Springfield’s Custom Shop 1911’s | NRA 17

Far too often custom 1911 buyers overlook the wonderful resource that is the Springfield Armory Custom Shop. While on the NRA Annual Meeting show floor, Patrick got a chance to handle some of these legendary pistols that many dream of. The Professional 1911 is widely regarded as one of the finest duty 1911s on the planet, and after handling one it is easy to see why.

Thanks to our sponsors:

 

Proxibid – Thousands Of Guns At Auction On Proxibid Now

 Ventura Munitions – Retailer of quality ammunition.

Hoppe’s No. 9 – A worldwide favorite since 1903

 

Please subscribe!!! Click here.

Please subscribe!!! Click here.

 

 

Transcript ….

 

[coming soon]



Patrick R

Patrick is a Senior Writer for The Firearm Blog and TFBTV Host. He is a verified gun nerd. With a lifelong passion for shooting, he has a love for all types of firearms, especially overly modified plastic handguns, precision rifles, and AR based things. You can follow Patrick on Instagram @tfbpatrick, Facebook, or contact him by email at TFBpatrick@gmail.com.

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


Advertisement

  • Cory Carlson

    Not touching a springfield after this weekend

    • Bean Guy

      I’m out of the loop. What happened?

      • Ed

        Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms screwed over IL gun owners and FFL’s by making a deal to essentially drop their opposition to bad legislation in exchange for a carve out that exempted them and any retailer that doesn’t derive more than 20% of their revenue from firearms.

        • BravoSeven

          What were Springfield’s choices/options in the matter? Shouldn’t we blame Illinois? Before you bash my head in, I’m still not exactly sure what the deal is. Doesn’t the bill still have to pass the House and be signed by the Governor? We all know what the real problem is in Illinois.

          • neckbone

            No because they were against it until they got a carve out for manufacturers. You don’t win against gun grabbers by making side deals. You would think companies would learn that gun guys have memories like an elephant.

          • BravoSeven

            If Springfield doesn’t have the “carve out” and the law passes, what happens to Springfield’s business?

          • neckbone

            Not sure. Probably nothing. But they were against it until they got a carve out. But as an industry leader, and one that stays in an anti gun state, it doesn’t help anyone. They have far more clout than the little guys. We have to stick together when these asinine laws are proposed.

          • BravoSeven

            I’m a Springfield owner, my next pistol purchase will most likely be a SA 1911 TRP and I’ll boycott Illinois. Not that I ever had any intention of going to Illinois anyway.

          • mmyers08

            Um, what does THAT accomplish? You’ll support the company that was happy to let the people of IL get screwed over, but you’ll boycott the state?

          • USMC03Vet

            They get put out of business. Then they get all the internet points for awesome “supporters” of the 2nd amendment obviously. I mean it’s such a full proof easy business strategy!

          • ostiariusalpha

            Yeah, just like Magpul got put out of business! Oh, wait…

            2nd Amendment supporters do just fine when they refuse to play ball with restriction-minded legislation.

          • No they don’t. They can move. Besides, what you fail to realize is that the next time the anti-gunners want more, and more and more and they will be out of business anyway, because that’s what they want.

            And pissing off your customers sounds like a “full proof easy business strategy!”

          • thmsmgnm

            They could move to another state with lower taxes and no bs gun control laws.

          • mmyers08

            They have balls and move to a gun-friendly state. You know, like Magpul and Kahr did…

          • RSG

            Springfield could’ve prevented passage. It passed the senate by 1 vote, only because of their position.

          • it’s just Boris

            Some gun guys may have elephantine memories, but most gun buyers don’t. Last time I checked, Ruger, Smith & Wesson, and Cheaper than Dirt are all still in business.

          • neckbone

            The thing is though when all else is equal most guys will choose the company that stands up. It’s obviously a choice. But I prefer to support companies that don’t sell out.

          • But S&W and Ruger have completely different owners. They are totally different companies. S&W nearly went bankrupt.

          • Edeco

            Change of ownership, pfft. Why does it have to end there? Presumably the previous owners got some equity out, whoever gave them that could have been boycotted. Our wrath could have followed the companies through bankruptcy and ownership/management changes. And it would have been constructive for it to do so, would have sent a stronger message. The next company to goof would lose equity way harder because would-be buyers would know it’s cursed. Faithful companies would gain more abdecated market share.

            People are so in love with futility. By letting Smith and Ruger off the hook, and accepting new ownership as pennance we gave the others an estimate of what it costs to anger us. Someday they may find that cost to be lower than that of not dealing with the antis.

