This has been bugging me for a while

**billamj** · December 11th, 2006, 11:35 AM

There is one thing about being a firearms owner, collector, shooter that has just be driving me nuts for years. That is the sheer number of manufacturers that have either corporate headquarters or manufacturing plants in anti states. I just looked at the web sites for 33 manufacturers and of those 22, exactly 2/3, are located in anti-gun states. Some people may wonder why this bugs me, but it is quite simple. By purchasing weapons from these manufacturers we are supporting anti-gun legistators and legislation by proxy. Just a look at some of the major names; Colt, Ruger, Stag - Ct., Smith & Wesson, Savage, Auto-Ordnance - Ma., Beretta, Benelli, Franchi - Md., Kimber - NY., and Springfield, RRA, Aramalite in Il. Just look at those names, names that we all support and they are paying for people like Kennedy, Schumer, Kerry, Clinton, Durbin, and Dodd. This does not give me warm and fuzzies.

<end of rant>

**jdlv4_0** · December 11th, 2006, 11:44 AM

I've often wondered the samething myself...

**TonyF** · December 11th, 2006, 12:03 PM

Some of the oldest manufacturers have been in business well before the anti-gun wave that started in the 60's with GCA 68.

The more recent companies such as beretta were wooed with tax breaks. Money talks.

**billamj** · December 11th, 2006, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by TonyF

Some of the oldest manufacturers have been in business well before the anti-gun wave that started in the 60's with GCA 68.

The more recent companies such as beretta were wooed with tax breaks. Money talks.

I'll give you the point about the older manufacturers and I'll even give Ruger the benefit of the doubt because they have moved manufacturing to Arizona. That still doesn't cut it. Some of these companies can do without the shooting public because of contracts with the govt. but if we were able to get all of the owners nationwide together and give the ultimatim, well you did say "Money talks."

**rwilson452** · December 11th, 2006, 02:01 PM

It worked with S&W when they signed on to that silly thing that Clinton put out a lot of people stopped buying S&W and a least one west coast distributer told S&W to stuff it. Soon after S&W changed hands. Then Bush came in and said the agreement was a dead letter. About that time Colt was backing away from the retail market and wanted to deal only with government stuff.

Originally Posted by TonyF

Some of the oldest manufacturers have been in business well before the anti-gun wave that started in the 60's with GCA 68.

The more recent companies such as beretta were wooed with tax breaks. Money talks.

**JayBell** · December 11th, 2006, 03:05 PM

Unforunately with Colt, they almost went out of business and got bailed out by MA.
one stipulation on the bailout was that they would not sell "Assault weapons" to the public...thats when the shaved bayo lugs, and 'match target" no flashhider models came out. prior to the 1994 AW ban...i think the Bailout was 9-92 era.

they made a choice that kept the business alive...and still the agreement stands, so even the new models with collapsing stocks, flashhiders and such are still marked "AR-15" and have LEO restricted markings(even after the ban ended), and sold to colt LE dealers, and "neutered" models go to civvie distribs and are marked "match target".
it was a survival adaptation that worked, and tho i don't like it, i'd rather they did that then go completely out of business.

besides, there is ways to get modern colts that are not supposed to go to us...just fnd a dealer and have him order one from a Colt LE dealer..they even pop up used fairly often, i have a Colt LE marked "Ar-15 A2 Govt Carbine" thats le marked and has all the "bad" features...hell i only got it because of the LE markings...the US govt, MA, and Colt didn't want me to have it, but i do, so $&^*&^%* em if they cant take a joke

A lot of importers settled in Maryland and Virginia, probably due to cheap corporation fees and such...almost any goofy crap importers do/don't do is due to the GCA of 68...which was pretty much slammed down the public throats with the full assistance of the US gun manufacturing groups as protection against 'cheap imports".

Springfield is not the original Springfield Armory, it's just a manufacturer name now, and all thier crap is pretty much Brazilian these days that includes the m1As...they probably had a good reason to settle there when the laws weren't so restrictive.

why the later guys settled in in Illinois I dont get either. had to have been cheap land/taxes/etc.

What really kills me is "Armalite". they act like they are the ORIGINAL Armalite when all they are is EAGLE ARMS that rented the armalite name:-)

I have a "pre-armalite" Eagle Arms AR15 that was my first AR-15 i ever got, and i still have it

I feel these days they wont bother moving due to costs, and having to shut down production.

btw, notice that due to the effed up elections that almost all AR-15 manufacturers now have a backlog of 8-12 weeks on guns and lowers?

**ChamberedRound** · December 11th, 2006, 03:40 PM

Originally Posted by billamj

I'll give you the point about the older manufacturers and I'll even give Ruger the benefit of the doubt because they have moved manufacturing to Arizona.

Personally, I don't give Ruger the benefit of the doubt and I will never purchase a Ruger firearm. Bill Ruger was a primary advocate of banning high-capacity magazines, and even now (I think, if I'm wrong on this one please correct me) you can't buy a Ruger firearm with more than a 10 shot capacity.

Here's the Wikipedia article on this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruger

**billamj** · December 11th, 2006, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

Personally, I don't give Ruger the benefit of the doubt and I will never purchase a Ruger firearm. Bill Ruger was a primary advocate of banning high-capacity magazines, and even now (I think, if I'm wrong on this one please correct me) you can't buy a Ruger firearm with more than a 10 shot capacity.

Here's the Wikipedia article on this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruger

Actually, they do make one model, P95, for which there are 15 round mags available. But I do get your drift.

**phillyd2** · December 11th, 2006, 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by JayBell

Unforunately with Colt, they almost went out of business and got bailed out by MA.
one stipulation on the bailout was that they would not sell "Assault weapons" to the public...thats when the shaved bayo lugs, and 'match target" no flashhider models came out. prior to the 1994 AW ban...i think the Bailout was 9-92 era.

I have the same markings on my Colt but I never heard the story about the MA stipulation. Do you have a source? I have heard that it was done on advice of their lawyers and was done voluntarily to keep the Clinton Admin. happy and themselves free of any potential lawsuits or possible effects to their Military contracts.

**SGTUSArmy** · December 11th, 2006, 05:49 PM

I think that the main reason that they are in the gun unfriendly states is because of the manufacturing base, and the ability to hire experienced factory workers (if they open new factories there.) That and the state governments are probably throwing tax breaks at them, lure them in, that way they can change their unfriendly appearance somewhat, and take heat off of them for a bit.