Perfect Union banner
1 - 20 of 33 Posts

Registered
Joined
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
http://www.survival.com.mx/gunrack/b_ruger.html

This webpage says that Bill Ruger sold out gun owners for $$$. Ruger sent a letter to congress in 1989 suggesting a way to control firepower: limit magazine capcity to 10 rounds. Ruger is quoted as saying, "No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun."

Ruger also said on national TV, "I see nothing wrong with a 15, or even a 30 day wait to buy a gun."

The Mini-14 is either not named, or specifically exempt from all gun bans. That's Ruger's payment, this webpage claims.

Is this guy right about Ruger?
 

No Longer Involved
Joined
2,398 Posts
While I can't vouch for the accuracy of that web page, I have heard, over and over, that Bill Ruger did sell out gun owners. Basically, he wanted the laws set to ~just skirt~ around the Mini-14.

:mad:
 

Registered
Joined
175 Posts
im gonna draw fire for this but i dont care.
what Bill Ruger did was cover his ass, and he was looking out for his company, period. What he did was insure that he could still build the Mini-14 and sell it to Americas sportsmen. And he is right in saying that honest folks dont need more than 10 round magazines, I am a deer hunter and a shooter, i dont need high capacity magazines for my mini 14, most of what you buy are crap anyway, the mini performs flawlessly with the 5 round mags, it carries on a sling better with the 5 round mags, a 20 round mag will dig into your back, i know because i have owned them in the past. First and foremost, the American shooters are plinkers, hunters and target shooters, we arent terrorists or commandos, and a 40 round clip hanging out of your rifle just gives the anti-gunners fuel to use against us, besides, most states have limits on how many rounds you can legally have in your rifle to hunt with, this stuff isnt nothing new, we have had to have our shotgun magazines plugged for years, i wish everyone would get over this 'pre-ban' business and get back to the fun of hunting and shooting and reloading.
 

No Longer Involved
Joined
2,398 Posts
The only comment I have is: Why not plug it to 2 rounds?

Why not bolt-action only?

Why not... (insert your limitation here)?

You'll only start to disagree with the limitations once it starts hitting you where you live and play.

I can't buy an AR-15 any more in CA, preban or not. They are all illegal. :mad:
 

Registered
Joined
716 Posts
You know it's funny, but you are right, Bill, "You'll only start to disagree with the limitations once it starts hitting you where you live and play."

But - that is exactly how laws sneak up on people. First limit it to 10 rounds, and it doesn't bother everyone. Then limit it to 5 rounds... Whew, nobody rose a stink... Hey, now lets try 2 rounds...

Its that kind of progression which begins to limit our freedoms and allow the government to dictate whatever they want. So yeah, even though I have no interest in having a 30 round magazine, I begin to feel a threat when the government bans 30 round clips.

Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary
 

Registered
Joined
175 Posts
Bill Ruger did what he did for his own company's survival, nothing more nothing less, Bill Ruger isnt trying to take away anyones freedoms, we oughtta be glad we have folks like Bill Ruger out there making us affordable, quality built firearms...does Colt and Smith & Wesson care about the American shooter???? hardly. as long as Colt and Smith & Wesson has military and police contracts, they could care less about the sporting crowd. believe what you want, Bill Ruger is on our side and we need to support him, just think, if ruger wasnt in business, what would we be shooting? cheap import junk that the government could place bans and restrictions on, i am not for gun control in any fashion, but i see the trend, i know whats going on. and as for you California folks, im sorry you have screwy laws there, but face it, california has always been a screwy place, the only thing you can do is, let the bleeding heart crossdressers have it and move to some state that isnt run by the PETA crowd.
 

No Longer Involved
Joined
2,398 Posts
Originally posted by gutpile
...and as for you California folks, im sorry you have screwy laws there, but face it, california has always been a screwy place, the only thing you can do is, let the bleeding heart crossdressers have it and move to some state that isnt run by the PETA crowd.
I find this concept so sick it is funny.:mad:

So, if/when they start pulling this **** in YOUR state, you'll run away and move away? Or will you stay, vote, and try to convince others to get out to the range and start shooting as well?