            Not that I regret letting them off the hook, or blame anyone. I may want a GP100, own a Smith and pointed out their 380 to a newb who likes small guns and manual safeties. They had guns on shelves after the AWB and during the 2008 and 2012 panics so te-absolvo. But we can do better this time, show even more resolve!

          • neckbone

            Only because people like you Boris, who bought $100 pmags from cheap dirt. Most people don’t brag about being stupid.

          • milesfortis

            Ruger is no longer run by Bill (of course, he’s daid)

            The S&W of the time of the deal with the Clinton administration was bought, at a fire sale price, by new corporate owners basically because the boycott nearly drove them into receivership.

            CTD has to seriously retrench and closed their secondary storefront operation due to lack of sales.

          • 8166PC1

            What exactly is a “gun grabber”? Is it somebody that seeks to eradicate gun ownership in the USA?

          • QuadGMoto

            Yes. The term comes from the fact that to actually end gun ownership, not only must they be made illegal, but they would also have to be taken by force, i.e. grabbed.

          • 8166PC1

            That’s some Alex Jones conspiracy theory stuff right there.

          • QuadGMoto

            What part? That there are people who want to entirely outlaw private gun ownership? Or that there are those who would refuse to “turn them all in” (to quote Senator Diane Feinstein)?

          • 8166PC1

            Can you find me an actual piece of legislation of hers that would have confiscated assault weapons?

          • QuadGMoto

            I gave you a simple answer to a simple question. It was not an invitation to engage in debate or trolling.

          • 8166PC1

            And that’s like only one Politician out of thousands.

          • ostiariusalpha

            With thousands of like-minded legislators supporting her, and many hundreds that don’t think she goes far enough.

          • 8166PC1

            She never said she wanted to ban all guns. and nobody else has said that unless you cherry pick examples.

          • QuadGMoto

            He’s trolling for a political fight, which is outside the terms of TFB.

          • ostiariusalpha

            It’s fine, he’s not expressing any desire to puke in any one’s face, and there’s no problem with having a difference of opinion.

          • Edeco

            Aw, I think USMC03 was just a little loaded or something and, you know, wanting to barf on people 😀

          • No its not. Its happened over and over again throughout history, including this country.

          • QuadGMoto

            Please don’t feed the troll.

          • 8166PC1

            Not even Bill Clinton said he wanted to completely end gun ownership.

          • ostiariusalpha

            The British firearms restrictionists said the same, now you can go to gaol if your airgun is too powerful.

          • 8166PC1

            You can own a gun in England despite that it has strict gun laws.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Yes, you can technically own a gun, but you darn well better not try to defend yourself with it.

          • 8166PC1

            The UK isn’t really the type of country where would you find yourself needing a gun to defend yourself, it’s not the USA. I felt safer walking the streets of Belfast than many other American cities.

          • Except crime is worse over there, and besides crime happens anywhere, so yes it is a place where you would need a gun to defend yourself.

            You may have “felt” safer, but you weren’t. Of course, many American cities have many similar gun laws as the UK.

          • 8166PC1

            That’s false. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/jun/24/blog-posting/social-media-post-says-uk-has-far-higher-violent-c/ There’s no American city that has a total ban on all semi automatics like the UK does so that’s also a myth that American cities have gun control laws to the extent the UK does.

          • Not any more, thanks to our courts recognizing our civil rights. Plenty such as DC and Chicago did for years though. Those two competed for the highest murder rates yearly.

          • 8166PC1

            The thing the USA doesn’t have universal gun laws. A person can obtain a gun from a state with less strict gun laws then come back to the state with stricter gun laws and commit their crime there.

          • Except the crime is worse in places with strict gun laws. And the places they supposed get the guns from (more on that in a second) have less crime.

            Besides, 95% of guns used in crime came from illegal sources. So it’s really irrelevant to care about the 5% that comes from less strict places.

          • 8166PC1

            According to what source is crime worst in places with stricter gun laws? Every single gun used in a crime can be traced back to a legal source in the USA, an FFL dealer.

          • Don Ward

            Oh really? I guess that means that the firearm used a week ago to shoot three Seattle police officers during a 7-11 robbery gone wrong can be traced back to a FFL dealer. Oh wait. It can’t be traced because the gun was purchased illegally by the shooter’s 17-year old sister on the black market. Not only are you a troll. But you are woefully ignorant of even basic firearms laws. Which is why your only purpose here on the forums is as entertainment and a warning that someone with your IQ can still remember to inhale and exhale air. http://ww3.hdnux.com/photos/60/56/13/12772054/3/920×920.jpg

          • 8166PC1

            If the gun has ever had a serial number on it then it originally came from a legal source. The gun was made legally therefore it was once a legal gun.

