Are gun bans biting PC sporting arms in the arse?

BattleRifleG3 · 07-20-2004, 06:15 PM

Colt and Ruger come to mind as gun companies that have sold out to being against civilian ownership of military type semi-auto rifles. Remington, Marlin, Winchester/Browning and others seem less involved in the struggle for or against gun rights, but seem to totally avoid non-PC arms.

Well I dunno about you people, but the impending threat of gun bans has guided my priorities of gun aquisition. Of my double digit number of firearms, I count only two designed from the start as "sporting" guns, ie semi-auto 22 and non-mil surp bolt gun. Everything else, even if intended for hunting, has been a military design and has been bought primarily due to the threat of future unavailability. If I knew they'd always be here, I doubt I'd have acquired an AR, and I'd probably wait a decade for a FAL and some time on an SKS.

But due to constant efforts to ban them, a semi-auto shotgun, FAL, and more SKSs are higher on the buy list than a Marlin 336, Remington 673, 7600 and 700 VLS, revolvers galore, and an O/U shotgun.

So is it just me, or do these "sporting" arms companies seem immediately hurt by gun bans as much as military type arms makers? Considering that pre-bans now cost double what they did before, suppose it ever occurred to these companies that half of that would come out of their sales?

Make sense to anyone? Suppose maybe these "sporting" arms manufacturers will get with the picture and all rally behind the full use of the Second Amendment?

BattleRifleG3 · 08-20-2004, 08:19 PM

Hello? Can't believe nobody has any thoughts on this.

NRAJOE · 08-20-2004, 08:23 PM

I dig AK's...what more do ya want?????

jerry · 08-20-2004, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BattleRifleG3

Hello? Can't believe nobody has any thoughts on this.

Patcience grasshopper

I don't think it's really selling out as much as how they go to market. With a plethera of mil type sporting arms out there, it may not be a good idea to try to enter that market. I'd think twice about it. You wouldn't win the price war for one.

I can say I'm less than impressed over some of the Mfg's stance on our rights. I think they could do more, sure.

I have bought guns and thought about buying guns based on the current environment, passing up some sporting arms I'd like to have. I'm sure it happens all the time.

08-21-2004, 08:38 AM

I think manufacturers like Colt, Ruger and Smith & Wesson got tired of being villified by the media..they still have to worry about lawsuits like the one where the kid's ignorant babysitter "accidently" shot him and he recently tried to buy Bryco to shut it down...HCI and it's allies will supply anyone who wants to sue a firearm manufacturer with legal help and court costs..while we can barely get some people who own firearms to join the NRA !..our 2nd Amendment right will be lost one day but it will be because gun owners didn't want to be put on a confiscation list or part with $35 a year :insane:

07-20-2004, 06:15 PM	#1
BattleRifleG3 Super Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Western PA Posts: 11,475 Images: 13	Are gun bans biting PC sporting arms in the arse? Colt and Ruger come to mind as gun companies that have sold out to being against civilian ownership of military type semi-auto rifles. Remington, Marlin, Winchester/Browning and others seem less involved in the struggle for or against gun rights, but seem to totally avoid non-PC arms. Well I dunno about you people, but the impending threat of gun bans has guided my priorities of gun aquisition. Of my double digit number of firearms, I count only two designed from the start as "sporting" guns, ie semi-auto 22 and non-mil surp bolt gun. Everything else, even if intended for hunting, has been a military design and has been bought primarily due to the threat of future unavailability. If I knew they'd always be here, I doubt I'd have acquired an AR, and I'd probably wait a decade for a FAL and some time on an SKS. But due to constant efforts to ban them, a semi-auto shotgun, FAL, and more SKSs are higher on the buy list than a Marlin 336, Remington 673, 7600 and 700 VLS, revolvers galore, and an O/U shotgun. So is it just me, or do these "sporting" arms companies seem immediately hurt by gun bans as much as military type arms makers? Considering that pre-bans now cost double what they did before, suppose it ever occurred to these companies that half of that would come out of their sales? Make sense to anyone? Suppose maybe these "sporting" arms manufacturers will get with the picture and all rally behind the full use of the Second Amendment? __________________ Trust is earned, not... GIVEN away. - Worf

08-20-2004, 08:19 PM	#2
BattleRifleG3 Super Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Western PA Posts: 11,475 Images: 13	Hello? Can't believe nobody has any thoughts on this. __________________ Trust is earned, not... GIVEN away. - Worf

08-20-2004, 08:23 PM	#3
NRAJOE Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Toledo,OH Posts: 19,256 Images: 3	I dig AK's...what more do ya want????? __________________ U.S. Army 1976-1979 237th Combat Engineers Heilbronn, Germany

08-21-2004, 08:38 AM	#5
Logansdad Guest Posts: n/a	I think manufacturers like Colt, Ruger and Smith & Wesson got tired of being villified by the media..they still have to worry about lawsuits like the one where the kid's ignorant babysitter "accidently" shot him and he recently tried to buy Bryco to shut it down...HCI and it's allies will supply anyone who wants to sue a firearm manufacturer with legal help and court costs..while we can barely get some people who own firearms to join the NRA !..our 2nd Amendment right will be lost one day but it will be because gun owners didn't want to be put on a confiscation list or part with $35 a year :insane: