I don't need or want your favors.... Go ahead and make all of the smart *** remarks that you want, it doesn't change the facts that to support a company that supports those that want to end gun ownership in this contry is just plain and simply stupid. Calling you NAIVE was just plain and simple and attempt at sugar coating the facts.
Cooper
- Thread starter alldayhunter
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
I don't need or want your favors.... Go ahead and make all of the smart *** remarks that you want, it doesn't change the facts that to support a company that supports those that want to end gun ownership in this contry is just plain and simply stupid. Calling you NAIVE was just plain and simple and attempt at sugar coating the facts.
MontanaRifleman
Well-Known Member
Can't believe I'm getting sucked back into this...
You just don't get it, do ya? I wont support a gun company that supports those who want to put an end to gun ownership in this country. That is why I sent that email. I'm going to look into it instead of making basically baseless accusations. Do you actually think the employees and management of that company support Obama and the like??? Who knows what brain disease struck Dan Cooper but I just cant phathom people dedicating their careers and lives to making guns, especially the quality of guns that Cooper Arms puts out, and supporting the very people who would put an end to that. If in fact they do, I will not buy their product. In the mean time, based on their action, I'll take them at their word. You and others may think it's naive, but I call it being reasonable. One great thing about this country you seem to forget, that one of the many rights we have is the idea of being "inocent until proven guilty", and that is right up there with the right to own and bear arms, if not higher. I am not going to punish numerous people and their families because of one man's lunacy. One other thing you might consider is this... I believe you and some others have something in common with President Elect Obama... you would all love to see Cooper Arms go under... think about it... Nothing like a vigilante, self proclaimed policeman to see that justice is served. Hang'em now and ask questions later.
Not a smart *** coment... just a not so subtle hint to becareful where you go. If you think my reasoning is niave, that's your call, but there is a fine line between identifying naive behavior and name calling and you're coming close to crossing that line. I was brought up that if you dont agree with someone or dont even like them, to show respect. Disrespect reflects on the one who disrespects. If you want to engage in that, I cant stop you, but I wont stoop to that level.
Last edited:
Now we have been through this before----READ THIS AGAIN!!!!!
"Let me try and put this into a perspective that you will be able to understand..
First if Dan Cooper is the partial owner or has an ownership interest in this company even by proxy he will be receiving profits or compensation in one form or another. This might even be possibly from another company that he has an interest in that supplies parts or materials to Cooper Rifles for incorporation into the final product. There are many many ways to get around the "appearance" that one is no longer associated with a private entity. My point is that not everyone is capable of being duped that easily. Please understand that I am not calling you stupid or anything of the sort only naive and not understanding the possible total scope of the issue. Just so you know the reason I am somewhat jaded as my profession has shown some of the aforementioned activities that were alluded to above during fact finding activities done in the past so "this is not this cowboys first rodeo" so to speak.
Not calling you a liberal however, your views on this matter certainly give that outside appearance or one that is naive. I hope this has helped you in some small way!"
MontanaRifleman
Well-Known Member
Your source? If that's true, then I wont be buying any Cooper's until he sells out. And once again, I am looking into it. Also, if it is true, it will take a while to negotiate that, and I'll wait until Mr Cooper is in fact gone.
"He said he had resigned the company. He did not address whether he will maintain an ownership stake — except to say, "stronger measures may be forthcoming."
Rifle maker bounces boss who supports Obama - USATODAY.com
Rifle maker bounces boss who supports Obama - USATODAY.com
Cooper Arms exec backs Obama, perhaps with illegal contribution
Posted by David Hardy · 29 October 2008 10:27 AM
USA Today ran a story noting that Dan Cooper, owner and CEO of Cooper Arms, is backing and contributing to Obama. It said he's given $3,300, "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."
