Gun firm head resigns over Obama support

[NJCher]

STEVENSVILLE, Mont., Oct. 31 (UPI) -- The namesake of Montana-based Cooper Firearms has been asked to resign as president of the company after he expressed support for Barack Obama.

The company said it asked Dan Cooper, founder and part owner of Cooper Firearms, to resign as president after he voiced support for the Democratic Illinois senator's bid for president in a USA Today interview published Tuesday, USA Today reported Friday.

"Although we all believe everyone has a right to vote and donate as they see fit, it has become apparent that the fallout may affect more than just Mr. Cooper," the company said in a statement on its Web site Wednesday. "It may also affect the employees and the shareholders of Cooper Firearms. The board of directors has asked Mr. Cooper to resign as president."

Cooper, who said he usually votes Republican, told the paper in the interview he planned to vote for Obama "probably because of the war. And also because the Republican Party has moved so far right in recent years."

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2008/10/31/Gun_firm_head_resigns_over_Obama_support/UPI-19331225496140/



Cher

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Wow! That is soooo rotten.

[Drunken Irishman]

2. WTF?

[Idealism]

3. Honestly I expect no less

The rethugs will wield any last vestige of power they have left to try to make lives miserable for Obama supporters

[Tangerine LaBamba]

4. I'm sitting here, staring at the screen,

and, for the life of me, I can't make sense of this story.

What on earth has this country come to?

[geardaddy]

5. sad...

I've been in many a corporation where I felt I may be judged on my support for Democratic candidates. But, there's no law against firing someone over it. There's no protection of political persuasion in the EOE.

[dweller]

6. seriously

:wtf:

dp

[DJ13]

7. But I thought the Republican free market theory says

...... that someone like Mr.Cooper, with a financial interest in that company, couldnt possibly do something that would violate his own self interests in that company?

[Citizen Number 9]

12. Free Market Theory..

Has been substantially discredited as of late...

[Mojorabbit]

8. This was posted earlier this week

This man started the company by hand and his rifles are beautiful like jewelry. A real craftsman.
Ironically I had been saving all year to buy my husband one for the holidays. Not happening now. There is nothing more unamerican than taking away a man's company because some freepers scared the board. If you are a second amendment Dem please give them a piece of your mind at [e-mail]
This happening to this man is wrong on so many levels.

[Citizen Number 9]

13. Maybe you were and maybe you weren't...

At least not for this Holiday. Last I spoke with them we were looking at a wait of more than a year for their fine product.

[Mojorabbit]

15. I totally expected that.

The knives he collects take 3 to 4 years before delivery(Randall). He would have received the purchase receipt as a gift and would have been just as thrilled.

[SteveM]

17. If he starts another company, I might buy one from him (nt

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

9. The Board feels it is protecting the stockholders interest.

I think it's a bit overboard but the boards responsibility is to the stockholders not to me. After looking at their web site I would be forced to agree with the board.

David

[tburnsten]

22. Sometimes making your company public

Just isn't the best thing to do. If it were still a privately owned company this would not have happened.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

25. I believe you are correct.

[hootinholler]

10. Should crosspost in the gungeon. n/t

[bertman]

11. The Palin stupidity is seeping into all of their brains. I'm with Mojorabbit on this.

I think I'll buy a rifle from a competitor and send them a note telling them that they lost a sale due to their fascist ideology and poor business judgment.

These idiots think that only Republicans buy firearms.

[SteveM]

18. Sounds like a good idea (nt)

[tburnsten]

24. I think they are more concerned over Obama's voting record

than party affiliation. Of course it doesn't help matters that almost all of the politicians who would back anti-gun legislation are in our party. And Obama's record on gun issues really is a serious cause for concern for gun owners, whether he syas he supprots the second amendment or not. His phrasing, for instance saying he "respects the tradition of gun ownership" and american's hunting traditions are also quite worrisome, because the second amendment and owning firearms is not an american tradition, it is a constitutionally entrenched right. I put my vote in today, but to be totally honest I wish he had come right out and directly addressed gun rights, and had promised to veto any gun-ban or anti-gun lagislation that came to his desk, and promised to discourage the House and Senate from drafting any anti-gun bills during his presidency.


