Springfield Armory Teams-Up With the NRA To Defeat IL FFL Licence Bill

That’s the top half of an email blast from the Springfield Armory railing against Illinois Senate Bill 1657, which only passed with the help of the gunmaker’s own highly-paid lobbyist. In their second mea culpa, Springfield denied knowledge of their lobbyist Jay Keller’s carve-out and promised to “fight shoulder-to-shoulder with the NRA, National Shooting Sports Foundation, the Illinois State Rifle Association and others to see it defeated as the unnecessary and harmful overreach.” So Springfield’s team effort to defeat the bill they enabled is not entirely unexpected. Here’s the rest of the text:

SB 1657 would create onerous mandatory regulations, fees potentially in the thousands of dollars and excessive amounts of red tape that would almost assuredly force the closure of many firearm dealers, and prevent prospective owners from opening new ones.  The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) already licenses and closely monitors all federally licensed firearm dealers (FFLs) and strictly enforces any violation of federal law.

SB 1657 goes far beyond federal law and is designed to shut down as many FFLs as possible.

Again, please click the “Take Action” button above to contact your state Representative and urge them to strongly oppose SB 1657!  Stay tuned to www.nraila.org for further updates on this bill.

Note that the email talks about “the closure of many firearms dealers.” The carefully chosen wording glosses over the fact that Illinois’ big box stores also negotiated a carve-out from the Illinois licensing scheme. (Naming names tomorrow.) I wonder if they didn’t know what their lobbyist was doing, or whether the giant retailers also made campaign contributions to anti-gun rights politicians.

Speaking of which, I’m still waiting for Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms to offer an explanation for channeling tens of thousands of dollars through their IFMA lobby group to anti-gun rights Illinois politicians, over more than four years. Do Springfield and Rock River execs seriously expect us to believe they didn’t know about those payments, either? Does anyone believe that?

comments

  1. avatar Nanashi says:

    I’m watching this very closely, both having escaped from IL well over a decade ago (I miss the snow, but that’s it) and knowing a first time gun buyer who picked an XD as her carry gun just before this went down (she bought it on Easter).

  2. avatar Ed says:

    This just goes to show how deep the rabbit hole really is. The two biggest firearm companies in the state are giving tens of thousands of dollars to NRA F- rated state politicans. What could they think would be the benifit of doing that? Was there no one else more deserving they could donate money to? There was some shady things in the works and I’m glad they got skunked. Now all of a sudden they are going to fight it along side of the NRA. How are we supposed to belive that this is a sincere move? Even if it is, who cares? They were obviously only worried about themselves until they got caught. Screw ’em!

    1. avatar John in TX (Was CT) says:

      To be entirely fair, it’s almost believable that Springfield and RRA told this guy “Look, we’re going to give you some start-up capital. Do what you can to protect our business, and leave us alone” and the guy took that and ran with it.

      There are certainly political reasons (How long have the Dems been saying the NRA was entirely funded by gun manufacturers/dealers? It seems to be a winning argument politically, for some reason that I can’t understand), and possibly ethical ones to have the lobbying group be decentralized.

      Of course, then they went and put all their bigwigs on the lobbying firm’s board, kinda ruining the point, but still…

      (I’m not going to be buying a Springfield or RRA product for the foreseeable future… I was really looking forward to buying an M1A in the near future, and I still need a 1911 and SA was near the top of that list too… guess I need to save up for a bit longer and get a Fulton M1A and a “I don’t even know yet” 1911, instead.)

      All I’m saying is that there’s the slightest possibility that they got fucked over by their lobbyist.

      In what industry did the lobbyist work prior to IFMA being founded?

      1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

        To be entirely fair, it’s almost believable that Springfield and RRA told this guy “Look, we’re going to give you some start-up capital. Do what you can to protect our business, and leave us alone” and the guy took that and ran with it.

        No, I don’t think it is. The president of IFMA, who is also the president of Springfield Armory, had no idea what was going on? There’s only a few people in IFMA, their board which consists of the principles of SA and RRA. What CEO gives $100K to someone and just says “do whatever you want to represent me” without knowing how they are being represented?

        Would you?

        1. avatar FedUp says:

          Boch reports that Jay Keller, back in January, was acting like he had something up his sleeve, and refusing to answer pointed questions on the subject. That Keller and Reese had no communication from January through April on the subject of a licensing scheme that had the potential to put Springfield out of business or greatly increase the cost of keeping the doors open, is not a credible concept.

