TexasCHLforum.com

Pawpaw wrote:

Liberty wrote:Oh crap! I was all set to pull the trigger on a long coveted M1/A. I'm kinda wishing I bought it a few weeks ago, but I can't do it with what I now know.

You could always buy one from Fulton Armory instead.

It'll probably be a better quality rifle, to boot.

At about 2x the price and pricey mods to get what I had in mind (Polymer stock), Frankly, I need to make a decision to either buy an inexpensive AR-15 or wait a while and go for the Fulton. I am always reluctant to buy used.

https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2017/05/0 ... nsing-act/
Put Away The Pitchforks: Springfield Armory & Rock River Arms Did NOT Sell Out Gun Owners
I think this has excerpts from SA and RRA press releases late yesterday (whether or not you agree with the article title).

I won't say never simply because companies can change. I have bought S&W products since 2000 and they sold out gun owners in a much, much bigger way during the Clinton Presidency. Based on press releases I saw later yesterday, SA and RRA seem to be reacting and trying to fix this. I'll wait and see what happens.

I have no problem with holding gun manufacturers to account, but I think we should give them a chance to fix it rather than dump them immediately.

Dennis Reese is the CEO for Springfield, Tom Reese is co-chairman of the board at Springfield and Chuck Larson is the CEO for RRA. They're the 3 directors on the IFMA. We're supposed to believe that they weren't aware that a tiny organization - of which they're the directors! - made a decision with ramifications of which they were unaware?

I am sure that is accurate, but I also bet it is mostly symbolic. I would be curious to know who is making the day to day decisions at the IFMA.

If nothing else, this might make ALL the US gun manufacturers take a closer look at who is doing their lobbying and what politicians they are giving money to.

MechAg94 wrote:https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2017/05/0 ... nsing-act/
Put Away The Pitchforks: Springfield Armory & Rock River Arms Did NOT Sell Out Gun Owners
I think this has excerpts from SA and RRA press releases late yesterday.

I won't say never simply because companies can change. I have bought S&W products since 2000 and they sold out gun owners in a much, much bigger way during the Clinton Presidency. Based on press releases I saw later yesterday, SA and RRA seem to be reacting and trying to fix this. I'll wait and see what happens.

I have no problem with holding gun manufacturers to account, but I think we should give them a chance to fix it rather than dump them immediately.

I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but it is hard to believe that they are so out of touch, with the lobbying group that they are solely responsible for, that political contributions, to anti gun legislators, as well as, whether or not the group, opposes, or supports specific legislation, went unnoticed. That argument sounds like it came from the HRC campaign. JMHO

Even if you buy into the companies stories, how do you explain that, for the last several years, IFMA has been making healthy donations of SA & RRA money to anti-gun legislators?

Either they're lying or they're totally incompetent. Either way...

SA and RRA are in the business of staying in business and making and selling guns. "Nuff said.....

Oldgringo wrote:SA and RRA are in the business of staying in business and making and selling guns. "Nuff said.....

To do so they need to meet their customers requirements. Behaviors that irritate their customer base can be destructive to their bussiness.

Liberty wrote: To do so they need to meet their customers requirements.

The only thing this customer requires from a gun manufacture is a well manufactured gun at fair price and supported in customer service for that gun after the sale.

I don't go to my favorite steakhouse looking for light bulbs
I have no expectation of my local motorcycle store advocating for free higher education...
The only thing I want from my local food store is, fresh food.

So as long as Springfield continues to manufacture quality guns at a fair price and support those guns with great costumer service, my requirements have been met.

E.Marquez wrote:

Liberty wrote: To do so they need to meet their customers requirements.

The only thing this customer requires from a gun manufacture is a well manufactured gun at fair price and supported in customer service for that gun after the sale.

I don't go to my favorite steakhouse looking for light bulbs
I have no expectation of my local motorcycle store advocating for free higher education...
The only thing I want from my local food store is, fresh food.

