[Ace]

When money finally came my way I decided that I need a new .44 so I went to the gun store and I had my heart set on a Ruger redhawk in stainless. But then I remembered one thing. About ten years ago (during the dark days of the Clinton administration) there was smtih and wesson and colt cowtowing to the democrats and rolling over to their demands that they would make their guns with such garbage as electronic owner id safeties and internal locks on their guns, just giving in to grant them immunity from getting sued. It was during all this there was Taurus and Glock telling the politicians to shove it. They weren't going to cave. Well I and several others back then wrote letters to Taurus and Glock thanking them for standing by us the customers and I told them that my next handgun purchase was going to be a Taurus. Well after that I became broke and couldn't afford anything so for the past decade I didn't buy anything. I remembered all this when I was handling the Ruger, and I was balking at the Ruger's 600.00 price as well I'm not going to lie. And then I decided I was going to buy a Taurus. Which I did, and when I filled out the registration card I sent them a note explaning that though it took me a while I didn't forget that they stood up for us in our hour of need, and if they will still stand by us that I'm sure that they will stay in business for a long time. To tell the truth I own only one Taurus although I am leaning on getting another one.

 

[MPanova]

Thanks for the story, Im glad you support those companies who support us. It is just one more reason I like Taurus!

 

[Bubba]

I am not sure why there are so many Taurus haters out there. I have 2 Taurus guns. I really love my 24/7. I have fed it the cheapest ammo available and it just eats it up like its the premium. Shot 600 rounds in a row without any sort of cleaning and it shot just as accurate if it was clean. I think they are wonderful guns no mater what people say. I am now thinking about buying another Taurus pistol.

 

[mrglock]

Cool story; brought tears to my eyes! Seriously though, you are right on!

 

[Pierce]

Very cool! Welcome to the Taurus family!



Eh, that sounded kind of corny... you know what I mean!

 

[SgtKnuckles]

ACE,... Nice to see you...<) Oh, I like My Taurus too...<)

QUOTE: [BUBBA... I think they are wonderful guns no mater what people say.]

~He Egged Me On... I accepted the Challange...<)~
I was standing up for Taurus in this Forum linked below... It was my first Post on the Forum, and there was Hostility in the Air... As you'll see in how the Thread Progresses... You'll see that I Sweetly Emasculated that Taurus Hater at the END OF THE THREAD...
Got the last word~Knocked his Dick in the Dirt...
I'm the wrong Guy to get in a PISSING CONTEST WITH...you would lose...<)

http://shootersforum.com/showthread.htm?t=41175&page=2

 

[pioneer461]

Mine is a similar story. During the 90's I was in the market for a "J" frame revolver, but since S&W were at the time drinking Clinton Kool-Aid, I chose instead a Taurus M-85, UltraLite. I next wrote a letter to S&W telling them of their lost sale, and the reason.

Now that S&W is back in American hands and again on our side, I've since purchased S&W, but my most recent purchase was a Taurus M617, .357. Great guns.

 

[dbsoundguy]

Wow ..Sgt ...that poor site administrator had his hands full..that was the most i have ever seen in a post..LOL... they did not waste time on you to answer your post ...just don't understand why people are so against a certain gun :bang:

I own only one Taurus although I am leaning on getting another one.

Ace .. me too...i love mine...i have the 357 4" tracker.. did you buy a 44...i shot a Ruger 44 redhawk one time...Never again ... just a wee to much for me..

They have a Tracker model...i bet that is one cool gun


I want a 2nd gun too...i love the look of the M617..for conceal carry, i think it would be perfect...

 

[Ace]

I am a big guy and i like big things. I fell in love with the .44 mag cartridge ever since I picked up a model 29 about a decade ago for way less than what they go for now. My idea of a carry gun is snubby in .44 mag, although I did handle a m85 today and I did not dislike it. It seems to be easily concealable, but I would have to buy another set of dies if I get a .357. If I find a judge for a decent price I will jump on it. Ruger and Smith and wesson now are in a contest to see how much they can get for their revolvers I believe. I've seen their "alaskan" revolvers for $800 and that's just way too much money for a snubby even if it is stainless.

 

[Taurus_9mm]

A very handsome pair of revolvers you have there pioneer461. The more I look at the M605 the more I'm debating getting one to add to the collection.

 

[Maineman]

Great story. Thanks. I chose a Taurus because I read a review where they questioned Taurus as to why they would keep their price so low for such a good gun. They summed it up by saying their policy was to produce a great gun at a low price. Not many have such a policy for the people. I did look at S&W revolvers and ended up buying a Taurus 651 revolver 357, which I now carry in a belly band. Great gun and almost half the price of a S&W. I now am planing to get a Taurus Millennium Pro Titanium 111PT-12 to carry in a cross breed holster.

PS I wish more companies would stand up to the Democrat Dodos!

 

[schlemer]

Ok, I need to ask a very ignorant question. I've only been into handguns for the last two years. Even though I've heard of the Clinton ban, I'm quite fuzzy on the whole story. From time to time I hear guys saying "F" Ruger and screw S&W, they sold out. I got to admit here seems to be a very interesting story concerning this topic.

As for trigger locks, how does Taurus come into play. It seems that every Taurus firearm I own has an internal trigger lock. Is Taurus considered a sell out or politically incorrect becuse of such a practice?

In all honesty, It will not change my opinion of my Taurus collection. So long as they do their job, I really have no complaints. Truth be told, I always forget that I have these internal locks. My first experience with any type of locking device happened when I bought my first handgun. My Ruger P89 came with a huge master lock type lock. I thought to myself, "am I supposed to use this thing?". I just threw it back in the box it came in and forgot about it. That being said, I have two children. One with "special needs" and the other who is normal. Feeling responsible for their well being, a gun safe is what's best for my home.