        2. avatar Ardent says:

          This^ AND: If one does give figurative carte blanche and literal funds to a lobbyist, does one not have some responsibility for the outcome?

          It seems SA has tried claiming ignorance, and when that failed, incompetence. Since when is incompetence a valid excuse to failure of an undertaking one set oneself to?

          I think the beginning of the end of 1st world civilization was probably when incompetence became an acceptable excuse. I recall when accountability was a thing, and (serious) people tended to shy away from things they didn’t understand so as to avoid even the appearance of incompetence, since it was no excuse anyway, and because it tended toward negative consequences.

          Is it too much of a stretch that utter incompetence at presiding over a gun manufacturers lobby group suggests a lack of competence for presiding over a gun company?

          Apples to oranges perhaps, but in my professional life, that sort of perception of blundering incompetence and the revelation that the one claiming it thinks it some sort of immunization against accountability for outcomes would be career ending, as it should be. Mistakes are one thing, inevitable and useful for learning, but to fail at what are, for the possition, key competencies (don’t pissed off large portions of the business’s market) and then to blame incompetence is merely doubly damning. To say: ‘That went poorly, and my mistake(s) was (were)…’ is more acceptable to my thinking than: ‘That went poorly, but it’s not my fault because I have no idea what my direct reports are out doing.’

          In the latter case, how does one commit to performance improvement when the explanation of failure was an admission of malfeasance?

          I’m of the understanding that managers are accountable for the performance of their subordinates, and if they are not, then who is? If it’s up to you to request reports from subordinates, to direct and monitor their work, and they are somehow both doing something you aren’t aware of, that also happens to be the opposite of what you expected, then your oversight or your expectations setting have failed, and ultimately the failure is yours.

          I know… I’m so out of touch with this accountability thing….

        3. avatar John in TX (Was CT) says:

          I’m not a corporate compliance lawyer and I’m not a lobbyist and I’m not in Illinois. I know that Springfield threatened to leave the state over previous legislative issues, and I can see how a lobbyist in a vacuum might not know what to do if told “Hey, we’ve amended this bill so it doesn’t affect you. Go away”.

          And, like I said, I am holding Springfield accountable for this nonsense. I was going to buy an M1A this year. Now I’m not, and will probably buy a Fulton in 3 years once I save up the price difference (or not buy one at all. At $1100 or whatever, they made for a fun toy. At $2700 minimum… it’s a much harder sell).

          I was leaning towards SA for a future 1911 purchase. Now I don’t know where to look. The croatian guns can sit and spin, but I might have considered the XD-E for a smaller carry gun if this didn’t happen.

          I’m not,by any means, saying don’t hold them accountable, I am. I’m just saying that there’s the meerest shadow of a possibility that they got blindsided. If they did, it’s still their fault. But it’d be hilarious if true.

      2. avatar Serpent Vision says:

        Possible that the state requires a non-profit organization to have a minimum number of board members, so they signed on to expand the lone lobbyist into a non-profit but left lobbying activities to the presumed expert. That it provided a convenient scapegoat to throw under the proverbial bus may or may not have been a consideration.

    2. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

      Dig deeper if you care to. I bet a whole bunch of other firearm-related companies that you Internet outragists think are on the gunowner’s side are doing the exact same thing.

      1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

        Could be. Which is why both SA and RRA must be boycotted into bankruptcy. If for no other reason to serve as a cautionary tale to other future, would be sell outs. The consequences must be the total loss of their livelihood.

        1. avatar Leo Kovel says:

          This comment makes the most sense and in my humble opinion we all should do what needs to be done to see it happens.

      2. avatar JohnyV says:

        I was going to argue against your comment because at first I thought you were trolling BUT you bring up a very valid point, one we firearm enthusiast MUST now investigate and be forever vigilant in the future and that is:

        How many firearm companies are either purposefully or unwittingly colluding with our enemies/gun grabbers through first, second or 3rd party hands? Who/what so called pro firearm lobbyist are doing with the money given to them? Are they truly in bed with the gun grabbers, piecemealing away our rights bit by bit in secret? Firearm Companies should direct their support money directly and be very wary of giving their money to slimy lobbyists who for the most part would sell their own mothers to make a deal/money. One day they are for firearms, next week they are hired to fight against them!

