Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.

Author Topic: Springfield and RRA liquidation  (Read 4258 times)

bignate88

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 191

  • Offline
Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
« Reply #25 on: May 17, 2017, 12:38:04 PM »
what do you guys think? definitely seems like a step in the right direction.

IllinoisThere’s a story about a turtle and a scorpion. Scorpion is stranded on a river bank. Turtle sees this and asks Scorpion to get on his back and he’ll take him across the river. Scorpion gets on Turtle’s back and they go into the river. When they’re about halfway across, Scorpion stings Turtle. As Turtle is sinking, knowing they’re both going to die, he asks Scorpion "Why did you sting me, we’re both going to die?" and Scorpion says "It’s not my fault; it’s what I am."

WeTheArmed.com

  • Advertisement
  • ***

    LowKey

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 134

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #26 on: May 17, 2017, 01:47:02 PM »
    Right at the 2:00 minute mark he starts exhibiting strong signs that he's lying. 
    Most of this video seems to be trying to soften up the viewer with warm stories of a family business done good, and sound bites from a shooter who they sponsor.  Everyone in this video stands to loose financially if SA goes under, so having them plead that this is all just a big misunderstanding isn't convincing in the slightest.  Dennis Reece may loose his business. Rob Leatham stand to loose a sponsor.  The mayor of Geneso stands to loose a big taxpayer and jobs for a lot of her constituents.
    Then he get's all choked up....just like hundreds of actors and actresses do on cue in front of the camera, which should be fairly easy to do by thinking of what this debacle may do to his business. 
    Anyone remember this...

    He's going to have to do something a whole lot more concrete and permanently binding to sell the idea that they didn't throw the 2A under the bus just to keep his golden goose laying safely.  The shooting community has grown far more cynical of big business players and being sold out by them for profit than they were 20 years ago. We've been sold down the river far too many times by people who've told us that they're really our friends and it was all a big misunderstanding.   The honeymoon is over.

    They want to do something to convince some of the more forgiving people that they didn't know about this, and perhaps atone for it in the eyes of those who won't buy this sentimental load of fertilizer they made?
    Make a legally binding commitment that 10% of their revenue goes to support a new lobbying foundation to fight anti-2A laws and political candidates, one in which they have NO control or influence,  and let it's board be made up of the most articulate and intelligent yet rabid and uncompromising supporters of the 2A that are known to the shooting community.   Not the NRA who has never met a big donor they didn't like, and most assuredly not the NRAILA. A new organization with only one goal...defeating and repealing anti 2A legislation, no compromises and no picking of the lessor of two evils. 


    Anything short of that and let SA and RRA go under and serve as a cautionary tale to businesses in the firearms industry that American shooters aren't going to support them if they try and cut deals with the opposition.    It's time for principle to matter just as much as profit margin in this industry, and where that has happened already it sure hasn't hurt support for those manufacturers.   
    « Last Edit: May 17, 2017, 02:50:49 PM by LowKey »

    Kaso

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6338
    • WTA Hardline Antagonist (aka: Jerk)

    • Online
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #27 on: May 17, 2017, 05:55:12 PM »
    Right at the 2:00 minute mark he starts exhibiting strong signs that he's lying.
    Most of this video seems to be trying to soften up the viewer with warm stories of a family business done good, and sound bites from a shooter who they sponsor. 
    I agree, normally, but the 2:00 mark was nothing but a step up in the 'show of contrition' that started at 0:01.  So is it lying?  The whole clip is a big show of acting... which is lying. 

    Then he get's all choked up....just like hundreds of actors and actresses do on cue in front of the camera, which should be fairly easy to do by thinking of what this debacle may do to his business.
    Once again, the whole clip is a big act.  Right or wrong in this, he is putting on a show for the gun community.  No, I can't believe that those tears are genuine, even if he does think he will lose his business. ::)

    He's going to have to do something a whole lot more concrete and permanently binding to sell the idea that they didn't throw the 2A under the bus just to keep his golden goose laying safely. 

    The shooting community has grown far more cynical of big business players and being sold out by them for profit than they were 20 years ago. We've been sold down the river far too many times by people who've told us that they're really our friends and it was all a big misunderstanding.   The honeymoon is over.
    To the first part, I agree.  They need to appear more sincere, less contrite.  Saying that you made an error of judgment is going to go farther than a 'I didn't know a thing' at this point.  The second part...  Nah.  People forget.  If the two companies can get past the next six months they will survive long term.

