November 4, 2008

USA Today Cites Gun Builder Dan Cooper As Obama Advocate; He Resigns from Company

WASHINGTON — A story on USA Today's website last week by Ken Dilanian lead with an anecdote that might surprise many gun-rights proponents:

It read, "Dan Cooper, a proud member of the National Rifle Association, has backed Republicans for most of his life. He's the chief executive of Cooper Arms, a small Montana company that makes hunting rifles.

"Cooper said he voted for George W. Bush in 2000, having voted in past elections for every Republican presidential nominee back to Richard Nixon. In October 1992, he presented a specially made rifle to the first president Bush during a Billings campaign event.

USA Today Cites Gun Builder As Obama Advocate

"This year, Cooper has given $3,300 to the campaign of Democrat Barack Obama. That's on top of the $1,000 check he wrote to Obama's U.S. Senate campaign in 2004, after he was dazzled by Obama's speech at that year's Democratic National Convention.

"Cooper is a player in one of the little-told dramas of the 2008 presidential campaign: how Obama has been able to out-raise Republican John McCain among swaths of the business community, outperforming previous Democratic presidential nominees in drawing business support."

Read the rest of the story here: www.USAToday.com/news/politics/election2008.

The follow-up on the story showed the consequences of Cooper's decision: The company posted a statement Wednesday night on its website that said:

"The employees, shareholders and board of directors of Cooper Firearms of Montana do not share the personal political views of Dan Cooper. 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. 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 Firearms employs 38 people, Cooper said Monday. Dan Cooper and two other former employees of Kimber of Oregon founded Cooper Firearms, Inc. in 1990. With a little over 50 years of combined experience in manufacturing custom quality long guns and funds provided by a small group of investors, the Cooper crew set out to manufacture America's finest rifles. Cooper first designed and manufactured the Model 36 TRP-1 (Target Rifle Project-Phase 1).

Comments (59)

I wonder if all the people crying about Coopers' right to free speech had something to say about the people who went after Joe the Plumber,when he dared to ask Obama about taxes?

Posted by: Johnringo | November 20, 2008 9:59 PM    Report this comment

I wonder if all the people crying about Coopers' right to free speech had something to say about the people who went after Joe the Plumber,when he dared to ask Obama about taxes?

Posted by: Johnringo | November 20, 2008 9:59 PM    Report this comment

"We exist in a spirit of tolerance and reason and my hope and expectation is that others do the same. For this man to be victimized for his beliefs is contrary to the very foundation of this country, our Constitution and the forefathers who had the courage and wisdom to create both. Intolerance such as apparently practiced at Cooper in this matter is a strike at the very roots of what we are pledged to protect and hold dear".
This is precisely the point; if the liberals would behave accordingly, and act in a spirit of tolerance then I doubt the board would have asked Mr. Cooper to resign. But, we all know what is coming, and it is counter to the goals and objectives of Cooper Arms. So, I would ask all of you business savvy folks...why not demand his resignation??

Posted by: Corespray | November 17, 2008 12:05 PM    Report this comment

The "free speech" argument is just moronic. Sure, Cooper has the constitutional right to free speech...just as his Board of Directors has the right to fire him at will. Jeez, a company shouldn't fire their main spokesman when he spits in the face of its customers by supporting the biggest threat to gun rights in our country's history?

What are you free-speech-people suggesting, that anyone can say absolutely anything, anywhere, to anyone, without any consequences whatsoever? Oh, I almost forgot, you liberals don't believe in consequences for actions.

If you don't think someone who's as much of a blatant jackass as Cooper should be canned, is there any limit at all? How about if he went around saying "all gun owners are a bunch of dumb rednecks". Free speech, right? How about "our guns are crap". Free speach?

Posted by: spammy s | November 15, 2008 5:34 PM    Report this comment

Dan Cooper does have a right to free speech. So do the shareholders. I do not know Mr. Cooper,and I am sure he is not stupid. However,to run a company,you must think before you act. To have him endorse Barack Hussian Obama,well,that is dumb.His company makes and sells guns to stay in business.So he wants an anti gun team in the Whitehouse.Stupid.I dont know what anybody on this list does for a living,but would you want someone who wants to ban what you do for a living and puts food in your family's mouth in control? We cant give an inch to anti-gunners. I take it everybody on this list is pro guns,so why dont we stand behind the shareholders? After all,thay are only looking ouy for the business,and want whats good for it. And Hussian and co. is not.

Posted by: Johnringo | November 14, 2008 8:00 PM    Report this comment

Dan Cooper does have a right to free speech. So do the shareholders. I do not know Mr. Cooper,and I am sure he is not stupid. However,to run a company,you must think before you act. To have him endorse Barack Hussian Obama,well,that is dumb.His company makes and sells guns to stay in business.So he wants an anti gun team in the Whitehouse.Stupid.I dont know what anybody on this list does for a living,but would you want someone who wants to ban what you do for a living and puts food in your family's mouth in control? We cant give an inch to anti-gunners. I take it everybody on this list is pro guns,so why dont we stand behind the shareholders? After all,thay are only looking ouy for the business,and want whats good for it. And Hussian and co. is not.

Posted by: Johnringo | November 14, 2008 8:00 PM    Report this comment

I don't think there would be much of an issue here if Obama would leave guns alone...Bush if he did one thing right proved that magazine capacity and short semi carbines doesnt increase the amount of crime in the world. This is Chicago/New York/DC politics and should remain in those cities.
Now Cooper does have the right to do as he wants, just as the board has to do what it feels it must to keep the company afloat. S&W went through the same issues when they teamed up with Clinton and volunteered to reduce the mag sizes and set the standard for that 8 years. They were drug thru the mud for years and eventually sold. Ruger took the same route and since both had a strong revolver following survived, but a company that deals in AK type or black rifles and hi-capacity autoloaders, this is the kiss of death.
Cooper is a good bit smaller than Smith or Ruger and the same people that buy Coopers rifles may/do/probably purchase hi-capacity mags and short rifles. Consumer confidence is everything in a tough economic turndown...

Posted by: Nick M | November 13, 2008 3:38 PM    Report this comment

CEO Cooper" talked the talk" so he had to "walk the walk". Lawful Gun owners are not going to tolerate our right to bear arms being
compromised anymore by anyone period.This is a fight we can't afford to lose because there will be "no second place winner"

Posted by: dotson54 | November 12, 2008 5:23 AM    Report this comment

Any one who uses pejorative phrases like "Busheviks" or "Obammunism" is a koolaid-drinking ideologue who has suborned his God-given powers of abstract thought to a shallow, sloganeering, bumpersticker mentality.

Get this through your heads: There is no difference between the Republican and Democrat parties. The three branches of government have long since stopped acting as checks and balances on each other, and are now actively aiding and abetting each other in the destruction of our Republic, our civil liberties, and our human rights. Our Bill of Rights is being deliberately and purposely ignored in the enactment of laws and the crafting of court opinions, and elections are becoming less and less important as entrenched officials continue to aggregate and consolidate power and engage in flagrant election fraud, in spite of public opinion and the rule of law.
So it doesn't matter who you voted for. Every single one of them is dedicated to the principles of curtailing more and more liberty and freedom, confiscating more and more private money and property, and expanding government hegemony into more and more areas in direct violation of Constitutional restrictions.

Mort, and Monticello, and all the others who insist that we still have "freedom of speech" and demand that we "give Obama a chance" are deluding themselves. There is no freedom of speech anymore, and the Fedgov will absorb Obama and his cronies, just like they have every administration since Teddy Rooseveldt, and seamlessly integrate his positions into the continuing attack on the rights of American citizens.

And until we unite and start shooting, it's not going to change.

But I'm not bitter.

Posted by: Gaviota | November 11, 2008 9:36 PM    Report this comment

This is a sadly undemocratic action against a man who acts on the courage of his convictions. I will never buy any product from a company like Cooper Firearms that conduct its business in such an un-American way. Shame on these hypocrites.

