Would you sell a gun b/c of their political views?

[sharkey]

Remington and many others have been based in anti states for years. Because of this, have you stopped buying products from all of them? More likely you have not, so why start now?

Are you going to stop buying from Henry, colt, beretta, Armalite, Kimber, Mossberg, Smith & Wesson, Springfield Armory as well as many more. Not much left is there?

IIRC, both Ruger and S&W took reputation and financial hits when they stood with the gun grabbers against us.

 

[Slapstick]

It does NOT appear Remington is the "longest continuing plant in the U.S." Casey-Masey Lorillard has been in continuous operation, at the same location, since 1760, a full 56 years before Remington. And there are some other companies also founded in the mid-1700's that appear to also have been in the same location since their founding.

Remington would NOT have to 'move on short notice'. But they COULD and SHOULD have stated that they would begin moving immediately, then follow through with that.

The claim that it would "degrade product quality to move" is absolutely, completely, and entirely false. This claim is based on the assumption that no one on INGO knows how production of a good actually works, or have never worked in a production environment. Again, an entirely false assumption.

So, that's all really just inaccurate rhetoric and an unjustifiable excuse for Remington's inaction.

FWIW, I mailed Remington and stated I won't buy another Remington firearm, nor any Remington ammunition, as long as NY is strictly anti-gun, and Remington remains in NY.

I encourage everyone to do the same. Flood their mailboxes.

Tell me how you really feel.

 

[SERparacord]

Ask the former S&W owners, they went with the gun ban and went bankrupt. Then you have the "I don't care crowd", they don't mind a company just wanting your money. Who needs rights.

 

[level0]

No I would not sell any of my firearms regardless of the manufacturers political views.
I may refuse to buy any new firearms made by that manufacturer in the future but I wouldn't sell what I already own.

Very similar to UAW/Auto Bailouts. I will never buy a new GM vehicle in the future.

Yes, this pretty much sums it up for me. I'm not parting with my Remingtons, but I won't be adding any in the foreseeable future. At least not any new ones, I'm open to buying a quality used weapon.

 

[JoshuaW]

Not something I already owned, how does that make a statement? I'm down a gun, and some schmuck will be raving about the awesome Remington they just bought.

Future purchases? Yup, I wont be buying a Remington made in or after 2013.

 

[churchmouse]

I would not sell due to this but I will re-consider owning anything they make in the future.

I actually prefer the older and better made pieces from them anyway.

 

[Enthusiast]

I have an old Remmington Viper and I consider it a POS by my standards.
Would I buy another? I'm a fool for low price points.

 

[BIGKAT9]

Wont sell ,might buy if product is good . Iwill probably take some heat for this but Remington got a tax break an stayed ,how many companys get all kind of tax incentives because they say we are gonig to bring 500 new jobs to the area .Then only a small amount of new jobs are created but they keep all the tax incentives.Also read where NewYork gives 25%of all state aidgiven to firearm manufactures .

 

[84VETTE]

I won't sell but that is mainly because all of my Remingtons were inherited. I wouldn't mind having one of the new stainless 1911s but I won't consider spending my money with them until all of the gun control shenanigans are old news.

 

[The Commissioner]

It amazes me how fast Remington went from hero (withdrawing support for superfudd Jim Zumbo) to zero (choosing to live under a law not of their choosing.) Despising Remington for staying in NY is the same as condemning all the law abiding New Yorkers who remain in their home state too.

 

[Wesley929]

So I take it you don't do any banking either?

Not as much as most but some.

I try not to give any money away to the banks.
I use the local credit union for direct deposit and savings.
I don't use any credit cards. I use a debit card on rare occasions where necessary.
I've paid cash in full for everything for the last 3 years. If I can't afford it I wait and save up for it.

Only debt left is student loans and the mortgage.
After that I'm Debt Free Dave Ramsey Style.

 

[CountryBoy19]

Remington would NOT have to 'move on short notice'. But they COULD and SHOULD have stated that they would begin moving immediately, then follow through with that.

I can understand that viewpoint... maybe they should have made a statement more along the lines of, "Due to the exorbitant cost to move our Ilion, NY manufacturing facility to a new state, we would have to increase prices to the consumer to weather through such an expense. We have made the decision that the price to the consumer is more important and we will not be relocating our Ilion, NY manufacturing facility. However, we will be transitioning all areas of production to other facilities in the US that can be possibly moved without negatively impacting prices or quality. We also will not be investing anymore capital in our Ilion, NY facility. It is our intent that over the next decade we will transition the majority of our operations to other states."

