[2nd_Amendment_Defender]

Oh, come on! Mr. Ruger might have made a bad mistake, but this is not anywhere near as bad as the Smith & Wesson deal with the Clinton administration.

You would buy from a company who's former head had stated:

"No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun."

and

"I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20 or 30 round magazines or my folding stock."

This "simple civilian" will never buy from Ruger again until this high capacity magazine law is tossed out (good luck in that). I have never bought anything from Smith and Wesson either, but if the only two gun companies left were Ruger and Smith & Wesson; Ruger would not be my choice.

It's because of Ruger that high capacity magazines are now getting very rare. What widespread effects did the Smith and Wesson deal have on U.S. firearm owners?

Smith and Wesson was attacked by many lawyers with lawsuits versus Ruger who willfuly jumped up unto the opponents' side on to get some more money.

Ruger is far worse than Smith and Wesson. I will not purchase from Smith and Wesson either until they have fixed up the mess that they have made with former Clinton administration.

[agrandis]

Ruger apparently is an elitist. But he was also a good firearms engineer, and I'll use his guns, if need be, to defend myself, my family, and my community, against his elitism. I admit, my next gun may not be a Ruger, though. Ordinarily, that would be the first brand I'd look at.