Originally Posted by
BoringGuy45
Care to elaborate why it's so absurd?? Because to me, actions speak louder than words. Every time they come out with a new rifle, it's the same deal: For government use only. Either that, or they give some big, heavy, dumbed down version of the rifle. It's the same thing that so many other companies did to the civilian marked in the early 90s, back when gun control was cool.
Covered on page 4, Post 31.
HK made the 90 series exclusively for the US market. Everyone else either could buy select fire models or couldn't buy semi autos at all. In 1989 we banned their entire line of rifles.
HK then made ban compliant firearms, the HK911, SR9, SR9T, SR9TC, etc. The US government simply added them to the ban list and they became non importable.
HK then focused on handguns because that seemed to be all they could bring to the US without difficulty and the USP series was actually pretty revolutionary.
HK recognizing demand for HK long arms produced TWO rifles that complied with US import restrictions, the SLR 8 and the USC. US gun buyers criticized them for being "neutered" and largely ignored them and HK lost a boatload of money in R&D for a US importable rifle and unrealized sales. Both rifles would be discontinued, despite being "importable."
HK then produced a rifle capable of accepting high capacity magazines and with features like adjustable stocks, they introduced the MR556 and MR762. Because if German export laws and US import laws things like "target barrels" were required which meant the MR556 was not an exact semi auto copy of the 416. Again the US gun market mostly ignored the MR556 costing HK to again lose R&D costs and unrealized sales.
I'm actually amazed HK is still trying to sell us anything. If most of the "HK sucks and they hate you" guys actually owned the company, they'd probably tell the US gun buyer to FO and call them when they have their stupid import laws sorted out.
And yes, they could make a LOT of stuff here, just like FN does. But how close did we come to President Clinton? Can we really blame a foreign firearms manufacturer for not wanting to gamble on the reinstatement of the Clinton Ban Part II which would negate any domestic production of anything that wasn't severely neutered?
It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.
Chuck, we miss ya man.
كافر
Bookmarks