So as long as Springfield continues to manufacture quality guns at a fair price and support those guns with great costumer service, my requirements have been met.

We'll said.

E.Marquez wrote:

Liberty wrote: To do so they need to meet their customers requirements.

The only thing this customer requires from a gun manufacture is a well manufactured gun at fair price and supported in customer service for that gun after the sale.

I don't go to my favorite steakhouse looking for light bulbs
I have no expectation of my local motorcycle store advocating for free higher education...
The only thing I want from my local food store is, fresh food.

So as long as Springfield continues to manufacture quality guns at a fair price and support those guns with great costumer service, my requirements have been met.

I guess we all have different requirements.

E.Marquez wrote:

Liberty wrote: To do so they need to meet their customers requirements.

The only thing this customer requires from a gun manufacture is a well manufactured gun at fair price and supported in customer service for that gun after the sale.

I don't go to my favorite steakhouse looking for light bulbs
I have no expectation of my local motorcycle store advocating for free higher education...
The only thing I want from my local food store is, fresh food.

So as long as Springfield continues to manufacture quality guns at a fair price and support those guns with great costumer service, my requirements have been met.

I also don't expect my favorite steakhouse to support legislation that restricts the selling or distribution of meats, ESPECIALLY if I find out that the steakhouse got a carve out exempting them from the legislation.

I would be pretty peeved at Harley Davidson if they were found to be backing legislation that imposed a tax on all motorcycles not built in Missouri, Wisconsin, or Pennsylvania.

You see where I'm going there....

Oldgringo wrote:

E.Marquez wrote:

Liberty wrote: To do so they need to meet their customers requirements.

The only thing this customer requires from a gun manufacture is a well manufactured gun at fair price and supported in customer service for that gun after the sale.

I don't go to my favorite steakhouse looking for light bulbs
I have no expectation of my local motorcycle store advocating for free higher education...
The only thing I want from my local food store is, fresh food.

So as long as Springfield continues to manufacture quality guns at a fair price and support those guns with great costumer service, my requirements have been met.

We'll said.

You might feel different if their actions impacted you directly and immediately. If these rats get away with screwing their customers like this unchallenged, one day your clapping will clap no more. Nuff' said...

"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."


Martin Niemöller

canvasbck wrote: I would be pretty peeved at Harley Davidson if they were found to be backing legislation that imposed a tax on all motorcycles not built in Missouri, Wisconsin, or Pennsylvania.

You see where I'm going there....

How do you feel about the same thing by Executive Order? You only missed it by 34 years.
http://www.nytimes.com/1983/04/02/busin ... ycles.html

JustSomeOldGuy wrote:How do you feel about the same thing by Executive Order? You only missed it by 34 years.
http://www.nytimes.com/1983/04/02/busin ... ycles.html

That's different. HD = 'merica.

JustSomeOldGuy wrote:

canvasbck wrote: I would be pretty peeved at Harley Davidson if they were found to be backing legislation that imposed a tax on all motorcycles not built in Missouri, Wisconsin, or Pennsylvania.

You see where I'm going there....

How do you feel about the same thing by Executive Order? You only missed it by 34 years.
http://www.nytimes.com/1983/04/02/busin ... ycles.html

Those are tariffs on imported bikes, not those made in other states.

The information posted regarding RRA and SA, looks pretty damning. Especially since the proposed legislation, would exempt them from the law. While I agree, that we may not be able to boycott, every corporation that we disagree with politically, I think that when a company appears to have helped, if only indirectly, with the restriction of 2A rights, and they rely directly on that right for their livelihood, we can and should stand up and at least hold them accountable.

They may do the right thing, and begin a concerted effort to defeat the legislation, disentangle themselves from the lobbying group they formed, issue apologies to anyone who has been hurt by this proposed legislation, then work more diligently towards removing these left wing reps from the legislature, then they can possibly redeem themselves. But they have dug themselves a deep hole, that will take a lot of time and energy on their part to crawl out of. JMHO