Ruger Still in Business

[mr_dove]

I apologize if this is very old news to some of you. It is new news to some of us as well who are just learning about Ruger policy now that the AWB has expired.

This began with a thread in the general forum asking about why Ruger refuses to sell 20 round mini-14 mags to civivilians. Nobody seemed to know why or know the history of Bill Ruger's betrayal. This is all new to me as well.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=109689&perpage=25&pagenumber=1

I was curious and decided to make a call to Ruger. They informed me that company policy is that they sel 15 round mags with 9mm handguns but that's it. Everything else is neutered.

I did some additional research and was astounded to learn that the high capacity magazine ban was the brain child of Bill Ruger. I did a few searches and read many articles on the net and a few other bulletin boards. This is the most informative article that I found.

http://www.thegunzone.com/rkba/papabill.html#vq

Keep in mind that this is new news to me and many other THR members but I'm asounded that gun owners are still supporting Ruger even more than 10 years after the betrayal. The high capacity magazine ban has affected almost every one of us and yet we continue to buy their products.

My phone call to them has shown that they have not changed their tune now that Bill Sr. is dead either.

So, answer me this. Why is there no concerted effort to boycott Ruger. I sold my Ruger P89 because it was HUGE. I was even considering a 10/22 purchase but I'll never purchase another Ruger knowing this. Its just unacceptable.

 

[R.H. Lee]

When California structured the Roberti-Roos legislation back in 2000, the Ruger Mini-14 was not included on the list of banned 'assault weapons'. I wonder if or how this might play into their current 'policy'.

 

[El Tejon]

No boycott, because Benedict Bill gave a cool million to the NRA Museum.

20 round magazines are just not responsible for you serfs.

I remember Bill Ruger's betrayal. I will never forget.

 

[SoCalGeek]

Not that the mag thing would make a damned bit of difference since I live in CA, but I have no intention of ever buying a Ruger. Ever. I've shot quite a few of their guns, and I really like them. But unless they do something to make up for Bill's actions (selling full caps with their 9mms doesn't cut it), I won't give them a dime.

 

[Justin]

I haven't bought a new Ruger since I found out about Bill's belief that none of us peons could be trusted with magazines that held more than 10 rounds.

 

[Tag]

It's a shame, but I still want to pick up a 22/45

 

[Art Eatman]

This was another of those sad situations where you give up a little in order to avoid giving up a lot.

For instance, the 1968 GCA gave us the Yellow Sheet. Had that not been developed in compromising between the NRA's friends and the gun-grabbers, we could well have been shafted with full registration. We were at a relatively low point in political power, and only the Lord knows how the vote might have gone.

Same deal with the 10-round mags. Pro-gun influence was at an ebb at the time. The limit on magazine size was a sop thrown out to avoid worse restrictions. It made the gun-grabbers look like they'd "done something" without really hurting us as shooters.

Politics always has been, is, and always will be the "art of the possible", with competing interests. Congress always has and always will do its best to ignore the Constitution when there is any loud public outcry to "Do Something!" Clinton's popularity and the media's PR campaign against EBRs provided the support to Do Something.

Bill Ruger may or may not have believed the 10-round mag thing was Good. I dunno. The only way to have any idea of the dealings would have been to be privy to the insider knowledge of vote counting. Odds are, though, it was his idea of a sop to the gun-grabbers.

Anyhow, that's why I've never had my stinger out for Ruger...

Art

 

[Standing Wolf]

After buying a Ruger Mark II, I'll never even consider buying anything from that company again. What a piece of junk!

 

[El Tejon]

Art, it was Bill Ruger that called me and everyone else here who owns magazines over 10 rounds "dishonest". "No honest man" needs . . . remember? I know you do.

Bill Ruger and his company are the lowest form of life--traitors who sought to save themselves by destroying our freedom. Traitors.

 

[rock jock]

Isn't the Mini-14 reason enough not to own a Mini-14?

 

[Art Eatman]

Yeah, well...

That's possibly just as much of a malapropism as Bush's "we won't have an all-volunteer military" or some such phrasing he made. I really doubt Bush meant that we'd go back to having a draft.

I dunno. People are all the time saying dumb stuff, and it often comes out different from what they intended. Hard for me to judge somebody on just one small portion of an entire lifetime.

Heck, I'd really hate to get totally negative about somebody over one particular statement. If I did, I'd have to quite being a moderator. Probably have to quit THR.

Art

 

[El Tejon]

Art, calling me dishonest is not a spoonerism or malapropism. It was a knowing or intentional act of betrayal.

If it was a malapropism, then why didn't Ruger's lawyer immediately issue a "clarification." *Looks at watch, taps foot while whistling* I'm still waiting for that "clarification" as to what old Billy Boy said.

If it was a malapropism, then why not rescind their policy of not selling standard cap mags to us serfs after Bill's met his reward?