          • Don Ward

            “Every single gun used in a crime can be traced back to a legal source in the USA, an FFL dealer.”
            Those are your words. Not mine. YOUR words.
            The issue is that gun is older than the 1968 Gun Control Act which created the system of mandating dealers get FFLs.
            You sir, are not only a liar. But a woefully ignorant liar who doesn’t even understand basic firearms laws.
            Now let’s start the game of moving the goalposts where you pretend like you didn’t actually mean what you wrote because you aren’t man enough to admit you’re wrong on the Internet.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Oh-ho, Don took the gloves off!

          • 8166PC1

            What exactly did I say that demonstrated that I don’t know basic gun laws? I don’t have to admit I’m wrong because I’m not.

          • Don Ward

            Raeding IZ HARd!

            “”Every single gun used in a crime can be traced back to a legal source in the USA, an FFL dealer.”

            Back-pedal harder.

          • 8166PC1

            All the guns used in mass shootings were mostly from FFL dealers.

          • ostiariusalpha

            And how about that shipment of Ruger guns that were stolen off a train in Chicago. I’m sure the thieves passed those through an FFL afterward so everything was nice and tidy.

          • 8166PC1

            If you can trace the serial number then it could be established whether or not it came from an FFL.

          • According to the FBI.

            And no, it cannot be traced back. Some are stolen from people, from manufacture, or illegally imported. Most are 20 years old.

            Stopping gun sales would do nothing to stop illegal gun possession.

          • 8166PC1

            It was actually found to be a myth that crime went up in Australia after the gun ban http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

          • ostiariusalpha

            Crime was going down in Australia well before the gun ban.

          • 8166PC1

            While that might be true they basically eliminated mass shootings because of the gun ban. They only had maybe perhaps 1 since the ban.

          • ostiariusalpha

            That would be 3:
            Monash University Shooting – Oct. 21, 2002;
            Hectorville Siege – Apr. 29, 2011;
            Sydney Siege – Dec. 15-16, 2014.
            And this is ignoring that the 1996 ban does nothing about arson mass killings, which is how you can really kill large numbers of people.

          • 8166PC1

            Which is down from what they had before the gun ban.

          • 8166PC1

            While you can’t eliminate all mass shootings, you can reduce them with good gun laws. There have been far more mass shootings in the USA than in Australia.

          • No you can’t. Europe has had worse and more mass shootings than the US despite tighter gun laws.

            The way to stop mass shootings is to end gun free zones. Almost all mass shooting occur in GFZs.

          • 8166PC1

            Proof that Europe has had more mass shootings than the USA?

          • 8166PC1

            Once again you’re wrong from wikipedia “More mass shootings occur in the United States than in other countries. Numbers listed by various sources differ as they use different definitions of what constitutes a “mass shooting”. Despite this it has been estimated in one study that 31% of public mass shootings occur in the U.S, although it has only 5% of the world’s population. CNN cites a study by criminologist A Lankford that finds that “there are more public mass shootings in the United States than in any other country in the world” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting#United_States

          • Regardless of which country has “more”, my point was they are worse in Europe.

            Plus, mass shootings are a rarity and aren’t actually a good proxy for this debate. They only take less than 1% of all deaths.

            Also, mass shootings only occur in gun free zones. Want to stop mass shootings? End gun free zones.

          • 8166PC1

            Even if they do target these so called “gun free zones” guns are more likely to be used in homicide than self defense according to many studies. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use-2/

          • That study is wrong. For starters, its from a anti-gun center, so its immediately suspect.

            Second, they use telephone surveys for their study. Gun owners are unlikely to report gun use to a random person on the phone, and even more so when used to stop a crime in progress.

            The data used otherwise is clear- its used millions of times for good than for bad.

          • 8166PC1

            What makes them anti-gun?

          • The fact that they believe in gun control.

          • 8166PC1

            The study didn’t say whether or not gun control was a good idea, it was simply stating facts about guns.

          • First, its clear the implication was to tear down a major talking point by pro-gun activists. The wording and the methodology was all clearly set up to get the answer they wanted. Second, the School of Public Health itself has been funded by major anti-gun organizations such as the Joyce Foundation, as well the center being run by known anti-gun supporters.

            And they got the facts wrong anyway.

          • 8166PC1

            Where does it say they are funded by the Joyce Foundation?

          • Literally on their firearms research page:

            https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/

          • 8166PC1

            Proof that mass shootings are worse Europe?

          • Just look at Norway and Paris shootings.

            We’ve never had that here.