    They want to do something to convince some of the more forgiving people that they didn't know about this, and perhaps atone for it in the eyes of those who won't buy this sentimental load of fertilizer they made?
    Make a legally binding commitment that 10% of their revenue goes to support a new lobbying foundation to fight anti-2A laws and political candidates, one in which they have NO control or influence,  and let it's board be made up of the most articulate and intelligent yet rabid and uncompromising supporters of the 2A that are known to the shooting community.   Not the NRA who has never met a big donor they didn't like, and most assuredly not the NRAILA. A new organization with only one goal...defeating and repealing anti 2A legislation, no compromises and no picking of the lessor of two evils. 
    And this is where you start to lose people.  10% of revenue? :rotfl  Since when does any modern manufacturer have 10% fat to cut?  :scrutiny  10% of profits... maybe. 

    'No control or influence...' Not a bad idea.  'Rabid and uncompromising...' Yeah, I'm not even going to go there... ;)

    Anything short of that... 
    And even if that, there will be those like you who will never forgive this perceived offense.  Just as some still boycott S&W, Ruger, and the others.  :shrug
    Donald J Trump, by the Grace of God: 45th president of the United States.
    20 January 2017, 12:01pm
    Here's to a great four years!

    booksmart

    • Token Left Leaning Idealist Libertarian
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 5762
    • E. Pluribus Unum.

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #28 on: May 17, 2017, 09:31:29 PM »
    I think the only way most people will hold this against them long term is if the bill makes it to law.

    LowKey

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 134

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #29 on: May 18, 2017, 03:22:39 AM »
    I think the only way most people will hold this against them long term is if the bill makes it to law.
    So they only hold robbery against the criminal if he gets away with it? ;)
    « Last Edit: May 18, 2017, 04:51:31 AM by LowKey »

    LowKey

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 134

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #30 on: May 18, 2017, 03:47:37 AM »
    I agree, normally, but the 2:00 mark was nothing but a step up in the 'show of contrition' that started at 0:01.  So is it lying?  The whole clip is a big show of acting... which is lying. 


    I agree that the whole thing is a sham, but his body language and eye movement became those of a classic "tell" that someone is lying right when he began to make his claim that he was unaware of the deal the lobbyist was making. 
    None of the video was genuine, but his statement that he was unaware of what the lobbyist was doing was a blatant lie.

    And this is where you start to lose people.  10% of revenue? :rotfl  Since when does any modern manufacturer have 10% fat to cut?  :scrutiny  10% of profits... maybe.   

    10 percent of gross, not 10 percent of net.  If you negotiate a deal for a percentage of net you will quickly discover that you are getting screwed as they will find ways to leave themselves with only a sliver of net while still getting fat.
    Besides, do you think they sell the firearms to their distributors with less than a 10% markup over what it costs to produce them? 
    'No control or influence...' Not a bad idea.  'Rabid and uncompromising...' Yeah, I'm not even going to go there... ;)
     
    Rabid as in willing to go viciously on the offense in defense of the 2A, full scorched earth regarding any individual or organization that tries to curtail or infringe on the 2A. 
    You're sponsoring a bill that's anti-2A?  Not only would this organization lobby against it, donate to the campaign of anyone running against you, and run ad campaign to make you look horrible in every facet of your life, you'd better hope you have no skeletons in your closet because they'll hire folks to go dig them up and parade them down main street. 
    It would be personal and unapologetic.  The goal wouldn't be to just defeat the bill but to destroy the political future of the idiot who sponsored or voted for such a bill, even if the weakness exploited to do so wasn't related to the bill in any way. 


    Overall I'm  leaning towards hoping that they go under just to serve as a warning to others.    One of the lessons should be that an attack on one, even the smallest and least significant, is an attack on all and needs to be met with vigorous, forceful, unyielding and uncompromising resistance.  If you become a turncoat in hopes of "carving out" deals for yourself you should be driven out of business and hopefully into poverty, and your name have the same associations as Quisling.