Posted by: Ed C | November 9, 2008 7:58 PM    Report this comment

democrates suck and they are all liberal commie scumbags

Posted by: centurio5 | November 9, 2008 7:58 PM    Report this comment

Monticello, you think Bush and company got us into this financial condition? Think again! Bush inherited the makings of this mess from the Clinton administration. The Democrats in the congress, aided and abetted by a few leftist Republicans (RINOs), passed legislation, signed by Clinton, that mandated subprime loans to unqualified home buyers. The banks had no choice in the matter. This created a new demand for houses, real estate values went up, and subprime home buyers started defaulting. The massive foreclosures caused home prices to decline, thereby bursting the bubble. Several times over the years Bush asked the Democrats in charge of regulating Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to reign them in but Barney Frank and Obama refused. Obama is not the cure for our finacial mess, but rather one of the chief causes.

That said, the most important priority for any president (or member of Congress) must be the preservation of liberty and adherance to the Constitution. Without that, this country is lost. Obama will be the most anti-civil- rights President this country has ever seen.

One issue voter? You bet! The Bill of Rights is by far the most important issue at any time, and the Second Amendment is the keystone of the Bill of Rights.

Clyde B.

Posted by: Bigboomer | November 9, 2008 6:19 PM    Report this comment

BHO just posted this on his "transition" website:
"Address Gun Violence in Cities: . . .They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets."

Here's the link: www.Change.gov/Agenda/UrbanPolicy/

So if he has his way, and he might, the idiotic and hated Clinton "Assault Weapon Ban" will be re-imposed and made permanent. And with that wording, it certainly doesn't appear they want any "grandfathering" of currently owned weapons either.

As Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story said a couple of centuries ago: "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." Palladium is a safeguard or protection.

It's clear from the Federalist Papers that the Founders all thought this way about gun ownership. The Second Amendment is the amendment upon which all the others are guaranteed. It's the protective safeguard of our liberties.

And BHO wants it removed extra-constitutionally.

Posted by: LON W | November 9, 2008 5:41 AM    Report this comment

I certainly understand the company acting in its self interest as chenemf describes. What I don't understand is the animosity of gun owners the company was reacting to, as in the S&W and Jim Zumbo cases. Reminds me of the French and Russian revolutions turning on their own, for not being revolutionary enough. We can't destroy the reputations, careers or businesses of people in the anti-gun business, but by golly if you're in the gun business, and the hard core comrades think you're not marxist-leninist-gunninist enough, you're purged. Is that a firing squad I hear, or just the Brady Bunch splitting their sides laughing? Why don't we all try to calm the waters, and make the shooting sports more inclusive, and more focused on guns than politics? Like the NRA used to be when I joined as a 16 year old, 50 years ago.

Posted by: Monticello | November 8, 2008 4:53 PM    Report this comment

In the first place all you Obama voters are forgeting, on more than one occasion Barack Obama & most of his democratic party has privately & publicly voiced thier objection to private ownership of firearms.They are now in a position to pass laws banning or confiscating
most or all firearms.Of course the board of Directors of a firearms company dont want
people who are running their company backing
some one who can destroy the industry.Are the company Directors not exercising their rights? We can only hope the people who voted against
Obama are wrong and his administration is for ALL people, gun owners or not. Think about it.
What if Obama voters are wrong.

Posted by: SPIKIE | November 8, 2008 3:01 PM    Report this comment

Freedom of speech in the first ammendment refers to the US Government and not corporate America.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

My company(and probably most other big corporations) has rules and policies around the behavior of the employee in public that could paint the company in an unfavorable light. Untoward behavior can be grounds for termination. This behavior could include things like being arrested for drugs, rape, etc, openly associating with groups promoting racism, or openly speaking out against the company.

In my opinion, Mr. Cooper's actions became a problem when it became public knowledge that he supported a candidate that was perceieved to conflict with the company goals and mission. Mr. Cooper, rightfully so, exercised his right to free speech and he may continue to speak or act in this manner. The company chose to also excercise its rights to act in the best interest of the company and persuaded Mr. Cooper to resign.

