Has the boycott of S&W and Ruger ended?

[Weevil]

Oh there was indeed a boycott and it was effective.

This is why the Ruger family bailed out when Bill died and the Brits dumped S&W.

Sales had slumped the companies were in trouble and they got out while the gettin' was good.

Kudos to the new owners of these companies for being able to overcome the bad blood and win back gun buyers to save these American institutions.

That's why I'm not sure why some die-hards are still hanging onto their grudge 10 years later.

We won guys, we proved our point!

What is to be gained by continuing to hate the new owners and boycott their products for what the old owners did???

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

I'm STILL fighting the bad gun laws that Bill Ruger advocated and helped pass 20 years ago and it is now seven years after his death. Ditto for S&W.

...my life time ban of S&W and Ruger products - new and used, continues....

...our freedoms are too precious to let people like this bargan them away in exchange for what they wanted at the time - money.... plain and simple

They aren't owned by the people that wanted those laws anymore. One owner died off and the other sold S&W. By boycotting them, you are hurting good American companies that are pro 2nd-Amendment.

 

[jon_in_wv]

I wonder if you guys that so self righteously boycott Ruger and S&W boycott companies that today give millions of dollars to anti gun organizations? Or do you only have enough hatred for those two companies?

 

[psyopspec]

Both companies make products that fill the needs of a thriving armed citizenry and are more than happy to sell you guns which defy those erroneous policies.

The last part of that sentence is why I forgave them. The sunset of the AWB wasn't enough - Ruger continued to deny selling so-called high-capacity magazines to civilians, and didn't manufacture any so-called assault weapons. I went back and searched, but couldn't find the post from around 2006ish where I said that it wasn't just silencing the rhetoric that would result in me letting them off the hook: It would take a full-on reversal of policy. When I started seeing Ruger ARs and standard capacity magazines on shelves, I stayed true to my word. I bought MK III. Even looking at that gun, there's plenty of evidence of the dark times - safety billboards on the upper receiver, locks, obscene loaded chamber indicators, but these are all just reminders of what was and not a reason to continue boycotting the company for being anti-2A.

As for S&W, I forgot we were supposed to boycott them, but I inadvertently helped out by not being interested in anything they had to offer back then.

 

[SabbathWolf]

...What is to be gained by continuing to hate the new owners and boycott their products for what the old owners did???

Absolutely nothing...unless it's "throat slashing" time for no apparent reason.

 

[Gottahaveone]

There's many people, including myself, that will not buy a new S&W that has the ugly lock hole in the gun.

I would not buy a new S&W for many years because of their caving in to Klinton. Then along came the new management. About the time I was willing to let bygones be bygones and start considering them as an option again, they came out with the internal lock nonsense. So no, I still don't buy S&W products.

I fully realize that my few dollars are not even noticeable to them, but it's MY money and I'll spend it (or not) where I want.....

 

[psyopspec]

I wonder if you guys that so self righteously boycott Ruger and S&W boycott companies that today give millions of dollars to anti gun organizations? Or do you only have enough hatred for those two companies?

With Ruger it wasn't disagreement about 2A that was the problem. It was the glaring hypocrisy that irked me.

As someone who "so self-righteously" boycotted, I admit that I probably do business w/ antigun companies from time to time. Think I might have purchased a bottle of Heinz ketchup in the last decade. Ms. Kerry doesn't run a business that should be implicitly for a human right while simultaneously going on TV and poo-pooing the same. If I only went to films with pro-2A actors, I'd be missing out on a great art form. I paid handsomely earlier this year to go to a Bruce Springsteen concert, and will do so again if the opportunity arises. The difference is that with these folks, I know what I'm getting.

"My hypocrisy goes only so far" / "My hypocrisy knows no bounds" as Doc H said.

 

[grizz13]

Ok what's all this about internal locks on all S&W products. I've bought 2 pistols in the past year and a half and neither has an internal lock. One is an M&P in 9mm the other is an Airweight in .38 special.

 

[spotch]

Even if you don't subscribe to the belief that Ruger played ball on some limitations in order to prevent larger bans from seeming necessary (as some do), boycotting a company long after they got rid of the policies you hate, and implemented policies you like, seems awful self-defeating. The way you train anyone is by rewarding good behavior and punishing bad. If you punish ALL behavior, they'll never learn anything.

 

[Davek1977]

I own both Ruger and S&W products. I see no reason to let former policies of former owners dictate what I buy. Both companies make some excellent products, and I am not the least bit ashamed in giving either company my business. With so many real threats to our freedoms, I'd focus my efforts elsewhere than boycotting a company that once had policies many found unfavorable, but has since changed direction and is now one of the premier "good guys"

 

[SabbathWolf]

I own both Ruger and S&W products. I see no reason to let former policies of former owners dictate what I buy. Both companies make some excellent products, and I am not the least bit ashamed in giving either company my business. With so many real threats to our freedoms, I'd focus my efforts elsewhere than boycotting a company that once had policies many found unfavorable, but has since changed direction and is now one of the premier "good guys"

Yep. In fact...I'm happy about just about "anybody" who will still make guns and sell them to the public just to p*ss off the libs.....lol

 

[Apuuli]

I was having a feud with my neighbor when he moved away. A new family moved into his old house. I continued the feud with them. After all, they had the same address...

 

[SabbathWolf]

 

[JERRY]

i will buy a .22lr rimfire gun from either one, but nothing with a built in lock for self defense in my house.

there are too many non locked centerfire S&W and Ruger revolvers on the market to buy a new one with a built in lock.

i made the mistake of not doing my home work with the LC9 thinking it was just an LCP with additional un-needed features.

had i known the LC9 had a built in lock id have bought something else. anyone want to trade for a LC9?

 

[Quiet]

Oh there was indeed a boycott and it was effective.

This is why the Ruger family bailed out when Bill died and the Brits dumped S&W.

Sales had slumped the companies were in trouble and they got out while the gettin' was good.

Kudos to the new owners of these companies for being able to overcome the bad blood and win back gun buyers to save these American institutions.

That's why I'm not sure why some die-hards are still hanging onto their grudge 10 years later.

We won guys, we proved our point!

What is to be gained by continuing to hate the new owners and boycott their products for what the old owners did???

I agree.

The need for the boycott is over.

 

[SabbathWolf]

i will buy a .22lr rimfire gun from either one, but nothing with a built in lock for self defense in my house.

there are too many non locked centerfire S&W and Ruger revolvers on the market to buy a new one with a built in lock.

i made the mistake of not doing my home work with the LC9 thinking it was just an LCP with additional un-needed features.

had i known the LC9 had a built in lock id have bought something else. anyone want to trade for a LC9?

I never did understand the big hatred for guns with an internal lock either way.
Granted, I'm against the very idea of it all together from a political point of view.
But, from an actual functional point of view, I see it as no big deal at all.
I mean "unlock" the gun and then destroy the key if you want to.
It will still function just the same either way.

My Ruger 357 Blackhawk for example has an internal lock.
You can't even tell either way.
In order to even get to it, you have to take the grips off.
I just took the grips off, unlocked the gun, put the grips back on and called it a day.
You cannot even tell one way or another that it even "has" a lock.





Now on the other hand...guns with a big stupid hole clearly visible on the sides of them or something is different.
I wouldn't want that just because of aesthetics reasons.

 

[Kiln]

It is kind of like when people boycott video games or movies. People whine and complain to no end about little crap and then are the first ones in line to pick up a copy when it comes out.

 

[SuperNaut]

Has the boycott of S&W and Ruger ended?

I boycott them because neither company makes anything I'm even remotely interested in buying.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

Has the boycott of S&W and Ruger ended?

Apparently, not in some people's minds.

WRT Ruger, there are not even any Ruger family members in its hierarchy. And they are making a number of firearms that - I will concede - the old man would never have approved of.

 

[jon_in_wv]

S&W and Ruger are the two largest gun makers in the US, Ruger stock is higher than it has ever been. I would say those who are boycotting aren't making much difference. I'll keep buying both. I'm not going to punish the company when they do the right thing because someone in the past did the wrong thing. Besides, I'm too busy boycotting General Motors.

 

[JohnBT]

I wonder why there's never been a boycott of Remington and Marlin for not making any concealable handguns. Ruger wasn't the only company with a limited selection.

How many votes did Mr. Ruger have on that old gun law? Anybody know? I doubt it from some of the nonsense I've just read.

 

[JERRY]

I never did understand the big hatred for guns with an internal lock either way.

an un-needed devise built in to disable the gun which requires a tool to disengage is not what i want on a defensive piece.

on a defensive gun i want features which enhance its shootability, not disable them.

 

[Gottahaveone]

I never did understand the big hatred for guns with an internal lock either way.

Not only does it add an unnecessary mechanical complexity that has the possibility of failure (no matter how small the possibility, it wouldn't exist if the lock wasn't there), it also apparently opens you up to liability if the lock is not used and an unauthorized person does something bad with the weapon. I'm willing to bet that this isn't the last that this father is going to hear about that lock.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=8177940&postcount=5

You said you unlocked yours and that's the end of it. What happens when some delinquent breaks into your house, steals your revolver and shoots a gang banger buddy with it? Do you really want to be explaining to a jury why you didn't utilize the included safety feature that would have prevented this poor misguided soul from being able to use the weapon that he committed several crimes to acquire?

The internal locks are an unnecessary solution to a non-existent problem.

 

[DPris]

The remaining Ruger "family" did not "bail" out because of either a boycott or "slumping" sales.
There was internal pressure involved.
Bill Junior was not....particularly beneficial to the company.
Denis

 

[psyopspec]

I wonder why there's never been a boycott of Remington and Marlin for not making any concealable handguns. Ruger wasn't the only company with a limited selection.

There's a difference between not manufacturing a type of gun, and publicly advocating for that family of firearms to be turned into contraband. No one in this thread who was ever for boycotting the company has said they did so due to Ruger not manufacturing concealed handguns. Maybe you had to be there, but there were also no executives from Rem or Marlin trying to raise public support for the AWB.

It also fractured the gun culture. Old man Ruger's demonizing of so-called "assault weapons" with folksy charm contributed to a large number of hunters (who shot exclusively bolt guns or break action shotguns and the like) to jump on the AWB wagon. I got more than one dirty look at the range during the AWB years for owning an AR; now I see more ARs when I go to the range than any other type.