SuRrEaLNJ 294 Posted April 30, 2017 http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/04/john-boch/springfield-armory-rock-river-arms-trade-opposition-to-illinois-ffl-licensing-scheme-for-carve-out/ 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. To be clear, the original version of SB-1657 did not exempt manufacturers from the licensing regulations. At the time, Jay Keller and IFMA opposed it. At a March Senate hearing, however, Keller stated that IFMA would drop its opposition to SB-1657 and go neutral if legislators gave the state’s gun makers a pass. State Senator Don Harmon delivered on his end of the deal with an amendment exempting big box stores and manufacturers from this scheme. With that amendment, IFMA dropped its opposition to the bill, going neutral on the witness slip. That serves as a very public position on a bill in Illinois politics. The bill then sailed through Committee. From there it went to the Senate floor, where it passed by the aforementioned one vote margin (note: at least 30 “yes” votes are required for a bill to pass in the Illinois Senate). I asked both Springfield and Rock River for comment on the then-pending deal with anti-gun legislators. Neither had any comment. Less than an hour ago, Springfield CEO Dennis Reese issued a statement about the IFRA capitulation. We will be publishing that statement in a few minutes in a following post (you can read it here). Springfield Armory and Rock River’s decision to cut a deal on licensing in Illinois — enabling the antis’ desire to control FFL dealer sales — is a dangerous gamble. As we pointed out in our Question of the Day, Smith & Wesson and Ruger paid an enormous price when they sacrificed gun rights on the altar of government “cooperation.” Will there be a similar consumer backlash here, or will The People of the Gun view this as a minor accommodation? We’ll see how this plays in the court of public opinion. Im not sure what else needs to be said, their obviously looking out for themselves as companies and no one else as a huge fan of all things xd im pretty bent out of shape to come home and read this today Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray Ray 3,566 Posted April 30, 2017 This is a sad day for us, now I'm glad I didn't buy another product from Springfield Armory. Adios Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuRrEaLNJ 294 Posted April 30, 2017 im guessing you didnt get your 3.8 before this hit then? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tattooo 220 Posted April 30, 2017 Unbelievable.......What do they stand to gain by funding anti 2A initiatives ?Sent from my SM-G925P using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fatty 241 Posted April 30, 2017 screw both companies Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted April 30, 2017 Lost my business Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indianajonze 379 Posted April 30, 2017 this can't be good for them from a pr perspective. wonder what they were thinking... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EX Carnival man 223 Posted April 30, 2017 You have to wonder whats going on at Springfield Armory. They sold out their customers to the anti gunners who don't buy anything from them. Are they crazy? I was looking at another FDE SC mod 2 in .40. Not going to happen now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob0115 1,105 Posted May 1, 2017 Scratch those two manufacturers off the list. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gleninjersey 2,141 Posted May 1, 2017 Are they complete idiots? Have they learned nothing from companies that made similiar mistakes (Ruger backing reduced capacity mags in 80s)? Their sales are going to plummet as a result of this. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted May 1, 2017 Springfield ILLINOIS sales up 10% national sales down 90% choices have consequences. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fatty 241 Posted May 1, 2017 where did you find those numbers? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray Ray 3,566 Posted May 1, 2017 On 4/29/2017 at 9:25 PM, SuRrEaLNJ said: im guessing you didnt get your 3.8 before this hit then? Nope, and I'm so glad I shot yours. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted May 1, 2017 9 hours ago, fatty said: where did you find those numbers? It's a prediction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 1, 2017 Unfortunately most gun owners won't care I think? I think they were doing the right thing for the owners of the companies and what would help them in the short term. in the long term, they are just hurting the 2A community. In either case, I would not be surprised if they left the state shortly. 9 firearms transfers per year? Damn, that is a slow month for some members here. lol. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob0115 1,105 Posted May 1, 2017 Yeah I'd have been done mid February if that were the cap. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ricky_Bobby 130 Posted May 1, 2017 On 4/29/2017 at 9:24 PM, Ray Ray said: This is a sad day for us, now I'm glad I didn't buy another product from Springfield Armory. Adios I KNEW there was a reason I hadn't bought a Springfield Armory product and this just solidifies it - and screw their stupid Saint rifle too - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MidwestPX 172 Posted May 1, 2017 Didn't Ruger do the same back in the 90s? I'm sure those of us who are more informed will take this into account when making purchasing decisions however the average gun owner walking into a gun store probably won't know or care. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hairless_Ape 76 Posted May 1, 2017 Looks like I'll be getting a shield instead of an xds, and a P220 instead of a loaded 1911. Thanks for making it an easy decision Springfield, ya sons of bitches. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuRrEaLNJ 294 Posted May 1, 2017 I heard tje head of rra was caught offguard and expreaed thay he did not suport this decision. I cant find the source atm (im bored at a fuberal, im handicaped) so dont make me swear tho Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 1, 2017 3 hours ago, SuRrEaLNJ said: I heard tje head of rra was caught offguard and expreaed thay he did not suport this decision. I cant find the source atm (im bored at a fuberal, im handicaped) so dont make me swear tho Here is the thing though, put yourself in the CEO's position. Would anyone shut down their business in order to stand up for it? While Springfield and RRA are the biggest there, it effects all gun manufacturers. How many thousands of jobs would be lost while fighting the anti's? Look, avoid Springfield or RRA for poor products or what not, but for doing what they think is best for their employees? Tough call. Looking being just the IL gun manufacturers, how many thousands of others would be out of work who support Springfield products down the pipeline. The gun marketing people, the distribution chains, etc. Think of the manufacturers that support the shooting sports. While I handled the sponsor stuff for USPSA, Springfield was the FIRST offer guns for all the matches, without even sending shooters or demanding anything. Springfield also sent the most swag out of anyone and that helped ensure that everyone got something. They also take care of folks at Shot Show and matches... want 40% off all hosters and accessories they offer? yep, gave out discounts. Springfield was, at the time I worked with them, the most generous manufacturer when it came time to support the shooting sports, even though their products were not all that prevalent or popular. And let's be honest, Smith & Wesson and Ruger also sold out the gun communities. Kimber, and all the other NY manufacturers too? Be pissed off at the Anti Gun crowd that forced gun manufacturers into that position in the first place. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted May 1, 2017 10 minutes ago, Maksim said: Here is the thing though, put yourself in the CEO's position. Would anyone shut down their business in order to stand up for it? While Springfield and RRA are the biggest there, it effects all gun manufacturers. How many thousands of jobs would be lost while fighting the anti's? Look, avoid Springfield or RRA for poor products or what not, but for doing what they think is best for their employees? Tough call. Looking being just the IL gun manufacturers, how many thousands of others would be out of work who support Springfield products down the pipeline. The gun marketing people, the distribution chains, etc. Think of the manufacturers that support the shooting sports. While I handled the sponsor stuff for USPSA, Springfield was the FIRST offer guns for all the matches, without even sending shooters or demanding anything. Springfield also sent the most swag out of anyone and that helped ensure that everyone got something. They also take care of folks at Shot Show and matches... want 40% off all hosters and accessories they offer? yep, gave out discounts. Springfield was, at the time I worked with them, the most generous manufacturer when it came time to support the shooting sports, even though their products were not all that prevalent or popular. And let's be honest, Smith & Wesson and Ruger also sold out the gun communities. Kimber, and all the other NY manufacturers too? Be pissed off at the Anti Gun crowd that forced gun manufacturers into that position in the first place. How would the wheels grind to a hault? It's the Illinois market, not the national or international market these restrictions where voted on. Oh and big box stores get the pass also? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuRrEaLNJ 294 Posted May 1, 2017 Maks, all valid points, and trust me i am more pissed at the antis Hopefully this statement is scincere and not damage controll after the fact http://blog.springfield-armory.com/springfield-armory-statement-regarding-gun-dealer-licensing-act-sb1657 Im stil figuring the mobile forum out heres the quote: Springfield Armory has always fought hand-in-hand with the NRA, NSSF, ISRA and many others for legislation that fiercely protects the Second Amendment, individual rights and the industry as a whole. Our fight continues today as some members of the Illinois legislature are pushing to overregulate the industry through Gun Dealer Licensing Act (SB1657). “At the time of my initial statement to the media, I was ill-informed of the ramifications of this bill and its detrimental effects to the Second Amendment, which I have personally fought to protect my entire life. I can tell you now, we at Springfield Armory are unequivocally 100 percent against this bill and will continue to work with the NRA and others to ensure that it is defeated,” said Dennis Reese, Chief Executive Officer, Springfield Armory. Springfield Armory, like Rock River Arms, was not aware of the actions taken by our trade association, IFMA, until after the fact. We take this situation very seriously and are looking into how this very unfortunate lapse in communication occurred. Springfield Armory has fought and defeated legislation like this in Illinois for the past 15 years. We are wholeheartedly against this bill and will fight to see it defeated as the unnecessary and harmful overreach that it is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gleninjersey 2,141 Posted May 2, 2017 This entire thing is starting to stink. Either: A) Springfield Armory knew what they were doing and were shocked (I don't know who, but possible?) by the backlash from the community and did a 180 with their statement today. Or B) They set this entire thing up to get some free publicity. "It was all a misunderstanding caused my miscommunication with our trade association / lobbyist. We are 100% committed to fighting this..." Yeah, right. They are probably the biggest (perhaps sole) contributor to the trade association / lobbyist. How could they not know what they were doing? Either way, it stinks like 9 day old fish left out in the summer sun. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 2, 2017 1 minute ago, gleninjersey said: This entire thing is starting to stink. Either: A) Springfield Armory knew what they were doing and were shocked (I don't know who, but possible?) by the backlash from the community and did a 180 with their statement today. Or B) They set this entire thing up to get some free publicity. "It was all a misunderstanding caused my miscommunication with our trade association / lobbyist. We are 100% committed to fighting this..." Yeah, right. They are probably the biggest (perhaps sole) contributor to the trade association / lobbyist. How could they not know what they were doing? Either way, it stinks like 9 day old fish left out in the summer sun. I doubt it is a publicity stunt... but A is likely. More than that, I think their statement is true. They are part of the association, and likely hundreds of others. They cannot control what the association spokesperson says. It would be like saying ANJRPC speaks for EVERY manufacturer and FFL in the state. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 2, 2017 1 hour ago, Zeke said: How would the wheels grind to a hault? It's the Illinois market, not the national or international market these restrictions where voted on. Oh and big box stores get the pass also? My understanding, at least the very very brief look, it would prevent them from manufacturing unless they go through that licensing too, so not just sales in IL. Will try to reach out to the folks who were at Springfield to find out, if they are still there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray Ray 3,566 Posted May 2, 2017 https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2017/05/01/springfield-armory-rock-river-arms-oppose-gun-dealer-licensing-act/ Let's see how this plays out Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sota 1,191 Posted May 2, 2017 This is going to take a bit to flush out fully. As i've said in other places, hold off on the pitch forks and torches for a minute, but I don't see any reason not to make sure they're sharp and fueled up though. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
raz-0 1,259 Posted May 2, 2017 I've been reading up on it, there's a fair bit being left out by the crowd who wants the pitchforks and torches put away. 1) The IFMA isn't an industry group. It's SA and RRA. They founded it, and three out of four board members are SA or RRA c-level suits or relations of them. The fourth is their primary lobbyist. 2) The bill didn't have enough votes to pass until the IFMA did their lobbying. This wasn't dodging inevitability, this was enabling shit legislation for a marginal competitive advantage. Or something else that has yet to be disclosed. 3) We live in the age of cell phones. There's zero excuse for not knowing what is going on and when. Even if your lobbyist had a "good idea" it should have been known days and days ago. SA's CEO's initial reaction was delayed and hostile. This press release is bullshit. 4) "While we do believe that IFMA acted in what it felt was the best interests of its members" IFMA has yet to produce any provable member of it's organization other than RRA and SA. You can wait and see all you like, but it's not shaping up well for them. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fatty 241 Posted May 2, 2017 Yup. That bill wouldn't have passed thru if IFMA didn't withdraw their opposition in exchange for their carved out deal. SA's CEO Dennis Reese says it isn't "too late" to fully oppose and reverse their actions, but whatever, I saw F them. There's no way in hell they weren't aware of pending legislation and what their lobbying group was about to do. SA and RRA are their only major contributors. Everything that used to make Springfield great is quickly being chipped away. Their custom shop is completely gutted (for those you who enjoy 1911's) and worthless now, and now this bullshit. They're obviously a huge company out for profits and to protect their interests, but they've just shot themselves in the foot. Couldn't the IFMA just have maintained their original opposition from the beginning and avoided the whole thing? From what I've read it didn't look like it was going to pass until they made their move. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites