long time). Free country however. Do as you wish and more power to you.
Click to expand...

I think most of us have 'forgiven' Ruger because, as you mentioned, Bill's been at room temperature for quite some time; as important, though, is the fact that those who followed him went out of their way to reverse the company's course.

As far as S&W, in most substantive ways today's S&W is a very distant relation to the S&W that did their deal with the devil. A large part of the reason it's got different ownership is directly related to that deal, in fact.


Larry
 
jjones45 said:
A mistake is understandable, this was treason to the gun community plain and simple. Ignorance is no excuse for this, as a CEO you should be well informed of what exactly is going on.
Click to expand...
A person who commits treason is known in law as a traitor. That said while you may feel that this business committed treason the word treason itself is a little strong. When local, state or federal governments enact laws you disagree with would that be treason? Would you classify those legislators who go against your beliefs and convictions traitors? Treason in this instance would seem to not quite fit what is happening. Then too, iof you see this as an act of treason you have every right to do so.

Ron
 
I buy S&W revolvers and Ruger rifles. The management of those companies has changed several times since they sided with the anti gunners. Bill Clinton even knew how slippery that slope was.

SA and RRA is about to find out what a lot of people already know. Siding with AG politicians is sleeping with the enemy. Lets see how Colt fares doing business with Gov. Malloy.
 
Reloadron said:
A person who commits treason is known in law as a traitor. That said while you may feel that this business committed treason the word treason itself is a little strong. When local, state or federal governments enact laws you disagree with would that be treason? Would you classify those legislators who go against your beliefs and convictions traitors? Treason in this instance would seem to not quite fit what is happening. Then too, iof you see this as an act of treason you have every right to do so.

Ron
Click to expand...
Traitor? Check. As a gun company signing a bill that would directly and negatively affect the gun community of your state, I consider that treason. Local, state, and federal governments enacting laws I disagree with would be treason if it was going against the constitution. I'm curious as to why you're so squeamish with my use of the word treason? Do you want to give them a pass for this despicable act? While treason may be the strongest word one can use for a traitor, I really do feel they earned that title for this act. "Defend your Legacy"
 
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.
 
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...

Excellent point. Totally makes sense. Because of that nobody should eve pay attention to or do anything about any concerns they may have about a company's behavior. In fact, I just sent this Oscar Munoz and wrote:

Dear Oscar,

Please tell your employees to bitch-slap your passengers until their arms fall off because some dude on the internet said Gaston Glock said Americans are stupid and he's like, wicked rich. So, you're all good!
 
Springfield speaking for themselves (and apparently RRA as well): http://blog.springfield-armory.com/...ent-regarding-gun-dealer-licensing-act-sb1657
Springfield Armory, like Rock River Arms, was not aware of the actions taken by our trade association, IFMA, until after the fact. We take this situation very seriously and are looking into how this very unfortunate lapse in communication occurred.
Click to expand...
And From RRA: https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2...fma-backdoor-politics-convoluted-deal-making/
After further review, Rock River Arms, Inc.® (RRA) is immediately severing all ties with the Illinois Firearms Manufacturers Association (IFMA). We feel that IFMA’s integrity is compromised and we will not be a part of the organization. We trusted that contributions and resources provided to IFMA by RRA were being used to promote and uphold our 2nd Amendment values. IFMA’s actions have destroyed that trust.
Click to expand...

Mike
 
jjones45 said:
Traitor? Check. As a gun company signing a bill that would directly and negatively affect the gun community of your state, I consider that treason. Local, state, and federal governments enacting laws I disagree with would be treason if it was going against the constitution. I'm curious as to why you're so squeamish with my use of the word treason? Do you want to give them a pass for this despicable act? While treason may be the strongest word one can use for a traitor, I really do feel they earned that title for this act. "Defend your Legacy"
Click to expand...
I am not really squeamish with the use of the word treason I just saw it as a bit heavy handed in this case. That said if you feel the word treason fits then by all means use it. That said, while any firearms related business has a responsibility to the shooting community they also have a fiduciary responsibility to any stock holders if they are publicly traded, Ruger being a good example. I also figure a business, any business, is going to act in its own best interest. Anyway, no big deal on treason I just wondered about the choice of using that word.

Ron
 
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
669
55645
5
M
  • Locked
IL Rifle Assn Director speaks to Obama's legislative history on the 2A
Replies
4
Views
832
Audrey
A
A
  • Locked
Effects of IL Gun Control...
Replies
15
Views
941
Cellar Dweller
C
Back
Top