          • 8166PC1

            All together though the USA has a higher body count for mass shootings as a whole.

          • Even if true, its really irrelevant. More people live than die because of guns, even including mass shooting deaths.

          • 8166PC1

            Why are there more homicides committed with guns than justified homicides if guns are used to save people?

          • A common misconception! Because not every use of a firearm leads to death. In many cases, the criminal runs off after seeing a gun. In other cases where they are shot, they do not die, but get medical help by the very people they were trying to hurt.

          • 8166PC1

            What proof do you have to back up that statement?

          • 8166PC1

            Even after many of the firearm victimization reports were excluded, the data show that more survey respondents report having been threatened or intimidated with a gun than having used a gun for self-protection. Most judges rated the reported self-defense gun uses as probably illegal in most cases, even assuming that the respondent had a permit to own and carry the gun and that the respondent had described the event honestly.

            Guns are used to threaten and intimidate more often than they are used in self-defense. Most self-reported self-defense gun uses may be illegal and against the interests of society. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1071427/

          • Again they used a telephone survey. The data is wrong. Guns are more often used in self defense than to threaten and intimidate. Also, the fact that they say that “self reported self defense gun uses may be illegal and against the interests of society” show their anti-gun lean.

          • Julian C

            Patrick WHY argue with an obvious antigun troll who cites facts from leftist sources? Throwing pearls before swine, but if you choose to do so, go for it.

          • Actually the myth is crime when down after the gun ban. The government played with the reported crime, and the actual numbers showed it went up. That snopes article is wrong.

          • 8166PC1

            Proof?

          • First its true. Please don’t cite politifact- they are biased against guns. Look up the numbers for yourself, and take into account the differences in how the governments report crime, especially how the UK underreports a lot of crime.

            Also, Did you actually read what I wrote? There is no longer any city that does, because our courts have protected our civil rights and made them lift the bans. But that’s not the only law to compare, so its a myth that UK cities don’t have gun control laws to the extent the UK does.

            Also, in 20 years we added 150 million guns, and our crime went down. So yes, guns save lives.

          • ostiariusalpha

            I wouldn’t get too carried away about underreported crime having a major skewing affect on the statistics; suffice it to say that even politifact admits that the crime rate is just as bad in the UK, and worse for certain types of crime. Lack of defensive firearms have done their citizens no favors at all.

          • PersonCommenting

            So when people bring up UK and crime I never have a good answer for this. UK has around 600 or so murders a year. Chicago alone had 717 gun murder, not counting those murder through other means. UK’s population is 64 million ish if I remember correctly and the state of Illinois is around 12 Million. Im sure there are other cities and states with lower populations and higher murder rates than the entire country. I just dont know how to argue UK has the same crime when their murder rate is significantly lower.

          • 8166PC1

            If guns save lives then why does the USA have the highest amount of gun deaths in the developed world? According to whom is politfact bias against guns? Since you didn’t bother to read the article what it basically said was that you can’t compare the UK to the USA because the UK has a different definition of violent crime than the USA does.

          • Edeco

            We’d be worse without ’em.

          • Because gun deaths are a poor metric to measure crime.

            First, we’ve added 150 million guns, and gun deaths have remained flat.

            Second, why does it matter if a person dies via gun or knife or bat or any other measure? It doesn’t- you need to look at overall crime.

            Third, crime has dropped as we’ve added 150 million guns. So less people are being injured and dying because they can defend themselves from criminals.

            As for the article, I did read the article, and I reject that statement. You can make some comparisons, and its clear that the US is safer than the UK.

          • RSG

            Up until Heller and McDonald, yes there was.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Well, lucky you! Thanks to your not being a Roma, you didn’t have to worry about having your property burned or looted. And thanks to the gun laws, the arsonists and looters didn’t have to worry about the Roma shooting them.

          • 8166PC1

            The USA is probably behind Europe in terms of human development about 20 to 30 years.

          • Ranger Rick

            Like the Serbs or Albanians perhaps?

          • 8166PC1

            Most of Western Europe at least

          • No one

            Hahahaha.

            Whatever you say to feel better about yourself champ.

          • Paul Rain

            I kind of fail to see where you’re coming from.

            The only people who have to worry about Roma shooting them, are victims of Roma crime like Tony Martin, who went to prison for 3 good years of his life and lost his farm for defending himself against feral Gypsies.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Well, he shouldn’t have had a gun.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Travellers have little to no genetic link to the Roma people. Harassing Roma for Traveller crimes is akin to assaulting Sikhs for terrorist acts by muslims.