The voters who are in support of anti-gun laws are unlikely to vote for McCain anyway, and he could have gotten quite a few voters who use gun-rights as a litmus test for candidates.

[aikoaiko]

14. Cooper arms are for semi-chichi fudds. He probably thought that since his product wouldn't be banned

...under an Obama Assault Weapons Ban he had the political cover to make that kind of endorsement. But now there is a lot more cross over between fudds and recreational/shooting sports/self-defense gun owners who are deepply concerned about any politician (Republican or Democratic) who says they support an AWB.

[Hangingon]

16. The gun industry is very sensitive.

Years ago, Bill Ruger attempted a "reasonable" approach on gun control - smaller magazine capacity, I believe. He took a lot of grief. Joaquin Jackson, an iconic Texas Ranger and NRA board member, created a major stir in the gun world last year because he made a statement on magazine capacity. He was branded an enemy and people wanted him off of the NRA board. Jim Zumbo, the gun sport writer, lost his career because he wrote that no one needed a "black gun". How can you be in the industry and not be aware of the consequences of these actions. The simple truth is gun owners by and large do not trust politicians with anti-gun history. The campaign rhetoric says, "We won't touch your hunting gun especially if you live in a rural area". The party platform says something different. The legislation now pending has a litany of sporting shotguns that will be outlawed if the bill is passed. We have reached the point that gun owners feel that any cocniliation will only be matched by a wider ban be it on magazine capaacity, gun type or taxes on guns and/or ammunition. Everyone must have the right to say what they think. Everyone must know that there are consequences for doing it.

[krispos42]

20. Bill Ruger said that nobody had a legitimate reason mags with more than 10 rounds

And they still only ship 5-round magazines for the Mini-14 families of rifles.


Of course, they also make a variety of handguns with 15+ round capacities, so go figure that one out.

:shrug:

[Hangingon]

21. You are correct.

I was always nan admirer of Bill Ruger. His early attempt at compromise cost him and showed that compromise is impossible.

[tburnsten]

23. Zumbo has changed his position since

He is now much more familiar with sprt utility rifles, and has recanted his statements. He also was pretty pissed when an anti-gunner tried to use his statements to legitimize some policy change he was arguing for.

And Bill Ruger's statement that "no honest person needs more than ten rounds in a magazine" were ridiculously insulting. How could he have not known what sort of backlash that would result in? I think the SR-9 is almost a deliberate apology for that statement, besides they wanted to get out a switchable backstrap pistol because the market almost demands that manufacturers have a model like that. I think Bill Ruger also recanted his statement sometime before he passed away, but it was still a remarkably poorly-thought out thing to say.

The campaign rhetoric says, "We won't touch your hunting gun especially if you live in a rural area". The party platform says something different. The legislation now pending has a litany of sporting shotguns that will be outlawed if the bill is passed. We have reached the point that gun owners feel that any cocniliation will only be matched by a wider ban be it on magazine capaacity, gun type or taxes on guns and/or ammunition.

Hell yes that is what politically-aware gun owners feel, because the last fifteen years or so have shown us that the result of ANY "compromise" on our part is only going to result in anti-gun gorups and politicians seeing what else they can get out of us. The truth is that someone who feels the need to try and micro-manage the exact configurations of guns that are "acceptable" for people to own really would be happiest if no one owned any guns, but to say so would be letting the cat out of the bag and have a disastrous result on their plans of action.

[jody]

19. In another DU forum a professional was bragging how he lashed out at a customer because she made a

disparaging comment about our presidential candidate.

I expect he lost her business and possibly other customers because he mixed politics with business.

That's business :shrug: