Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban

ironsight65 · 09-20-2004, 09:12 PM

I heard from a local FFL dealer that Ruger has no plans to start producing
hi capacity mags and folding stocks or any of the other "evil" cosmetic details that were banned under that ridiculous ban that has gone away.
This really disappoints me as Ruger has always been one of my favorite firearms companys. I had heard that way back when Bill Ruger was in favor of the 10 round limit but I didn't think that would carry over after the ban was gone. Seems they are really out of touch with their customer base to me. I think everyone should let them know about it too. I will not be buying anymore Ruger products if this policy stays in place.

Anyone heard of any other companys that seem to think the ban was
a good idea?

stash247 · 09-22-2004, 02:24 AM

Colt. one of the few pre-ban rifles that didn't lose value, because they are not building any more.
Gradecard: Economics-B Political Science-D-

inplanotx · 09-22-2004, 04:43 AM

Maybe if we make a fuss and it is loud enough, Ruger might rethink its position. Start writing those letters!

bambihunter · 09-24-2004, 02:51 AM

I think they are just trying to stay visibly politically correct thinking the ban will eventually come back and they want to look like they were proactive during the gap.
All they are really doing is alienating thier customers and to help reaffirm the stereotype that these features are indeed evil...
What a F-d up PC world we live in now in the USA...

ironsight65 · 09-24-2004, 11:11 PM

I think you are right Bambihunter. Hopefully their former customers will show them that PC thinking and business sense are two completely different concepts.

offeror · 09-25-2004, 12:17 AM

I agree that politically correct for Ruger is not economically sound. If they did market research I'm sure they would find that pleasing the public "at large" does not equal better sales. Most if not nearly all gun buyers would prefer they go right back into production on the formerly banned accessories, since they were not "evil" to begin with.

Cheimison · 09-26-2004, 10:58 PM

Personally I'd capitalize on it while it lasts. I'd be making stupid, ridiculous crap like 500 round spiral magazines for AK-47s and 7mm Winchester Magnum hunting rifles with 40 round magazines with pistol grips. And dual bayonettes.

LIKTOSHOOT · 09-29-2004, 08:08 PM

Yep and while we`re at it.....where is my preban Weatherby???
GHEESH!!!!!!

LTS

Crpdeth · 09-29-2004, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LIKTOSHOOT

Yep and while we`re at it.....where is my preban Weatherby???
GHEESH!!!!!!

LTS

Thought you died

LIKTOSHOOT · 09-30-2004, 07:25 PM

Naw, guess it`s time for my yearly shower.....man it`s gonna burn!!!!!

LTS

ibtrukn · 10-01-2004, 09:22 AM

YO Phishie, yur preban W-by lives up here in the shape of an Mk XXII eyetalian bilt w/W-by scope an 3 clips

yar ol IB still gotta cupple cuties hangin aroun

Crpdeth · 10-02-2004, 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LIKTOSHOOT

Naw, guess it`s time for my yearly shower.....man it`s gonna burn!!!!!

LTS

Cleanse the inside first with 100 proof, and you wont feel a thing on the outside.

LIKTOSHOOT · 10-03-2004, 09:05 PM

Don`t expect me to water down Soggy Bottom`s finest. "EVER!"

LTS

Crpdeth · 10-04-2004, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LIKTOSHOOT

Don`t expect me to water down Soggy Bottom`s finest. "EVER!"

LTS

Fine with me, but it's gonna burn!

~Crp

Tony Mig · 10-04-2004, 08:09 PM

What did Ruger ever really offer before the Ban.....?

Most all of the bolt on goodies for the Mini's were after market. Back in the day when I had a Mini-14, the only thing Ruger made for it was 30 round mags, folding stocks, flash suppressors, and the other "banned" cosmetics were made by other companies.

I don't understand the beef you guys have with them, if you want that stuff for your guns, there's plenty of other sources to choose from.

JudgeColt · 10-05-2004, 09:45 PM

Ruger has long been too politically correct. Mini-14 magazines holding more than five rounds were withdrawn from public sale in the 1970s as I recall.

The late William Ruger is considered by many to be the "father" of the 10-round magazine limit. Ruger essentially supported the 10-round limit in exchange for the Mini-14 being left out of the definition of "assault rifle" being considered for years before the 1994 ban. He called it "saving his little rifle." That support gave encouragement to those who eventually got the ban passed.

