Springfield Armory & Rock River Arms - No More for Me

[Arizona_Mike]

Both Ruger and S&W are both under new ownership so why would we blame the new owners for what the old ones did. If SA or RRA change hands then we can forgive them.

S&W is under new ownership. Ruger has been publicly traded since 1969.

Mike

 

[Arizona_Mike]

So how does the IFMA work? Do members have veto power over Jay Keller's decisions? For some reason I doubt it.

Mike

 

[ShootingIsFun]

Illinois.... Might as well live in California or New York...
I'd rather live in a free state

 

[Warp]

I don't own a single anything from either of them that I can think of, so, ha! Never was interested in most of the...stuff...they put out anyway. Won't even look now.

 

[DoubleMag]

''I'm not sure how smart of a decision this was as they're alienating their customers.''

Oh my. Well RRA does make a dandy National Match Rifle. I saw it at Camp Perry last year. Actually suggested it to a friend who scampered up there Q-uick and bought it. I was thinking about a RRA NM rifle this year at the matches. ''Was'' is past tense as in, not now, this heavily weighs into my elective purchases.

 

[DT Guy]

Folks talking about how Ruger and S&W 'are just fine' after their debacles forget the pain they went through following their collusion with our enemies; Smith didn't go through a change of ownership following it because it was so profitable, and Ruger *still* has folks that won't buy their products, even with Bill at room temperature for several years.

I get to spend my money as I wish, and have lots of choices when I go gun shopping. I don't patronize companies with poor service, or companies that don't agree with my right to freely purchase and own a gun, as SA did here.


Larry

 

[Tirod]

I understand the angst about a lobbyist trading a company's reputation for 30 pieces of silver.

What did the boycott against S&W do? It hurt their bottom line and now we have less guns available. It also made them less competitive against the Euro Bloc who now dominate American gun sales.

Do you want to close down all the Made in USA makers? Because this is how you do it.

 

[BearBrimstone]

I understand the angst about a lobbyist trading a company's reputation for 30 pieces of silver.

What did the boycott against S&W do? It hurt their bottom line and now we have less guns available. It also made them less competitive against the Euro Bloc who now dominate American gun sales.

Do you want to close down all the Made in USA makers? Because this is how you do it.

As far as I know most of Springfield Armory's products are not made in USA, so boycotting them does not hurt a Made in USA company. If I am correct on it they are essentially a foreign company that bought an American name to put on their firearms. No clue with RRA though.

 

[JR24]

I understand the angst about a lobbyist trading a company's reputation for 30 pieces of silver.

What did the boycott against S&W do? It hurt their bottom line and now we have less guns available. It also made them less competitive against the Euro Bloc who now dominate American gun sales.

Do you want to close down all the Made in USA makers? Because this is how you do it.

Was it really that? Or was it simply failing to out maneuver Glock via police sales?

Fewer XDS sold probably means more Shields sold, and their 1911 losses will certainly be covered by a different American manufacturer.

 

[Reloadron]

It doesn't matter if they move out of state, the decision to screw over Illinois gun owners remains.

If anyone has been screwing Illinois gun owners I would think gun owners need not look beyond their own state legislature to see who is and always has been screwing them. Springfield Armory is a business and do whatever it needs to do to survive and turn a buck. When you do not turn the almighty buck your business is short lived.

Ron

 

[reddog81]

And what if they hadn't negotiated for a carv-out and the bill passed anyways. Then they'd be screwed and may have had to close their doors. Firearms sales aren't peaking right now. SA and RRA are big enough that moving to a new state would cost them quite a bit, but small enough that they may not survive a move. I don't know, I don't have enough knowledge of their financial to make a decent guess on that. Do you?

What was in the original bill that would have caused them to close their doors? I haven't researched the details but all I see is a licensing requirement.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Harmon's bill reads like the Chicago handgun ban was overturned by SCOTUS in McDonald 2010, so I'll use outrageous licensing fees to tax our way to a defacto prohibition state.

The Activism forum has a thread with a description of the bill, but that thread is for Illinois activists actually doing something about it. No venting there please.