There is no doubt reasonable or otherwise that Ruger is a pack of traitors willing to destroy your freedom to save their pocketbooks. Bill tried to buy his way back into our good graces with his "donation" to the NRA museum.

That may work amongst the East Coast Eloi that run the NRA. It does not buy my forgiveness to their treachery.

The youngsters should be educated as to Ruger's cowardice. They must be driven into bankruptcy as an example to the rest of the gun makers.

True enough what you said. And, no doubt Bill Ruger was a firearms genius, but so were many others who designed firearms, but did not support freedom.

 

[F4GIB]

Gun owners didn't drive S&W out of business although it has a history of much greater treachery. They won't do anything to Ruger. "If I want a cheap .22, I'll buy a Ruger." The commitment of the average gun owner doesn't include personal discomfort and their staying power is very weak. They shout, they pout, they forget.

 

[Tag]

Mk II

After buying a Ruger Mark II, I'll never even consider buying anything from that company again. What a piece of junk!

Wolf, what was wrong with it? I'm about to get one of these puppies, but if I should look elsewhere I will...

 

[Cool Hand Luke 22:36]

If you want a new DA revolver, and decide not to patronize companies that have screwed up on RKBA issues, you're going to find a very limited selection.

Smith & Wesson: Boycott over "the HUD agreement"

Ruger: Boycott over Bill Rugers helping to write the 10 round magazine limit

Taurus: The company is Brazilian, no RKBA there, and a participant in New Jersey's "smart gun" travesty.

Colt: Limits civilian market sales.

That pretty much leaves Dan Wesson, EAA, Charter 2000, and NAA.

 

[Kamicosmos]

The Mark II is a fine gun. I too would be interested in Standing Wolf's problem with it. Any time a Ruger thread comes up, he just says because of the Mark II he won't buy any more Rugers. Considering how many Mark I and IIs have been sold over the past 50ish years, I am having trouble determining what was so terribly wrong with his... (Nothing personal towards you SW, I enjoy your posts and knowledge you share with us here, just curious about your Mark II problem.)

As far as the 'Bill Ruger Betrayal': S&W and Colt have been much worse to us 'civilians' than Ruger. Ruger did get elitist as he grew older, and pretty much became a Only Cops and the Military need my guns type of guy. But, to butcher HKs slogan 'We live in a world of compromise'. What would you all say if Bill (And the NRA, remember) hadn't supported the 10 round limit, and all semi auto handguns were flat out banned in '94?

Oh yeah...vote from the rooftops, shoot down the Blue Helmet piloted blackhawks with our Barretts...yadda yadda....

 

[FPrice]

Bill Ruger and his company are the lowest form of life--traitors who sought to save themselves by destroying our freedom. Traitors.

I'd have to say that this description is a bit over the top, especially when when you consider that Bill Ruger almost single-handedly built a company that exists only by providing us products that support our 2A freedoms. After all Sturm Ruger is first and foremost a Firearms Company and probably depend less upon military and police sales than most of the other big companies and therefore more on civilian sales.

Granted he made one very misguided decision. But to say that this is "destroying" our freedom just does not follow logically. Emotionally, yes, but logically no.

 

[Marshall]

Ruger makes some nice firearms, I'm not going to cut my nose of to spite my face. I've bought rugers since then and will continue to consider a Ruger when gun shopping.

 

[Cosmoline]

Different times, different politics. Bill has passed away and the time to launch a boycott came and went a decade ago.

 

[Boats]

Certain people would rather beat a dead man. . .er, horse, than simply accomodate themselves to the market reality. Ruger, for better or worse, is a publically owned company and so governmental intervention in their market is a very real threat to the bottom line. So Ruger doesn't make 20 or 30 round Mini 14 mags as a sop to their social critics? Well, if there is an aftermarket worth spit, that won't long be a problem except for some lost accessory sales for Ruger.

Hmm. Let me check my personal boycott list concerning RKBA and politics:

Anschütz: Axis of Weasels products.
Auto-Ordnance Corp: Garbage
Bushmaster: Settled with a Brady lawsuit.
Browning/FNH: Axis of Weasels products.
Colt: Limits civilian sales and dabbles in smart gun issues.
EAA: Sucky service.
Glock: Axis of Weasels. Mucks around with ballistic fingerprinting.
Heckler & Koch: Axis of Weasels products. Internal locks.
Kel-Tec: Garbage.
Kimber: MIM and Schwartz.
Marlin: Safety interlock on lever.
Mauser: Axis of Weasels.
Para Ordnance: Garbage from a fine country with a big Weasel problem.
Remington: Engineering issues.
Rossi: Garbage from an anti country.
Ruger: Everbody else has laid out the case above.
Sigarms: Axis of Weasels with a North American operation.
Smith & Wesson: Closet Clintonistas with nipple locks.
Springfield Armory: Importer of products from an anti-RKBA country.
Steyr Mannlicher: AoW
Taurus: See Rossi, add smart gunning and internal locks to the problem.
Winchester: See Marlin.
Walther: AoW in bed with Clintonista S&W.