I wish domestic firms like Ruger would ignore the political correctness issues, but it is a complex world these days, and being too bold can result in adverse state legislation. The .50 caliber ban in Kalifornia is an example of what can happen when political correctness runs away.

Marlin · 10-06-2004, 08:01 AM

Well Stated, JC, but - - -

I would have said "RUN AMOK"!!!!!

ironsight65 · 10-08-2004, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tony Mig

What did Ruger ever really offer before the Ban.....

I don't understand the beef you guys have with them, if you want that stuff for your guns, there's plenty of other sources to choose from.

My beef with them is that by sticking to the restrictions of that ridiculous ban they perpetuate the myth that it acutally was correct and in some way contibuted to reducing crime.

I don't even care about the mini 14 in particular. I prefer my AR15 by far, but I have always liked many of their other guns. My beef is the principal of a gun company getting in bed with the gun grabbers and ingnoring what their potential customers want. I can tell you that as long as they stick to their current policy, I will not buy any Ruger products and I will tell everyone I can that they shouldn't either.

I know of one local FFL dealer who will not even deal in Ruger products any longer and I support that decision. I urge everyone to let Ruger know how you feel about their policy.

ElectricEye · 11-09-2004, 08:13 PM

Ruger won't even sell an AC556 front sight to a civi because it came from a machinegun. It makes this buyer feel like I am dealing with the DOJ rather than a firemarms manufacturer and a 2nd Ammendment supporter.

LDBennett · 11-10-2004, 06:09 AM

Ruger is the biggest American gun manufacturer. Along with that comes lawyers and law suits. They have been sued many times and probably wish to protect themselves. They have decided to take the politically correct path to minimise their size in the eyes of the potential lawyers and jerks that choose to try to get rich off of Ruger.

As for the Mini14, it falls into the same catagory as the Springfield M1A or the Keltek or any other magazine fed semi-auto that has none of the other features to make it an assualt rifle (bayonet lug, flash hider, protruding pistol grip, etc.). And it has no exact model that it emulates that has been deemed an assualt rifle (like design). The law in California matches the just sunset'ed federal law in those respects but of course we still have it in California. If the manufactures modified the design of any of the banned guns to not be magazine fed then they would also be legal in California. The FAB10 receiver for AR15 is legal in California-no magazine. Any AR15 upper can be used (but to not push the issue don't have an upper with any of the "bad" features).

LDBennett

LDBennett

09-20-2004, 09:12 PM	#1
ironsight65 V.I.P. Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 458	Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban I heard from a local FFL dealer that Ruger has no plans to start producing hi capacity mags and folding stocks or any of the other "evil" cosmetic details that were banned under that ridiculous ban that has gone away. This really disappoints me as Ruger has always been one of my favorite firearms companys. I had heard that way back when Bill Ruger was in favor of the 10 round limit but I didn't think that would carry over after the ban was gone. Seems they are really out of touch with their customer base to me. I think everyone should let them know about it too. I will not be buying anymore Ruger products if this policy stays in place. Anyone heard of any other companys that seem to think the ban was a good idea? -->

09-22-2004, 02:24 AM	#2
stash247 Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Central Texas Posts: 2,815	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban Colt. one of the few pre-ban rifles that didn't lose value, because they are not building any more. Gradecard: Economics-B Political Science-D- __________________ Don't start no s**t and there won't be none, Terry

09-22-2004, 04:43 AM	#3
inplanotx Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 8,897	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban Maybe if we make a fuss and it is loud enough, Ruger might rethink its position. Start writing those letters!

09-24-2004, 02:51 AM	#4
bambihunter V.I.P. Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Oklahoma City, OK Posts: 197	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban I think they are just trying to stay visibly politically correct thinking the ban will eventually come back and they want to look like they were proactive during the gap. All they are really doing is alienating thier customers and to help reaffirm the stereotype that these features are indeed evil... What a F-d up PC world we live in now in the USA...

09-24-2004, 11:11 PM	#5
ironsight65 V.I.P. Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 458	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban I think you are right Bambihunter. Hopefully their former customers will show them that PC thinking and business sense are two completely different concepts.

09-25-2004, 12:17 AM	#6
offeror Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: NE Indiana Posts: 586	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban I agree that politically correct for Ruger is not economically sound. If they did market research I'm sure they would find that pleasing the public "at large" does not equal better sales. Most if not nearly all gun buyers would prefer they go right back into production on the formerly banned accessories, since they were not "evil" to begin with. __________________ The Second Amendment does not exist to protect the gun rights you like. It exists to protect the gun rights you hate.