A statement like that would be a much better way to avoid the negative flak they are getting and still not be forced to move a huge manufacturing operation to another state.

The claim that it would "degrade product quality to move" is absolutely, completely, and entirely false. This claim is based on the assumption that no one on INGO knows how production of a good actually works, or have never worked in a production environment. Again, an entirely false assumption.

So, that's all really just inaccurate rhetoric and an unjustifiable excuse for Remington's inaction.

I work in a production environment everyday. You cannot pick up an entire operation, relocate it to another area and expect quality and production rate to be at the same level. If you think they can you're dilusional. First of all, not all employees will re-locate. As a matter of fact, it's going to depend greatly on the "relocation package" they would offer. They give a more generous package more employees will go with them, but ultimately it will cost them more money. So now you have to weigh "experienced workforce vs. cost" Of course the experienced workforce means less of an impact to quality and production rate when they get the new factory up and running. But the consumer will see higher prices because of it. Fewer employees relocating means you're basically starting at square one training new employees on the operations. Your quality, from a new employee, will NEVER be that of an experienced employee. Second, the factory itself will likely not be laid out the same nor maintain all the same machinery. The impact of this will mostly be production rate until all the bugs get worked out, but there is a risk that quality will slip as they try to meet demand working in a new facility where they still have to iron out some kinks. For example, if, due to poor layout etc, there is a production hold-up in one particular area, the supervisors will push for higher productivity in those areas. Typically more push for high-productivity yields a slip in quality. So it's another balancing act.

The fact of the matter is, anybody familiar with production operations at all should know that even small things can contribute to a slip in quality/quantity, and therefore something as large as moving an entire manufacturing operation to a different state with a new work-force, new machinery, and new facilities will most definitely cause a slip in quality/quantity.

 

[Denny347]

By now everyone knows about Remington selling out, and not leaving NY.

The question is:

Would you sell guns because of the manufacturer's political views?

I would be a hypocrite to not buy a Remington based on a political view. I've got a safe FULL of Nazi, Soviet, Communist guns. Yeah, kinda dumb.

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

Whats the problem with remington? It was my understanding New York has been anti gun for some time now, but all of a sudden they are bad for not moving their plant and excepting a multi million dollar contract? :scratches head: why werent you people crying about not purchasing Remington products years ago?

Edit:

Also, if you buy a used gun off somebody, be sure to make sure said person will not be purchasing a new gun from these companies you are hating on so much, or else you may as well be purchasing from these companies

 

[Bear2517]

If their excuse is regarding cost of moving the facility, I'm sure they could find a number of persons willing to pay a little more to make it a reality. I'm no money bags but, if a weapon manufacturer stated that they wanted to get out of the "no gun zone" to practice free enterprise of their product, I wold certainly be more inclined to pay a bit more.

Granted, I'm sure there are an abundance of logistical issues I'm not addressing (Countryboy19 touched on some) but, I can say personally that as a customer and defender of our rights, I would be happy to pay an increased cost.

I certainly would never give up any of my weapons based on the political beliefs of a company, or for that matter, anyone.

 

[PapaScout]

I'm not selling my AK because I don't support the Communist Party. I will buy the best product I can afford and put it to the best use I can.

 

[DRob]

Remington

I don't need to worry about the current Remington stance. I swore off them when they did their screw-the-customer recall on the .17 HMR 597. They offered about half your purchase price in credit toward another Remington product if you sent them your gun or Remington-branded .17 HMR ammo.
Thank God I didn't have one!

 

[lucky4034]

Please do... By the end of the year I'll be looking for a nice 870 for HD and I'd also like a nice 700 in .308 if anyone wants to give one away.

 

[EnochRoot43]

Ummm, just how popular are Chinese, Soviet, German Nazi era, Albanian, Japanese firearms here at INGO?

I think the difference is, buying surplus arms isn't contributing to the current political situation we as American gun owners are faced with.

Until MagPul completes a move, however, every magazine and part purchased from them supports the Colorado economy, and provides taxes that those opposed to us gladly spend.

Had Remington just pointed to the economic realities of moving such a large operation they might have gotten a pass, or faced a mild boycott until somebody decided that they forgave them. I believe that a lot of people are upset about the backroom cronyism that went down, though.

 

[SERparacord]

Looks like the majority of posters are in favor of more gun laws.