    Kaso

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6338
    • WTA Hardline Antagonist (aka: Jerk)

    • Online
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #31 on: May 18, 2017, 10:14:11 AM »
    10 percent of gross, not 10 percent of net.  If you negotiate a deal for a percentage of net you will quickly discover that you are getting screwed as they will find ways to leave themselves with only a sliver of net while still getting fat.
    Besides, do you think they sell the firearms to their distributors with less than a 10% markup over what it costs to produce them?
    By that, are you asking if I believe that 10%+ of 'distributor cost' goes to line Reese's pockets?  No, I seriously doubt it.  And if it does, how do I get into the firearms manufacturing industry? :hmm

    Further to that, is your legally binding agreement going to freeze SA prices where they are at?  Otherwise, customers will just end up paying a 10% (or more) stupid tax to support this pro gun organization.

    Rabid as in willing to go viciously on the offense in defense of the 2A, full scorched earth regarding any individual or organization that tries to curtail or infringe on the 2A. 
    Witch hunts against anyone who even thinks contrary to the party line?  That is too close to modern PC and SJW tactics, and I can not support it.  In fact, in any other circumstance, I don't think you would support it.

    Donald J Trump, by the Grace of God: 45th president of the United States.
    20 January 2017, 12:01pm
    Here's to a great four years!

    MTK20

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 5340
    • Mind of a philosopher, mouth of a sailor.

    • Online
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #32 on: May 18, 2017, 11:13:51 AM »
    By that, are you asking if I believe that 10%+ of 'distributor cost' goes to line Reese's pockets?  No, I seriously doubt it.  And if it does, how do I get into the firearms manufacturing industry? :hmm

    Further to that, is your legally binding agreement going to freeze SA prices where they are at?  Otherwise, customers will just end up paying a 10% (or more) stupid tax to support this pro gun organization.
     Witch hunts against anyone who even thinks contrary to the party line?  That is too close to modern PC and SJW tactics, and I can not support it.  In fact, in any other circumstance, I don't think you would support it.

    Good rebuttal. if it's not voluntary, it's coercion.

    Allow the consumer to sort this one out, we'll vote with our dollar. I believe though, that for all the fun owners shrieking, nothing will become of this. Our memories are too short and we will continue to buy their products.
    Texas
    Do we forget that cops were primarily still using 6 Shot Revolvers well through the mid 80's? It wasn't until after 1986 that most departments then relented and went to autos.
    Capacity wasn't really an issue then... and honestly really it's not even an issue now.
    Ray Chapman, used to say that the 125-grain Magnum load’s almost magical stopping power was the only reason to load .357 instead of .38 Special +P ammunition into a fighting revolver chambered for the Magnum round. I agree. - Massad Ayoob

    Paradoxically it is those who strive for self-reliance, who remain vigilant and ready to help others.

    LowKey

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 134

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #33 on: May 23, 2017, 11:37:37 AM »
    Good rebuttal. if it's not voluntary, it's coercion.

    Which isn't voluntary? 
    The idea that they should make amends by setting up an organization under a binding agreement?

    Or are you saying if they did so purchasers of their products would be involuntarily supporting said organization with 10% of the sale price?     
    Putting aside the fact that purchasers aren't being forced to buy the product,  how would giving 10% of revenue (or 5%, or 1%)  to an organization that fought infringement of the 2A tooth and nail be any different than giving whatever portion of revenue that  SA and RRA had been forking over to the IFMA?        :coffee



    Allow the consumer to sort this one out, we'll vote with our dollar. I believe though, that for all the fun owners shrieking, nothing will become of this. Our memories are too short and we will continue to buy their products.
    Pushing SA and RRA into something like that through economic pressure is one way of letting the consumer sort this one out.

    As to your comment about memories being short and people continuing to buy their products, sadly that is all too likely correct and why companies believe they can get away with paying off or backing special interest groups at our expense just to get a slight advantage in the market or bump profits up a point or two...because it seems the average consumer will give up their privacy and their rights just to get %10 off, or forgive and forget being stabbed in the back if the offending  company sells their widgets for a few dollars less than the next company.     