Posted by: chenemf | November 8, 2008 2:41 PM    Report this comment

CHUCK S mentality: "strolling through the parkinglot" reminded me of "strolling through Berlin gettin rid of anyone with a Star of David ........... " Come on America, 1776 to today ..... we're still here despite the fear mongers and naysayers. The man won the popular AND electorial votes. "Just maybe" he can get us out of this mess .... at his news conference today I saw 7 gun owners standing behind him (his economic advisers). Evidently they were pre-occupied with something more important than their guns.

Posted by: JayInLA | November 7, 2008 7:34 PM    Report this comment

Nine or ten years ago I joined a gun club in my community. I went to the local range with the group a couple of times, attended one or two meetings and lunched with some of the members several times. Well, these guys did nothing but bitch about Bill Clinton and worry that he was going to take their guns away. Didn't seem as if a Democrat was welcome , so I bade them good bye and happy shooting. Lonedrake45 has it right: there are bigger issues at stake than gun ownership, but most of the poster her don't seem to care. Their guns come first.

Posted by: MORT S | November 7, 2008 5:00 PM    Report this comment

Freedom of speech, assembly & etc. only apply until you decide to act on whatever you believe or advocate.
No one commenting would likely say Mr. Cooper has no right to say he agrees with say, Al Queda or Hamas, but when he sends money he is aiding and comforting the enemy, period.
This has historically been known as treason.
The words and actions of Mr. Obama certainly are against the second ammendment. Sure looks like treason to me and anyone who supports this falls into the same category.
Further I agree that the NRA has been a self serving entity for many years. If they were even half as effective as they claim there would be no BATFE or anything remotely like it.
My money and support will no longer go to this organization which cuddles up to the anti-gun crowd and the BATFE.
I want an effective hard-line outfit to represent me. The best I have seen of late, is the JPFO (Jews for the Protection of Firearms Ownership.

Posted by: DES | November 7, 2008 3:49 PM    Report this comment

Nine or ten years ago I joined a gun club in my community. I went to the local range with the group a couple of times, attended one or two meetings and lunched with some of the members several times. Well, these guys did nothing but bitch about Bill Clinton and worry that he was going to take their guns away. Didn't seem as if a Democrat was welcome , so I bade them good bye and happy shooting. Lonedrake45 has it right: there are bigger issues at stake than gun ownership, but most of the poster her don't seem to care. Their guns come first.

Posted by: MORT S | November 7, 2008 3:41 PM    Report this comment

It seems to me that most of you gun owners and NRA members are Republicans and don't seem to think that a lot of Democrats own and love to fire firearms. When a person votes for president there is a lot bigger picture than gun ownership at stake. That is the reason I dropped out of the NRA years ago was that it was too mired down in its own self interests.

Posted by: lonedrake45 | November 7, 2008 1:24 PM    Report this comment

Not to worry, Chicken Littles. The sky is not falling. People are canceling their health insurance, hocking their wives' engagement rings, putting off car purchases, sending their kids to work instead of to college and are on a huge gun buying spree with their cash. Guns are here to stay, so now you can turn your attention to some real problems that Barack Obama and Co. have before them. What I gather from the news is that O is dealing with our sick economy; he hasn't breathed a word about guns. So, gun lovers, go eeasy on the paranoia.

Posted by: MORT S | November 7, 2008 12:33 PM    Report this comment

If we all support the second amendment then we must support all of the other amendments...including his right to free speech. I don't like the way people in this country are eroding our freedoms little by little and I feel the same is being done to Mr. Cooper by censoring his actions.

Posted by: shinglhed | November 7, 2008 8:56 AM    Report this comment

It's too bad, but no one person is indispencable to any given company or project. In some cases you only get one strike and you're out.

Posted by: firstsoldier | November 7, 2008 5:10 AM    Report this comment

Look past the Obama election. You also have the House, Senate and now the White House that will be controled by the Democrates! What BHO wants, he will most likely get.

Posted by: Curtis A | November 6, 2008 6:24 PM    Report this comment

It's still majority rules last time I looked (that would be yesterday). A president was elected, not a dictator, so take a step back and look at the forest for a minute. Yes, Cooper was stupid to go public with his position, but he's entitiled to his views, albeit in perceived opposition to his customers' viewpoint. IMHO, the election this time around was to punish the boneheads who could have prevented our problems in the first place, this was not about second amendment issues. Just stay viligant and be heard, it was something like a 7 point spread altogether, not a bloody landslide, so keep up the pressure, and we'll be fine.