          • iksnilol

            Gypsies are generally “Roma”.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Except when they’re not. Irish Travellers, such as the ones that tried robbing Tony Martin, are almost 100% genetically Irish and traditionally spoke a Irish crypto-dialect called Gammon. You would be hard pressed to find a single one that has so much as a drop of Roma blood, a people descendant from the Indian subcontinent. But, they both had an itinerant lifestyle with decorated wagons, so ignorant morons conflated the two and called them both “gypsies.”

          • iksnilol

            Ey, mate, those are “pikeys”. Get your racism straight.

          • ostiariusalpha

            My racism is just fine, sirrah! It isn’t just Travellers that get called pikeys, many a swarthy foreign-born vagabond has received the title as well. Basically, any non-English unsettled person you might suspect of criminal tendencies is a pikey.

          • iksnilol

            Yes, that’s what the vulgar commoners perpetuate.

            But there’s a system, a messed up system albeit still a system.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Pikey literally refers to someone that lives on the pike, i.e. the highway.

          • iksnilol

            Yeah, thus Irish itinirenants can be called pikeys. See, Romas are already itinirenant and you could do the mistake of calling them pikeys because they are pikeys. But the gypsy identifier for Roma people takes precedence over the more generic pikey.

            I’ve studied my terminology, gatekeeper.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Actually, Roma were referred to as pikeys just as often as Travellers were referred to as gypsies. The difference between them wasn’t relevant to those that wanted them both run off.

          • iksnilol

            That’s horrible, WORDS HAVE A MEANING FOR A REASON! The assault on language will never end 🙁

            To be fair, I can see why’d they want them run off.

          • neckbone

            People who support your group called moms demand action. You know that sounds like a good porno flick. I noticed your group only had 30 protestors at the NRA convention. So you had to come online and troll. It’s painfully obvious you have no clue what you are even talking about. I’m embarrassed for you.

          • PersonCommenting

            are those two companies in Illinois?

          • milesfortis

            Yes.

          • USMC03Vet

            They are apparently just supposed to be forced out of business to appease neckbeards online that are the ultimate moral f@gs of authority when it comes to the 2nd amendment. These people are no friends to the 2nd amendment. They are those liberal 2nd amendment supporters. My way or the highway.

          • They only way they would be forced out of business is if they give him and compromise. Because the customers will stop buying and the anti-gunners will eventually force them out of business anyway.

            The solution is no compromise. Anything else, like you, is no friend of the 2nd amendment.

          • David L. Willis

            it was the willingness to screw over everybody to better their own profits. Completely classless act. That would be like blaming the bar for you choosing to get drunk and crashing. Yeah, the state is wrong, but there’s a very fitting adage that fits this “evil prevails when good men stand by and do nothing”.

        • Bean Guy

          I wanted a SA Operator or an M1A for a long time. I looked into what they did based off of your post and it’s safe to say:

          Springfield Armory, Rock River Arms.

        • RSG

          That’s only a small part of the treachery. In the bill, there’s a stipulation that Illinois citizens can only make 9 firearm transfers per year. That includes buying and selling. Bloomberg will takenthis victory to every state he can, with the pitch, “this is what reasonable gun control looks like. Even Springfield and RRA didn’t oppose it”.

    • USMC03Vet

      Unlike Hitler, Springfield Armory did nothing wrong. These people trying to make Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms as the enemy are the real problem. They are literally blaming people that didn’t create the legislation or vote for the politicians that voted for it.

      You disgust me.

      • Except they HELPED get it passed. They gave cover for politicians to vote for it. If they did not give it, it would have died. So how is helping anti-gun legislation “doing nothing wrong”, and those opposed to such legislation” the real problem”?

        You have it backwards buddy.

        • Marcus D.

          It has only passed one house, it has another to go, and a governor to sign it.

          • abecido

            With Springfield and RRA cheering every step of the way, apparently.

          • RSG

            SA and RRA have already exposed themselves in showing us that certain infringements are A OK with them. To me, NOT ONE MORE INCH.

      • keazzy

        You are misunderstanding how our government works. Lobbying is an essential part of legislation. Springfield and RRA could have hired the NRA’s lobbyist and not fallen flat. The lines are being drawn and we are approaching another war. This one with ballots.

      • abecido

        Traitors disgust me. Whoever gives aid to the enemy is a traitor.

      • mmyers08

        They are one of the largest supporters of IFMA. IFMA was not going to support the legislation UNTIL an exemption was given to manufacturers and big box stores in general, and SA in particular.

        So they’re OK with mom and pop stores being saddled with a licensing fee(which SA is much more easily able to pay) and with gun owners being limited to 9 transfers a year, as long as they don’t have to pay.