    LowKey

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 134

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #34 on: May 23, 2017, 11:38:09 AM »
    By that, are you asking if I believe that 10%+ of 'distributor cost' goes to line Reese's pockets?  No, I seriously doubt it.  And if it does, how do I get into the firearms manufacturing industry? :hmm

    Further to that, is your legally binding agreement going to freeze SA prices where they are at?  Otherwise, customers will just end up paying a 10% (or more) stupid tax to support this pro gun organization.
     Witch hunts against anyone who even thinks contrary to the party line?  That is too close to modern PC and SJW tactics, and I can not support it.  In fact, in any other circumstance, I don't think you would support it.

    Kaso

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6338
    • WTA Hardline Antagonist (aka: Jerk)

    • Online
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #35 on: May 23, 2017, 12:56:51 PM »

    How would giving 10% of revenue (or 5%, or 1%)  to an organization that fought infringement of the 2A tooth and nail be any different than giving whatever portion of revenue that  SA and RRA had been forking over to the IFMA?        :coffee
    In a word?  Amount.  From what I heard, SA was only putting in $50k per year.  I don't have their financials handy, but I suspect they bring in far more than the $5 million that $50k would be 1% of.

    I would have no issue with them committing to give that same amount (or even double) that they were giving to IFMA, to this 'rabid' organization that you mention.  My objection comes from the amount - if it is so much that it hurts the company, it is not helping anyone.  Wanting to 'tax' them out of business, as it seems that you do, is not going to make the gun industry or the shooting community stronger.
    Donald J Trump, by the Grace of God: 45th president of the United States.
    20 January 2017, 12:01pm
    Here's to a great four years!

    Kaso

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6338
    • WTA Hardline Antagonist (aka: Jerk)

    • Online
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #36 on: May 23, 2017, 01:00:10 PM »
    As to your comment about memories being short and people continuing to buy their products, sadly that is all too likely correct...
    Sadly, it seems that there was no reaction at all.  'Sadly,' because I have been looking all over for a steal on some self righteous sap dumping his M1A...  No luck so far.  None. :eh
    Donald J Trump, by the Grace of God: 45th president of the United States.
    20 January 2017, 12:01pm
    Here's to a great four years!

    MTK20

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 5340
    • Mind of a philosopher, mouth of a sailor.

    • Online
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #37 on: May 23, 2017, 01:02:24 PM »
    Sadly, it seems that there was no reaction at all.  'Sadly,' because I have been looking all over for a steal on some self righteous sap dumping his M1A...  No luck so far.  None. :eh

    Damn  :(.

    Once again, it seems that this is all much ado about nothing. I guess that gun owners just aren't that good at outrage culture.
    Texas
    Do we forget that cops were primarily still using 6 Shot Revolvers well through the mid 80's? It wasn't until after 1986 that most departments then relented and went to autos.
    Capacity wasn't really an issue then... and honestly really it's not even an issue now.
    Ray Chapman, used to say that the 125-grain Magnum load’s almost magical stopping power was the only reason to load .357 instead of .38 Special +P ammunition into a fighting revolver chambered for the Magnum round. I agree. - Massad Ayoob

    Paradoxically it is those who strive for self-reliance, who remain vigilant and ready to help others.

    Kaso

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6338
    • WTA Hardline Antagonist (aka: Jerk)

    • Online
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #38 on: May 23, 2017, 01:15:09 PM »
    Damn  :(.

    Once again, it seems that this is all much ado about nothing. I guess that gun owners just aren't that good at outrage culture.
    As I said, I am selfishly disappointed. :cool
    Donald J Trump, by the Grace of God: 45th president of the United States.
    20 January 2017, 12:01pm
    Here's to a great four years!

    Penguin

    • Contributor
    • ****
    • Posts: 1651

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #39 on: May 23, 2017, 09:25:27 PM »
    Sadly, it seems that there was no reaction at all.  'Sadly,' because I have been looking all over for a steal on some self righteous sap dumping his M1A...  No luck so far.  None. :eh

    I'm not very happy with what is going on. As well I am very disappointed with Springfield Armoury they were probably my favourite gun company. All the same but sorry but I don't plan on selling any of mine.

    I do have a long memory though. I still remember what Ruger and Smith and Wesson did. I am sure next time I go to buy a gun I will still remember this so chances are slim that my next purchase will be a Springfield. Especially the next time I buy a 1911. Which is a shame for them since I don't have the gun money that I used to so they are bound to miss out on what little I do have. Everyone makes 1911s now so there are plenty of other options out there.