Posted by: STEVEN G | November 6, 2008 6:13 PM    Report this comment

The election of Obama is the begining of of our fight for the 2nd amendment! That is how 38 employee's may lose their jobs.

Posted by: Curtis A | November 6, 2008 5:49 PM    Report this comment

Remember when Smith and Wesson was taken over by a Briton and made deals with the devil? S&W almost disappeared and a lot of good people lost their jobs. Gun buyers voted with their wallet. This is not a First Amendment issue. It is about the survival of a company. Dan Cooper obviously did not inform himself of BHO's hostility toward firearm ownership or his plan for wealth redistribution and what that will do to small businesses. BHO will become our 44th president and we firearm owners will be in the fight of our lives. Dan Cooper deserves to go.

Posted by: Wyomingguy | November 6, 2008 5:18 PM    Report this comment

Remember when Smith and Wesson was taken over by a Briton and made deals with the devil? S&W almost disappeared and a lot of good people lost their jobs. Gun buyers voted with their wallet. This is not a First Amendment issue. It is about the survival of a company. Dan Cooper obviously did not inform himself of BHO's hostility toward firearm ownership or his plan for wealth redistribution and what that will do to small businesses. BHO will become our 44th president and we firearm owners will be in the fight of our lives. Dan Cooper deserves to go.

Posted by: Wyomingguy | November 6, 2008 5:17 PM    Report this comment

Mr. Cooper made a decision that could negatively influence consumers to buy their guns elsewhere. It is a wise business move by the Board Members to sever his connection with the company.

Posted by: Robert M | November 6, 2008 5:07 PM    Report this comment

With freedom of speech, comes the responsibility for your speech. If the CEO of a company I owened shares in supported, with co. money, someone that would put the co. out of business. I would try to have him fired. Without the 2nd amendment all the rest have no teeth.

Posted by: John R | November 6, 2008 5:06 PM    Report this comment

Oh, about that CFO, three things I neglected to mention: first, we can't fire him without giving him beaucoup millions for doing a lousy job; second, we can't fire him because he's a friend of Dic Cheney's; and third, we can't fire him because there ain't no such guy.

Posted by: MORT S | November 6, 2008 3:56 PM    Report this comment

Fire that CFO! It's financial wizards like him who have guided our economy into its current economic black hole. He has computed rate increases without any basis for the conclusion he has reached; shown a lack of awareness of his company's personnel policies, not given thought to the company's well being (for all he can tell by looking at their bumper stickers he may be about to fire the company's best salesman, an essential researcher, the CEO's indispensable personal assistant, the firm's lead counselor and a couple of other indispensable employees). Sounds like a Republican to you? He does to me.

Posted by: MORT S | November 6, 2008 3:45 PM    Report this comment

I have personaly worked for a very prosperous company started by one man, doing design and custom machine work all over this fine country. He had "cream of the crop" mechanical and electrical engineers and master machinists. To make a long story short that president was so brigity, arogent,obnoxious, and generaly a misinformed smart ass (everyone has known someone like this). The company failed---60 people went job hunting. Aah but he was president! I'm seeing people say Dan Cooper should be able to say-or do what he wants. I guess that's if they don't work for him. Good thing Dan wasn't the captain of the Titanic--his "cheer leaders" would find it hard to polish the brass on his ship. Comment by Dave S In Virginia

Posted by: Dakardt | November 6, 2008 3:38 PM    Report this comment

Whatever happened to peoples' rights to their own political opinion and choice? There seems to be lockstep, lynch mob philosophy out there. Look at what happened to Jim Zumbo!
Well, I hope the zealots are happy. We now have absolutely no traction in Washington, and since we spent years demonizing the Democratic leadershihp--it is little wonder.

Posted by: Millwright | November 6, 2008 3:29 PM    Report this comment

Mr. Cooper, as an American citizen is entitled to express his opinions.

