Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So why does Springfield have its back all up? Because all they make are AR-15s. And while the roots of the company go way back, those roots were when it was a government-owned armory. The company has been a private business for some time now.
So don't buy into the BS. The decisions made by both companies are strictly business.
Springfield doesn't want the re-tooling costs to start making bolt-action rifles, so they're trying to squeeze Dicks into dropping their new policy.
Dick's doesn't want to be the next place that sold the gun that slaughtered the kids, so they're not gonna sell AR-15s any more unless Springlfield can force them to do it.
If Springfield can't get it done, well, maybe making a big noise about it will sell a few of their guns anyway.
Wow. You are just going to make things up?
Springfield armory is famous for its M1a rifle, 1911 style handguns and XD model handguns. They didn't even START making AR-15 type rifles until two years ago.
Dick's sells so much more than just guns. They'll manage.
Maybe, maybe not.
If people interested in guns (maybe not even gun owners) swing by Dicks to check 'em out, then go pick up some boot laces and a water carrier. They're now more likely to go to Cabelas or another outdoor store that still carries guns.
Sometimes having stock of certain things is more about attracting foot traffic than selling them. Dicks last quarter results weren't great, they can probably use all the foot traffic they can get.
I like the way the lined article was phrased in such a way as to imply there were political reasons behind it all.
I think the REAL reasons have more to do with liability and money than politics.
Did Dick's hire a couple of lobbyists? Sure they did. The sporting goods stores want a legal way to refuse to sell a gin to an obviously disturbed person. Right now, if they refuse a sale, they could face a lawsuit If the sell the gun and the guy goes out and kills another school-full of kids, Dick's can get sued by all the survivors.
Dick's doesn't necessarily want to quit selling guns. They just quit selling the favorite kid killing gun, the AR-15.
The article doesn't mention that, exactly. It says Dick's refuses to sell "modern sport rifles". That's just dog whistle of the AR-15.
What, really, is a sporting rifle?
A varmint gun? The Ruger ranch rifle uses the same ammo as an AR-15, and does a better job as a varmint gun. Other brands like Stevens and Winchester have better rifles.
A gun for target shooting? Pick any rifle for that purpose.
A game rifle? Nope. The bullet is too small and too fast to bring down an elk, moose, deer, or anything bigger than a woodchuck.
So why does Springfield have its back all up?
Because all they make are AR-15s. And while the roots of the company go way back, those roots were when it was a government-owned armory. The company has been a private business for some time now.
So don't buy into the BS. The decisions made by both companies are strictly business.
Springfield doesn't want the re-tooling costs to start making bolt-action rifles, so they're trying to squeeze Dicks into dropping their new policy.
Dick's doesn't want to be the next place that sold the gun that slaughtered the kids, so they're not gonna sell AR-15s any more unless Springlfield can force them to do it.
If Springfield can't get it done, well, maybe making a big noise about it will sell a few of their guns anyway.
And "The Federalist", that website that was linked, where the article was written? What's in it for them? More ads for guns 'n gear, of course. Gotta keep gun fancier all riled up to keep their advertisers happy in a real down year for the entire gun industry.
It's all one big conspiracy to take away your guns, isn't it?
But what if it isn't? What if it's actually just business as usual? That's the real question.
After all, conspiracies are the same in one regard. There has to be something that will line the pockets of the conspirators, or it just isn't worth the time, trouble, and the danger of forming a conspiracy.
I like the way the lined article was phrased in such a way as to imply there were political reasons behind it all.
I think the REAL reasons have more to do with liability and money than politics.
Did Dick's hire a couple of lobbyists? Sure they did. The sporting goods stores want a legal way to refuse to sell a gin to an obviously disturbed person. Right now, if they refuse a sale, they could face a lawsuit If the sell the gun and the guy goes out and kills another school-full of kids, Dick's can get sued by all the survivors.
Dick's doesn't necessarily want to quit selling guns. They just quit selling the favorite kid killing gun, the AR-15.
The article doesn't mention that, exactly. It says Dick's refuses to sell "modern sport rifles". That's just dog whistle of the AR-15.
What, really, is a sporting rifle?
A varmint gun? The Ruger ranch rifle uses the same ammo as an AR-15, and does a better job as a varmint gun. Other brands like Stevens and Winchester have better rifles.
A gun for target shooting? Pick any rifle for that purpose.
A game rifle? Nope. The bullet is too small and too fast to bring down an elk, moose, deer, or anything bigger than a woodchuck.
So why does Springfield have its back all up?
Because all they make are AR-15s. And while the roots of the company go way back, those roots were when it was a government-owned armory. The company has been a private business for some time now.
So don't buy into the BS. The decisions made by both companies are strictly business.
Springfield doesn't want the re-tooling costs to start making bolt-action rifles, so they're trying to squeeze Dicks into dropping their new policy.
Dick's doesn't want to be the next place that sold the gun that slaughtered the kids, so they're not gonna sell AR-15s any more unless Springlfield can force them to do it.
If Springfield can't get it done, well, maybe making a big noise about it will sell a few of their guns anyway.