Of Arms and the Law: Cooper Arms exec backs Obama, perhaps with illegal contribution
Snowflakes in Hell notes that he's caught flak, and is now claiming that he donated nine months ago, with the purpose of defeating Hillary, and that's he's now given to McCain. Snowflakes eats up that alibi: there's no record of a McCain donation. It appears it was after the convention. But as it was the ILL senate race, he was hardly motivated by seeing Obama defeat Hillary.
[Comment on how he might have gone over limits deleted here, since I investigated and show hard date in the post above. Basically, OpenSecrets and other secondary sources were picking up on FEC errors, and then adding some more of their own.]
UPDATE: I followed Bitter's suggestion and looked up the FEC records. Very confusing, since they have under his name and address two different Daniel Coopers who donate to Obama, and other errors, so I checked the images:
1/17: a New Yorker, no job given, donated $2100.
2/6: An Ohioan, CEO of Cooper Arms, gives $1000.
2/6: Sane person and occupation gives $800
2/6: Same person and occupation gets a refund of $800.
2/6: Same person and occupation gives $1000.
No reason given for the refund (-800), and the listing of cumulative donations doesn't match anything (they show for most of these cumulative donations of $3100 or 3200). Egad. All are for the primary tho, and the Ohio Cooper seems to have given $2800, going over the limit, which was probably remedied by the refund).
· Politics
Comments
Crap. I love my Cooper rimfires (22, 17m2), but I guess I've bought my last Cooper. There are other manufacturers I can give my money to.
Posted by: Robin at October 29, 2008 11:23 AM
Either the guys a complete idiot - which is unlikely, since he seems to have built a successful business - or there's some serious **** going on here. Someone doesn't do something that is against his apparent self-interest to the extent of violating a law where the violation is fairly easily found (large risk) without some (probably criminal) other reasons. Someone has pictures with the proverbial dead girl or live boy (or sheep - Montana joke), or there's been a promise of serious federal cash flowing his way. Did someone in the Ob camp promise him a lucrative military contract? At any rate, he's lost his bet - he's not going to live this down (S&W anyone?) in the civilian market, if McC wins, he's out, and if Ob wins, they won't follow through on the promise because, at this point, the cat's out of the bag.
Posted by: bud at October 29, 2008 11:36 AM
The limit is $4,600 with $2,300 for the primary and then again for the general.
As for the date of donation in 2004, that is an 8, not a 6. It was given after his speech to the convention.
As for the HuffPo listing, it would appear that their data is pulling the information incorrectly. If you look at both OpenSecrets and FEC, all of the Dan Cooper listings in MT are for the same man. There's no OH listing. I would rely on the original sources for that information.
So everything looks legal, it's just scummy.
Posted by: Bitter at October 29, 2008 11:51 AM
An 8, yes, but 8/16, which was before the gathering of Patriots in Boston later that month.
The OH listing is here: F.E.C. IMAGE 28930926481 (Page 481 of 3000)
B&C at that link. He lives in OH or at least owns a house there.
Posted by: Anon Anon! at October 29, 2008 12:01 PM
Actually, it was a couple of weeks after the convention, which was held earlier in 2004 than it was this year. My bad. Still, he wasn't running against Hillary then...he was running against Alan Keyes and needed so much help to get 70% of the vote.
Posted by: Anon Anon! at October 29, 2008 12:09 PM
There are no records of the FEC website of contributions to McCain from him, only Obama:
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $2,100 1/17/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $50 6/6/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $50 7/26/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-900 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $900 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $1,000 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-200 4/15/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $200 4/15/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $200 4/15/2008
Presidential Campaign Finance
Posted by: anona at October 29, 2008 12:54 PM
Dan didn't used to be an idiot (he lived down the hall from me in college, many years ago) and I doubt that he is now. Looking at that list of charges and refunds, though, I wonder if he's actually making those donations, or if someone else with his number and name are, and he's asking for the ones he catches to be refunded?
Posted by: htom at October 29, 2008 01:11 PM
You might want to double check your numbers, Dave. I'm still getting different information. I still get zero hits for any Dan/Daniel/any variation of Da* in OH in the FEC database. I also turn up an odd donation of $900 that was returned, not $800.