Your federal government is banning weapons, has been for years. Why haven't you moved to Switzerland?

Don't take my comments personally... I know we're all on the same side. But the whole "give up and get out of town" concept makes me sick to my stomach.

I happen to live in a relatively conservative (politically) area and many of most of my friends and colleagues own a lot of firearms.

Just remember... there are only 70 million gun owners in the US. That makes us a minority. But, if push comes to shove, we have all the guns.

;)

:usa: :usa: :usa:
 

Registered
Joined
175 Posts
sorry bill, i didnt mean to step on your toes with the california comment, i'm from the midwest, and california has always seemed a bit strange to me, its gun laws are way more stringent
than ours, didnt mean to offend you. after all, like you said, we are all on the same side.
 

Registered
Joined
2 Posts
I aploud the man he is just going along to get along whatever his motives maybe he is giving us a reliable firearm for all situations,wether it be hunting,protection,fun.We need to understand that there are people out there that do not like guns no matter what statistics we give them. We as gun owners need to vote as much as posible to get some people with some COMMON sense in there and not people that bow down to special interest groups iterested in increasing there power by scaring people into giving up there freedom for a false sense of security. We need to realize that alot of people do not care about freedom because they do not have the mind set or they have always been taken care of,most of all they have never faced really hard times.Last we need to understand this fight may be futile we may be to far gone therefore we need to stick together. Please excuse the poor gramar.
 

Registered
Joined
63 Posts
"No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun."
Yes, that makes all policemen and soldiers dishonest. It also makes the man breaking into your home with a six-shot revolver honest, and makes you dishonest for defending your home with a rifle with a 20 round capacity. Also, all WW2 veterans are dishonest.
 

Registered
Joined
1,864 Posts
The funny thing about sleeping with the devil. It comes back around to bit you. From what I have herd and found, Bill Ruger did what he did to keep his company from being sued and from banning his product. But the problem is. The latest and greatest ban named the mini 14 by name, to be ban. I hope the folks that are drive Rugers bus now can see the writing, but I will not hold my breath.
 

Registered
Joined
372 Posts
Gotta go with gutpile on this one. Old Bill knew which way the wind was blowing and played a fair game of CYA. Did he sell out the Second Amendment? Yeah. But he did it to save his business, since the neither the military nor the police were interested in the mini any longer. You would prefer that Ruger made only golf clubs?

Also, let's not talk like Old Bill was the only one to sell out. Remember Ronald Reagan? Champion of the 2A? Yet the 1986 NFA laws passed through under his watch and he also recommended enactment of the ban when it was a bill. Let's not kid ourselves, folks...almost everyone went into the tank for this one in one form or another, including the NRA, who did not fight near as hard for its prevention or its repeal the following year as they did for the sunset.

But what's done is done. Either move on, or stay pissed off at Ruger, for all that it benefits anyone.

-Drake
 

Registered
Joined
984 Posts
Originally posted by gutpile@Nov 2 2001, 02:58 PM
And he is right in saying that honest folks dont need more than 10 round magazines, I am a deer hunter and a shooter, i dont need high capacity magazines for my mini 14, most of what you buy are crap anyway...
Don't mean to keep beating a dead horse, but there are lots of guys who could use hi-cap magazines. In practically all the practical shooting competitions (IPSC, 3-gun, etc.), guys use hi-caps. This makes it so the shooter doesn't have to reload so often (.....duh!) ;)

Oh, and as for hi-caps being crap, try pmi :lol:
 

Registered
Joined
150 Posts
Not that this even matters, but there are many reported instances of people "needing" high cap mags to defend their life and property. Think LA riots. With Quislings like gutpile, who needs enemies.
 

