Is the Springfield Armory gun maker dead to you, after they supported anti gun silliness?

[2aguy]

I just saw the new Springfield Armory pistol.....it is brand new and for me, it looked interesting and a possible buy.........but then......I looked at the comments section and the posters there said that Springfield Armory was dead to them......

I looked deeper....

The anti 2nd Amendment nuts in Illinois have passed through the state House new gun control laws that do nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters, but simply ratchet down on our rights.....and backing it....for a cut out in the law...Springfield Armory, and Rock Island Armory....

So...I called them and told them I would not be buying their new gun, and how stupid they were to side with this anti gun crap at the same time they are releasing a brand new pistol......during the week of the NRA convention.....

Screw em...

This was the pistol.....the one I will no longer think about picking up....plus magazines........

Hands-On With Springfield Armory's New XD-E 9mm Hammer-Fired Pistol - The Truth About Guns

This is the stupid thing they did.....

Springfield Armory, Rock River Arms Trade Opposition to Illinois FFL Licensing Scheme for Carve-Out - The Truth About Guns

Earlier today, the Illinois State Senate passed bill SB-1657 by a one-vote margin. While its prospects are still unsure in the House, if signed by Governor Bruce Rauner, the new law will mandate state licensing for all Illinois gun dealers. It will also restrict all others in Illinois to nine firearm transfers per year.

The lobbyist for the Illinois Firearms Manufacturers Association (IFMA), Jay Keller, traded that group’s opposition to the bill in exchange for a carve-out, removing Prairie State firearms manufacturers from the licensing requirements.

Two companies provide the bulk of the funding for IFMA: Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms.

Call them.....and let them know how stupid they are....selling out their customers...for no gain....

 

[SavannahMann]

I wasn't going to get one of their guns anyway.

 

[2aguy]

I wasn't going to get one of their guns anyway.

You should call anyway.....

 

[SavannahMann]

I wasn't going to get one of their guns anyway.

You should call anyway.....

Why? I won't pretend to be what I am not. I won't threaten to boycott a company I don't use. I am too old to pretend anymore.

 

[WinterBorn]

State licensing for gun dealers isn't the worst thing. And allowing 9 transfers per year for non-dealers seems fairly reasonable. If you sell more than 9 guns in private transactions, you should be licensed.

I love my Springfield M1911 and M1A. If I get the chance to get the M1A Scout rifle, I will do it.

 

[Silent Warrior]

It's Illinois, after all. They made the best of a bad situation. I love my RO Champion and will continue to buy from them.

 

[WinterBorn]

Apparently the fact that Springfield gives money to the group that capitulated does not stop Springfield Armory from actively opposing Illinois SB-1657. They have ads up on their website and on GunsAmerica.

Looks like you may have been too quick to judge this fine firearm company.

 

[2aguy]

Apparently the fact that Springfield gives money to the group that capitulated does not stop Springfield Armory from actively opposing Illinois SB-1657. They have ads up on their website and on GunsAmerica.

Looks like you may have been too quick to judge this fine firearm company.

And you would be wrong......they put the ads up after they got caught donating money to john cullerton.....one of the democrat crime members who works for the shadow governor mike madigan, the real power in the state.....cullerton is anti gun to his core.......I will find the article detailing the timeline.......

 

[2aguy]

Apparently the fact that Springfield gives money to the group that capitulated does not stop Springfield Armory from actively opposing Illinois SB-1657. They have ads up on their website and on GunsAmerica.

Looks like you may have been too quick to judge this fine firearm company.

Here you go.....what they did....and how they are now trying to stop the hole digging...

Editorial: Springfield Armory, Rock River Arms - Forgive But Don't Forget? - The Truth About Guns

As you probably know, the lobbying arm of Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms recently cut a deal with Illinois Senator Don Harmon to exclude the gunmakers from a licensing scheme. As a result, SB 1657 passed the Illinois State Senate and is headed to the House. It’s a horrible bill that includes onerous licensing for FFL’s and a nine transfer limit for Land of Lincoln gun owners.

TTAG exposed the carve-out, unleashing a firestorm of criticism. Days after the news broke, Springfield and Rock River issued public statements denying any knowledge of the deal. By implication, they were saying that their lobbyist, Jay Keller, had gone rogue.

