I was told Cooper rifles was sold to the empolyees. Can anyone tell me if this is true?
Thanks in advance,
Matt Nicol
Thanks in advance,
Matt Nicol
Cooper rifles ???
matttrapn
- Status
21 - 33 of 33 Posts
Joined
·
135 Posts
For the same price as a Cooper, you can have a Rem 700 rebarreled, restocked, and reworked.
Then you will have a better shooting gun.
"Looks" don't kill groundhogs or prairie dogs at 400+ yards.......accurate rifles do.
My 700's are reworked and rebarreled; wish like hell I could $wing a bunch of jewell trigger$...
Then you will have a better shooting gun.
"Looks" don't kill groundhogs or prairie dogs at 400+ yards.......accurate rifles do.
My 700's are reworked and rebarreled; wish like hell I could $wing a bunch of jewell trigger$...
I have a Cooper in 223 AI s/n 31, have shot over 5000 parie dogs with it. It shoots as good as the test target, it is toped with a Leupold 24X and pet load is 26.5 grain VV133 and 53 moly coat Seria match bullet. Also have a 17 MacIV and no problems with anything and will buy another. thanks Ronnie
Joined
·
4,202 Posts
Wolfram no one is saying Mr. Cooper isn't entitled to support Odumbass. But we have that same right not to support a business he benefits from. I still won't knowingly buy and will never buy anything made by Heinz because John Kerry and his wife benefit from it...Bill
Joined
·
6,754 Posts
Sure and that is your choice Bill .... but make no mistake you are doing this with the intent of causing harm to someone because they don't have the same political view that you do. How would you like it if the situation were reversed and it was you who got booted from your own business because you gave a few bucks to somebody's election campaign? Something to think about before you get back on your high horse.
Fundamentally this is the root of what is wrong with our political system .... it is all about how much $ is attached to a particular vote on a particular bill. Rarely is it about what is going to be best for our country.
Fundamentally this is the root of what is wrong with our political system .... it is all about how much $ is attached to a particular vote on a particular bill. Rarely is it about what is going to be best for our country.
Gene, my guess would be your luck on rifles suck. Seems they went the extra mile to please you, and bless your patience for waiting. All of mine would match the factory target.
For one shot out of a cold barrel I have never seen a rifle to match the performance of the 3 Coopers that I have owned, one was a model 36.22lr, a Model 22 in .22-250, and the Model 54 in .308. there are rifles that will outshoot them in groups of 5 or shooting a program of record but then they aren't a factory ordered hunting rifle. Remington barrels have too much freebore now a days, Getting a rifle rebarreled isn't cheap( $300-400 for a barrel plus that much for labor) and there are no guarantees although getting a properly cut chamber would be a huge step in the right direction.
For one shot out of a cold barrel I have never seen a rifle to match the performance of the 3 Coopers that I have owned, one was a model 36.22lr, a Model 22 in .22-250, and the Model 54 in .308. there are rifles that will outshoot them in groups of 5 or shooting a program of record but then they aren't a factory ordered hunting rifle. Remington barrels have too much freebore now a days, Getting a rifle rebarreled isn't cheap( $300-400 for a barrel plus that much for labor) and there are no guarantees although getting a properly cut chamber would be a huge step in the right direction.
I still do have the 22 though- its a rare one and now it shoots- it is called a TRP and was designed as a contract bid for the government
I think also that I might have been between reorganziations ( of which I think there have been several) and it took a long time to get the rifles back and send them out and them keeping them a long time
So yes in the end they shot
I have sent brownings back that were out of spec
I have never had a remington 700 or 40Xon the other hand that didnt shoot
Gene
I think also that I might have been between reorganziations ( of which I think there have been several) and it took a long time to get the rifles back and send them out and them keeping them a long time
So yes in the end they shot
I have sent brownings back that were out of spec
I have never had a remington 700 or 40Xon the other hand that didnt shoot
Gene
Joined
·
218 Posts
Every anti gun law that I have ever heard of has been proposed by and passed by Democrats.
For Dan Cooper to heavily donate to the Obama campaign in spite of this, which he had to be aware of, just offends gun owners to the core and he should be willing to pay the piper for his actions.