Now, to answer the title post. I chose Taurus simply because I love the looks, ergonomics, performance, price and of course the Lifetime Warranty. My first Taurus was a PT111 mil pro for carry once I realized that my P89 was a bear for CCW. Next was a PT145 mil pro, I felt underpowered by the 9mm (silly me). Next came the model 85 and 94 which my wife really enjoys. Finally came the faternal twins, the PT1911B and stainless. These are my Colts (no, I'm not delusional) . Now I'm awaiting my latest member to my Taurus family, the legendary PT92. I chose it over the Beretta because it just felt right.

For the fun of it I've always wanted a Colt 45 styled single action revolver. Ruger has that real nice Vaquero which I have though about many a night, but wait. What''s that in the forground? Could it be a Gaucho looming in the distance? You know, the one that seems to be getting quite a bit of attention these days. Hmmm, what to do, what to do?

.....To be continued

 

[Ace]

Gunmakers were under pressure from the Clinton administration to change their products to make them inopperable if they got into the hands of the wrong user. Colt got the ball rolling on that one when they press released the smart gun, a gun that had a microchip circuit board in which some poor cop had to posses an a electronic key in order to fire the weapon. I say cop because that's who colt was marketing the idea too, but the tech was not there yet. In steps Clinton with his proposal to make all guns into smart weapons. At the time Smith and Wesson was under control of a British firm which cared about nothing but profit, so they took the opportunity to curry favor with the government by stating that they will produce internal locks on their guns and develope smart gun technology to make the world a safer place. Colt who's main customer is Uncle Sam jumped on and then all eyes were on Ruger, Bill was still alive back then and he was about to cave in when the president of Glock USA and Taurus who both said they won't jump off the cliff with the rest of the lemmings. See what I left out was that Smith & Wesson and Colt was offered a really good carrot: Complete immunity from civil suits if they agreed to the Clinton Adminitration's demands. If you are big company and you produce a product who's purpose could be for causing great harm, then that's a preatty sweet carrot. So what happened? Well Colt's main customer was the US military, and their boss was the president, Colt did ok. Smith & Wesson they had a lot of contracts with law enforcement, but not enough to keep them afloat. They relied on civilian sales which just dropped like a rock after the announcement. To add a cherry to sundae they got sued by Glock over the sigma which is preatty much a cheap copy, as a result, their British parents dropped them and they got new American owners. Ruger did OK but they never stated that they agreed or dissagree, but I think after Bill died the people still there know which side their bread is buttered on. Taurus and Glock held firm and I own at least one of each.

 

[Steelheart]

I'm only going to add a couple of things to Ace's great post.

Since Taurus isn't a US company they don't have the same amount of pressure as Smith, Colt Ruger etc. Glock does quite a bit of business here but since they're world wide they could probably handle the hit if need be (especially with their LE sales).

Ruger did a form of sell-out years back with their corporate decision in regards to high-cap magazines for pistols and Mini-14's. This has cost them over the years as well. I feel that Ruger doesn't have a firm grasp of what the shooting public actually wants. Maybe its similar to the Big 3 automakers not that many years back.

Steelheart

 

[Jkwas]

My first handgun purchase was a taurus on the recommendation of a co-worker who had owned one. It was a Stainless 605 revolver and I still have it. It has been a good gun. At the time I couldn't see laying down the extra $100 for the smith&wesson.
Now that I own guns from several other manufacturers, I still feel the taurus is a good product, and a good value.
Right now I'm on the fence between the Beretta 92 and the Taurus pt92, and to tell you the truth, it's going to come down to what's available at the time. (even though I don't own a beretta at the moment)

 

[Robby]

My reason for my first purchase, was I wanted something for home defense, and possibly taking care of some coyotes, and bobcats on the property. Due to the closeness of homes in most directions, which gave me field of fire problems with regular pistols and revolvers, I looked at THE JUDGE, when I found them locally the only thing available for immediate purchase was the 6.5" barrelled version, because a customer had broken the front sight on the 3" version. Both were Satin Stainless. So I got the big guy, and fell in love with the idea of 45/410 mix capable.
However, If I wanted to carry off the farm, that 13" long thing was gonna be a bear, without a shoulder rig and a long coat.

So I looked at and fell in love with the PT111 Pro, because I did not want to have a 45 carry gun, for some darn reason. Love the gun, but the learning curve from a 6.5" barrel down to the 3" has been tough.

But that brought me to the next item, "the other taurus", a Rossi 461 357 snubby, which for some reason I could put on paper, 81/2 by 11 on the first time I fired it, most were inside the circular target printed on the sheet. The Rossi was the only one I purchased looking at cost and effectiveness balancing cost per round, comparing 5, 6, 7 or 8 rounds and the dollar amount of the purchase.

I found this place, and learned lots about the ones I bought, and maybe sometime in the future, I might move up to a 917, or a 1911.

 

[schlemer]

Ace and Steelheart, thanks for the info.

 

[SgtKnuckles]

Jkwas,... Its no contest... Get the Taurus with the Rail and 17+1 for less money...


Beretta 92FS Inox (Stainless)
http://www.gunbroker.com/auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=89655659


Taurus PT-92 NEW 9mm 17+1 Rail Stainless
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=90225126

 

[Jkwas]

I do like the metal vs plastic parts on the Pt92 compared to the Beretta.  I really need to handle them and see the fit and finish overall.  I'm still a little ways off from tax refund time so I've got some lee way.  The improved locking block on the beretta has me giving it strong consideration.  Both are classics.
But that 24/7 longslide looks pretty good too...... I digress.

 

[SgtKnuckles]

Well Jkwas, here is some Info to Chew on... Seeing as you mentioned the 24/7...<)

M1911 vs. M9
http://www.sightm1911.com/index.htm