Ruger & Califorina...

wildgenewildgene Senior MemberPosts: 1,036 Senior Member
...anyone seen any confirmation on this???

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/01/robert-farago/breaking-ruger-stop-selling-semis-california/

...my guess is Ruger is tired of spending the money to get pistols on the "Approved List", & just figgered it wasn't worth the time, effort, of cost anymore...


...not sure if the "Microstamping" had anything to do w/ Ruger's decision...
«1

Replies

  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,816 Senior Member
    wildgene wrote: »
    ...anyone seen any confirmation on this???

    http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/01/robert-farago/breaking-ruger-stop-selling-semis-california/

    ...my guess is Ruger is tired of spending the money to get pistols on the "Approved List", & just figgered it wasn't worth the time, effort, of cost anymore...


    ...not sure if the "Microstamping" had anything to do w/ Ruger's decision...

    Sounds like a golden opportunity for the entire firearms industry. Neither sell directly to or through distributors to Cal. LE, and refuse to service any firearms from Cal. Time for the crack smoking tail to stop wagging the dog.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,624 Senior Member
    I'm a big fan of corporate civil disobedience - call it " non-compliance." All firearms and ammunition manufacturers should cut California off from arms and ammo - including all police departments in the state. Oil refineries should refuse to make state-mandated blends of gasoline. 87, 89, 91 octane and that's it. No ethanol, no seasonal oxygenation. Take it, leave it, or refine your own. Good luck. Car makers should ignore CAFE regulations. And so forth. The makers of things should be united in resistance to government interference. Together they should say, "This is my product. if you won't let me sell it here, I'll export it." Imagine any state without new cars, without gasoline, without arms and ammunition, without a bazillion other goods. How long before organized deprivation by the people who make everything to the people who need everything forces government to withdraw from economic interference? I don't think it would be long at all - especially if no corporations break ranks, and while the supply of everything dwindles, millions of workers are laid off, overwhelming state governments across the country with catastrophic fiscal predicaments.

    Governments don't sit on the boards of directors, they don't own stock, they aren't investors and corporations should ignore their meddling. Tell them to stuff the legislative imperative in a dark, stinky place. Don't worry about the people. The lawyers will make sure manufacturers are held accountable for their mistakes and shortcomings. The market will make sure that companies producing inferior merchandise fail. But corporations should never allow themselves to be exploited for political agendas or social engineering.
  • SlanteyedshootistSlanteyedshootist Senior Member Posts: 3,947 Senior Member
    From Mike Fifer, CEO at Ruger...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z866foa2t9c
    The answer to 1984 is 1776
  • Sir FlannelSir Flannel New Member Posts: 3 New Member
    As much as I may agree with your sentiment, I'm not sure the people who elect these government busybodies, nor the busybodies themselves, would come up with the "maybe we should relax these onerous regulations" as opposed to "we will FORCE companies to OBEY, and MANDATE they give us what we need"
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 6,945 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    I'm a big fan of corporate civil disobedience - call it " non-compliance." All firearms and ammunition manufacturers should cut California off from arms and ammo - including all police departments in the state.

    Well, yeah, that's a cute theory, assuming that you can get an entire industry OF COMPETING MANUFACTURERS on the same sheet of music. I would LIKE to think that enough of the players have smelled enough of the coffee to close ranks on this issue, but the cynic in me believe that if one company blows off a region with obnoxious restrictions, another will merely sense an open market opportunity.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,269 Senior Member
    Commiefornia can take an airborne fornication at a rotationally-motivated piece of pastry! Ruger, and every other firearm business should simply stop shipping anything remotely related to the shooting sports out there, effective immediately. Ronnie Barrett got the idea, and even refused to return some of his guns that LEO organizations had sent him for repair. If John Q. Citizen can't have a Barrett 50, the cops don't need one, either. What are the bedwetter government pukes going to do? Ruger has guns!
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,652 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    Well, yeah, that's a cute theory, assuming that you can get an entire industry OF COMPETING MANUFACTURERS on the same sheet of music. I would LIKE to think that enough of the players have smelled enough of the coffee to close ranks on this issue, but the cynic in me believe that if one company blows off a region with obnoxious restrictions, another will merely sense an open market opportunity.