Posted by: Bitter at October 29, 2008 01:13 PM
Opps, I was thinking of Dan Coonan. Still wonder if Dan Cooper was making that series of donations (I know his name is attached, but it could as well be Joe SixGun, the way Obama's records are being kept.)
Posted by: htom at October 29, 2008 01:16 PM
Bitter, it's all very murky. Under his name in MT, you get donations from a guy in OH who claims to be Dan Cooper, President/CEO of Cooper Arms (or some variation thereof). Very odd. If he entered the wrong address by mistake, that would be one thing, though Akron and Stevensville are pretty hard to confuse on a keyboard, as are MT, OH and the odd NY guy. This all points to shoddy record keeping somewhere and potentially problematic donations from Cooper, who admits to giving $3,300 to Obama, which would be illegal if given in a single election cycle, but potentially legal if spread out.
The real issue is that the owner of a gun manufacturer is giving to Obama and his company is covering for him in a very misleading fashion, to the point of what seems like an outright lie in regards to his original 2008 donation being in opposition to Hillary when he gave to Obama in '04.
Posted by: Anon Anon! at October 29, 2008 02:11 PM
For further murkiness, see OpenSecrets | Donor Lookup: Find Individual and Soft Money Contributors
He appears to live in lots of Stevensvilles in several states.
The FEC docs don't shed much light on this mystery, sadly.
Posted by: Anon Anon! at October 29, 2008 02:13 PM
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Posted by: Anonymous at October 29, 2008 02:27 PM
Anon,
I don't think you understand the law. It is perfectly legal to give $3,300 (or more - all the way up to $4,600) in a single election cycle. There are multiple accounts - a primary account, and a general account. Candidates can start a general account before the primary ends and that account can have donations put into it before the primary is over. There is absolutely nothing illegal about it. When you max out on one account, you're given the option to give the surplus to the other account. There is nothing about election cycles which tend to be considered every two years in DC terms.
Accusing him of a crime when there is no clear evidence of one is inappropriate at best, and well beyond dirty politics. I don't agree with him, and I would like to see the market show him that he's making a bad decision. However, that doesn't mean we should jump on board with accusations when it's pretty clear from even an initial reading that records are not perfect.
Pick the right battle here. It's a battle that is really nothing more than a gunmaker who is about to learn a hard lesson via the pocketbook. Tell people about his support and the subsequent cover-up, promote alternatives to anyone in the market for those types of guns. However, there's no need to start a battle that smears his name with false claims of crimes. Besides, if you want to pick that route, it's better if you actually know the law.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 29, 2008 03:14 PM
Anonymous,
I agree completely. The company's rather lame statement is what really got me ****ed off.
Just noting that there is something fishy, either with the FEC's record keeping or the Obama campaign's (the latter, I think is more likely given what I've read), or there could have been an illegal donation (hence the refund). It's fishy, but perhaps just because of the murkiness, not because of a crime. The $4600 limit as I understand it is for a family (husband can give $2300 and wife can give the same). Perhaps I am wrong, if so, please let me know. In other words, if I give $4600, that is illegal, but if I give $2300 and my wife gives $2300, it's ok. Is that correct?
His name is smeared...by him, not anyone else.
Posted by: Anon Anon! at October 29, 2008 04:00 PM
I sent an email to Cooper Arms today with a full accounting of Dan Cooper's donations as reported by OpenSecrets.org. I concluded the email by stating:
"According to OpenSecrets.org, Mr. Cooper has never given any money to anybody who wasn't a Democrat - and there is no arguing the damage done by Democrats to our 2nd Amendment rights. Who are you guys trying to kid, anyway? You guys make beautiful rifles, but their beauty is irrelevant as I may someday be unable to buy one in part because of your CEO's political contributions."
I received the following reply from them just a few minutes ago:
"In response to the recent article highlighting Dan Cooper's personal political donations, the board of directors, shareholders and employees of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc would like to issue the following statement.