It doesn't leave a very exciting remaining line-up, especially in large bore handguns.

Armalite
Beretta
Ceska Zbrojovka
Charter 2000, Inc.
Dan Wesson Firearms Co.
DPMS
DS Arms, Inc.
Freedom Arms Inc.
Henry Repeating Arms Company
Hi-Point Firearms
High Standard Manufacturing Co. Inc.
IAR, Inc.
Israel Arms International
Ithaca Gun Company
Kahr Arms
Magnum Research Inc.
Navy Arms Company
North American Arms, Inc.
Olympic Arms
Sako Ltd
Savage Arms, Inc.
Thompson Center Arms
Traditions, Inc.
Uberti
U.S. Fire Arms Mfg. Co.
Weatherby


Good thing I ignore my own list.

 

[Mastrogiacomo]

Not buying a gun because you're upset with the company's policy would leave you pretty empty of choices. Beretta's customer service could be better, but I still own them, S&W and Ruger offend many gun owners here but I've had nothing but good luck with the gun so I'll keep buying. If it really ticks you off, let the company know but other than that, not much you can do.

 

[Can'thavenuthingood]

Like Giuliani's analogy of cars and guns, it's talking to symptoms rather than the problem.
All business's do what they must to remain in business and create wealth, contributing to the economy.

Those politicians in Washington created the environment for gun control. A band-aid fix here and a band-aid fix there, all addressing a symptom rather than a problem. Squeakers get the grease and money talks, BS walks and the potlickers got re-elected.

If a company wants to stay in business and be or remain competitive they must be in step with current industry technology. Research and development is a must for invention and product innovation. This is true for any business.

The gun industry is playing by the rules our government sets. They are doing what they can to stay in business and still create a product worthy of our dollars attention.

Harley Davidson designed a new engine and patented many items the aftermarket cannot manufacture, and the aftermarket for HD products is huge. Sole source is with the mother company.

Not so with firearm industry. If you have a better magazine, grip, barrel or business plan get out in your garage and build it, we will buy it. Your primary problems will be the politicians. The secondary problems will be the bureacracy at all levels of government making administrative law. Either way you have to continue to keep the revenues at a respectible level or the investors are gone. And so is your company.

To blame and boycott Ruger, S&W, Remington, Marlin etc. is misplacing the blame. The problem is right there in your city hall and up.
The conservatives have won the Presidency, additional seats in both the Senate and House, yet the NRA-ILA says the climate isn't right for going after big change. They are wrong. Looks to me like the sun is coming up and its a great day for a battle.

This "Climate" is our opportunity to attack. Our numbers are fresh, the other side is gasping and screaming from the wounds of Nov 2's miscalculations.
Don't backup now, don't rest, move forward.

Its the politicians.

Vick

 

[Gewehr98]

And yet, some still don't get it.

From a current thread in the Rifle Country forum, I can't let this one escape.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=147711&page=3

There's one statement, repeatedly in that thread, that's supposed to make a difference:

Cite your facts. Bill Ruger was the largest single contributor to the NRA, among other gun and hunting groups, and I'm getting real tired of folks repeating BS.

Yup... Bill Ruger was the largest single contributor to the National Rifle Association.

Ok, Bill Ruger Sr. gave money to the NRA, and lots of it. Yippee. And that means that the NRA loved him so much they automatically condoned his sellout letter urging magazine capacity limits to protect his beloved Mini-14? Or did his huge contributions give him carte blanche to assault the 2nd Amendment and sensibilities of the gun-buying public without fear of retribution? (Well, he pretty much avoided the retribution part, by checking out of town on 6 July 2002)


Yup, you betcha. That's like me saying because I'm the largest single contributor to the Gewehr98 Halfway House for Unwed Syphalitic Teenage Mothers, you should just look the other way while I dip into the nookie jar.


I like certain Ruger firearms, and own a few. Others to me aren't worth the powder to blow them to hell, they're either clunky, ugly, or can't hit the broad side of a barn from inside. It's a darned shame he became a sellout circa 1994, and it's a darned shame that I quit buying any new Rugers after that date. But I'll be damned if I support a company that still abides by the policies of it's late chairman. They have a chance to make things right now, Bill Sr. won't care. Really. Business would only get better, because gun owners would actually think you're on their side. Imagine that!

And I really, really wonder how much a certain vociferous defender of Ruger's policy in that thread gets paid by the company to be their poster child. It must be a tidy sum, disavowing knowledge of the Ruger magazine ban letter and all...

 

[beerslurpy]

Uh just FYI, belgium != france.

 

[c_yeager]

Not only are they still in business, they have been one of the most consistently profitable American gun companies in history. How many times has Ruger changed hands? How about the other large American gun manufactures? Like it or not, Ruger is making sound business decisions.