Company That Makes Colt AR-15 Rifles Opening Factory In Texas

by Categorized: Economic Development, Manufacturing Date:

An Oregon company that makes Colt AR-15 rifles for Colt’s Manufacturing Co. is opening a factory in Breckenridge, Texas, expanding the iconic brand to a state that has aggressively courted Connecticut firearms makers.

The company, in Canby, Oregon, does business as Colt Competition and is part of Bold Ideas Inc., which licenses the Colt name to make rifles used in shooting competitions — including one that costs more than $2,000. Dave Wilcox, vice president of Bold Ideas, confirmed the plan but declined to give details Monday.

“The plant that’s opening down in Breckenridge will be making Colt branded products,” Wilcox said.

Wilcox would not say how many people the plant will employ. But there’s no indication it will include any of the 670 people now at Colt’s and its affiliated company, Colt Defense LLC.

Colt executives have said they must consider options for expanding or even moving some work to other states, now that Connecticut bans the sale of most AR-15 rifles. The ban is part of the broad gun control law adopted last week by the General Assembly and signed into law by Gov. Dannel P. Malloy Thursday.

The ban affects much of the Colt line of rifles, and even though it allows manufacture and wholesale distribution in the state, executives at Colt’s and other companies have said they are seeing pressure from customers to exit Connecticut — or face possible boycotts.

The directors of the Breckenridge Chamber of Commerce and the Breckenridge Economic Development Corp. declined to comment on the move, or on any other efforts they may be mounting to attract Connecticut firearms makers.



The Courant is using Facebook comments on stories. To comment on articles, sign into Facebook and enter your comment in the field below. Comments will appear in your Facebook News Feed unless you choose otherwise. To report spam or abuse, click the X next to the comment. For guidelines on commenting, click here.

74 thoughts on “Company That Makes Colt AR-15 Rifles Opening Factory In Texas

  1. Ryan

    Colt, Mossberg, Stag and others will definitely face a boycott, they know how the market reacted to Ruger and Smith and Wesson during prior gun control fights, and that was before the internet could inform and mobilize millions upon millions of people at a moments notice. Staying in CT will soon be both a business and perception liability for these companies.

    Fortunately, many other major manufacturers are lining up at our borders just waiting to take their places. Companies that will create high paying manufacturing jobs and pay significant taxes, companies like…um…gimme a minute…um…yeah. I can’t think of any. Can you?

    1. Torts dildos

      Companies look at the flavour of the business climate. Any location that takes political correctness as state policy, is not a location for any business that may at sometime become undisflavor. Such as using animal parts (real leather) may become incorrect tomorrow, or perhaps the use of natural material may become gauche on monday, or that the psuedoscience that brought global warming. Of course you could open public education centers to train the mandrains of tomorrow…

      1. I

        Way to go Danny! Saving CT from corporate greed through knee-jerk legislation! One round of layoffs at a time….

        1. Torts dildos

          Isn’t corporate greed what gets politicians elected. Biggest contributer to the most campaigns gets the best sweatheart deals. Like the one Monsato is getting from the feds; where they are not liable for thier products by federallie law….

    2. Lynn McFadden

      Ryan; I’d like to agree with you on the boycott, but the run on guns now is so extensive that I feel it very unlikely. At such time as the rush on guns slows and you can purchase what you want when you want it, yes … perhaps people would tend to lean towards the companies that took action and moved to non-restrictive states.

      1. MarineGunner

        True that the outrageous actions of leftist politicians has created the biggest run on guns and ammo since the American Revolution but there are still a lot of choices. At gun shows, there are still acres of AR-15s available, albeit at $1.5K to $3K, and the Colts are usually among the most expensive. Gun owners are people of principle and will opt to buy a Bushmaster or DPMS over a Colt if Colt stays in CT.

        1. Joe In CT

          Bushmaster and DPMS are now owned by an investment consortium which started out by buying out Remington Arms; they have bought out several other gun and accessory manufacturers as well. Suggest you check out their website and SEC filings; Remington’s gun plant is located in Ilion, New York, and its ammo plant is located in Arkansas (used to be in Bridgeport, CT, but was forced to move in the 1970s due to high costs of doing business in CT and squeeze by residential and commercial construction all around the borders of the property it owned going back to the pre-1900 era).