My take on all this:

[sarcasm] Maybe Illinois firearms manufacturers like Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms want to be allowed to operate in Gun Free Zone Illinois as an advertising gimmick, like Jack Daniel's Distillery in Alcohol-Free Moore County, Tennessee, which has local option prohibition. [/sarcasm]

Realistically, the manufacturers may be carving out an exemption just-in-case the bill should pass.

It is a bill, not an act, yet, maybe never but not now. This could end up like Bloomberg's carry permit riciprocacy fiasco in Virginia. That over-reach hurt the anti-gun movement.

SA's and RRA's goal may be to protect their business and the jobs of their employees come-what-may. I do not think it is wise to trash SA or RRA for employing pre-emptive tactics. (For full disclosure I own an M6 Scout sold by SA but have no other ponies in this race.) Rest assured, when the bill fails, the gun makers will be blamed for undermining it behind the scenes and catch heat from the other side. Question: are Illinois gun dealers organized and what are they doing?

This bill does illustrate that the power to tax gives the power to destroy that which you cannot constitutionally prohibit. That was FDR's Attorney General Homer Cummings' reasoning behind the NFA $200 registration tax on so-called "gangster weapons": he recognized you could not prohibit firearms under the Second Amendment, but the government had the power to tax into submission. Ignoring constitutional limits, D.C. and Chicago outright banned private handguns, leading to the Heller 2008 and McDonald 2010 Supreme Court rulings overturning their handgun bans. So now Chicago and D.C. are using prohibitive "regulation" as a substitute for bans. After all, reasonable regulation to prohibitionists is prohibitive regulation: training requirements including range time to own a handgun in Chicago but firing ranges open to the public are zoned out of possible existence.

 

[Warp]

Illinois.... Might as well live in California or New York...
I'd rather live in a free state

Well, Illinois has shall issue concealed carry. New York has May Issue for mere handgun ownership in the home. California has May Issue for carry and that really silly handgun roster. Not even remotely comparable IMO

 

[buster94]

Big business has never been for anything except their own profits. Lobbying is such crooked garbage it is pathetic.
I had two SA pistols and sold them both without even a second thought. They are good guns but they didn't impress me. I will not be buying anymore especially after reading this.
Shall not be infringed is beyond most ignorant crooked politicians understanding.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Actually, think about how much more it will be worth in a few years, after SA files bankruptcy and fold due to alienating their customer base.

Well, Colt filed for bankruptcy and they're still around, barely. They left a lot of suppliers and investors holding the bag. That alienated many of their customers and I was one of them. Lots of bad product coming out of that factory right now and their warranty service sucks. They also cut a deal with CT governor to use public funds to purchase the building where they operate under the guise of more jobs for the locals. The state of CT is about as AG as they come yet Colt has no problem doing business with them. They can't get a loan from the banks and investors are nowhere to be found these days. Talk about pimping yourself for a few bucks.Their days are numbered. I have 3 Colts in my safe right now and they aren't going anywhere.

http://www.journalinquirer.com/publ...cle_c036fcac-12d2-11e7-9b59-5f2e299a5478.html

I think what we are going to see in the next few years is a real dog eat dog environment in the gun industry. When firearms mfg's start sucking up to politicians who they know are AG the end is near for those companies. Colt would be the last company to get any of my money for an AR or 1911. Now you can add SA and RRA to the list. Hasta la vista baby.

 

[jjones45]

Springfields deal with the devil just cost a lot of Croatians and South Americans their jobs. HS Produkt and whoever they import most of their 1911 frames and rifles from will take the hit first. SA will reduce their imports if they have to save money. It will be a long time before the owners of SA are really hurt by this backstabbing act. All I can think about is "defend your legacy", what a crock of s***. My legacy is not buying from companies who do things like this. Hey for the inconvenience of pulling the knife out of your back Springfield Armory is offering 4 free mags, holster and mag pouch with the purchase of a new Springfield Armory pistol. I wonder if they add this to their timeline for 2017 in the "about us" menu of their website. I have absolutely no knowledge of RRA company, practices or history, but they can surely burn as well for making a deal with the devil

 

[CoalTrain49]

At first I disliked Springfield Armory for this and thought I definitely won't be buying any of their products in the near future, but then I started thinking about it. If I'm honest about it I would have made the same decision if I were in their shoes. If I owned a company and I had the option of protecting my company but I had to throw other people under the bus of course I would do it. Why hurt my company just to help people I don't know? They merely made the smart business decision.