    Perhaps given time I will feel like those other companies that have done short sighted things in the past. And that they have changed their ways but in my mind first I have to see the change then wait to see if it is for real. In the case of S&W and Ruger I feel they changed especially Smith and Wesson. I hope to one day say I feel SA turned back around too but, that is going to take time. 
    Doobie Doobie Doo...

    ksuguy

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 4695

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #40 on: May 23, 2017, 11:45:30 PM »
    I've got an M1A, but I'm not going to be selling it.   However, I don't anticipate buying any new Springfields anytime soon.
    Kansas

    Kaso

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6338
    • WTA Hardline Antagonist (aka: Jerk)

    • Online
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #41 on: May 23, 2017, 11:58:26 PM »
    I appreciate that position, and maybe this is how the shooting community has changed in the past 20 years.  From what I have read, many S&W owners dumped their Smiths after they got into bed with Clinton.  So much so that (supposedly, I was young back then) the market floor for used Smiths dropped out.  Anyone that was involved with guns back then care to chime in?
    Donald J Trump, by the Grace of God: 45th president of the United States.
    20 January 2017, 12:01pm
    Here's to a great four years!

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 7138
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #42 on: May 24, 2017, 12:28:59 AM »
    I can't say that's how I remembered it.  :hmm   It was well known that S&W was, by that point, a poker chip in the high stakes corporate game of acquisitions and liquidations.  I think the more significant upheaval was the purchase of S&W by Bangor-Punta as that actually involved some noticeable changes in the quality of firearms being bought by the public.  There was a British tie-in that didn't set well considering the draconian British gun laws but the company managed to weather that and by the time Bill Clinton was in office things were getting back to some semblance of normality.  Or at least what passed for it in that era.   :facepalm   The mid 1990's was the time that many police agencies were switching over to the "Wonder Nines" and I think that had as much to do with the low prices for S&W revolvers as anything political.  Too many used revolvers and not enough buyers.    :doh     Supply and demand will always rule the market even in the presence of other factors.
    Arizona"A dying culture invariably exhibits personal rudeness.  Bad manners.  Lack of consideration for others in minor matters.  A loss of politeness, of gentle manners, is more significant than is a riot."
                          Robert A. Heinlein ,   Friday

    ksuguy

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 4695

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #43 on: May 24, 2017, 12:30:35 AM »
    Just don't see much point.  Selling a gun I already have isn't going to affect their bottom line one way or the other.   In fact, it was lightly used when I bought it in 2009, so they never got any additional money from it to begin with.   

    Honestly, I'm more annoyed at Rock River because I was really looking forward to buying that .458 SOCOM upper and theirs seemed to offer the best value for the money.   So now I've got to find another option.  Either Radical, which I've heard has hit or miss quality problems, paying extra for Wilson Combat or Tromix,  or buying an upper and barrel and having someone assemble it for me.   
    Kansas

    Kaso

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6338
    • WTA Hardline Antagonist (aka: Jerk)

    • Online
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #44 on: May 24, 2017, 12:48:04 AM »
    I can't say that's how I remembered it.  :hmm   It was well known that S&W was, by that point, a poker chip in the high stakes corporate game of acquisitions and liquidations.  I think the more significant upheaval was the purchase of S&W by Bangor-Punta as that actually involved some noticeable changes in the quality of firearms being bought by the public.  There was a British tie-in that didn't set well considering the draconian British gun laws but the company managed to weather that and by the time Bill Clinton was in office things were getting back to some semblance of normality.  Or at least what passed for it in that era.   :facepalm   The mid 1990's was the time that many police agencies were switching over to the "Wonder Nines" and I think that had as much to do with the low prices for S&W revolvers as anything political.  Too many used revolvers and not enough buyers.    :doh     Supply and demand will always rule the market even in the presence of other factors.
    Okay, fine.  Like I said, I was too young to remember.  It was only what I read. (probably online)
    Donald J Trump, by the Grace of God: 45th president of the United States.
    20 January 2017, 12:01pm
    Here's to a great four years!

