Ruger's reaction to sunset of ban

Discussion in 'The Pre-Ban Forum' started by ironsight65, Sep 20, 2004.

  1. JudgeColt

    JudgeColt New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    21
    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 Mini-14 magazines holding more than five rounds were withdrawn from public sale in the 1970s as I recall.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.
  2. Marlin

    Marlin *TFF Admin Staff Chief Counselor*

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Messages:
    13,856
    Location:
    At SouthernMoss' side forever!
    Well Stated, JC, but - - -

    I would have said "RUN AMOK"!!!!!
  3. ironsight65

    ironsight65 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Messages:
    458
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    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.

    :(
  4. ElectricEye

    ElectricEye New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2004
    Messages:
    12
    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.
  5. LDBennett

    LDBennett Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    6,901
    Location:
    Hesperia, CA
    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

Share This Page