Para,

Upon reading an earlier comment you made, I see the core point that you are trying to make:

Folks are upset simply because of others being upset (without taking the time to understand exactly what is happening, researching the evidence, or facts).

...because they trust the people they see getting upset, and then simply follow the lead of their friends. That's right.

The anonymity afforded by the internet amplifies this effect greatly.

You could look at it from the perspective that the character of those that frequent here inspires face-value trust in their opinions, yes?

Are you asking me if I believe the accusations simply because members I know and trust believe them? The answer is no.

I don't believe it "because I read it on SF," but, in part because I read about it on SF I felt it worthwhile to check into its veracity. (Actually, I first read about it on Facebook, in a post by Somebody I Trust. Then came here. Then checked elsewhere.)

Now, my outrage is greatly tempered by the fact I own no SA or RRA product, had no intention of purchasing any SA or RRA product, and, quite honestly, by being somewhat jaded after having observed nearly a half century of politics--sometimes more closely-up than is good for you In fact: I'm more appalled than actually outraged. And then mainly from a perspective of "what did they think was going to result from this?"

The alleged contributions to the alleged anti-gun politicians I just figure is business as usual for a state, like Illinois, that is rife with political corruption. But, what the IFMA did wrt tht bill is another matter and I don't believe, for so much as a New York heartbeat, that its members didn't know what they were going to do.

And now their biggest members are disowning them. Hmmm...

I don't have a dog in this fight, but it really boggles my mind that SA/RRA could be 3 of 4 principles in a lobbying group and NOT know what they were advocating for. At least that's what "seems" to have happened...

quote:

Originally posted by stoic-one:
At least that's what "seems" to have happened...

Sounds kinda shaky, doesn't it?

And, once again, for anyone who thinks I am defending SA Inc and RRA, you are mistaken.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by stoic-one:
At least that's what "seems" to have happened...

Sounds kinda shaky, doesn't it?

And, once again, for anyone who thinks I am defending SA Inc and RRA, you are mistaken.

Para, you are doing something that is all too uncommon in America today, reminding people that they need to Trust but Verify the story on issues that really concern a person. After all, its not like the ancient days when you had to go to the library and use the Dewey Decimal System and a card catalog to root through books, newspapers, and periodicals to find information.

Trust but verify, man, that's catchy, ain't it? I think its Biblical.

Para, I agree I need to read and comprehend it before I become outraged, my friends I trust may already be outraged but I have to examine the document and read it before I decide my stance.

I sent RRA an email with the information in my post at the top of page 10.

I got a response.

quote:

We appreciate your concern in regard to SB1657. To discuss the matter further, please contact Sarah Larson, General Manager at 309-792-5780.

Thank you,

Rock River Arms, Inc.

I wasn't concerned about the bill; I did mentioned it, but as a frame of reference.

My emailed concern was telling them that their dealer base is getting blow back from people who are and who aren't our customers.

Thank goodness I am also an Aero Precision dealer. I called them today about a weird message I got from UPS. They took my information, unraveled the issue, and called me back with the resolution, all in under 30 minutes.

Does the amendment exempting big box stores (page 1 of this thread) present an interstate commerce issue with the bill?

quote:

Originally posted by AUTiger89:
Does the amendment exempting big box stores (page 1 of this thread) present an interstate commerce issue with the bill?

I don't see how. It applies to only to firearms dealers in Illinois. Virginia has a state-based licensing requirement (in addition to the federal requirement).

The big issue is the bill says anyone who sells more that 9 (IIRC) guns in a calendar year is a "dealer" and subject to both the federal and state licensing requirement. So, if you want to liquidate a small collection you couldn't, without going the consignment route,or selling to a dealer, or getting the required licenses (impossible because ATF won't issue an FFL for that purpose).

Bottom line is the average Joe gets screwed.

I have no idea what any of this means.

I spent at least 10 minutes trying to make heads or tails out of this. Still have no idea what it's about.

I'm right there with you.

