Colt LTD edition

Sounds interesting but they seem to be a little slow getting to the dealers with their newest offerings, I still haven't seen anyone show off a Colt New Frontier except the demos at SHOT. Let's hope they can get these out. Chris

I don't know about other areas, but in my own there are very, very few new manufacture Colt products in store, of any stripe. A big part of this has to do with wholesaler/distributor policy. Some distributors will save items for their preferred dealers. Since a dealer is going to have to deal with a distributor at some point, those who do not sign the exclusive contract, and a host of other rigged market policies tend to get relegated to those items available in large quantities.

This is a nice way of saying if you can't-or won't play, then you don't get first, or even second picks.
The saving grace, if there is one, is that if all fails, your dealer can order any SAA through the Colt custom shop-the only caveat here is that you need to have some type of custom work done-such as stocks.  Otherwise, you need to have your dealer check regularly with those distributors he or she does business with, and make sure you order up as soon as you have availability.

I haven't really kept up with Colt for some time. The last time I called for some parts info was way back when they were real big on idiot proof firearms with user identification etc. I was not too keen on a company run by a conglomerate that was not really in tune with our concept of freedom. I had heard they were re-organized and hope they are a better company now. Chris

I haven't really kept up with Colt either.  I recall they suspended civilian sales of their AR's at one point and I kind of wrote them off like the previous management at S&W.
I don't own an AR, and  likely never will, but it is a sorry day when a law abiding American cannot buy his nation's service weapon to practice with. The right to keep and bear arms includes ugly guns. 

I remember the dark days when lawyers made decisions for firearm manufacturers, and municipal lawsuits engineered by gun grabbers from the federal level to the private sector actively operated to destroy the firearms industry.
Colt was named in most of these lawsuits. Yes, they were junk suits, engineered to bankrupt, and they worked all too well.  These types of shenanigans turned several of my more moderate friends into Clinton haters to this day. The only way Colt could stay even partially alive was through a massive reorganization, which was exactly what happened. This meant that most Colt guns that we used to know and love would be shelved, some permanently. Some, like the Magnum Carry, were not around long enough for most people to realize they were ever released.

Colt came back, slowly, and with a very limited catalog. On the other hand, this small production load enabled the venerable company to produce all kinds of limited, and specially embellished editions. It is important to make the distinction between manufacturer and distributor. Some manufacturers, such as Browning, will not release certain special run guns to any but their preferred dealers. Colt will make special editions for Lew Horton, Lipseys, Talo, etc., and also from the factory, yet as I write this, I am unaware of Colt forcing any dealer into an exclusive contract a' la' Browning.  Equally, I am unaware of Colt withholding any firearms from the American people-other than fully automatic arms, which were stolen from us when President Reagan signed the gun control act of 1986. Yes, that's right, Mr. Reagan signed the most onerous gun control legislation in the last 30 years-doing more damage to our rights than Mr. Clinton-and for the record, I am no fan of Clinton.
While all this was going on, no one was watching the distributors.

A manufacturer sells direct to to the network of distributors, and a dealer will order direct from one or more distributors. However, what is happening today is that distributors are attempting to corral dealers into exclusive contracts, and preferred situations. No, not all distributors are guilty, but some most definitely are. They will allocate certain models and certain runs to their preferred dealers. They will make certain models unavailable to those who do not sign up, or play the game. To my knowledge, this has nothing to do with the manufacturer, it is simply current business, which is anti-competition, and anti-free market.
Colt isn't perfect, but they have survived- scarred and battered- but alive, and they make damn good guns. Availability issues will always be a problem with limited production and high demand. However, where there is a will, there is a way, and if you want to get a hold of a new Colt, it might take some creativity, but it can be done.

I really don't want to start a trend here of discussing Second Amendment issues here, or Gun Control, since there are plenty of other forums which have entire sections devoted to this topic, however, just for this one time I will. I sincerely hope that after reading this no one will start a whole argument over who's right or wrong. So I don’t intend to delve deeply into a subject that is as volatile as this on this forum because it is too political and divisive.
A basic overall view of this subject actually goes far back in our country’s history because many cities or towns routinely enacted regulations or local laws regarding the use or carrying of firearms in their jurisdictions.
For all practical discussions the NFA or National firearms Act of 1934 was our first national gun law. It basically put restrictions and tax fees on machineguns, sawed off shotguns and silencers. It must be noted that there were several court challenges and modifications to the law but for our purposes it is as described.
The next significant gun law was the 1968 Gun Control Act which rewrote the Federal law for firearms restrictions in the country. This was probably the most restrictive act to be passed to date regarding firearms because it established the BATF and set the mail-order prohibitions for shipping firearms along with dealer licensing and recordkeeping regulations. It also made firearms regulation a federal jurisdiction rather than a state matter thereby broadening the power of the federal government to enforce gun laws under the interstate commerce act. It was initially introduced in 1963 but was rewritten many times over the ensuing five years until it was finally enacted in 1968.
A very interesting facet of the debate overlooked by almost everyone is that the 1968 act sponsored by Senator Dodd was most likely influenced dramatically by some of the firearms manufacturers. Supposedly, some major manufacturers were upset because of the rise of small custom gunsmiths converting surplus military rifles into sporting arms after WWI and WWII thereby cutting into the manufacturers business of selling new firearms. This influence, no matter how large or small, cannot be underestimated because it may have impacted the final wordings of the Act that affected manufacturers, dealers and recordkeeping when it passed.
The Firearms Freedom Act of 1986 was a bundle of modifications to the 1968 Act to increase its “effectiveness”. This act is what prohibited convicted felons from owning firearms or ammunition, along with other additions. Initially the act only specified felons convicted of “Serious Offenses” but this distinction was eroded over time. It was supported to some extent by the NRA.
In 1993 The Brady Handgun Violence Act established the Instant Background Check system. This act was also, either endorsed or somewhat supported, by the NRA and other pro-gun groups.
In 1994 the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act initiated the so-called “Assault Weapons Ban”, which expired in 2004.
To sum all this up, it is meaningless to assign blame to any one person or group for any loss of firearms freedom in this country. First of all, many different groups and/or individuals backed some or all of the restrictions at one time or another, whether the firearms manufacturers trying to rid themselves of the small gunsmith population perceived as a threat or a group such as the NRA actually backing some provisions of a law that curtails individual rights. There is enough blame for everyone to share in, since ultimately, it is us, who share as much blame as anyone for not protecting our right to start with. You can only lose a “Right” when you don’t fight to keep it!
Chris   

...for the refresher, Chris. Good points.

I agree with the implication in your statement, that the history of our loss of freedom can be viewed in many different ways, and is the source of constant friction, within and without the firearms community. Ultimately, my purpose was to respond, with the best of my knowledge, to the issue of availability, and the issue of certain models that were not available at certain times, and why.
I think its important to understand that the political climate of the 1980's &1990's is not the political climate of today, and that current availability issues are often created within the industry itself. However, since observations from that time period were brought up, I though it was pertinent to respond.
My point is not to ignite a raging contest, but it seems to me that freedom issues are central to all of our concerns.