      2. SOG74

        Please understand, many of the CT companies’ sales were here in CT – and now they can’t sell here, so I can’t buy or have them. Even the gun I ordered and PAID FOR over 6 months ago cannot be delivered! So if I want an “outlawed” gun, not only do I have to go out of state to buy it, I would have to register it 1/1/14!

        As a share-holder in several CT gun companies, I will be working with others to put “Move Out of CT” initiatives on the next annual meeting ballots – if they haven’t moved already. And on the day I retire from my regular job in 2016, the moving van will be at my house and loading everything to go! And take my tax-paying home business and that of my wife to a state that honors the US Constitution.

  2. Mitch

    I’m hopeful all of the gun companies take leave of Connecticut, simply make a statement and go to better locations. Dan Haar and the Courant editorial board must be flying high and so pleased with themselves that these new laws are in place. Never before have I seen such biased reportage and editorial writing to help shape a twisted narrative as what has just played out in Connecticut. Hopefully these companies will leave and take the tax money with them.

    As the above person mentioned, there are literally tons of other manufacturers lining up on the border to come to Connecticut, I just can’t remember any of their names!!!!

    1. Jim

      Dan Haar is one of the few writers that doesn’t puke out politically correct trash. He’s the only columnist I follow with any regularity. I do not find his reporting biased like some other columnists who can’t wait to use goofy phrases like, “It’s common sense” or other political commentary that is parroted by oh so many reporters nationwide. His columns are as close to factual as you will find.

    1. MarineGunner

      An important consideration that I had not thought of was brought to mind by a friend who lives in Hartford, CT. He is an Army Ranger combat veteran and competition shooter who has put his house on the market and is leaving CT to live in VA in order to continue to enjoy use of his guns, including his AR-15. It makes him sad since he is a CT native and most of his family is there but he is not willing to give up his Constitutional rights to a bunch of leftist politicians who are willing to trample the Constitution for their own, personal political gain. Sad.

      1. Be careful

        Tell your friend that Virgina is a purple state. There are nearly enough workers/contractors sucking off the federal teat to turn the state blue on a consistent basis. It bears watching.

        Semper Fi from an old sailor.

  3. Ryan

    Mitch – while I agree about the paper generally (and have cancelled my subscription as a result, credit that to the anti gun Jim Shea) Haar has been one of the few writers in the entire state to shine a light on the huge role that firearms play in our economy, as well as the state’s gun heritage. Not looking to defend the whole paper, just the one competent, unbiased writer working there.

    1. Jon Hendry

      “Haar has been one of the few writers in the entire state to shine a light on the huge role that firearms play in our economy,”

      What does this story have to do with Connecticut? The company is from Oregon.

    2. Mitch

      Good point, Ryan, but Haar is far from unbiased. He is just less biased than the bulk of the staff there. Jim Shea and Englehart are two that are some of the worst, but the editorial board is frightful. Remember, Wesleyan does not graduate many pro-gun or unbiased people and Haar is certainly not middle of the road on the issue, but a business writer cannot avoid the history of the industry in Connecticut and would be wrong to do so.

    3. walls

      Hey – I cancelled as well due to Jim Shea. Maybe he’ll get an award ‘Newspaper Salesman of the Year’ [sarc] just as Obama should get ‘Gun Salesman of the Year’.

  4. vic

    yep, people will lose their jobs, their houses, and if they voted for Malloy they deserve what they get!

    1. Torts dildos

      Ah dear friends just rememember that you are only one politically correct legislative choice away from losing your job also. The cheap sale of your home the forced removal of your family allows others who believe as the elected a cheap place to live.