        I have a lot of respect for the people like The Truth about Guns for helping to expose this BS and others who use their investigated internet skills to research the ‘who, ‘what and ‘how firearm companies are truly doing behind the scenes/ in bed with…. so please, net ninjas and others like TAG, continue to do your magic and uncover how many other so call “2nd amendment supporters” & firearm Companies like SA and RRA are hiring as lobbyists and if their money is being used to help or f@ck us.

        So well said The Gray Poseur

    3. avatar The Duke says:

      It’s IL so calling the politics shady is a little redundant.

      These guys will fight tooth and nail to defeat this bill so they can recoup some of their sales losses, and next year when a similar one is introduced and having strong momentum they will be much more careful not to get caught.

      They are a company, their interests are this years bottom line, not us or the health of the long term market. Don’t expect them to have a change of heart and coming to Jesus moment

      1. avatar Ing says:

        If they don’t have an eye on the long-term health of the market, they’re a dumb and self-destructive company.

        But it’s possible that they see being hooked into the crony-socialist system as vital to the long-term health of their company. It may be the only way to prosper in the future United Socialist States of America.

  3. avatar Chris says:

    Trust is hard to earn once you have lost it. Already sold one Springfield product at a loss just to get rid of it. I have my M1a on the market now at a loss. I don’t trust them anymore. It’s a shame because they don make some good stuff. Oh well guess I am an ar10 guy now.

    1. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

      You sure your other firearms are made by ideologically pure companies? I wouldn’t bet on it.

      1. avatar Jean-Claude says:

        But we know Springfield isn’t. Boycott. If another company pulls this. Boycott.

        Eventually they will get the picture.

        1. avatar Turd Ferguson says:

          the Gray Posuer would rather just sit back and say “So what?” instead of making examples out of companies like SA/RRA for their bullshit.

          If Gray Posuer doesnt like what we’re doing, So What?

    2. avatar Leo Kovel says:

      Like you and probably others after being made aware​ of this debacle known or ignorantly unknown, I’ve decided to sell all SA items I have. For me this is no small inventory but the principal is more important than the monetary value. I already have chosen Sig Saur to replace the majority and will find others later. For now it’s Good Bye SA too bad you were too Stupid.

  4. avatar pete says:

    The real victims are current Springfield Armory firearm owners who are now bridled with a stigma 😛

    1. avatar Wiregrass says:

      I’m not going to worry about it. They are just as good a gun as they were before last week and I’m certainly not going to sell them at a loss just because the brand fell into disrepute. Not to equate SA products with classic S&W revolvers, but I bet the people that sold off their perfectly good S&W revolvers because of that shitstorm now regret it.

      1. avatar Ed says:

        If for no other reason than the ones they sold DIDN’T have that horrible hillary hole. I still havent bought anything new s&w since.

      2. avatar Leo Kovel says:

        Wiregrass I am not so feeble minded as you would make me out to be. I would not under any circumstances take a loss that would amount to drastic, but for me break even or small loss means nothing. I invested wisely and my retirement is very comfortable.

  5. avatar Kroglikepie says:

    I’m still butthurt about SA because I love my XD(M)’s and XDS’s, but damn this has been the best entertainment of the year for me so far. Watching the quislings squirm has been just too much fun!

    Jambi! More oil!

  6. avatar JTW says:

    TTAG, thank you for all you do and the relentless effort you’ve shown – it is a reflection well representing what we all stand for. SA is giving us nothing more than what FPC and NRA already doing…try again, try harder. For all we know its a paid NRA template. C’mon man.

  7. avatar Specialist38 says:

    Priceless. Like a 3 year old.

    Springfield crapped in their bed and then somebody told everybody that they crapped their bed.

    Now they’re looking for somebody to help them change the sheets and saying their dog crapped in their bed

    Springfield CEO ought to run for office. Greedy bastard has already mastered politics.

    1. avatar Anner says:

      Perfect analogy.

    2. avatar Leo Kovel says:

      That’s it.

  8. avatar Hannibal says:

    Compare this to their first press release.

    I think they’ve been taking lessons from Delta Air.

  9. avatar Special K says:

    And now I’m steamed at NRA. What the hell? Time to send more money to state firearms associations.

    1. avatar Chris says:

      Right there witcha. Lifetime NRA member here, and *beginning* to lose trust in them, too.

      1. avatar Leo Kovel says:

        Look into the 2nd amendment foundation

    2. avatar rc says:

      See Danny Griffin’s comment below….this didn’t come from the NRA at all. It came exclusively from SA. Another weasel move by SA.