The gunmakers’ mea culpas are seriously lacking in the credibility department.

Mr. Keller’s paymaster, The Illinois Firearms Manufacturers Association (IFMA), is was wholly owned and controlled by Springfield Armory and Rock River. IFMA’s IRS form 990 lists four Directors: Dennis Reese, (CEO of SA), Tom Reese, (Co-chairman of the Board of SA), Chuck Larson, (Co-Owner of RRA ) and Jay Keller, (paid lobbyist).

The idea that Mr. Keller would act without the two manufacturers’ direct knowledge and supervision in a matter than directly affects their business beggars belief. If nothing else, our reporter John Boch called both gunmakers before the bill’s passage.

The fact that IFMA paid tens of thousands of dollars to rabidly anti-gun Illinois Democrats over the last five years may not be directly relevant to SB 1657 but . . . what? Why did the two companies line the pockets of the sworn enemies of firearms freedom? What did Springfield and Rock River Arms expect to receive in return?

Neither Springfield nor Rock River have addressed this aspect of IFMA’s past. It’s nothing less than delusional to think they didn’t know about those payments.

In any case, Springfield Armory has now launched a major campaign to defeat SB1657 — the bill that would’ve died without their support. And I do mean major: ads all over the Internet (including TTAG), email blasts and coordination with the NRA-ILA.

Why wouldn’t they? If this licensing and transfer limitation bill becomes law, both Springfield and Rock River will be justifiably crucified by small gun dealers and Illinois gun owners. They will face an even greater danger of financial ruin.

Which is also true even if it isn’t passed. Illinois Dems could simply table the bill. If so, it can be brought to the floor any time in the next 18 months. Not to put too fine a point on it, HB 1657 is both a direct threat and a cancer on the body politic.

 

[WinterBorn]

Eh, if not that is fine too. I like my Springfield firearms. Not sure what the details are, but I am not going on a witch hunt over some shadow gov't or Illinois law that may not pass.

 

[2aguy]

State licensing for gun dealers isn't the worst thing. And allowing 9 transfers per year for non-dealers seems fairly reasonable. If you sell more than 9 guns in private transactions, you should be licensed.

I love my Springfield M1911 and M1A. If I get the chance to get the M1A Scout rifle, I will do it.

Do you know the details of the licensing? I have heard what might be done and it is all directed at costing gun dealers so much they can't stay in business....

 

[2aguy]

Apparently the fact that Springfield gives money to the group that capitulated does not stop Springfield Armory from actively opposing Illinois SB-1657. They have ads up on their website and on GunsAmerica.

Looks like you may have been too quick to judge this fine firearm company.

Here is the nature of what they did....

EDITORIAL: What Did Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms Know and When Did They Know It? - The Truth About Guns

Senator Don Harmon, being the dedicated anti-gunner he is, introduced a slightly altered version again this year, SB-1657. This time, we had lobbyists from many of the national gun control groups in Illinois working against us.

Stymied on the federal level, a full compliment of DC-based lobbyists came to deep-blue Illinois in search of a gun control victory. Carpetbaggers representing Everytown, Moms Demand, Gabby Giffords’ ARS and the Brady Campaign, to name a few, found their way to our fine state. They work out of hotel rooms here in the heart of flyover country, pounding our legislators relentlessly along with our own homegrown gun control groups.

For gun rights forces, once more, it was all hands on deck.

We all knew the vote would be close. We rallied the troops. The two big powerhouse lobbyists from NRA-ILA burned the candle at both ends. Richard Pearson, Maureen Mulhall and Jim Vinopal all lobbied on behalf of the Illinois State Rifle Association.

I donned my suit and spent time there too, representing Guns Save Life. Mike and Valinda Rowe spent countless hours working the rail on behalf of IllinoisCarry. The Illinois Federation for Outdoor Resources stood by our side. Whitney O’Daniel from the National Shooting Sports Foundation was there at key times. We even had Knox Williams from the American Suppressor Association helping out now and then.