    2. MarineGunner

      Too late. The damage has been done. To change CT law now to restore 2nd Amendment rights to CT citizens will be fantastically difficult. Every action (or failure to take action) has a consequence. When CT voters decided to elect socialist (leftist) politicians to high office in order to get “free stuff,” they caused this. Here is a law of nature you can carve in stone: THERE IS NO FREE STUFF. Never has been; never will be. There WILL be payment made by someone. Karma being what it is, the Union members who work for the gun manufacturers will pay a huge part of this price. If CT voters continue to vote leftists to high office, CT will eventually go bankrupt, like CA cities are doing. So, CT voters, what will it be? No work = no freedom.

  5. Fred D

    This is not a story about a company leaving Connecticut.

    Stag Arms opened in Connecticut about 10 years ago. Maybe they move. They have not said yet.

    1. MLPC

      Colt has been in Connecticut for 175 years. They are considering leaving the state taking jobs and tax revenue with them.

      1. MarineGunner

        When your neighbors continuously insult you and do things to make your life difficult, you will eventually move … no matter how long you have lived there. It’s human nature. We can endure only so much abuse before we “get it” and take corrective action.

  6. Kathleen Nowakowski

    For awhile I was so proud of CT where I lived for 46 years. For once it appeared that politicians understood what the majority of the people in this country want. Then I read the absolutely ridiculous comments about gun companies leaving the State. TX has been courting business of all sorts for a long time and CEO who worry about their year end bonus and other b.s. know that they have the lowest hourly pay rate in the country. There is NO reason to have 30+ clips or an assault rifle unless you are in some branch of service or police. They are specifically to kill people and are the ONLY item that has the capacity to do harm that does not require registration, licensing or insurance of any kind. Read the polls – the people should get their voice heard.

    1. Tao

      “There is NO reason to have 30+ clips or an assault rifle” – you have no idea what you’re talking about, please educate yourself before making dumb comments such as this one…

      1. Jan

        So enlighten us. Why would any citizen not in law enforcement or military need a 30-clip?

        1. McGinty

          Why does law enforcement need them? Civilians come into contact with the same folks they do.

          1. Torts dildos

            Civilians come into contact first and lacking a means of self defense are forced to call the policy enforcers.

        2. Mike

          Why does law enforcement need 30 round capacity magazines? Before you answer research just how many “fire fights” CT law enforcement has engaged in to justify the need
          It doesn’t matter how many rounds the magazine holds, 10,20,30, etc. It’s an arbitrary number. As long as you’re permitted to carry more than one magazine the rest is meaningless.
          Kathleen above is in error on a few points. The rifles being specifically targeted are required to be registered if you purchase them in CT. Yes they are designed to kill, but so are many other firearms, not just these.
          The particular rifle being addressed, and vilified, is favored by many “non-shooters” because it is a lightweight rifle with very little to no recoil. Hence smaller, lighter weight people, male, or female, can shoot the rifle and not get beat up with the recoil.
          What should be upsetting to people, is that the elected leadership of CT used a tragedy to put forth,and establish, mechanism to collect new fees from people.
          Nothing has changed that would have prevented the tragedy, except that the shooter’s mother would have had to pay some additional fees to keep all of those firearms that he had access too, and shouldn’t have.

          1. Torts dildos

            Mike you are incorrect in the statement “Nothing has changed that would have prevented the tragedy, except that the shooter’s mother would have had to pay some additional fees to keep all of those firearms that he had access too, and shouldn’t have.” The state of Ct has enhanced it’s revenues. It not the payment of additional fees by citizens it’s about revenue enhancement by the state. If a criminal really wants a good gun, they don’t have to buy them and pay the tax they can just shoot a cop and get some good guns, with superlarge cap mags.
            So if the good people of Ct want to really protect the public they should disarm the law enforcement. Ah by the way have you looked at the deaths justified by gun violence of law enforcement. I mean they even have aeuthinism for suicide by cop.

      2. Torts dildos

        Your right to bare arms is being stripped from you so that you may not resisted the policy enforcers with their street sweeper shot guns.
        For them that say bare arms is a miss use consider that the chains at your wrist do not stop the government from stealing the shirt off your back.

      3. Ron Green

        Typical asinine libby response. Get your facts straight before you spout out babble, with NO basis of evidence.