    :that::that:
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,052 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    Well, yeah, that's a cute theory, assuming that you can get an entire industry OF COMPETING MANUFACTURERS on the same sheet of music. I would LIKE to think that enough of the players have smelled enough of the coffee to close ranks on this issue, but the cynic in me believe that if one company blows off a region with obnoxious restrictions, another will merely sense an open market opportunity.
    Not a cynic. Realist.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,102 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    Commiefornia can take an airborne fornication at a rotationally-motivated piece of pastry! Ruger, and every other firearm business should simply stop shipping anything remotely related to the shooting sports out there, effective immediately. Ronnie Barrett got the idea, and even refused to return some of his guns that LEO organizations had sent him for repair. If John Q. Citizen can't have a Barrett 50, the cops don't need one, either. What are the bedwetter government pukes going to do? Ruger has guns!
    Jerry

    But all the good citizens who still exist in California (people not in big liberal quagmires, i.e. cities) should not be denied a firearm product due to "corporate disobedience" or boycott, etc.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,269 Senior Member
    Why not? There happens to be 49 other states where the good folks can live. The best thing I ever did was move out of the peoples republic of commiefornia and come back to Tennessee. The last time I checked, they haven't installed armed checkpoints at the border (unless you happen to have an orange in your pocket).
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • USUFBUSUFB Senior Member Posts: 830 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    On the same token, I shouldn't have to buy a gun with stupid safety features because it meets some requirement mandated by a clueless state.

    :that:
    Sometimes, I lie awake in bed at night wondering "Why the heck can't I fall asleep?"
    NRA Life Member
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,226 Senior Member
    Remember what I said in the CA microstamping thread over in the general forum?

    http://forums.gunsandammo.com/showthread.php?17727-CA-microstamping-law
    They really don't care a lick about catching criminals with this. At least I can't fathom that even they aren't dumb enough to think it's worth the trouble to try and catch them via microstamped brass. A bit of sandpaper and minor disassembly will sidestep this in a hot minute. It's the worst-kept secret in the country: all they want to do is add more dead-weight requirements to the cost of owning a firearm to eventually make it an infeasible pursuit for the shooter and no longer worth the time and energy of the manufacturers to try and dance to their tune.


    It's here, boys.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,652 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    On the same token, I shouldn't have to buy a gun with stupid safety features because it meets some requirement mandated by a clueless state.

    I think it has more to do with the threat of lawsuits. You cant fix stupid but you can be stupid and sue.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • Pelagic KayakerPelagic Kayaker Banned Posts: 1,503 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    But all the good citizens who still exist in California (people not in big liberal quagmires, i.e. cities) should not be denied a firearm product due to "corporate disobedience" or boycott, etc.

    Exactly! Imagine if pro 2A California citizens were denied NRA membership. Last I checked many so called red states are getting closer to becoming blue states as population increases. Arizona and Texas come to mind. The mindset certain people and manufactures have regarding California and equating everyone here as the same is akin to waving the white flag of surrender to the gun grabers. Might as well write off around 700,000 NRA members. Stupidity.
    "The reflection upon my situation and that of this army produces many an uneasy hour when all around me are wrapped in sleep. Few people know the predicament we are in" ~General George Washington, January 14, 1776
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 6,945 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    But all the good citizens who still exist in California (people not in big liberal quagmires, i.e. cities) should not be denied a firearm product due to "corporate disobedience" or boycott, etc.
    Exactly! Imagine if pro 2A California citizens were denied NRA membership. Last I checked many so called red states are getting closer to becoming blue states as population increases. Arizona and Texas come to mind. The mindset certain people and manufactures have regarding California and equating everyone here as the same is akin to waving the white flag of surrender to the gun grabers. Might as well write off around 700,000 NRA members. Stupidity.

    Well, since it looks increasing like I'm going to be here in California till they bury me, I appreciate the thought, however. . .

    Humoring the California state legislature by altering your product line is self-destructive in a lot of ways - everybody gets features that nobody wants, it only encourages the legislature to keep acting like tools, and it drives up the price for old, transferable guns that don't have the undesirable nonsense on them. I'm essentially out of the new handgun market - if anything new comes out that I want, it won't make the Cali "safe gun" roster, and the only way to obtain it would be secondhand through a legal transfer from one of my cop buddies (who are exempt from having to buy only new guns that California considers "safe":roll:). In that case, I'd have to REALLY want it because the purchase would include the price of the gun, the transfer fees for that original purchase, and then a SECOND transfer fee to me.