    LowKey

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 134

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #45 on: May 24, 2017, 02:56:19 AM »
    In a word?  Amount.  From what I heard, SA was only putting in $50k per year.  I don't have their financials handy, but I suspect they bring in far more than the $5 million that $50k would be 1% of.

    I would have no issue with them committing to give that same amount (or even double) that they were giving to IFMA, to this 'rabid' organization that you mention.  My objection comes from the amount - if it is so much that it hurts the company, it is not helping anyone.  Wanting to 'tax' them out of business, as it seems that you do, is not going to make the gun industry or the shooting community stronger.
    Well it's not as if I have a magic wand to wave and cause any of this to happen, let alone set the percentage.  I don't really care what percentage it would be set at, as long as it was large enough to hurt a bit rather than a tiny token-only amount.   
    I would argue however that either going out of business wouldn't hurt the industry or community as there are plenty of competitors and the market is glutted.  If you considered the support they've given via the IFMA to anti-gun politicians you could also argue that loosing them might be beneficial, as in "With friends like these who needs enemies?"


    BTW, apologies for the quote without a response a few posts up.  Having computer and connectivity issues.

    LowKey

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 134

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #46 on: May 24, 2017, 03:00:58 AM »
    Just don't see much point.  Selling a gun I already have isn't going to affect their bottom line one way or the other.  .
    This is why I wouldn't expect to see a flood of used SA and RRA products hit the market. 
    However, sales of new firearms may suffer a bit of a slump.   

    Bud

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 2732

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #47 on: May 24, 2017, 03:07:16 PM »
    I was a long time Illinois resident and a heavy participant in the CCW movement there. I also occasionally write for TheTruthAboutGuns and was involved i some of the background research into the expose.

    I have always loved SA and have written here and TTAG about good experiences with SA firearms, particularly 1911s and the SA Custom Shop.

    Now, having said all of that, let me assure you that Springfield Armory is the ultimate scum of the earth.

    It was not only performing the carve out in the Illinois Senate bill that exempted SA and RRA from what constitutes a death blow to Illinois FFLs but then LYING about it when they got caught by claiming it was done by the Illinois Firearms Manufacturing Association without their knowledge. Except that the Illinois Firearms Manufacturing Association entire membership roster is made up of exactly two principals and a back stabbing lobbyist. The two principals are Denny Reese the CEO/owner of SA and Chuck Larson the CEO/Owner of RRA.

    When I started researching them I found the tax forms (IRS 990) that the IFMA had submitted which included TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS donated to the campaign chests of some the Democrats most rabid anti gun politicians in Illinois and this had been going on for years.

    SA and RRA can FOAD for all I care. And suggesting that they move to another State equates to relocating your cockroaches over to the neighbor's kitchen.
    This whole freaking mess goes even layers deeper and hopefully a lot more is going to be exposed.
    « Last Edit: May 24, 2017, 03:36:56 PM by Bud »
    MissouriBud
    Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death! Patrick Henry

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 7138
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #48 on: May 24, 2017, 05:48:30 PM »
    Good inside info, Bud.  Thanks for shedding some much needed light on what is actually going on there.  I think Reese and Larson are about to receive a delivery of rancid karma. 
    Arizona"A dying culture invariably exhibits personal rudeness.  Bad manners.  Lack of consideration for others in minor matters.  A loss of politeness, of gentle manners, is more significant than is a riot."
                          Robert A. Heinlein ,   Friday

    Kaso

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6338
    • WTA Hardline Antagonist (aka: Jerk)

    • Online
    Re: Springfield and RRA liquidation
    « Reply #49 on: May 24, 2017, 06:51:44 PM »
    When I started researching them I found the tax forms (IRS 990) that the IFMA had submitted which included TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS donated to the campaign chests of some the Democrats most rabid anti gun politicians in Illinois and this had been going on for years.
    That seems perfectly reasonable for a lobbyist to do, when it is democrats that heavily control the state House, and are even stronger in the Senate.  You want to lobby for something, then you have to deal with those who have the power to give it to you.  Don't think for a minute that their donations were made because anyone at IFMA liked these legislators' positions on guns.
    Donald J Trump, by the Grace of God: 45th president of the United States.
    20 January 2017, 12:01pm
    Here's to a great four years!

    Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.