    2. Mitch

      Kathleen .. please stop making such ignorant comments … “They are specifically to kill people and are the ONLY item that has the capacity to do harm that does not require registration, licensing or insurance of any kind. Read the polls – the people should get their voice heard.”

      When someone buys a semi-automatic rifle from a gun shop, it is all recorded, purchaser (who must go through a background check, serial numbers recorded, etc) … you just can’t walk into a shop and walk out with one. If you have a license, you get a background check and can usually leave that day with the gun. Otherwise, there is a waiting period of almost two weeks for someone who does not have a license.

      Semi-automatic rifles are not designed to kill people any more than any other gun is. These are NOT military rifles.

      Get your facts straight before you make such ignorant comments.

      1. MLPC

        You need not register a sledge hammer, ball bat, chain saw, hammer, steak knife, box cutter, etc. but they are all quite capable of causing bodily harm and death. Should we register or ban those too?

        1. Bob

          MLPC – Seriously, are you an 8 year old? Your argument is a complete failure. Can anyone kill 26 people in 5 minutes with a baseball bat or hammer? Would it be easier to overcome someone who has a baseball bat or a AR- 15?

        2. Torts dildos

          Ah does anyone remember the 911 aircraft hijacks. Wasn’t the weapons used box knives.

      2. I

        Guns don’t kill people, they are inanimate objects. 30-clips don’t load themselves into the gun, just as 10,20 or 30 rounds don’t load themselves into the magazine. And the gun can’t pull it’s own trigger – no matter how hard it tries, aim or move on it’s own. It can only collect dust and corrosion when left to itself. It can’t even talk! Imagine That!

        People kill people, very simple logic can figure this out – the human is the assault weapon. And these people typically are not doing it with high end rifles. The majority prefer Baseball bats, knives, hands & feet, cars, shovels, hammers, golf clubs, rope, Rx Medicines, piano wire, water, household chemicals and lamb shanks. These account for more murders than the weapons that have just been banned.

        If you really look into US Deaths it’s smoking, poor diets and lack of exercise and poor drivers that kill the most.

    3. Pete w

      This is the line in the sand, you cannot have automatic weapons(99.9999% of people)so these are semi auto,as is most rifles, take them and it opens the door to every other weapon. Now fact,take a 12 guage shotgun , load it with 00 buckshot and watch the damage you can do, probably more than an ar15 , so where does the arguement stop. Take all guns, probably the only way, wait a minute they did that with alcohol once, ya that worked, only the criminals drank.

    4. walls

      What do you do if a group of criminal thugs intent on doing you harm come onto your property? Remember, cops are minutes away. Do you ask the thugs to wait until the cops arrive for a shootout?

    5. MarineGunner

      Well, it is precisely this attitude and gross ignorance of the subject that is at the root of the problem, isn’t it? You obviously know nothing about guns, you are anti-gun without a basis for your opinion other than a gut-level feeling created by listening to the anti-gun echo chamber formed by leftist politicians and leftist media patting each other on the back. It’s disturbing that there are so many people like you, who mean well but have no clue what’s really going on. I wish I could have the opportunity to truly educate you on this subject,along with others like you, but this forum is incapable of supporting the tome that would be necessary, starting with English Common Law and the Magna Carta, the American experience with King George and the tyranny of abuse that he heaped on us, then the reasons underlying our Bill of Rights and the type of arms it addresses and why. For example, I know that the Boston Tea Party is famous for being a seminal event leading to the Revolution. However, an even more significant event was in 1775 when the British Redcoats, with direct orders from King George, came to confiscate guns and gunpowder from the colonists. In response, freedom-loving patriots refused to give up their weapons and instead they fired “the shot heard around the world” giving birth to the revolution and leading to the creation of a new and free nation. Consequently, when our founding fathers wrote the Bill of Rights, they included the 2nd Amendment that is intended to protect private ownership of military style small arms and has nothing to do with hunting or sporting events. Think about it.

  7. ctworker

    So…because of the gun laws, manufacturing cannot take place in CT and products cannot be shipped to another state? Pretty sure that’s what happens now, or did CT residents buy ALL the guns before – really?