And "The Federalist", that website that was linked, where the article was written? What's in it for them? More ads for guns 'n gear, of course. Gotta keep gun fancier all riled up to keep their advertisers happy in a real down year for the entire gun industry.
It's all one big conspiracy to take away your guns, isn't it?
But what if it isn't? What if it's actually just business as usual? That's the real question.
After all, conspiracies are the same in one regard. There has to be something that will line the pockets of the conspirators, or it just isn't worth the time, trouble, and the danger of forming a conspiracy.
This post is rife with FUD. The AR-15 is available in about 20 calibers capable of taking any game in N America....for starters.
Yea, so? They made a business decision that will likely cost them money. But if it makes them feel better, good for them. At the end of the day, no one even cares.
It was a business decision and anyone who doesn't want Dick's for an outlet is certainly free not to partner with them, but I am betting that there will be more manufacturers who need or want that sales outlet than don't.
So, for them, staying with Dick's for whatever portion of their product line Dick's is willing to sell will make good business sense.
Dick's is likely reacting to what their shareholders wanted to see. They weren't even selling whatever the lightweight term is for guns used in school shootings at their regular Dick's stores anymore anyway.
I think all this drama is pretty crazy.
Dick's sells so much more than just guns. They'll manage.
More than fast food news for supporters of the 2nd Amendment
Just wait and watch. More companies will cut off Dicks like SA just did
"They just quit selling the favorite kid killing gun, the AR-15."
PSSST! Pistols kill a WHOLE LOT MORE then the "evil" AR-15!
But if you only follow the LSM you wouldn't know it.
Oh, I know it, all right. I'm a shooter, and have been all my life.
But facts are facts. While pistols kill more people, the AR-15 kills more school kids than any other gun.
Naturally so. They were built to kill people, as fast and as many as possible, and they have a 50-year reputation for that purpose. As a combat weapon, they're right up there with the best of them.
But that's really all they are the best at doing. In everything else, there's a better, less lethal gun that can do a better job.
Sure, any and all guns can kill a person, but that's not the point.
The AR-15 has become the gun of choice for gun buyers who just want to feel like a heroic war veteran. Buying an AR-15 is a hell of a lot easier and safer than actually enlisting in the military, and once purchased, the buyers can play Army all they want, without any risk of being in a for-real combat zone.
We have already seen many times in the past 20 years that the mass shooters like the AR-15 the best. The shooters always pick the targets that are safest for them; kids are at the top of that list. We have seen time after time how much slaughter the AR-15 can do to innocent people.
And as it stands right now, anyone who doesn't have a criminal record can go put down the cash and walk out with an AR-15, even if he's obviously enraged, as mad as a hatter, is still too young to drive legally, or is so drunk he's seeing double.
The store can't refuse to sell a gun to any of those folks. If they have the money, they can demand the gun. Right then, with no wait. And then, they can have a school shot up to pieces before the gun shop closes its doors for the day.
A reasonable record search could change all that, without denying an AR-15 to anyone. That's what needs to happen. No one gets bent out of shape waiting for a car they ordered, or a thousand other items. Why should a rifle be any different?
I exclusively hunt with a modern sporting rifle. Dozens of deer, and 100's of hogs, many with body mass and bone structure(that plate) greater than any elk.
Let the air out of both lungs on anything and it ain't going far.
So what? All that says is you're a more dedicated hunter than most and have become proficient with a gun that's a poor choice.
Nothing new about that. There are guys who still hunt elk with muzzle-loaders and bows. They're bad choices when better is easily available.
No one's stopping you from hunting elk with a spear if you want, or a bowie knife, a crossbow, or even a slingshot and a rock if you want. They're all bad choices too.
Me? If I want to load up an elk, I don't want to risk having to chase the big rascal down over a couple of mountains after I shoot him. I want a rifle that fires a big enough bullet to drop him like a rock. Personally, my fave is a .308 shot through a bolt-action rifle. The rifle is heavier, but safer, and the bullet is big and goes fast.
Shooting is the easy part. It's the rest that follows that takes all the work. I'm good, but I'm not Hawkeye, and there's nothing more I hate than having to chase a big bull down one side of a mountain and up the side of another before I can drop him, dress him out and carry the meat home.
Maybe you aren't as particular as I am about the game I eat, but I've found all that adrenalin that shoots through an elk sure doesn't help the flavor of the meat afterwards, but that's me.
Yuk. No thanks. I'll save that teensy little bullet for woodchucks. I don't ever eat them.
Dicks has forever lost my business and I don't usually go shopping for gun stuff there anyway. They don't sell anything that I can't find elsewhere without any hassle.
If people interested in guns (maybe not even gun owners) swing by Dicks to check 'em out, then go pick up some boot laces and a water carrier. They're now more likely to go to Cabelas or another outdoor store that still carries guns.
Sometimes having stock of certain things is more about attracting foot traffic than selling them. Dicks last quarter results weren't great, they can probably use all the foot traffic they can get.
Well, they do still sell guns. Just not "modern sporting rifles" or whatever term they use for guns people like to use in mass shootings.
And, yes, I realize people use them more often for hunting and target practice, but still.
I feel like this is really blown up because Dick's wasn't even selling those guns in their regular stores for ages now.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