Registered
Joined
63 Posts
i dont need high capacity magazines for my mini 14, most of what you buy are crap anyway
You don't need an M16 or AR15, those are what terrorists use.
You don't need a rifle with a magazine, single shot will do.
You don't need a modern rifle unless you're a criminal. Muzzleloaders only for you.
No honest person needs a gun. No guns for you.

Anti-gun people are crafty, but they're easy to spot if you know their games.

Gutpile, why don't you just saw your rifle in half now so that we don't have to listen to you later.
 

Registered
Joined
296 Posts
I'd like to think that I am somewhat knowledgeable about Ruger firearms, I own three of them: 1) a stainless mark II with 5" bull barrel 2) a stainless 10/22 with a synthetic stock and 3) a stainless mini with synthetic stock and standard rear sight. I am more than satisfied with each one as far as their quality and function according to design is concerned.

On that note, let me point out that Bill Ruger is dead. The fact that the company still won't provide magazines over five rounds or GB model features to the general public even though there is a demand for them says a lot about what they think of their customers and market demand. I'd like to know where Ruger would be today if civilians weren't able to buy their firearms or the Second Ammendment didn't exist and civilian sales were heavily restricted/non-existant? Considering the fact their sales to the public are what keeps that company a float, one would think they would try to satisfy the demand of every little niche of the market in which they operate. <_<

If a company comes a long (and one will) and makes a PMI quality aftermarket mag again now that the AWB went flatline at midnight today, more power to them. That's the beauty of a having a free market economy.

Think what you may about the "need" for a magazine over ten rounds or features such as a pistol grip or flash hider. :rolleyes: Fact of the matter is that I'd take one PMI thirty rounder over six ruger five rounders anytime. To each their own. But I wouldn't want to restrict someone's ability to whether they can use a five, ten, or ninety round magazine, flash hider, semi auto or bolt action, etc, etc, etc. I put a flash hider on my mini because the muzzle flash was blinding when shooting in the late afternoon/early evening.

The fact of the matter is Bill Ruger did what he thought was best for his company and sold us and the Second Ammendment out in the process by taking effort to restrict the choice of the American gun owner to own the type of firearm he/she desired. Keeping this in mind after acquiring three of his firearms, (no regrets here) I can honestly say I will not be looking into getting a fourth Ruger firearm anytime soon. If many other companies acted in a manner similar to Bill Ruger's at the time when the AWB debate was started, who knows what options would be available to the consumer today. Being purely speculative, I would assume the ban would have been even more restrictive, and probably would not have had a sun set clause.

My most recent firearms purchases were of a S&W 686 and a Mossberg 590 with speedfeed stock and ghost ring sights. I went with a Smith 686 over a Ruger .357 not because of what Bill did, but because for me it seemed like a better option. After shooting my friends Ruger .357 and then mine I realized that for me, I had made the right choice. I bought the Mossberg because there isn't a Ruger shotgun that has the features I was looking for at the time.

I don't care if the guy next door owns 50 Kalashnikovs, only a Carcano bolt action or no guns at all, that is his right to decide what is best for him. It's all boils down to freedom of choice. Why get a V-6 or V-8 when a 4-cylinder is available? Why a two story house when a ranch will do? Why get a 62" widscreen tv when you can get a 27 inch?

When I look into getting a high powered bolt action, I will look at Remington, Winchester, Savage, Browning, Kimber, Sako, Sauer, Tikka, Steyr, or Weatherby before considering a Ruger on principle alone. Thank God for Capitalism! :D
 

Registered
Joined
1,850 Posts
Yes, Bill Ruger was evil and he sold all of out. I don't care what motives he had let's fact the facts and cut through the BS!!!!

What part of "....shall not be infringed upon..." is so difficult to understand.

Somebody plese tell me why a law abiding man need a Porsche 911 or crotch rocket that can go 160mph. They don't need it, but if they can afford it and want it then who in the hell has a right to tell them they can't have one.

TD
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top