    1. Jon Hendry

      “So…because of the gun laws, manufacturing cannot take place in CT and products cannot be shipped to another state?”

      No, not at all. Get a frigging clue.

    2. MarineGunner

      Actually, as unfair as it is that one of the most famous and storied gun makers in history has been run out of its home, throwing ordinary, hard-working CT citizens out of their jobs and homes, it is not the fault of anyone but those who voted for the leftist politicians who passed these laws. If you voted for them, then this is YOUR fault. If you did not vote for them, you have my sympathy. Nevertheless, you cannot blame the gun maker or the people of Texas for this problem; it is purely the making of leftist politicians and the selfish people who voted them into office.

  8. Chris

    Really ctworker? No CT residents didn’t buy all the guns from these manufacturers but why would they want to stay in a state that is unfriendly to their business? They can go someplace that is more gun friendly and has cheaper labor and taxes. It would be a win win for them and a lose lose for the states economy. We are already lagging behind in housing and unemployment; let’s just add this to the mess we are in. It is not only the manufacturing jobs, what about all the jobs these employees touched. The coffee and lunches, the clothes, the home repairs, etc. I for one don’t want to pay more taxes to make up for the taxes the state will be losing with the higher unemployment. Please think a little economically about the situation.

    1. Fred D

      Gun sales are booming so the makers and suppliers are paying more fed and state tax. So your taxes are actually lower.

      Stag Arms opened in CT about 10 years ago. They chose CT. They could have picked another state. So now they will look at their options. It costs money to move a company and there are risks to product quality and quantity. If it is in their best interests to move, go with God. This is a free country.

    2. MarineGunner

      Good point, Chris. “coworker” and the rest of CT citizens will either come to understand the wisdom of your note or they will join CA in bankruptcy court. If they think that this doesn’t have dire consequences, they should take a close look at what’s going on in CA. This is only one example but consider that union pensions are forfeited. So, the unions did NOT actually “win” those outrageous pensions in the end … instead, they actually cost their members ALL of their pensions. Not only do they no longer have the exorbitant pensions they “negotiated,” they are losing the reasonable pensions that they would have had if they hadn’t been so greedy. Once again, we find that there is “no free lunch.” Not now. Not ever.

  9. Richard

    I’m ashamed of all of you for such cynicism and such a lack of faith in Dan Malloy.

    Trust in Dan Malloy. Dan will deliver bags of taxpayers money to the CT weapons industry at the end of the session and fully subsidize the manufacture of AR-15s in CT for export elsewhere. It’s the Democratic way.

    Now stop whining. The bags of loot are coming.

    1. walls

      Somehow I believe you. Danny Boy surely must be concentrating on improving our lot. He thinks about us all the time. I don’t even think he has time to shop … did you ever notice he is always wearing that same green tie:)?

    2. MarineGunner

      Richard, I know that your tongue is practically pushing a hole in your cheek but, as strange as it may seem, there are hoards of “masses of asses” who actually believe that the “bags of loot are coming.” They are the “weak” among us who will keep holding onto the socialist promises of “free stuff” until it is too late to save them. As Darwin observed, this massive FAIL will eliminate them from the gene pool and eventually result in improving the specie (i.e., individual liberty). Unfortunately, while failing, they will drag a lot of innocent CT workers down the drain-hole with them.

  10. Bill

    Hey kathleen you’d make a good target for someone with a 30 round mag! Better yet a MP-5 MP!
    I’d like to know what companies are going to fill the void by those leaving! Perhaps all the do nothing Libs that live in the state can donate more of their tax money!

  11. Gman

    The Post Office is also losing jobs….we is the cry about those jobs? Nobody flinched an eye lid.

    1. Torts dildos

      The Postoffice is down sizing because the Government prefers to by pass all the postal protection laws and deal from computer to computer with your bank. Notice there really is no identy thief law, so the government is not responsible for your loss through their leaky computers..

  12. Gman

    I hear CT is going to start manufacturing Dildos, because we got enough of them Republicans around.