Mr. Cooper, as CEO is responsible to the company to properly represent the business and not do anything to harm the business.

Mr. Cooper's mistake was risking the company name and reputation by associating them with his personal political opinions.

It is regretable that Mr. Cooper paid such a serious price for exercising poor judgement. This is a reminder that there is no freedom without responsibility.

Posted by: FRANK B | November 6, 2008 3:08 PM    Report this comment

The phony layoff letter Chuck shared should say, lay off anybody with a Bush/Cheney '04 bumper sticker. It's the Bushevik ideology,
arrogance and incompetence that bankrupted America. Obama didn't do it; he inherits it and will have to deal with it. And a question to those who say Dan Cooper had it coming, because he was telling people not to buy guns, and to oppose the second amendment. Where do you guys get this stuff, just make it up? The man did NOT do any of that, and supported Obama because of the importance of his policies on other issues. On the Second Amendment, Obama knows politics requires compromise, and he ain't sending anybody to get our guns, even though he personally wishes there weren't any. We can all understand what motivates that point of view, we just don't agree, for good reasons. Obama's got much bigger fish (gigantic) to fry, leading us out of the hole we're in. He's got to herd a lot of cats to get there, from the Busheviks who brung us to this dance, to screwballs in the Democratic party. Let's help him.

Posted by: Monticello | November 6, 2008 3:03 PM    Report this comment

"He could have remain silent and there would not be a problem."

He did remain silent. USA Today looked it up, because they are required to report financial contributions over a certain amount with name and occupation to make sure they are not taking donations from say a foreign national.

Dan Cooper did nothing wrong. To bad people punish the company for the contribution of the CEO. This crap happens all the time at big companies, but they don't run the risk of going under due to politics.

Posted by: computererds | November 6, 2008 2:50 PM    Report this comment

NEWELL Nov. 6, 2008
The point is that Mr. Obama is not operating in the best interest of the company. For the CEO to support him any way would indicate a judgement short coming not in the best intrest of the investors. It is not about freedom of speech. The board can fire any CEO for any reason, or no reason. That is the cross a CEO has to bear.

Posted by: NDA | November 6, 2008 2:34 PM    Report this comment

The Board acted in the true American vein: if you think it will affect the bottom line, give it the boot. If your spokesperson or leader comes out of the closet, inadvertently makes a statement counter to the belief of the kookiest customer, is caught doing something that only the crackpot fringe might find slightly objectionable, deep six him or her. A bad word about religion and you're gone. A perceived deviation from the orthodox and you can kiss our job goodbye. We're on the way to becoming a nation of whisperers, fearful of expressing unpopular points of view.

Posted by: MORT S | November 6, 2008 2:20 PM    Report this comment

Here's a copy/paste of an email making the rounds today that fits into this thread:

Fellow Business Executives:

As the CFO of this business that employees 140 people, I have resigned
myself to the fact that Barrack Obama will be our next President, and
that our taxes and government fees will increase in a BIG way.

To compensate for these increases, I figure that the Clients will have
to see an increase in our fees to them of about 8% but since we cannot
increase our fees right now due to the dismal state of our economy, we
will have to lay off six of our employees instead. This has really been
eating at me for a while, as we believe we are family here and I didn't
know how to choose who will have to go.

So, this is what I did. I strolled thru our parking lot and found 8
Obama bumper stickers on our employees' cars and have decided these
folks will be the first to be laid off. I can't think of a more fair way
to approach this problem. These folks wanted change; I gave it to them.

If you have a better idea, let me know.

Posted by: CHUCK S | November 6, 2008 2:12 PM    Report this comment

I see in almost every response that someone talks of checks and balances being the answer. I think the point is there are no more checks and balances, nor are we going to be able to use the judicial and legal systems to remedy what happens. Whatever it is and however good or bad it is we are now left with nothing but the consequences of our actions which is to elect the most liberal president, senate and house that has held power in some time. In short order we will be faced with bans and possible confiscations with no remedy or redress. I guess we all get to wake up and smell what ever it is we smell. What I smell does not not smell like coffee to me but it is usually brown.