        Yeah they did do something wrong. They screwed over their customers, both the wholesale and retail variety.

        • RSG

          The only supporters of IFMA. Literally the only 2 companies.

    • Bmiller

      I am with you. I don’t know how you sell out the 2nd like that.

      • Ranger Rick

        Actually it’s fairly simple if you only see as far as your own nose

  • D

    Springfield Armory is dead to me.

    • USMC03Vet

      Self immolate. Make sure to facebook it so I can laugh.

      • We will laugh at you for defending anti-gun legislation.

        There are plenty of companies who are hard core supporters that make 1911’s and AR-15s. So punishing those who are not is actually very helpful and not “self immolating”

        • abecido

          There are also a few other companies making M14-type rifles.

  • RSG

    This is really embarrassing for TFB with their support for Springfield after what they’ve done to the Second Amendment.

    • BR8

      Every scene Alex left TFBTV the content has been very low quality and not worth watching. This is just another nail in the coffin for TFBTV

    • Edeco

      I don’t mind them covering it. Ultimately there’s something to point the camera at so journalize that stuff. As long as they don’t make excuses or otherwise try to ride in in a white horse.

    • USMC03Vet

      Embarrassing is how many supposedly 2nd amendment supporters are willing to throw actual companies that do far more than any of them under the bus for some of the most asinine reasons. Because a business doesn’t want to go out of business and gets an exception to stay in business they are now worse than the politicians and especially the voters that created the situation?

      If I could puke through the internet I’d do it right in your face.

      You might as well vote for Elizabeth Warren in 2020 because you’re a hardcore anti second amendment turd floating in the wrong bowl.

      • RSG

        Do you know what an aberration is? Because that’s what you are. Now, I could not care any less what others think, but you should visit the truth about guns website. You’ll see you are the only one out of hundreds, maybe thousands of comments by now, who disagree. Or perhaps you aren’t aware of what they’ve done. They supported a limit transfer of 9 firearms per year for civilians. They supported a bureacratic nightmare for FFL’s that they are exempt from. Just like cheaper than dirt exercised their capitalistic right to gouge customers during the recent panic, folks were entitled to boycott them into bankruptcy. That’s precisely where Springfield and RRA belong. We will vote with our dollars. You have a problem with that, or are you a fascist, like the Liberal Terrorists™? And FYI- I’m probably the most hardcore, militant 2A advocate you’ve run into in a long time. I’m not just willing to fight and die for these rights. I’m willing to kill for them, too.

        • USMC03Vet

          I’ve been to that digusting pile of crap before. They promote stolen valor phonies like John Gudick and absolute turd factories like Nick Leghorn which have a serious attitude towards war veterans. TTAG can eat a bag and their reader base are tactical nerds living hilarious fantasies online.

      • What is embarrassing is how you are defending them. Nobody would go out of business either way, not yet. But by giving in to the anti-gunners, they will continue to push for their end goal- no guns for civilians. So they will go out of business then. So the best policy to stay in business is to oppose bad legislation, not help it. Because that’s what they did- HELP pass it. What they did is like supporting Warren for president because she said SA and RRA would be affected by any legislation she would sign.

      • Don Ward

        Like the other folks here, I’m gonna disagree with you on this issue man. But I’ll do it respectfully.

        But you have made this comment thread interesting! Good luck debating the other commenters! http://greenlining.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Lynch-mob-2.jpg

      • Porty1119

        Your position is completely illogical. Boycotting manufacturers that colluded to deny rights to Illinoisans is not an anti-Second Amendment position. If anything, it is likely to strengthen gun rights by making the financial results of selling out very clear to other manufacturers. It’s been over twenty years since a big industry player messed up like this.

        Do you work for SA or RRA?

    • Drop the political garbage. I’m not embarrassed and Springfield did nothing wrong. Take the tme to investigate that whole situation in IL.

      • RSG

        “Take the tme to investigate that whole situation in IL”. I did. And it’s bad. Very bad.

      • Edeco

        Good lord. I didn’t mind you covering their stuff as I said below. But now you politicize and be-fudd yourself, sir. I hope you’re just still feeling loyal from the Saint release event and don’t sincerely believe what you typed.

        You can edit your post and delete mine, I won’t make a stink. Maybe few others have seen it yet.

      • Zack mars

        What a stupid and ignorant thing to say

        Lots of us HAVE taken the time to look at all the evidence.

        And guess what? SAINC and RRA are in the wrong

      • mmyers08

        Oh, TTAG has. You are incorrect, and you should be embarrassed about your attitude. SA and RRA are the IFMA. They also donated money to politicians with F ratings from the NRA.