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 of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc.
Daily operations will continue with the competent staff currently in place in Stevensville, MT producing the finest, most accurate rifles money can buy.
Dan Cooper has spent all of his working life producing the highest quality rifles built here in the USA. He started with nothing but the American Dream and built that into firearms company anyone would be proud of. We firmly believe Dan stands by the 2nd amendment.
We wish him all of the best in his future pursuits."
I don't generally agree that a man should be hounded out of his job because of his political beliefs, but it goes without saying that his continued employment as President and CEO would have permanently harmed the company's bottom line. If it is a publicly traded company with a board of directors, and if Cooper's position was as a "C" level employee whose presence in the position would harm the company, then they have no choice but to ask for his resignation. It will be interesting to see if he actually resigns, since they "asked" him to.
Posted by: whamprod at October 29, 2008 05:20 PM
Hmmm... I guess that blockquote tags center text instead of indenting it like they should...
Posted by: whamprod at October 29, 2008 05:21 PM
**** that place
Posted by: Anonymous at October 29, 2008 05:49 PM
I find the following at Cooper Arms' website...quoted verbatim:
In response to the recent article highlighting Dan Cooper's personal political donations, the board of directors, shareholders and employees of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc would like to issue the following statement.
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 of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc.
Daily operations will continue with the competent staff currently in place in Stevensville, MT producing the finest, most accurate rifles money can buy.
Dan Cooper has spent all of his working life producing the highest quality rifles built here in the USA. He started with nothing but the American Dream and built that into firearms company anyone would be proud of. We firmly believe Dan stands by the 2nd amendment.
We wish him all of the best in his future pursuits.
Posted by: doug in colorado at October 30, 2008 08:39 AM
The statement on Cooper Arms website is bull. They've asked him to resign when it is a privately owned company that he is a founder of? Damage control, where is the proof that he has been booted from the company entirely? Isn't going to happen.
Posted by David Hardy · 29 October 2008 10:27 AM
USA Today ran a story noting that Dan Cooper, owner and CEO of Cooper Arms, is backing and contributing to Obama. It said he's given $3,300, "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."
Of Arms and the Law: Cooper Arms exec backs Obama, perhaps with illegal contribution
Snowflakes in Hell notes that he's caught flak, and is now claiming that he donated nine months ago, with the purpose of defeating Hillary, and that's he's now given to McCain. Snowflakes eats up that alibi: there's no record of a McCain donation. It appears it was after the convention. But as it was the ILL senate race, he was hardly motivated by seeing Obama defeat Hillary.
[Comment on how he might have gone over limits deleted here, since I investigated and show hard date in the post above. Basically, OpenSecrets and other secondary sources were picking up on FEC errors, and then adding some more of their own.]
UPDATE: I followed Bitter's suggestion and looked up the FEC records. Very confusing, since they have under his name and address two different Daniel Coopers who donate to Obama, and other errors, so I checked the images:
1/17: a New Yorker, no job given, donated $2100.
2/6: An Ohioan, CEO of Cooper Arms, gives $1000.
2/6: Sane person and occupation gives $800
2/6: Same person and occupation gets a refund of $800.
2/6: Same person and occupation gives $1000.
No reason given for the refund (-800), and the listing of cumulative donations doesn't match anything (they show for most of these cumulative donations of $3100 or 3200). Egad. All are for the primary tho, and the Ohio Cooper seems to have given $2800, going over the limit, which was probably remedied by the refund).
· Politics
Comments
Crap. I love my Cooper rimfires (22, 17m2), but I guess I've bought my last Cooper. There are other manufacturers I can give my money to.
Posted by: Robin at October 29, 2008 11:23 AM
Either the guys a complete idiot - which is unlikely, since he seems to have built a successful business - or there's some serious **** going on here. Someone doesn't do something that is against his apparent self-interest to the extent of violating a law where the violation is fairly easily found (large risk) without some (probably criminal) other reasons. Someone has pictures with the proverbial dead girl or live boy (or sheep - Montana joke), or there's been a promise of serious federal cash flowing his way. Did someone in the Ob camp promise him a lucrative military contract? At any rate, he's lost his bet - he's not going to live this down (S&W anyone?) in the civilian market, if McC wins, he's out, and if Ob wins, they won't follow through on the promise because, at this point, the cat's out of the bag.
Posted by: bud at October 29, 2008 11:36 AM
The limit is $4,600 with $2,300 for the primary and then again for the general.
As for the date of donation in 2004, that is an 8, not a 6. It was given after his speech to the convention.
As for the HuffPo listing, it would appear that their data is pulling the information incorrectly. If you look at both OpenSecrets and FEC, all of the Dan Cooper listings in MT are for the same man. There's no OH listing. I would rely on the original sources for that information.
So everything looks legal, it's just scummy.
Posted by: Bitter at October 29, 2008 11:51 AM
An 8, yes, but 8/16, which was before the gathering of Patriots in Boston later that month.
The OH listing is here: F.E.C. IMAGE 28930926481 (Page 481 of 3000)
B&C at that link. He lives in OH or at least owns a house there.
Posted by: Anon Anon! at October 29, 2008 12:01 PM
Actually, it was a couple of weeks after the convention, which was held earlier in 2004 than it was this year. My bad. Still, he wasn't running against Hillary then...he was running against Alan Keyes and needed so much help to get 70% of the vote.
Posted by: Anon Anon! at October 29, 2008 12:09 PM
There are no records of the FEC website of contributions to McCain from him, only Obama:
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $2,100 1/17/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $50 6/6/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $50 7/26/2007
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-900 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $900 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $1,000 2/6/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $33 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $61 3/7/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $-200 4/15/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $200 4/15/2008
COOPER, DAN COOPER ARMS/PRESIDENT / CEO STEVENSVILLE MT 59870 Barack Obama $200 4/15/2008
Presidential Campaign Finance
Posted by: anona at October 29, 2008 12:54 PM
Dan didn't used to be an idiot (he lived down the hall from me in college, many years ago) and I doubt that he is now. Looking at that list of charges and refunds, though, I wonder if he's actually making those donations, or if someone else with his number and name are, and he's asking for the ones he catches to be refunded?
Posted by: htom at October 29, 2008 01:11 PM
You might want to double check your numbers, Dave. I'm still getting different information. I still get zero hits for any Dan/Daniel/any variation of Da* in OH in the FEC database. I also turn up an odd donation of $900 that was returned, not $800.
Posted by: Bitter at October 29, 2008 01:13 PM
Opps, I was thinking of Dan Coonan. Still wonder if Dan Cooper was making that series of donations (I know his name is attached, but it could as well be Joe SixGun, the way Obama's records are being kept.)
Posted by: htom at October 29, 2008 01:16 PM
Bitter, it's all very murky. Under his name in MT, you get donations from a guy in OH who claims to be Dan Cooper, President/CEO of Cooper Arms (or some variation thereof). Very odd. If he entered the wrong address by mistake, that would be one thing, though Akron and Stevensville are pretty hard to confuse on a keyboard, as are MT, OH and the odd NY guy. This all points to shoddy record keeping somewhere and potentially problematic donations from Cooper, who admits to giving $3,300 to Obama, which would be illegal if given in a single election cycle, but potentially legal if spread out.
The real issue is that the owner of a gun manufacturer is giving to Obama and his company is covering for him in a very misleading fashion, to the point of what seems like an outright lie in regards to his original 2008 donation being in opposition to Hillary when he gave to Obama in '04.
Posted by: Anon Anon! at October 29, 2008 02:11 PM
For further murkiness, see OpenSecrets | Donor Lookup: Find Individual and Soft Money Contributors
He appears to live in lots of Stevensvilles in several states.
The FEC docs don't shed much light on this mystery, sadly.
Posted by: Anon Anon! at October 29, 2008 02:13 PM
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Posted by: Anonymous at October 29, 2008 02:27 PM
Anon,
I don't think you understand the law. It is perfectly legal to give $3,300 (or more - all the way up to $4,600) in a single election cycle. There are multiple accounts - a primary account, and a general account. Candidates can start a general account before the primary ends and that account can have donations put into it before the primary is over. There is absolutely nothing illegal about it. When you max out on one account, you're given the option to give the surplus to the other account. There is nothing about election cycles which tend to be considered every two years in DC terms.
Accusing him of a crime when there is no clear evidence of one is inappropriate at best, and well beyond dirty politics. I don't agree with him, and I would like to see the market show him that he's making a bad decision. However, that doesn't mean we should jump on board with accusations when it's pretty clear from even an initial reading that records are not perfect.
Pick the right battle here. It's a battle that is really nothing more than a gunmaker who is about to learn a hard lesson via the pocketbook. Tell people about his support and the subsequent cover-up, promote alternatives to anyone in the market for those types of guns. However, there's no need to start a battle that smears his name with false claims of crimes. Besides, if you want to pick that route, it's better if you actually know the law.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 29, 2008 03:14 PM
Anonymous,
I agree completely. The company's rather lame statement is what really got me ****ed off.
Just noting that there is something fishy, either with the FEC's record keeping or the Obama campaign's (the latter, I think is more likely given what I've read), or there could have been an illegal donation (hence the refund). It's fishy, but perhaps just because of the murkiness, not because of a crime. The $4600 limit as I understand it is for a family (husband can give $2300 and wife can give the same). Perhaps I am wrong, if so, please let me know. In other words, if I give $4600, that is illegal, but if I give $2300 and my wife gives $2300, it's ok. Is that correct?
His name is smeared...by him, not anyone else.
Posted by: Anon Anon! at October 29, 2008 04:00 PM
I sent an email to Cooper Arms today with a full accounting of Dan Cooper's donations as reported by OpenSecrets.org. I concluded the email by stating:
"According to OpenSecrets.org, Mr. Cooper has never given any money to anybody who wasn't a Democrat - and there is no arguing the damage done by Democrats to our 2nd Amendment rights. Who are you guys trying to kid, anyway? You guys make beautiful rifles, but their beauty is irrelevant as I may someday be unable to buy one in part because of your CEO's political contributions."
I received the following reply from them just a few minutes ago:
"In response to the recent article highlighting Dan Cooper's personal political donations, the board of directors, shareholders and employees of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc would like to issue the following statement.
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 of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc.
Daily operations will continue with the competent staff currently in place in Stevensville, MT producing the finest, most accurate rifles money can buy.
Dan Cooper has spent all of his working life producing the highest quality rifles built here in the USA. He started with nothing but the American Dream and built that into firearms company anyone would be proud of. We firmly believe Dan stands by the 2nd amendment.
We wish him all of the best in his future pursuits."
I don't generally agree that a man should be hounded out of his job because of his political beliefs, but it goes without saying that his continued employment as President and CEO would have permanently harmed the company's bottom line. If it is a publicly traded company with a board of directors, and if Cooper's position was as a "C" level employee whose presence in the position would harm the company, then they have no choice but to ask for his resignation. It will be interesting to see if he actually resigns, since they "asked" him to.
Posted by: whamprod at October 29, 2008 05:20 PM
Hmmm... I guess that blockquote tags center text instead of indenting it like they should...
Posted by: whamprod at October 29, 2008 05:21 PM
**** that place
Posted by: Anonymous at October 29, 2008 05:49 PM
I find the following at Cooper Arms' website...quoted verbatim:
In response to the recent article highlighting Dan Cooper's personal political donations, the board of directors, shareholders and employees of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc would like to issue the following statement.
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 of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc.
Daily operations will continue with the competent staff currently in place in Stevensville, MT producing the finest, most accurate rifles money can buy.
Dan Cooper has spent all of his working life producing the highest quality rifles built here in the USA. He started with nothing but the American Dream and built that into firearms company anyone would be proud of. We firmly believe Dan stands by the 2nd amendment.
We wish him all of the best in his future pursuits.
Posted by: doug in colorado at October 30, 2008 08:39 AM
The statement on Cooper Arms website is bull. They've asked him to resign when it is a privately owned company that he is a founder of? Damage control, where is the proof that he has been booted from the company entirely? Isn't going to happen.
Last edited by a moderator:
Name: COOPER FIREARMS OF MONTANA, INC.
Corporate ID Number: D094226
Filing State: MT
State of Incorporation: MT
Type: PROFIT
Business Registration Type: CORPORATION
Date of Incorporation: 03-27-1998
Status: GOOD STANDING
Description: FILING OFFICE
Name: SECRETARY OF STATE/CORPORATIONS BUREAU
Address Type: FILING OFFICE ADDRESS
Address: 100 N. PARK
HELENA MT 59601
Description: BUSINESS
Name: COOPER FIREARMS OF MONTANA, INC.
Name Type: PRIMARY
Description: REGISTERED AGENT
Officer: DANIEL COOPER
Address Type: REGISTERED AGENT ADDRESS
Address: 4004 HWY 93 N PO BOX 114
STEVENSVILLE MT 59870
Description: OFFICER
Title: DIRECTOR
Officer: DANIEL L COOPER
Address Type: OFFICER ADDRESS
Address: PO BOX 114
STEVENSVILLE MT 59870
Corporate ID Number: D094226
Filing State: MT
State of Incorporation: MT
Type: PROFIT
Business Registration Type: CORPORATION
Date of Incorporation: 03-27-1998
Status: GOOD STANDING
Description: FILING OFFICE
Name: SECRETARY OF STATE/CORPORATIONS BUREAU
Address Type: FILING OFFICE ADDRESS
Address: 100 N. PARK
HELENA MT 59601
Description: BUSINESS
Name: COOPER FIREARMS OF MONTANA, INC.
Name Type: PRIMARY
Description: REGISTERED AGENT
Officer: DANIEL COOPER
Address Type: REGISTERED AGENT ADDRESS
Address: 4004 HWY 93 N PO BOX 114
STEVENSVILLE MT 59870
Description: OFFICER
Title: DIRECTOR
Officer: DANIEL L COOPER
Address Type: OFFICER ADDRESS
Address: PO BOX 114
STEVENSVILLE MT 59870
Roll-Yur-Own
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2006
- Messages
- 795
Even if Cooper owns 51%. What about the other 49% owners? Why should they be punished?
If your brother robs a bank should you go to jail too?
MontanaRifleman is right. If we put Cooper out of business we are only doing the anti-gun peoples work for them.
In addition. As far as this thead and others go. I understand mentioning that Cooper supported Obama, but this forum does have rules about hijacking threads and that is what this has become.
If your brother robs a bank should you go to jail too?
MontanaRifleman is right. If we put Cooper out of business we are only doing the anti-gun peoples work for them.
In addition. As far as this thead and others go. I understand mentioning that Cooper supported Obama, but this forum does have rules about hijacking threads and that is what this has become.
So everytime you buy a Cooper, 51% of your money could go to some who might try to take your guns away? Why not just go with a company that fully supports the 2nd Amendment and stay away from people who burn both ends of the candle.
MontanaRifleman
Well-Known Member
jwp and Bosshoss, I have read dozens of posts just like the ones you've posted here as well as some of these. My position remains the same... Innocent until proven guilty. I believe the company is in fact pro 2nd Amendment and want to see Dan Cooper gone. I believe (and may be wrong) that they are in the legal process of accomplishing that. They know what is at stake. I am taking their word for it until proof shows up otherwise and I am checking into it.
My view is, if Cooper Firearms does remain in control of Dan Cooper after the dust settels and the smoke clears, they can be dealt with then. If the company is in fact pro 2nd Amendment and working to cut it's ties to Mr Cooper and we put them under, I think that would be a very sad state of affairs indeed... killing your own, with liberals cheering us on.
I called the NRA about this several days ago and their response was that Mr Cooper had stepped down and they were not going to make any knee jerk reactions and no statements were planned. Very wise. If the NRA, who I think we all agree, very zealously fights for 2nd Amendment rights, is taking a wait and see approach, I don't think it's unreasonable for the rest of us to follow suit. United we stand, divided we fall.
My view is, if Cooper Firearms does remain in control of Dan Cooper after the dust settels and the smoke clears, they can be dealt with then. If the company is in fact pro 2nd Amendment and working to cut it's ties to Mr Cooper and we put them under, I think that would be a very sad state of affairs indeed... killing your own, with liberals cheering us on.
I called the NRA about this several days ago and their response was that Mr Cooper had stepped down and they were not going to make any knee jerk reactions and no statements were planned. Very wise. If the NRA, who I think we all agree, very zealously fights for 2nd Amendment rights, is taking a wait and see approach, I don't think it's unreasonable for the rest of us to follow suit. United we stand, divided we fall.
Roll-Yur-Own
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2006
- Messages
- 795
I don't think the 51% of the money is funding for anti gun people.
The fact is that cooper makes guns. So we are do the anti's work for them by putting them out of business. There are people who work there as well. With families! How you you feel if you were one of them? These people are on our side.
Additionally, I don't think that Dan Cooper opposes the 2nd amendment. Remington is owned by a HUGE hedge fund. Has anyone checked to see if they donated to Obama?
Sorry but there is a slight difference between:
Cerberus Capital Management, L.P. is one of the world's leading private investment firms. Cerberus specializes in providing both financial resources and operational expertise to help transform undervalued companies into industry leaders for long-term success and value creation.
Cerberus is headquartered in New York City with affiliate and/or advisory offices in Atlanta, Chicago, Los Angeles, London, Baarn, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Beijing, Osaka and Taipei.
Cerberus holds controlling or significant minority interests in companies around the world. In aggregate, these companies currently generate over $100 billion in annual revenues.
AND DAN COOPER!!! Lets compare Apples and Apples shall we? Dan Cooper is the one who potties in his companies "Post Toasties" and unfortunately until the situation is resolved by his complete severance then the employees will have to eat them. Just a simple matter of accountability for ones actions. You will find that most people who are in the target market of Cooper feel this way(who wants to spend highly discretionary funds on something that will fall much greater % wise in value compared to your competition) and that in the end Cooper will cease to exist as it stands today. Only time will tell---hell I do not wish ill on any of the employees in fact wish them well and hope this will get behind them.
Cerberus Capital Management, L.P. is one of the world's leading private investment firms. Cerberus specializes in providing both financial resources and operational expertise to help transform undervalued companies into industry leaders for long-term success and value creation.
Cerberus is headquartered in New York City with affiliate and/or advisory offices in Atlanta, Chicago, Los Angeles, London, Baarn, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Beijing, Osaka and Taipei.
Cerberus holds controlling or significant minority interests in companies around the world. In aggregate, these companies currently generate over $100 billion in annual revenues.
AND DAN COOPER!!! Lets compare Apples and Apples shall we? Dan Cooper is the one who potties in his companies "Post Toasties" and unfortunately until the situation is resolved by his complete severance then the employees will have to eat them. Just a simple matter of accountability for ones actions. You will find that most people who are in the target market of Cooper feel this way(who wants to spend highly discretionary funds on something that will fall much greater % wise in value compared to your competition) and that in the end Cooper will cease to exist as it stands today. Only time will tell---hell I do not wish ill on any of the employees in fact wish them well and hope this will get behind them.
Last edited:
Roll-Yur-Own
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2006
- Messages
- 795
So it a double standard because Dan Cooper does not have vast holdings?
