What do you think? (Petition to Colt)

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What do you think? (Petition to Colt)

Posted: 10/13/2003 7:05:13 PM EDT

I have been deliberating this for some time and I feel that now is the time to begin planning if it will work at all. I feel that (if my logic holds true) a petition should be drafted to Colt. The petition would say something to this effect, not necessarily verbatim:

"As the 1994 crime bill draws to its end, many of us are planning purchases in celebration of the death (if only temporary) of this unconstitutional measure. Many of us have Colts. All of us admire the tradition and workmanship behind the name. We have created this petition however to inform you that we have concerns about your product line that will be manufactured after 2004. As proactive consumers we wish to give you the proper time and information that will help you better address your consumer's needs, which in turn will generate a wider and more loyal customer base. What we want to see on the new Colts is what we deem a "proper configuration". This configuration includes the following items:

1. The restoration of AR-15 marked lower receivers to the public. The AR-15 name designation is as important as the Colt name to your customers. It is tradition and history to us. We are sensitive to the fact that some states have their own assault weapons ban, which ban a rifle designated "AR-15". We do not ask that all of the rifles in your line bear this badge of tradition, but we ask that some do.

2. The removal of the sear block. This item as originally intended was designed to prevent illegal conversion of your weapon to an automatic rifle. It is a design failure nonetheless, as the rifle can still be converted via an unregistered lightning link or by simply removing the block. The negative consequence of the sear block is that your customers cannot install a match trigger or a legally registered drop in auto sear in the rifle as configured, requiring the additional cost of gunsmithing.

3. The option(s) of factory installed features deemed "preban" in the 1994 crime bill. These options include the flash suppressor, the bayonet lug, and the collapsible or telescoping buttstock. These features as you are well aware are cosmetic and do not in any way affect the mechanical performance of your rifles, and they never should have been banned from the start.

4. (Just added) The option of small/military spec takedown pins. One of your finest collector's pieces is the Colt Government Carbine. We are proud of the role that Colts have played in our military history and have a genuine desire to embrace that history through the collection and enjoyment of the (nearest possible) replicas. Additionally these pins are more convenient for takedown while outdoors.

We thank you for taking the time to examine our requests that properly address our needs and hope you weigh the matter most gravely. We are committed to buying these rifles from you and each signature you see before you is a potential client, intent on buying at least one of these rifles from you. Consequently, if you feel you are not willing or able to furnish us with these needs we will regretfully have to pledge our purchases to those who will better serve their customers. We hope that in the end you will do what is right and better serve your civilian customers. If so, we can personally assure you of our intent reward you for that decision.

Let me know if it is something worth starting & if there is anything that should be added or subtracted to it.

Posted: 10/13/2003 7:25:28 PM EDT

[#1]

Unless you're the U.S. Government, or any other Government who either is currently, or potentially might do buisness with them, Colt will not listen to you. Cold hard truth: Colt doesn't care about their civilian customers. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't mind if the AWB did not sunset at all. Keep in mind that nobody forced colt to insert a sear block...They did it "out of the goodness of their hearts" (gag and puckes at the same time)

But you've got a decent letter here, and I'm not saying that you shouldn't give it a shot if you want to.

Posted: 10/13/2003 7:31:06 PM EDT

[#2]

Then why did COLT come out with the MT6400?

CRC

Posted: 10/13/2003 7:36:38 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Unless you're the U.S. Government, or any other Government who either is currently, or potentially might do buisness with them, Colt will not listen to you. Cold hard truth: Colt doesn't care about their civilian customers. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't mind if the AWB did not sunset at all. Keep in mind that nobody forced colt to insert a sear block...They did it "out of the goodness of their hearts" (gag and puckes at the same time)

But you've got a decent letter here, and I'm not saying that you shouldn't give it a shot if you want to.

View Quote

Many people feel the same as you do. I felt that if Colt was "informed" then the blood would be on their own hands in terms of their sluggish sales (from us at least). Moreover, I felt this might be a decent time to act because (last I heard anyway) FN has the military contract and they might be more sensitive to an alternate market.

Posted: 10/13/2003 8:30:58 PM EDT

[#4]

I'd sign my name to you petition, I think it is worth a try. If it doesn't I don't buy anything from them ever again, only Bushmaster, and [b]maybe[/b] like S&W they'll reconsider their stance...

Posted: 10/13/2003 8:39:04 PM EDT

[#5]

pulpsmack

What about spec receiver holes?

Posted: 10/13/2003 9:02:15 PM EDT

[#6]

Good suggestion, Scott. I had that in mind & forgot to post it. Still taking suggestions for input.

Posted: 10/13/2003 9:35:13 PM EDT

[#7]

You > [banghead]

My opinion: See below.

Posted: 10/13/2003 9:43:03 PM EDT

[#8]

That's why I'm glad I have an REAL Colt AR-15, made by the real Colt company, a 28 year old SP-1 carbine.

Posted: 10/13/2003 10:03:17 PM EDT

[#9]

Well Slash, I can't say that I disagree with you. I would be very surprised if it did work. The thing is that it's no skin off my ass to see what happens. Moreover, it's no skin off my ass to buy more Bushmasters. I'd like to have a bonafide AR-15. It's not worth $1500 to me on a used one though. Maybe we'll be pleasantly amazed.

Posted: 10/14/2003 5:29:57 AM EDT

[#10]

PS,

No offense, but I think that your time could be better spent working to make sure that the AWB is not renewed or replaced.

Without that, this whole thread is a moot point.

That said, if Colt's does actually listen to their (civilian) customers, I'll buy one! [:)]

Edited because my fingers don't type as fast as my brain thinks, and I suck at proofreading. [:(]

Posted: 10/14/2003 5:57:08 AM EDT

[#11]

I'd sign it...

Any effort to aid the death of the AWB (or I should say "maintain" the upcoming death) deserves my support...

[sniper2]

Posted: 10/14/2003 6:09:51 AM EDT

[#12]

I'd sign it too. Good job.

Posted: 10/14/2003 6:31:55 AM EDT

[#13]

I'd sign just to see if I am wrong in assuming Colt's arrogance (which is right up there with Ken Elmore's (SAWLESALES.com)arrogance and disdain of AR15.com.

Bring on the petition. And mail a copy of the Colt petition to their competitors so they can capitalize if Colt refuses to listen to the AR buying public.

Posted: 10/14/2003 8:06:26 AM EDT

[#14]

2 suggested additions:

All milspec pin sizes.

Ask for a public written response to the letter within 30 days. If they provide one (doubtful) post it here.

Posted: 10/14/2003 8:14:12 AM EDT

[#15]

pulps.,
to give your letter the 'best' chance, find out the name of the President & CEO and send your letter to him (her?) by FedEx. In dealing in the past with large companies, my experience has been that an overnight delivery by FedEx at least seems to get through to the right person.

5sub

Posted: 10/14/2003 8:55:54 AM EDT

[#16]

Colt's reaction to the letter:

[ROFL2]

Their management traded common sense for political correctness a long time ago. They have absolutely no interest to set foot in the arena of defiance.

I'm with Slash on this one.

Posted: 10/14/2003 9:04:02 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
Colt's reaction to the letter:

[ROFL2]

Their management traded common sense for political correctness a long time ago. They have absolutely no interest to set foot in the arena of defiance.

I'm with Slash on this one.

View Quote

The owners and management then are not the same owners and management now. IIRC, you have a retired Marine general running the show now.

Posted: 10/14/2003 9:57:47 AM EDT

[#18]

I would give it a try. At least we have told them what we think about them... and for "we" I mean the buying public.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What do you think? (Petition to Colt)

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us