      1. avatar rc says:

        That’s clarifies the source, though I’m not sure there is any evidence that the last paragraph is accurate. There could be, but I haven’t seen it yet.

    3. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      Well, first things first. This legislation must be killed. Let the NRA do what they do best. Even if SA helps at this point, it doesn’t matter. The priorities are, kill the bill, then kill off SA and RRA. There’s plenty of time to boycott them into bankruptcy.

  10. avatar Cj says:

    If i had to guess, nothing is either forgiven or forgotten. This is a “go clean up your mess and take your lumps” situation. Not as emotionally satisfying as raking someone over hot coals, or tarring and feathering them, but much more productive. SA and RRA just got inducted into the penal battalion. Be interesting to see if they survive.

  11. avatar Keystone says:

    I saw that email in my inbox and my jaw just about hit the floor.

    That being said, job #1 right now is killing the bill. Yes, SA & RRA are responsible for it. The NRA does get adverising $$$ from SA.

    All that aside (for now), job #1 is still killing the bill.

    If they can’t, SA & RRA deserve to go out of existence, whether they knew what Keller was doing or not. They own it.

    If they do manage to kill it, they should thank their lucky stars and do some penence TBD. MAJOR MAJOR penence. What i have no idea. That’s for down the road.

    Right now killing the bill is job #1.

    All available resources need directed on that. Everything needs set aside, all differences with other people and sites (temporarily). This is an all hands / save a state overboard situation.

    We can argue about details later, the folks in Illinois will have to deal with the consequences forever (or leave the state, which everyone who can do should do. Same for NY and CA.) Not everyone can.

    The question then is: what can we all do to help save Illinois from this colossal screwup of all screwups?

    Is there anything us folks from other states can do?

    1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      Agree. Kill the bill. Plenty of time to drive SA and RRA into bankruptcy, where they belong.

  12. avatar Keystone says:

    The only idea that comes to mind in these wee hours is a coordinated massive threat to boycott the big box stores that (i am guessing) also paid to get exempted.

    It would require a huge email and phone onslaught to whoever they are (and we need to be 100% sure they are on the exemption list and in cahoots with Harmon or whoever)

    Target went from $50B to $30B with their tranny bathroom ploy. Don’t think we can manage an equivalent groundswell, BUT tagging any big box outdoor store as a gungrabber supporter (with proof) would ding them. Enough for them to lean on Illinois politicians and say “whoa, we can’t do this right now”? Don’t know.

    Open for ideas.

  13. avatar Keystone says:

    Gander Mountain went Tango Uniform and just got bought at bankruptcy auction by Camping World:

    http://emfizz.com/2017/05/gander-mountain-bought-out-by-camping-world/

    With competition from Amazon and other etailers, I’m guessing margins are slim enough for other big box sporting goods stores that an organized, nationwide boycott by the firearms community could be enough to drive some of them under. If they’re in on the carve-out, they deserve it, unless they also do an about face and publicly call for the bill to be voted down or vetoed. We’d need all firearms groups (yeah herding cats but since the bill impacts ALL firearms owners, it might be doable.

    Not doing this for SA/RRA, who are dumbasses. Doing this for everyone in Illinois.

  14. avatar JAlan says:

    The cynical part of me suspects that they knew exactly what they were doing and would take a short-term loss to get that carve-out. They expect to be forgiven. I, for one, will never buy their products again, no matter what they do, until the company is either sold or disappears.

  15. avatar FU Springfield says:

    Wow, the NRA is essentially posing for a photo with Springfield Armory after SA was caught being a traitor. Not another dime goes to the NRA after that ploy.

    1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      Um, no. The priority is killing this bill. However it has to happen and whoever helps. Let the NRA do what they do best. After that, we should continue to pursue the bankruptcy of SA and RRA. No mercy. No forgiveness. If for no other reason than to serve as a cautionary tale for other future would be sellouts.

      1. avatar Ed says:

        “Let the NRA do what they do best..” You mean take our money, and give us lip service? You can’t possably think the NRA still cares about 2A rights? A lobbying group will NEVER lobby themselves out of business. Whens the last time the NRA took any MEANINGFUL action to repeal the NFA? Or DO AWAY wih firearm licensing of any sort? Mark my words, the NRAs next move will be national reciprocity, but WITH mandatory insurance (that they just happen to sell now.) So, hows that freedom???

        1. avatar The Packetman says:

          When was the FIRST time the NRA tried to get the NFA repealed?!

        2. avatar Turd Ferguson says:

          dont give the .gov any ideas, they already forced us to buy medical insurance…and looky here, you can only buy from 1 insurer in some states (AZ, IA)

  16. avatar FEO2 says:

    Springfield’s tactic: tell the lie over and over, eventually some people will believe.

  17. avatar O2HeN2 says:

    As someone said a few replies back:

    >>Right now killing the bill is job #1

    If it takes the NRA getting into bed with Springfield Armory to do it, do it.

    The alternative is far, far worse.

    O2

  18. avatar rc says:

    Hot dog….you’re right! Wow, that makes them look even worse. Every step these clowns have taken to get out of this mess just makes them look worse.

  19. avatar docduracoat says:

    I agree with other posters
    The first thing is for all of us gun enthusiasts to help the citizens of Illinois defeat this bill
    Springfield needs to be the major player in blocking it if they ever hope to get out of this mess
    I must say I do not see this being anywhere other than TTAG
    Even other gun blogs are saying nothing about a bill that would limit citizens to 9 gun purchases/sales per year
    California went for one handgun per month
    Who decided 9 was a good limit?
    That is a funny number to pick

  20. avatar Tyler says:

    Changing their tune and wanting to fight what they supported doesn’t change the fact they sold the 2nd amendment down the river. People need to punish Springfield and Rock River Arms financially by not purchasing firearms from them for months if not a year. We can’t have gun manufacturers selling us out or we won’t be able to buy guns in the future.

  21. avatar FedUp says:

    We keep calling it the big box store carve out, but as I understand it, it’s a ‘less than 20% of revenues from gun sales” carve out.

    The 20% threshold obviously exempts Wal-mart and K-Mart, does it exempt Cabela’s, Dick’s, Dunhams?


    I’d love to know who asked for that and how they compensated Don Harmon for it.

  22. avatar Kevin says:

    Next question: how did they get my email? I’ve never purchased an SA product. Did they acquire an email list from NRA?

    1. avatar Ed says:

      More than likely, they sold my information multiple times.

  23. avatar Furley says:

    These are some of the most observant comments I’ve seen on this subject. Smart people.

  24. avatar Button Gwinnet says:

    “Do Springfield and Rock River execs seriously expect us to believe they didn’t know about those payments, either? Does anyone believe that?”

    Sure, I believe it. It’s very believable that a company didn’t keep tabs on a lobby. And any company that stupid is obviously not to be trusted to build a firearm that will go bang when you need it to, and remain silent when you need it to.

    Taurus and Hi Point did not lobby for a carve out. They are more reliable.

  25. avatar Fin says:

    THE NRA are cucks, SA and RRA got caught red effin handed, if there was no threat of gun control, what would the nra do? Where would all those millions go? Surley the nra wouldnt use threats of gun control to justify their existence, i order to keep the cash cow going and paying those massive salaries……..

    1. avatar rman says:

      I used to feel that way. Google the salaries of their top execs..far underpaid for the size organization they run and what they have to do and put up with (I’m guessing LaPierre gets threats daily).

      1. avatar Turd Ferguson says:

        As much as I dislike some of hte inaction of NRA, they do serve the citizenry well in some ways. Eddie Eagle is pretty good, training for noobs is good, being able to counter lies by antis is good

      2. avatar Ed says:

        I’d say a $1,000,000.00 a year is way overpaid for a windbag who said the most egregious crap after sandy hook. I still can’t belive that the members didn’t get out the pitchforks and drag him from his position to deposit him on the street corner with the rest of the trash. Buncha clueless wonders.

  26. avatar FedUp says:

    Did NRA-ILA give Springfield permission to use their logo?

  27. avatar olivehead says:

    No comments that Springfield uses a Smith & Wesson SD in their email pic? Or did I miss one above? Maybe they didn’t want to be accused of promoting their own products in the ad?

  28. avatar great unknown says:

    About the only thing that would convince me sufficiently to ever buy a Springfield gun again would be if they filed suit, publicly, against their lobbyist, with all documents, proceedings, depositions, and final disposition fully public. Off the top of my head, breach of contract, fraud, and tortious interference with business are good starting points.

    Anything less would be rather damning evidence of complicity.