09-26-2004, 10:58 PM	#7
Cheimison Former Guest Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 58	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban Personally I'd capitalize on it while it lasts. I'd be making stupid, ridiculous crap like 500 round spiral magazines for AK-47s and 7mm Winchester Magnum hunting rifles with 40 round magazines with pistol grips. And dual bayonettes.

09-29-2004, 08:08 PM	#8
LIKTOSHOOT Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 9,367	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban Yep and while we`re at it.....where is my preban Weatherby??? GHEESH!!!!!! LTS

09-30-2004, 07:25 PM	#10
LIKTOSHOOT Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 9,367	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban Naw, guess it`s time for my yearly shower.....man it`s gonna burn!!!!! LTS

10-01-2004, 09:22 AM	#11
ibtrukn Advanced Senior Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: central N.J. Posts: 4,335	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban YO Phishie, yur preban W-by lives up here in the shape of an Mk XXII eyetalian bilt w/W-by scope an 3 clips yar ol IB still gotta cupple cuties hangin aroun

10-03-2004, 09:05 PM	#13
LIKTOSHOOT Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 9,367	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban Don`t expect me to water down Soggy Bottom`s finest. "EVER!" LTS

10-04-2004, 08:09 PM	#15
Tony Mig Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: The Sorprano State Posts: 716	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban What did Ruger ever really offer before the Ban.....? Most all of the bolt on goodies for the Mini's were after market. Back in the day when I had a Mini-14, the only thing Ruger made for it was 30 round mags, folding stocks, flash suppressors, and the other "banned" cosmetics were made by other companies. I don't understand the beef you guys have with them, if you want that stuff for your guns, there's plenty of other sources to choose from. __________________ "I solemnly swear to tell the truth as I know it, the whole truth as I believe it to be, and nothing but what I think you need to know." New Jersey Politician's oath of office O /\ (( -------------v-

10-05-2004, 09:45 PM	#16
JudgeColt Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 21	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban Ruger has long been too politically correct. Mini-14 magazines holding more than five rounds were withdrawn from public sale in the 1970s as I recall. The late William Ruger is considered by many to be the "father" of the 10-round magazine limit. Ruger essentially supported the 10-round limit in exchange for the Mini-14 being left out of the definition of "assault rifle" being considered for years before the 1994 ban. He called it "saving his little rifle." That support gave encouragement to those who eventually got the ban passed. I wish domestic firms like Ruger would ignore the political correctness issues, but it is a complex world these days, and being too bold can result in adverse state legislation. The .50 caliber ban in Kalifornia is an example of what can happen when political correctness runs away.

10-06-2004, 08:01 AM	#17
Marlin TFF Admin Staff Chief Counselor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: At SouthernMoss' side forever! Contributor Posts: 13,854	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban Well Stated, JC, but - - - I would have said "RUN AMOK"!!!!! __________________ *The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing.* *The only criminal class native to the United States is Congress.*

11-09-2004, 08:13 PM	#19
ElectricEye Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 12	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban Ruger won't even sell an AC556 front sight to a civi because it came from a machinegun. It makes this buyer feel like I am dealing with the DOJ rather than a firemarms manufacturer and a 2nd Ammendment supporter.

11-10-2004, 06:09 AM	#20
LDBennett Advanced Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Hesperia, CA Posts: 5,710	Re: Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban Ruger is the biggest American gun manufacturer. Along with that comes lawyers and law suits. They have been sued many times and probably wish to protect themselves. They have decided to take the politically correct path to minimise their size in the eyes of the potential lawyers and jerks that choose to try to get rich off of Ruger. As for the Mini14, it falls into the same catagory as the Springfield M1A or the Keltek or any other magazine fed semi-auto that has none of the other features to make it an assualt rifle (bayonet lug, flash hider, protruding pistol grip, etc.). And it has no exact model that it emulates that has been deemed an assualt rifle (like design). The law in California matches the just sunset'ed federal law in those respects but of course we still have it in California. If the manufactures modified the design of any of the banned guns to not be magazine fed then they would also be legal in California. The FAB10 receiver for AR15 is legal in California-no magazine. Any AR15 upper can be used (but to not push the issue don't have an upper with any of the "bad" features). LDBennett LDBennett