Also there: IFMA’s paid lobbyist Jay Keller…right up until last Thursday, when Mr. Keller went missing. That’s when his witness slip showed up under “No Position,” meaning IFMA officially took no stance as to SB-1657’s passage. As a result, the amended bill cleared committee and went to the Senate floor.

The bill quickly passed the entire Senate by a single vote.

And that’s when I decided this story needed telling. We had been betrayed by the lobbyist of a firm led by Rock River Arms and Springfield Armory’s owners — and no one else. (As above, from the 2013 IFMA IRS Form 990.)

To be fair, Mr. Larson and Mr. Reese’s respective claims of not keeping up on what was happening in the Illinois General Assembly might be true. After all, neither Springfield nor Rock River – as evidenced by their Tuesday statements severing ties with IFMA – are even in tune enough to even know who’s in the capitol fighting hard for their gun rights along with those of their customers.

Yes, they mentioned the NRA and the Illinois State Rifle Association in their statements. But they failed to mention Illinois Carry, the Illinois Federation for Outdoor Resources and Guns Save Life, all of which have worked hard in Springfield, putting in hundreds of lobbying hours fighting against Second Amendment infringements like SB-1657.

Not without warning

In January, I asked Jay Keller to clarify rumors I’d heard about IFMA possibly negotiating a deal for manufacturers as part of dealer licensing. Mr. Keller’s response: “Man, there’s no way I’m going out to SHOT with a dealer licensing bill hanging over my head.”

“You’re not answering my question, Jay. You’re surely negotiating with (bill sponsor) Harmon on this, are you?” I asked him.

He repeated his statement about SHOT and dealer bills.

I warned him that if he cut a deal, the gun owning community would not look favorably upon it. He repeated his SHOT line a third time, parrot-like, before walking away.

That’s when I did more research on the political donation story. In February, I placed calls to Chuck Larson at Rock River and Dennis Reese at Springfield. After identifying myself, those answering the phone told me the men were “unavailable.” So I left a detailed message.

“I’m working on a story about some campaign contributions your lobbying outfit, the Illinois Firearms Manufacturers Association, has made to some anti-gun Democrats. Tens of thousands of dollars. Can you give me a good reason why this is going on, and/or perhaps a reason why I shouldn’t run this story?”

I figured if they learned of my discovery of their lobbying group’s donation history, that might convince them that cutting a deal on SB-1657 was a bad idea. Or perhaps they might call and give me a legitimate explanation.

All I heard were crickets.

Over the weekend at the NRA convention, I reached out to both Reese and Larson. Reese ignored my message. Larson called and spoke with me. My return trip to Illinois prevented me from meeting with Mr. Larson in person, but we did have a good conversation.

I told him about the political donations his lobbying group, IFMA, had made to anti-gun Democratic politicians. I explained how a number of those donations don’t appear to have been properly reported to the Illinois State Board of Elections. He asked for proof. I told him to compare and contrast the IFMA Form 990s with the ISBE website, just as I’d done. Or, he could read about it with everyone else at TTAG.

 

[WinterBorn]

Apparently the fact that Springfield gives money to the group that capitulated does not stop Springfield Armory from actively opposing Illinois SB-1657. They have ads up on their website and on GunsAmerica.

Looks like you may have been too quick to judge this fine firearm company.

Here you go.....what they did....and how they are now trying to stop the hole digging...

Editorial: Springfield Armory, Rock River Arms - Forgive But Don't Forget? - The Truth About Guns

As you probably know, the lobbying arm of Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms recently cut a deal with Illinois Senator Don Harmon to exclude the gunmakers from a licensing scheme. As a result, SB 1657 passed the Illinois State Senate and is headed to the House. It’s a horrible bill that includes onerous licensing for FFL’s and a nine transfer limit for Land of Lincoln gun owners.

TTAG exposed the carve-out, unleashing a firestorm of criticism. Days after the news broke, Springfield and Rock River issued public statements denying any knowledge of the deal. By implication, they were saying that their lobbyist, Jay Keller, had gone rogue.

The gunmakers’ mea culpas are seriously lacking in the credibility department.