    And claiming that it’s not worth it for them financially would show that they are too stupid to understand the PR hit they just took. The United Airlines of gun manufacturers, except without the virtual monopoly the large carriers enjoy.

  29. avatar Ralph says:

    The entire episode is like something out of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, except this is more bizarre.

  30. avatar L.A. Myers says:

    I absolutely think SA and RRA lost big on this and they have earned it, rightfully. However, do not be stupid. Gaston glock was most probably an antigun leaning socialist who made billions selling weapons and military goods with capitolism. And; how many of us own russian made goods, or old soviet block country goods??? Turkish junk??? Or, god forgive me, IMI stuff? Not that im anti isreal, but if they dont trust their own citizens, why give them business. My point is; how far do we go up on our high horse and it still be justified? Lots of american owned pro 2a business needs our business, so dont be a hypocrite bashing SA with a glock in one hand and a mosin in the other…

  31. avatar Brad says:

    Unless SAI and RRA cut some BIG checks to state gun organizations, NOT the NRA, they can pack sand. If they do write checks the amount should be for at least 4 time the amount they have already donated to the IFMA. They should be spending every dime they have to try and stop their losses from getting bigger.

  32. avatar neiowa says:

    So if all you echo chamber parrots could post links to ACTUAL info on the Illinois Lobbying system. It is not a subject on which simple search brings up much info. Given that EVERYTHING in Il is crooked no surprise.

    I only find one document listing at the Sec of State’s website concerning the
    ILLINOIS FIREARMS MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
    P.O. BOX 9292
    NAPERVILLE, IL 60567
    TELEPHONE: (630)355-8517 FAX: (630)355-8518
    CONTRACTUAL
    HUNT, J. ALEXANDER, INC.

    Where is all this funding, activity, organization info?

    1. avatar rc says:

      There are about half a dozen articles on this site alone about this and sources (with images) are all over the place. You’ll need to go to the effort of scrolling down off the top article on the site to see them, however.

  33. avatar Bob Jones says:

    I’d be more suspicious of a Big Box employee selling guns to the wrong person in return for a “commission”.than a LGS owner. The LGS has everything to lose.

    Many Big Box employees are paid peanuts and have crappy benefits.

  34. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    “Do Springfield and Rock River execs seriously expect us to believe they didn’t know about those payments, either? Does anyone believe that?”

    People who only heard a passing comment about the brouhaha will believe that Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms should be back in our graces now since both entities are now publicly opposing the bill. People who really understand what happened will not believe the execs.

  35. avatar John in Indiana says:

    All their hired lobbyist has for sale is his Rolodex. He certainly sells it to anyone with a checkbook. Representing his many customers, he is also almost certainly not a gun rights purist and plays (and takes money from) both sides.

    Even as principals in IFMA, RR and SA may have been not totally in tune with what their lobbyist was doing exactly. But, that doesn’t make them blameless. He was their hired gun, after all. They may have been awed by his past performance and partnered with him, even though he wasn’t ‘one of us’. If so, they chose poorly, and they reap the consequences.

    I wonder if he was representing both sides on this issue? Conflict of interest, I know, but it would not surprise me.

  36. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

    SA gets no accolades for taking the position that should be automatic default, always. Had they fought this bill from the start, we wouldn’t be in this situation now. They are just trying to save their business. The legislation isn’t important to them, obviously.

  37. avatar BobProg says:

    A few months ago, I watched a video of a CEO of a large gun manufacturer demonstrate a new pistol. His stance was wrong and he tea cupped the pistol. It was obvious to me that he doesn’t use his own product, that his knowledge of firearms was less that those who have taken a basic pistol course. This got me to wonder how wide spread this is. Are manufacturing companies hiring “ready-made”CEOs outside the industry, and if so, who are they really recruiting? Are Board of Directors at some of the companies unwittingly hiring company officers who have political agendas that are not in the best interests of the company? It would be interesting to find out who these people really are. All we know, they could be hard leftists on a mission to sabotage us. Some may say that sound insanely farfetched, but after seeing what the Progressives have done over the last decade, it is plausible and unbelievably likely they would try. Yes, after 8 years of Obama, I have trust issues. 🙂

    1. avatar Warren says:

      Of course they’re “ready-made.” CEOs are not paid to know the product, they’re paid to steer the company in such a way as to maximize profits. I had a passing acquaintance with a CEO for a major computer manufacturer a number of years ago. His background was civil engineering, he ended up in tech, and now advises on trade policy. His real perceived “value,” and where he made his money, was making that tech company more profitable. Full stop. I guarantee you he can’t program software or build/design hardware to save his life.