        Seriously?

  • st381183

    Quit promoting Springfield. No one cares anymore after their traitorous behavior to Illinois gun owners.

    • BattleshipGrey

      I can’t believe this is the first I’m hearing about all this.

  • jonp

    I read about the IL stuff but not Springfields or Rock Rivers side deal. Thanks for the heads up. I will place them with Dicks and a few others I will never do business with again. Make sure you let them know why

  • Bill Jordan

    I was going to buy a TRP in the next few paydays.
    Never will support them in any way ever again. Same way I stopped buying Ruger products when Bill sent a letter to every member of Congress proposing that magazines over 15 rounds be outlawed.

    • 8166PC1

      Bill Ruger has been dead for a long time and the people who own Ruger now are a completely different mentality.

      • Bill Jordan

        Agreed, but until it wasn’t his company anymore. I never spent a nickle on a ruger product.

  • ExMachina1

    LOL. I love the anti Springfield Armory comments here. Reminds me of what happened to Ruger and Smith&Wesson a while back, yet those two companies seem to be doing just fine….better than fine actually.

    The long and short of it is this: gun makers are NOT in business to defend the 2A, they’re in business to capitalize upon the 2A. Springfield is just protecting it’s business interests. You may not like it, but they–like all corporations–are not not here to make political stands, they’re here to make a profit. Making a political stand is OUR job.

    • ostiariusalpha

      Both Ruger and Smith & Wesson took a great deal of financial loss during those periods, S&W was nearly destroyed as a company. It wasn’t till they had a change of management that things turned around for them.

      • ExMachina1

        And yet they still have the lock…

        • ostiariusalpha

          Which they would be happy to get rid of if they weren’t contractually obligated to put it on there, they’re pretty open about it costing them sales.

          • ExMachina1

            What contact is holding them to this? You mean the amnesty thing? That’s purely optional…it was voluntary

          • ostiariusalpha

            It’s a legacy of when Saf-T-Hammer Corporation bought out S&W, part of dealing with the $53 million in liability was obligating the internal lock on all their revolvers.

          • keazzy

            Maybe because it’s late, but I’m confused. Did Saf-t sign a contract with Thompson?

          • Paul Rain

            Ohhh.. voluntary like those ‘voluntary’ consent decrees courts put PDs under, under a certain former president? Nice argument.

          • jonp

            I’m a little hazy on what “contract” a company signs to produce it’s own product?

          • ostiariusalpha

            It’s a hazy, crazy world. Manufacturers have thousands of restrictions on how they can make their products that they’ve put on themselves contractually to avoid litigation.

      • Brad

        It was a change of OWNERSHIP that brought them back, not management. They were destroyed by the boycott.

        • ostiariusalpha

          That’s a distinction without a difference. I was trying to be more general in scope and include Ruger in the meaning of the sentence; the same people owned stock in Ruger both before and after Bill Ruger kicked the bucket, after all. Yes, S&W had new ownership as well, but if they had kept the same management what would have changed? S&W was on the brink of complete insolvency, but unlike Colt, they didn’t actually have to file for bankruptcy.

    • neckbone

      Yea after they got new owners. It is a political stand to not give our dollars to gun companies that are looking for legal carveouts, while supporting more burdensome restrictions.

    • Edeco

      Well, Ruger and Smith had lots of guns on the shelves after 2004, so they had an opportunity for redemption. It was a jailbreak, so much BS going on, one ban ending, threatened with other bans… I don’t care about the changes in management, that’s not very sincere of a mea-culpa in the grand scheme.

      Springfield and RRA, now, on the other hand, might be a good opportunity to show that we can run a long, resolute boycott.

    • USMC03Vet

      Yup. Blame businesses. Don’t blame voters or politicians.

      Classic liberal ideology if I ever saw it.

      • Yes, blame the business who help pass anti-gun legislation. And nobody isn’t blaming voters or politicians. But when a company HELPS the politicians? Yes, they should get blamed.

        Ignore the facts like you do is “Classic liberal ideology.” But sounds like you don’t know what that is.

    • BravoSeven

      Your last sentence should be the last sentence on this topic. Unfortunately, it won’t be. It’s citizens of Illinois that must rectify this situation, not Springfield Armory or Rock River.

    • Paul Rain

      *Beep bloop*.

      Are you a polygamous (cucked) libertarian by any chance?

    • Brad

      S&W sold the company before they went bankrupt due to the ban. Today’s S&W isn’t the same company that it was back then. The boycott worked then as it will now.

  • neckbone

    Boycott Springfield and Rock River Arms.