Mr. Keller’s paymaster, The Illinois Firearms Manufacturers Association (IFMA), is was wholly owned and controlled by Springfield Armory and Rock River. IFMA’s IRS form 990 lists four Directors: Dennis Reese, (CEO of SA), Tom Reese, (Co-chairman of the Board of SA), Chuck Larson, (Co-Owner of RRA ) and Jay Keller, (paid lobbyist).

The idea that Mr. Keller would act without the two manufacturers’ direct knowledge and supervision in a matter than directly affects their business beggars belief. If nothing else, our reporter John Boch called both gunmakers before the bill’s passage.

The fact that IFMA paid tens of thousands of dollars to rabidly anti-gun Illinois Democrats over the last five years may not be directly relevant to SB 1657 but . . . what? Why did the two companies line the pockets of the sworn enemies of firearms freedom? What did Springfield and Rock River Arms expect to receive in return?

Neither Springfield nor Rock River have addressed this aspect of IFMA’s past. It’s nothing less than delusional to think they didn’t know about those payments.

In any case, Springfield Armory has now launched a major campaign to defeat SB1657 — the bill that would’ve died without their support. And I do mean major: ads all over the Internet (including TTAG), email blasts and coordination with the NRA-ILA.

Why wouldn’t they? If this licensing and transfer limitation bill becomes law, both Springfield and Rock River will be justifiably crucified by small gun dealers and Illinois gun owners. They will face an even greater danger of financial ruin.

Which is also true even if it isn’t passed. Illinois Dems could simply table the bill. If so, it can be brought to the floor any time in the next 18 months. Not to put too fine a point on it, HB 1657 is both a direct threat and a cancer on the body politic.

So the fact that Springfield Armory and Rock Island each donated a grand total of $50k each to this lobbying group (since 2014) means they have total control over what that group does?

Nah, I'm not buying that. But I'll keep buying Springfield. The editorial you posted (and an editorial is an opinion) does not really prove either gun maker knew what the lobbyist was doing. If they cut a deal to save their ass in Illinois, it was a business decision.

 

[Old Rocks]

Well now, I think I might call them and congratulate them on fine decisions. LOL Not really. I have all the guns I will ever need, and am not into buying items useless to me.

 

[Marion Morrison]

I won't buy anything from them post after-they-did-that.

The m1 I want is not included.

 

[WinterBorn]

I won't buy anything from them post after-they-did-that.

The m1 I want is not included.

I have an M1A and love it. If I get the chance I will buy a Scout Squad version, but that is a bit pricey for me now.

 

[Marion Morrison]

I won't buy anything from them post after-they-did-that.

The m1 I want is not included.

I have an M1A and love it. If I get the chance I will buy a Scout Squad version, but that is a bit pricey for me now.

Them things are not as available as they should be due to sanctions. Even My cousin that used one in the war couldn't find an all-original number-matched one for a decent price. He's got one, with a composite stock, different numbers. I think that's a shame.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Oh! I just looked and there's none! Makes me mad.

M1 is not .308

No.

 

[JimBowie1958]

State licensing for gun dealers isn't the worst thing. And allowing 9 transfers per year for non-dealers seems fairly reasonable. If you sell more than 9 guns in private transactions, you should be licensed.

Why?

What is the numerical threshold to get a car dealer license?

Only nine sounds like a hassle if you are a gun enthusiast who trades and buys guns as collector pieces.

Maybe it should be nine a month?

But then again, why is it necessary to interfere in someones private life to impose a fairly arbitrary number of gun transactions?

And this gets the camels nose under the tent also, and in years to come, nine may become seven then five, then three and then AL gun transactions require a dealers license?

I personally do not like it, though I do not see anything unconstitutional about it.

 

[WinterBorn]

I won't buy anything from them post after-they-did-that.

The m1 I want is not included.

I have an M1A and love it. If I get the chance I will buy a Scout Squad version, but that is a bit pricey for me now.

Them things are not as available as they should be due to sanctions. Even My cousin that used one in the war couldn't find an all-original number-matched one for a decent price. He's got one, with a composite stock, different numbers. I think that's a shame.

You are talking about a Garand? They are sweet rifles.

Yeah, I am talking about the M1A. Civilian M14. They may have the best iron sights I've ever used.