You would make a great CEO for a company like United Airlines. When you throw people under the bus better first check to see if they aren't your customers.

 

[kimberkid]

SA has taken bankruptcy several times, bought their own equipment back at auction and set up shop down the street with a slightly different name ... Now almost none of their products are made in the US ... I believe the XD is made in Crotia

As for RRA, they're just another AR company ... We have plenty of choices, I don't think they are even significant any more.

I understand the angst about a lobbyist trading a company's reputation for 30 pieces of silver.

What did the boycott against S&W do? It hurt their bottom line and now we have less guns available. It also made them less competitive against the Euro Bloc who now dominate American gun sales.

Do you want to close down all the Made in USA makers? Because this is how you do it.

Their (SA's) guns aren't made in the US anyway ... And S&W was British owned during that boycott ... But at least they were made here!

 

[RPRNY]

Great job OP of bringing this to our attention. Thank you. Dialogue here is great too. But the only way to make a difference is to tell SA and RRA that they have got it wrong and that unless they make it right, you will vote with your wallet. I for one was very excited by the XD-E. Now, no. And I have written to tell SA so. Write. Tell them why you are writing and that they are under boycott until they change their position. Use "boycott". As a corporate hack myself, I can assure you that's a scary word from a couple of hundred people. Give your name and address or email. Anonymous doesn't count.

Springfield Armory:

http://www.springfield-armory.com/contact/

Rock River Arms:

https://www.rockriverarms.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&page_id=8

Doesn't need to be complicated: "I am writing to express my extreme displeasure with (name of company) about your stance on ..(fill in what you angry about).. Be advised that I am participating in the boycott of all (name of company) products and will actively encourage others to as well until you rectify your position on this issue and demonstrate corporate values consistent with the Second Amendment and the values of American gun owners.

Regards,

Name and address or email"

 

[captain awesome]

why would you do that and lose money?

Flooding the used gun market with used guns of a certain mfg will hurt the companies bottom line. Why buy brand new when you can buy used for a fraction of the cost. Not to mention the loss of the most loyal customers. Smith and Wesson paid a terrible price for their treachery in the 90s.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

Well.....looks like I WON'T be buying an RRA National Match A2.

HOWEVER...I WILL continue to own, carry, shoot, and compete with my 1945 Springfield Armory M1 Garand with pride.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

As for RRA, they're just another AR company ... We have plenty of choices, I don't think they are even significant any more.

I believe they are well regarded in Service Rifle competition circles. They aren't "just another AR." Which makes this all the worse. SA had already sold out to Asia and South America in terms of manufacturing, so no surprise, and no great loss, that they sold out to the Illinois legislature.

 

[Reloadron]

HOWEVER...I WILL continue to own, carry, shoot, and compete with my 1945 Springfield Armory M1 Garand with pride.

Yeah, the M1 Garand made at the Springfield Armory in Springfield MA and today is a National Park having nothing to do with the Springfield Armory in Missouri. Springfield Armory, Inc. is an American firearms manufacturer based in Geneseo, Illinois, founded in 1974. It is one of the largest firearm companies in the world.Having nothing to do with the actual and original Springfield Armory in MA.

 

[Demi-human]

Sent them both a respectful request to support their customers, instead of legislators. I have done what I can. I was looking hard at the Xds, but will have to wait I suppose. Shoot well.

 

[edwardware]

From Springfield's website:

"At the time of my initial statement to the media, I was ill-informed of the ramifications of this bill and its detrimental effects to the Second Amendment, which I have personally fought to protect my entire life. I can tell you now, we at Springfield Armory are unequivocally 100 percent against this bill and will continue to work with the NRA and others to ensure that it is defeated,” said Dennis Reese, Chief Executive Officer, Springfield Armory.​

Corporations make mistakes, whether innocently, or stupidly. Give them some grace.