Posted by: Wood Butcher | November 6, 2008 1:56 PM    Report this comment

Mr. Cooper knew what the repercusion would be when he voted. We all have to accept the results of our own actions, and sometimes we have to do what our hearts tell us even our mind knows better. When we have 2 lousey choices we have to make a decision and accept the consequences. WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!!!

Posted by: Jayr | November 6, 2008 1:49 PM    Report this comment

Mr Cooper had every right to do as he did but must be aware and ready to accept the consequences of his actions. Also this is not some 3rd world banana republic so lets not act like one. The election is over and vour choice did not win. We need to use the `system our founders made to keep the system in check.

Posted by: kc5aiy | November 6, 2008 12:59 PM    Report this comment

Every supporter of the 2nd amendment should be appalled at anyone who supports a person who has made it no secret that he wants to confiscate every gun in America!

Posted by: adamsj3 | November 6, 2008 11:09 AM    Report this comment

Never step back. Never take a breath. Never "chill". Call me a single issue voter. But, without the Second Ammendment (or any of the Bill of Rights) there is no Bill of Rights. Remove or undermine one of the cornerstones of founding principals of the country and all could fall apart.

Everyone is entitled to their vote and their opinion. That being said I applaud the company's board for removing this person. For the CEo of a firearms company to PUBLICALLY come out for a rabidly anti 2A candidate is just plain bad for business.

One only needs to look at the beatings taken by S&W, Ruger and Mr. Zumbo to see the backlash of alienating your core of potnetial clients.

Posted by: SEAN C | November 6, 2008 11:05 AM    Report this comment

Given a choice I will not buy a product from any company led buy someone that contributes to anti 2nd Amendment causes and that includes Obama. I have not bought a Levi product since the 1980s, and I will not buy a Cooper product as long as he is an officer in the corporation.

Posted by: Steven H | November 6, 2008 10:38 AM    Report this comment

We cannot "step back and chill".Gun owners must let the politicians & Corporations know we will not financially or politically support anyone who attempts to take our guns from us.
What we Gun Owners need to do is " Wake up and smell the coffee"
"Yes we can"

Posted by: dotson54 | November 6, 2008 10:20 AM    Report this comment

If Obama is as smart as we think he is, he will offer Dan a job and use Dan's data base for the future roundup of firearms and as a liason to the NRA. Dan Cooper has every right to his opinions and no one can take them away.How the company deals with Dan is their business, not ours, and if he feels wronged enough, there is always our most liberal court system to help him heal a wound. I applaud his feelings, but would not have publicly expressed them to the shareholders.It makes NO difference what political leanings he has, only his actions within the company.

Posted by: Sharps | November 6, 2008 10:16 AM    Report this comment

EVERYONE needs to take a step back and chill. The ink isn't even dry on the ballots and people are runing scared. This is the USA folks. Majority rules. Let's wait a bit and see which way the wind blows. Freedom, Justice , Equality, Dan Cooper has rights just like the rest of us. I'll continue to buy their guns ............ even shooting off-hand, I can't tell if it was made by a Democrat or Republican !

Posted by: JayInLA | November 6, 2008 10:03 AM    Report this comment

My first thought was that the Board should have formed a firing squad and shot him with one of his own rifles for daring to back Obama (obvious sarcasm here I hope is recognized). On reflection, the CEO of a company does have responsibility to the people who work there and the share holders. Given the level of anxiety the election has causesd in the gun community, the company, the company's products and workers could conceivably be affected. The guy isn't just an employee of the company--he is the leader and his actions will reflect on his organization. He really doesn't have the luxury of acting like a private individual. I think a person should be able to back who they please and we should respect this basic American right, but this guy isn't just a "person." I have to tell you though, the story makes me sad.

Posted by: Seiurep | November 6, 2008 10:00 AM    Report this comment

Realize that a CEO must make decisions for the greater good just as President Elect Obama will have to. If I were a CEO of a firearms company, I wouldn't have any anti-gun sentiment on or around my board either.If you were the president of Snap- On Tools, would you keep an officer around that told everyone to buy Mac Tools? As with every decision we make in life, there are reprocussions, Dan's choice and Dan will live with the consequences. As Silver Rings states:remaining silent may have been a better option.