I just got the following email from Springfield. No mention at all of their involvement.

quote:

Dear friend,

The 2nd Amendment urgently needs your help in Illinois!

The Illinois House of Representatives may consider Senate Bill 1657, legislation that could put state gun dealers out of business, at any time!

It is imperative you share this with friends and family living in Illinois and strongly urge them to OPPOSE SB 1657!

SB 1657 would create onerous mandatory regulations, fees potentially in the thousands of dollars and excessive amounts of red tape that would almost assuredly force the closure of many firearm dealers, and prevent prospective owners from opening new ones. The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) already licenses and closely monitors all federally licensed firearm dealers (FFLs) and strictly enforces any violation of federal law.
SB 1657 goes far beyond federal law and is designed to shut down as many FFLs as possible.

Again, please click the “Take Action” button above to contact your state Representative and urge them to strongly oppose SB 1657! Stay tuned to www.nraila.org for further updates on this bill.

I got the same one. I find it ironic that they are only warning us about this after it's already passed the IL senate due to SA's lobbyist dropping opposition to the bill.
I wonder since they link to the NRAILA if the NRA is going to cover SA's ass on this without calling them out as they should.

quote:

Originally posted by 4x5:
I just got the following email from Springfield. No mention at all of their involvement.

quote:

Dear friend,

The 2nd Amendment urgently needs your help in Illinois!

The Illinois House of Representatives may consider Senate Bill 1657, legislation that could put state gun dealers out of business, at any time!

It is imperative you share this with friends and family living in Illinois and strongly urge them to OPPOSE SB 1657!

SB 1657 would create onerous mandatory regulations, fees potentially in the thousands of dollars and excessive amounts of red tape that would almost assuredly force the closure of many firearm dealers, and prevent prospective owners from opening new ones. The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) already licenses and closely monitors all federally licensed firearm dealers (FFLs) and strictly enforces any violation of federal law.
SB 1657 goes far beyond federal law and is designed to shut down as many FFLs as possible.

Again, please click the “Take Action” button above to contact your state Representative and urge them to strongly oppose SB 1657! Stay tuned to www.nraila.org for further updates on this bill.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yeah me too. Only I rate being addressed by my first name, I guess they know me personally. We will see what comes of this. They did help me out with a purchase I made in the past, and they did not have to go out of their way. I can forgive people if they don't lie and do the right thing.

Some interesting stuff about Dennis Reese and SA Inc. from the late 80s. Something about bribes and conspiracy.

http://www.upi.com/Archives/19...arges/5406606027600/

At this point you can't really be down on them for putting out the "Dear Friend"/"Take Action" email. The only way to show their contrition is to become actively involved in beating the bill in the House, and they did say (in one or the other of their communiques) that they would do so. One useful way to do that is to take part in the outreach effort to gather opposition to the bill.

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:

quote:

Originally posted by AUTiger89:
Does the amendment exempting big box stores (page 1 of this thread) present an interstate commerce issue with the bill?

I don't see how. It applies to only to firearms dealers in Illinois. Virginia has a state-based licensing requirement (in addition to the federal requirement).

The big issue is the bill says anyone who sells more that 9 (IIRC) guns in a calendar year is a "dealer" and subject to both the federal and state licensing requirement. So, if you want to liquidate a small collection you couldn't, without going the consignment route,or selling to a dealer, or getting the required licenses (impossible because ATF won't issue an FFL for that purpose).

Bottom line is the average Joe gets screwed.

My thought was that exempting "big box stores" (large retailers such as Walmart or Academy) would give preferential treatment to those stores over local mom-and-pop shops. Since those big box retailers operate across state lines, and that it is likely that smaller shops also sell across state lines, that would bring it into the realm of interfering in interstate commerce. I know I may be grasping at straws, but I saw it as a potential avenue to have this bill overturned.

I also got the Springfield e-mail. I know the responses are probably not even read, but I responded that I was opting-out of future SA e-mails, which I did also.

If they are able to stop this bill from moving forward, or if it is shown that they didn't participate in this in the first place, I can forgive that.