How many rifles do you suppose he would have sold had he advertised that a portion of the profit from your purchase would be given to the political party that wants to curtail or end your gun ownership?
For Dan Cooper to heavily donate to the Obama campaign in spite of this, which he had to be aware of, just offends gun owners to the core and he should be willing to pay the piper for his actions.
How many rifles do you suppose he would have sold had he advertised that a portion of the profit from your purchase would be given to the political party that wants to curtail or end your gun ownership?
This is for Neal, Although I believe that the Republicans are more gun friendly, they are not without blame.
NEWSMAX.COM - Anti-gun crusaders seem worried about the advent of a Republican administration. Heaven knows why. Republicans, in recent years, have managed to do nearly as much damage to the Second Amendment as Democrats.
In 1969, journalist William Safire asked Richard Nixon what he thought about gun control. "Guns are an abomination," Nixon replied. According to Safire, Nixon went on to confess that, "Free from fear of gun owners' retaliation at the polls, he favored making handguns illegal and requiring licenses for hunting rifles."
It was President George Bush, Sr. who banned the import of "assault weapons" in 1989, and promoted the view that Americans should only be allowed to own weapons suitable for "sporting purposes."
It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street." The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners.
Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. "I support the Brady Bill," he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, "and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay."
One of the most aggressive gun control advocates today is Republican mayor Rudolph Giuliani of New York City, whose administration sued 26 gun manufacturers in June 2000, and whose police commissioner, Howard Safir, proposed a nationwide plan for gun licensing, complete with yearly "safety" inspections.
Another Republican, New York State Governor George Pataki, on August 10, 2000, signed into law what The New York Times called "the nation’s strictest gun controls," a radical program mandating trigger locks, background checks at gun shows and "ballistic fingerprinting" of guns sold in the state. It also raised the legal age to buy a handgun to 21 and banned "assault weapons," the sale or possession of which would now be punishable by seven years in prison.
NEWSMAX.COM - Anti-gun crusaders seem worried about the advent of a Republican administration. Heaven knows why. Republicans, in recent years, have managed to do nearly as much damage to the Second Amendment as Democrats.
In 1969, journalist William Safire asked Richard Nixon what he thought about gun control. "Guns are an abomination," Nixon replied. According to Safire, Nixon went on to confess that, "Free from fear of gun owners' retaliation at the polls, he favored making handguns illegal and requiring licenses for hunting rifles."
It was President George Bush, Sr. who banned the import of "assault weapons" in 1989, and promoted the view that Americans should only be allowed to own weapons suitable for "sporting purposes."
It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street." The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners.
Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. "I support the Brady Bill," he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, "and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay."
One of the most aggressive gun control advocates today is Republican mayor Rudolph Giuliani of New York City, whose administration sued 26 gun manufacturers in June 2000, and whose police commissioner, Howard Safir, proposed a nationwide plan for gun licensing, complete with yearly "safety" inspections.
Another Republican, New York State Governor George Pataki, on August 10, 2000, signed into law what The New York Times called "the nation’s strictest gun controls," a radical program mandating trigger locks, background checks at gun shows and "ballistic fingerprinting" of guns sold in the state. It also raised the legal age to buy a handgun to 21 and banned "assault weapons," the sale or possession of which would now be punishable by seven years in prison.
Joined
·
218 Posts
rustygun, there isn't enough space on this forum to list the anti-gun rants and statements nor to reference the introduced bills in the houses, both nationally and in states, nor city governments, that have been done by the Democrats in their efforts to ban gun ownership.
To say that the Republicans are "more gun friendly," is the biggest understatement of the year.
But this thread is about Dan Cooper. It is my opinion he never thought his contribution(s) to the Obama election would be found out. Seems I read somewhere that it was discovered when a list of contributors was published. Perhaps true, perhaps not. Whatever the thought process he had, he deserves the gunowners anger over what he did.
To say that the Republicans are "more gun friendly," is the biggest understatement of the year.
But this thread is about Dan Cooper. It is my opinion he never thought his contribution(s) to the Obama election would be found out. Seems I read somewhere that it was discovered when a list of contributors was published. Perhaps true, perhaps not. Whatever the thought process he had, he deserves the gunowners anger over what he did.
21 - 33 of 33 Posts
- Status
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