Posted by: Sharps | November 6, 2008 9:58 AM    Report this comment

Seems to me Dan Cooper followed John McCain's advice and put country first. That led him to decide to support then-Senator Obama, as the man with the better overall plan for America, even though he was not the best for Dan Cooper's lifelong passion for firearms, or his career. Putting country first is not consistent with "single issue" or "me first" politics. Bravo Mr. Cooper, hope you will continue to fight for the Second Amendment while supporting other policies you think best for America. As Obama said when McCain wanted to cancel the first debate to work on the financial sector crash, being President means you have to be able to work on more than one thing at a time. Maybe that's true of being a good citizen too. To those who say we can't do it all, how about Pres.-elect Obama's answer? Yes we can.

Posted by: Monticello | November 6, 2008 9:58 AM    Report this comment

Just another case of making a move before engaging you brain. Or, acting without thinking.

Posted by: gerhardt | November 6, 2008 9:41 AM    Report this comment

He is in titled to vote for any one, however as the president of a company making his political choice know, it impacts the company. He could have remain silent and there would not be a problem.

Posted by: Silver Rings | November 6, 2008 9:39 AM    Report this comment

I am appalled to hear that Dan Cooper has been professionally censored for his personal opinions. The right to free speech and to one's own opinion is the greatest right we have and to see the small mindedness of people on his board and in HIS company is grievous and deeply discouraging. What is their reasoning? Will the quality of their guns degrade because of his beliefs? Will the company founder because of them? Is the gun buying community so narrow in perspective and vindictive in act that they will turn their back on an entire company and product line?
I happen to be a politically independent person and voter who leans centrist-liberal and have been a proud gun owner, shooter and collector for many years and have every intention of continuing in each activity. I have good friends who owns guns and others who don't and some who share my political beliefs and others who don't. We exist in a spirit of tolerance and reason and my hope and expectation is that others do the same. For this man to be victimized for his beliefs is contrary to the very foundation of this country, our Constitution and the forefathers who had the courage and wisdom to create both. Intolerance such as apparently practiced at Cooper in this matter is a strike at the very roots of what we are pledged to protect and hold dear.

Posted by: tigertanks | November 6, 2008 9:32 AM    Report this comment

Forced out of his job because he supported the candidate he preferred, in a public election? What are we coming to? Further, why would Dan's support for Obama cost 38 people their jobs? Are you suggesting that no one will buy the guns anymore because a Republican employee of the gun company preferred the Democrat candidate in one election, and did not hide that fact? "Political correctness" is a disease, on any side of an issue.

Posted by: WILLIAM R | November 6, 2008 9:32 AM    Report this comment

I am appalled to hear that Dan Cooper has been professionally censored for his personal opinions. The right to free speech and to one's own opinion is the greatest right we have and to see the small mindedness of people on his board and in HIS company is grievous and deeply discouraging. What is their reasoning? Will the quality of their guns degrade because of his beliefs? Will the company founder because of them? Is the gun buying community so narrow in perspective and vindictive in act that they will turn their back on an entire company and product line?
I happen to be a politically independent person and voter who leans centrist-liberal and have been a proud gun owner, shooter and collector for many years and have every intention of continuing in each activity. I have good friends who owns guns and others who don't and some who share my political beliefs and others who don't. We exist in a spirit of tolerance and reason and my hope and expectation is that others do the same. For this man to be victimized for his beliefs is contrary to the very foundation of this country, our Constitution and the forefathers who had the courage and wisdom to create both. Intolerance such as apparently practiced at Cooper in this matter is a strike at the very roots of what we are pledged to protect and hold dear.

Posted by: tigertanks | November 6, 2008 9:31 AM    Report this comment

I agree with Cooper Firearms decision to ask Dan Cooper to resign.We must lead by example.
His behavior may cause 38 people to lose their
jobs at Cooper Firearms.

Posted by: dotson54 | November 6, 2008 9:15 AM    Report this comment

Add your comments ...

New to Gun Tests? Register for Free!

Already Registered? Log In