    We have a Bass Pro about 20 miles from my home. The parking lot is large and usually quite full. The last few gun shows I have been to (over a year ago now) were standing-room only, shuffle-through-the-aisles affairs. My constant comment on witnessing these crowds is "if all of these folks were single-issue voting, we wouldn't have these problems here".

    I am at the point of "Whatever it takes to get the backlash fire lit". I would LOVE to see an industry-wide application of the Barrett Doctrine applied to this state across a united front, but as I said in my earlier post, each manufacturer has its own agenda for making money and its own take on the long-term big picture.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 4,584 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    The best thing I ever did was move out of the peoples republic of commiefornia...

    +1
    The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.

    Ayn Rand
  • wildgenewildgene Senior Member Posts: 1,036 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    But all the good citizens who still exist in California (people not in big liberal quagmires, i.e. cities) should not be denied a firearm product due to "corporate disobedience" or boycott, etc.

    ...it don't pay to sell eye glasses in a town where everyone's blind. Gun manufactures are businesses, if the business climate becomes so bad it's impossible to operate, you cut your loses & run. It is not the firearms businesses who are denying you the ability to purchase something, it's your govt...
  • zorbazorba Senior Member Posts: 19,118 Senior Member
    Its all in Ayn Rand...
    -Zorba, "The Veiled Male"

    "If you get it and didn't work for it, someone else worked for it and didn't get it..."
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,102 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    Well, since it looks increasing like I'm going to be here in California till they bury me, I appreciate the thought, however. . .

    Humoring the California state legislature by altering your product line is self-destructive in a lot of ways - everybody gets features that nobody wants, it only encourages the legislature to keep acting like tools, and it drives up the price for old, transferable guns that don't have the undesirable nonsense on them. I'm essentially out of the new handgun market - if anything new comes out that I want, it won't make the Cali "safe gun" roster, and the only way to obtain it would be secondhand through a legal transfer from one of my cop buddies (who are exempt from having to buy only new guns that California considers "safe":roll:). In that case, I'd have to REALLY want it because the purchase would include the price of the gun, the transfer fees for that original purchase, and then a SECOND transfer fee to me.

    We have a Bass Pro about 20 miles from my home. The parking lot is large and usually quite full. The last few gun shows I have been to (over a year ago now) were standing-room only, shuffle-through-the-aisles affairs. My constant comment on witnessing these crowds is "if all of these folks were single-issue voting, we wouldn't have these problems here".

    I am at the point of "Whatever it takes to get the backlash fire lit". I would LOVE to see an industry-wide application of the Barrett Doctrine applied to this state across a united front, but as I said in my earlier post, each manufacturer has its own agenda for making money and its own take on the long-term big picture.

    I didn't say alter their product to placate California law. I think Ruger (and all companies) should refuse to abide. If California refuses to allow sales following the protest, then the denial of firearms products came from the tyranny of California law-makers, not the abandonment by gun makers.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 6,945 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    I didn't say alter their product to placate California law. I think Ruger (and all companies) should refuse to abide. If California refuses to allow sales following the protest, then the denial of firearms products came from the tyranny of California law-makers, not the abandonment by gun makers.

    Well, there's little question of fixing this state through the legislature - it's gonna take the courts. Unfortunate that knee-jerk politics moves so much faster than constitutional deliberation.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • rberglofrberglof Senior Member Posts: 2,369 Senior Member
    This is something I was expecting to see happen and am surprised that only one company has announced it so far.
    Moving out of California was a good decision, I had already stopped buying handguns there.
    I refused to take a test to buy a product that I had been buying for years.
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 6,945 Senior Member
    rberglof wrote: »
    This is something I was expecting to see happen and am surprised that only one company has announced it so far.

    I am not surprised that manufacturers are reluctant to let go of the California cash cow, but I am VERY surprised that Ruger is the first big one to pull up stakes. They've sunk more money than any other manufacturer with the MKIII, the LC9, and SR series to make guns that are CA and MA compliant. You'd think companies with less invested in "lawyerizing" their guns would bail out first. One hopes they plan to take an active lead here.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,269 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    I am VERY surprised that Ruger is the first big one to pull up stakes.

    Maybe Ruger learned something when old Bill bent over for the feds after the 1968 GCA fiasco. Their customers' reaction to his betrayal just about drove the company bankrupt. S&W was another example of consumers punishing a company foe getting too cozy with the feds. Good for Ruger- - - -and let's hope the other big players take notice and tell commiefornia to take their business and stuff it- - - -particularly official business form all the state and local government agencies!
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,102 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    I am not surprised that manufacturers are reluctant to let go of the California cash cow, but I am VERY surprised that Ruger is the first big one to pull up stakes. They've sunk more money than any other manufacturer with the MKIII, the LC9, and SR series to make guns that are CA and MA compliant. You'd think companies with less invested in "lawyerizing" their guns would bail out first. One hopes they plan to take an active lead here.

    They've probably realized they are just wizzing in to the wind. They'll whittle the mag capacity down to a single shot and put 3 thumb safeties on it and California'd still make it non-compliant.

    It's unfortunate that cities have become cesspools of liberal mania and socialist baby mills. Massive cities are a ruin to society.

    There are a lot of damn fine conservative Californians out there that will suffer the fallout of this asinine mess.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • bruchibruchi Senior Member Posts: 2,582 Senior Member
    Think that 20% of the US population lives in the state of CA, perhaps too large a custoker base for some companies to give away.


    Sent from my SGH-T999L using Tapatalk
    If this post is non welcomed, I can always give you a recipe for making "tostones".
  • Pelagic KayakerPelagic Kayaker Banned Posts: 1,503 Senior Member
    bruchi wrote: »
    Think that 20% of the US population lives in the state of CA, perhaps too large a custoker base for some companies to give away.


    Sent from my SGH-T999L using Tapatalk

    Agree.

    After California it will be Texas, then Arizona, then Idaho, Florida etc.. Seems this leftist tactic of banning firearms has finally worked. Can't ban em' ...just make the gun manufactures cower to legislation. Nice to know Ruger has said eff you to over a million NRA members and conceded defeat to leftist ideology. Bad move.
    "The reflection upon my situation and that of this army produces many an uneasy hour when all around me are wrapped in sleep. Few people know the predicament we are in" ~General George Washington, January 14, 1776
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,816 Senior Member
    Agree.

    After California it will be Texas, then Arizona, then Idaho, Florida etc.. Seems this leftist tactic of banning firearms has finally worked. Can't ban em' ...just make the gun manufactures cower to legislation. Nice to know Ruger has said eff you to over a million NRA members and conceded defeat to leftist ideology. Bad move.

    You're right. What Ruger should have done is make the California law compliant firearms, and tack on a $300 surcharge for the added features, and make the rest of them without the stupid California compliant features for everyone else. And if the firearms are going to LE in Cali, then add on an additional $250 to the civilian price.

    It's real simple; the gun manufacturers make a product. Cali wants stuff that is ignorant and unnecessary added to that product. If the nose pickin' butt scratchin' legislature wants those added features on the product, they they should darned well pay the CUSTOM PRICE for the CUSTOM MADE PRODUCT. Kind of like the price difference between a Les Baer 1911 and a RIA 1911. In other words, YOU WANNA PLAY, THEN YOU GONNA PAY! :silly:
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • wildgenewildgene Senior Member Posts: 1,036 Senior Member
    ...most of these guns are coming up on re-certification, a process CA makes extremely onerous & expensive if the first place, add the micro-stamping & it's just more worms in the can. S&W has announced they're joining Ruger...

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/22/smith-wesson-stop-selling-guns-california-due-micr/
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,226 Senior Member
    I see a wave coming. If only a handful of manufacturers bail out of Cali, Cali effectively gets what they want, which is a de facto semi-auto gun ban. At this point, pretty much everyone needs to bail on them If that happens, I would think you have decent grounds for federal case against Cali for making an accumulative, legislative effort to ban guns - if not in general, then at least by type - similar to what happened with DC/Chicago with their handgun bans being overturned.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • wildgenewildgene Senior Member Posts: 1,036 Senior Member
    ...& Glock won't be sending in any of the new model 41 or 42 pistols for CA Cert. either...

    http://bearingarms.com/sorry-california-glockaholics-no-glock-41-or-glock-42-for-you/
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.