Dakota Arms & RKBA - Part 2

[HankB]

This is a follow up to a thread I originated back in December '05: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=168715&highlight=dakota+arms+soft

The gist was that at the time, DAKOTA magazine featured their "Scimitar" tactical rifle, which, it was emphasized, would be sold only to government bodies. This was controversial - a bolt action rifle, not a .50 BMG, legal in all 50 states, and they chose not to sell it except to the government?

Well, the Spring 2006 issue of DAKOTA which I received in today's mail paints a rather different picture. The headline in the "Letter from Sturgis" column, authored by Charlie Kokesh, CEO, Dakota Arms, reads "The Scimitar Goes Public"

"We received a great deal of feedback on Steve Helsley's review of the Dakota Scimitar, our newest tactical rifle, in the Fall 2005 issue of DAKOTA. Many of the comments, as well as a number of chat room discussions, focused on the fact that the Scimitar was then available only to law enforcement and the military.

We want our readers to know that we heard you loud and clear and have changed that policy.

We are now taking orders for the Scimitar - designed as a tactical rifle of extreme precision and reliability. I can personally affirm that it also makes a suberb hunting rifle. On my most recent trip to Tanzania, I carried a Scimitar chambered in .338 Dakota Short Magnum and a Model 76 in .423 Dakota.

We expect to built up to 30 Scimitars a month for the general public and our preferred dealers, so if you are interested call our sales team directly."

I for one am very happy to see Dakota Arms rationalize their sales policies to make a very nice bolt action rifle available to regular people, not just government agencies, and like to think that THR played at least a small role in Dakota Arms' rethinking of their sales policies.

Kudos to Charlie Kokesh and Dakota for recognizing their mistake and correcting it.

 

[JohnBT]

Reading between the lines, I suspect government sales have been less than satisfactory. Aw, what do I know.

John

 

[Hawken50]

On my most recent trip to Tanzania, I carried a Scimitar chambered in .338 Dakota Short Magnum and a Model 76 in .423 Dakota.

there's an article about that hunt in the latest American Hunter.

as far as dakota rifles, i won't ever be buying one because of thier former policy. (i swear that's the reason, not because i could never afford one.)

you hear that dakota? you're dead to me.

 

[bouis]

Wow, formerly available only to the government? It must be a great rifle -- I'll order one right now.

Maybe I'm too cynical but this sounds like a marketing ploy to me.

 

[cbsbyte]

I agree that the Gov sales where probably not steller, because Dakota guns are probably to expensive for many police dept to buy, when you can have a Rem or Savage built for alot less. They decided to offer the rifle to for sale to the civilian market.

 

[stevelyn]

I agree that the change wasn't on principle or the RKBA, but rather the Almighty Greenback Dollar.........or the lack thereof from deep-pockets goobermint sales.

 

[Cacique500]

Maybe I'm too cynical but this sounds like a marketing ploy to me.

+1

Reading between the lines, I suspect government sales have been less than satisfactory.

+2

 

[torpid]

In Lloyd Bentsen voice:

"Charlie Kokesh, you're no Ronnie G. Barrett."

.

 

[Diamondback6]

Deleted. See below.

 

[billwiese]

I know Charlie Kokesh, Dakota Arms' CEO.

I worked for him 17 years ago when he was ran a VC (Venture capital) firm in CA (I was an IT weenie).

He's unquestionably pro-gun. He's also a skillful marketeer.

The supposed 'controlled sale' of the Scimitar was a marketing stunt to get .GOV types hot & bothered to have an exclusive 'non-sporting' rifle for a tac rifle. I believe the exact same gun could be ordered piece by piece from Dakota as a collection of options on another rifle. It wouldn't be called a 'Scimitar' even though it shot like one. This is just a name game, and apparently it's not worth the trouble continuing.

We're engaging in political correctness on our own side over marketing trivia.
This is substantively different than if, say, Bushmaster wouldn't sell legal AR15 parts to California for legal use on legal guns. (Which is precisely the conduct of vendors like Sportsman's Guide and, sometimes, Cheaper Than Dirt.)

Bill Wiese
San Jose, CA

 

[Don Gwinn]

I won't be buying one of these rifles because I can't afford it and couldn't shoot it any better than my old Mauser if I could.

HOWEVER:

If you don't want the people who disagree with you to change their minds and come over to your way of thinking, you're doing exactly the right thing by continuing to punish a company by boycott after the owner has admitted publicly that he was wrong and rescinded the policy that got your dander up.

There's literally nothing more he could do to fix that initial mistake, so some of you are saying by your actions that the moment he did it he was beyond the pale and untouchable. That's fine if that's what you want to say, but it means nobody has any reason to change their policies to accomodate you--ever.
Good luck with that.

 

[Diamondback6]

I apologize, and retract my previous comment. Just wish people would give their real business-base a wink and nod to let us know what they're up to...

 

[BurmKiller]

I realize that this thread is almost a year old now...but I never came across it until today. Just as an FYI, I felt compelled to pass on my experience with this rifle. First, the original article by Helsley, as I recall, was not authored specifically for DAKOTA magazine, but was reprinted...I could be wrong on that. The same week that article was released I called Dakota regarding the rifle. I am NOT a LEO and made that clear and was told at that time that the Longbow and Scimitar were both available for sale to the public, but that LEO orders took priority and that they were backlogged. I was told at that time that it was a $500 deposit, 6-8 month wait, total price just over $6K. I asked about the "LEO Only" statements and was told that the only thing that had been passed on to the salespeople were that LEO orders came first and would bump other orders in line - but that there was no official LEO Only policy. Now, who knows how accurate this info was, but it was just 3-4 days after the magazine came out.

The LEO first is nothing new...try to order an H-S Prescision these days. Their tactical take down is not even available for order and existing orders are 3 years out - all due to LEO and military priorities. I cannot say I disagree with this policy either.

As mentioned, I felt compelled to pass this on for those that may, for political reasons, boycott what is, in my opinion, one of the finest production rifle builders out there. And, BTW - I ended up with a TRG-22 as I could not justify double the costs for the Scimitar at the time.

 

[Prince Yamato]

I can personally affirm that it also makes a suberb hunting rifle.

Yes, but how well does it work on people?