  • 8166PC1

    Does it perhaps violate the firearm’s blogs no politics rule by attending an NRA event? An organization that is highly political and far to the right. Honestly I frequent the firearms blog to get away from NRA propaganda that dominates the US shooting sport.

    • ostiariusalpha

      Nope.

    • Dan

      No because TFB picks and choses what constitutes politics. And then they trip over themselves trying to justify their position. Articles on HPA legislation= not political. Article on Illinois legislation that involves RRA and Springfield= political.

    • AJ187

      If you weren’t such a whiny than you wouldn’t have a problem with it.

  • Andrew Dubya

    I doubt they`ll sell too many, considering how they and RRA sold IL gun owners up the river. Those two can rot for all I care.

  • Don Ward

    But guys! If I boycott Springfield, where can I buy clunky Croatian made guns with questionable QA which are rebadged to come off as American made?

    • ostiariusalpha

      Gonna’ hafta’ resort to buying Grand Power or Arex handguns to get that fix now.

      • Paul Rain

        But I understand Grand Power makes their guns properly. They’re a cut above Springfield’s suppliers. I suppose you could always replicate Springfield’s ‘manufacturing’ process, take them out of their cases and smash them on something hard a few times.

        • ostiariusalpha

          That’s basically how you do it. Just get wiggling in there with a little screwdriver, best if you’ve actually had a few screwdrivers for yourself, and make that Springfield magic happen.

    • BattleshipGrey

      You’ll have to use a Dremel on a Glock and write “Grip Zone”

  • Tom Currie

    I have to wonder one thing. How many of the people in here screaming hatred at Springfield and Rock River Arms are NRA members? Remember folks, not one single piece of anti-gun legislation has passed at the federal level in the past sixty years without the backing of the NRA.

    • Don Ward

      Don’t get me started on the greedy, money-grubbing cowards at the NRA.

      *Washington state resident here*

      • ostiariusalpha

        I don’t hate the NRA, they occasionally do help out somewhere, just not in our Evergreen State. They’re not getting any pats on the back from me, much less a single dime.

    • Edeco

      I’m not an NRA member

  • David L. Willis

    won’t ever buy anything Springfield or RRA now…so how’s that decision to screw over the gun industry working out for ya now, jackasses..

  • PissedIllini

    If you want to support good, non-traitorous gun manufacturers from Illinois, please support Armalite and DSArms in lieu of Springfield and RRA. We’re hearing a lot about the latter, but based on the documents the former did not “bend the knee” so to say.

    So yeah, Armalite and DSArms=Good
    Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms=Bad

    • Porty1119

      I will be buying some Armalite products when able. Their rifles are excellent, but not cheap.

      Although an Armalite-Eagle Arms stripped lower is only $60…

  • SomethingToChewOn

    Why were Springfield Armory and RRA even relevant before their betrayal? The only guns Springfield was making themselves were the M1As; the XDs are Croatian imports, their 1911’s are assembled here from Brazilian forgings, their SAINTs are basically a BCM contract-assembly gun. And really, who the hell buys or shoots M1As anymore?

    As for Rock River Arms, talk about a lower/middle-end AR builder with pretentious aspirations to be top-tier. If you were dumb enough to buy their DPMS-level rifles at their asking price, well PT. Barnum did say there was a sucker born every minute.

    • Brad

      Over 4 million M1As built and sold would tend to say a buttload of people buy and shoot M1As still.
      As for RRA, a lot of competitions have been won with their rifles and parts.

      I’m not buying anymore from either company, just putting you uninformed rant into proper perspective.

    • Brad

      Over 4 million M1As built and sold would tend to say a lot of people buy and shoot M1As still.
      As for RRA, a lot of competitions have been won with their rifles and parts.

      I’m not buying anymore from either company, just putting you uninformed rant into proper perspective.

    • A hell of a lot of people still shoot the M1A including me. Check Brads figures below.

  • No one

    I didn’t realize their Brazilian suppliers had a custom shop.

  • Joshua Anderson

    Springfield Armory. “We didn’t know what our lobbyist were doing”. SHAME ON YOU! You had 2 months to read the damn thing. Gun owners aren’t idiots we know what’s going on. You won’t see a dollar from me for the rest of my life you traitors.

  • John Q. Shooter

    Screw Springfield & TFB Phil. Phil is the modern day equivalent of the Jüdischer Ordnungsdienst.

  • Julian C

    Springfield is a POS company and betrayed the gun community. Never will own another of their products. I hear they are coming out with a new model called the Judas, in honor of their new position as the official butt kissers of the anti-2A community.