  38. avatar Warren says:

    How nice, asking me to put my money where their mouth is.

  39. avatar Ted Unlis says:

    “Springfield Armory Teams-Up With the NRA To Defeat IL FFL Licence Bill”. Licence? Hard to miss that annoying typo in the story title. Wonder if Farago had been doing a little product research on his other blog.

  40. avatar kap says:

    Doesn’t matter, the Fox got in the Hen house! now a lot of eggs are gone, take a lot of doing to get credibility back!
    This thing with the NRA is Smoke and Mirrors, and the NRA be Damned if they help this F***ing company!

  41. avatar Tojomojocoltsgottagojoespendintimeinheavenwithhis1911 says:

    This response smells like a lie, sounds like a lie and looks like a lie. They are now creating the tangled web of a lie.

  42. avatar LJM says:

    I guess you guys, not being from Illinois, never heard of the term the “Illinois Combine”.

    Oh well.

  43. avatar former water walker says:

    I’m already seeing apologists fr Springfield all over FB. CLUELESS BASTARDS. It’ll be INTERESTING which big box stores have gotten in bed with demoRATS. Oh well.I decided to buy all my hand guns in Indiana and transfer them Illinois…I hope I ‘ll be able to find a cheap FFL!

  44. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    So now Springfield and RRA are trying to hide behind NRA. Someone needs to remind them that concealment isn’t cover, and camouflage isn’t going to save their butts in the Internet era.

  45. avatar Keystone says:

    I’ll reiterate: whatever SA & RRA deserve is not Job #1.

    Job #1 is killing the bill. By whatever means necessary.

    After that let the chips fall where they may.

    Anything distracting from * KILLING THE BILL * is precisely what Harmon, Madigan and Bloomberg want.

    We can all go back to our various positions after the bill is killed.

    So let’s have some ideas on how to work towards that goal.

  46. avatar Keystone says:

    If someone would be so kind as to post the “Killing the Bill is Job#1” message or a link to this thread on ARFcom, I’d appreciate it. I left that site after the Troy debacle and banning of good members, and no longer enjoy posting privileges there (one of many old timers who left in disgust)

    http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1988839_Springfield-and-RRA-make-a-deal-with-gun-banners-in-IL-.html&page=30

    As noted above, despite other concerns or disagreements, ALL members of the firearms community need to temporarily get on the same page and formulate a coherent plan to *KILL THE BILL*. Afterwards, regular bickering may resume.

  47. avatar Bud Harton says:

    This bill was introduced into the Illinois House last Spring and defeated. It contained the exact same language as the present bill. But if you read the House transcript on the day it was defeated, you will see the House sponsor, Rep. Willis describing Amendment 6 which is exactly where the carve out was added. Hre also describes the language of the carve out as’
    ” So… we took in… making
    sure we added additional exemptions, we put in the
    manufacturers of firearms are exempt, and that is, in fact,
    one of the reasons we had so many making sure that we listen
    to their language and put their language in there directly. ”

    That means the manufacturers were already aware of the provision and as a matter of fact, they wrote the actuallanguage that provided them an exemption. So how is it possible that Springfield Armory didn’t know about it? Read it for yourself :
    http://www.ilga.gov/house/transcripts/htrans99/09900138.pdf

  48. avatar Gary Howell says:

    This thing just makes me think the people with money are still racking it in and we are footing the bill. If I want a hammer fired pistol I’ll carry a 1911, and it won’t be a Springfield.

  49. avatar Andrew says:

    Screw Springfield two faced company and their never ending FTF XD’S pistol.

  50. avatar Nobama says:

    another question:

    what gun manufacturers have been consistent in supporting the 2A?

  51. avatar A-Aargh15 says:

    As a soon-to-be-EX-owner of a Springfield XDS 9mm, I was signed up on Springfield’s email list. I got the above email last night and promptly fired off a big F.U. reply and demanded they take me off their damned email list.

    Thank heaven for TTAG – I was just about to buy a SAI Saint AR this past weekend when I first heard on here about SAI and RRA’s backstabbery. The more I read, the more it stinked. SAI lost a sale to another AR mfgr and I took my XDS to my local gunshop on Tuesday and put it up for consignment sale.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email