    1. Torts dildos

      LOL liberals are the sexual elite. Republicans tend to be to conservative to play with toys..

  13. Jon Hendry

    So what you’re saying, is that the connection to Connecticut is tenuous at best. I doubt the Oregon-based company ever had any interest in moving to Connecticut, so what’s the relevance?

    “But there’s no indication it will include any of the 670 people now at Colt’s and its affiliated company, Colt Defense LLC.”

    Of course not. THOSE ARE DIFFERENT COMPANIES ENTIRELY. The company that’s moving is a completely separate firm, a mere licensee.

    Sheesh. This is not complicated.

    I expect better from a business reporter.

    1. Torts dildos

      Ah jon these are journalist; reporters are different. The big difference is a journalist is writting a “dear diary” article; and reporters tend to report facts and avoid political opinions.

  14. Randy

    They are leaving. You can bet your last dollar on it. They will establish an operation there, and then ban, everything is loaded on a truck, and gone.

    1. MarineGunner

      Yep, Randy. You’re correct. In fact, I was a senior manager at a huge company (one of the largest) that had its HQ in a major U.S. city. We had decided to move to a more friendly city (the host city had become politically hostile). A rumor got started and the city fathers actually started punitive legal action to prevent us from moving. We assured them that we were not moving. And, we didn’t move … while we were building our new HQ campus 200 miles away. Once the first building on the new campus was complete, we moved several departments. Then, as each subsequent building was completed, we moved more departments. Our senior management had offices in both locations. We bought houses at the new location and gradually spent more time at the new location until, one day we wrote a letter announcing that our HQ is relocated. End of story. One day we were headquartered in city A. The next day, we were headquartered in city B. The original host city was upset but … oh, well. That’s how it happens.

  15. Torts dildos

    Perhaps it is time that the enlightened citizens of Ct, demand that government agents need not have fire arms at all. Since the citizens are unarmed the Policy enforcers need only to ask polightly for their compliance. Of course those same policy officers will be there at a seconds notice if force is required. Now never you worry that the Policy enforcers will respond in a timely manner, they will follow their policy to arrive after, or at least long enough later that the policy enforcers are rarely endangered, well it is policy or is it fact….

  16. Marty

    We all said “Never Again” for holocausts,…people defenseless lead to slaughter!,…NOW ENFORCE IT !!!

    1. Torts dildos

      LOL gave them a home land and then allowed the well armed neighbors to attack them. Now we are tell them Never again give up your land and your neighbors will not attack you any more. Of course those neighnbors are all saying next year we will own Jeruslem.

  17. Torts dildos

    a href””

  18. Joey

    I’m looking forward to starting a new business here in Connecticut. I’m just a little tied up with paper work and obtaning state and federal funding for the start up capital. I have a great location selected, the old Colts building in Hartford. It will be primarily manufacturing red coats and powdered wigs targeted for those serving us in government. It should have tremendous growth potential and more jobs for Connecticut!

  19. America Is Dying

    Senate Gun Vote Tally.

    Sen. Andres Ayala (D) YES.

    Sen. Dante Bartolomeo (D) YES.

    Sen. Toni Boucher (R) YES.

    Sen. Beth Bye (D) YES.

    Sen. Steve Cassano (D) YES.

    Sen. Clark Chapin (R) NO.

    Sen. Eric Coleman (D) YES.

    Sen. Joseph Crisco (D) YES.

    Sen. Paul Doyle (D) YES.

    Sen. Bob Duff (D) YES.

    Sen. Len Fasano (R) YES.

    Sen. John Fonfara (D) YES.

    Sen. L. Scott Frantz (R) YES.

    Sen. Terry Gerratana (D) YES.

    Sen. Tony Guglielmo (R) NO.

    Sen. Toni Harp (D) YES.

    Sen. Joan Hartley (D) YES.

    Sen. Rob Kane (R) NO.

    Sen. Kevin Kelly (R) YES.

    Sen. John Kissel (R) NO.

    Sen. Gary LeBeau (D) YES.

    Sen. Carlo Leone (D) YES.

    Sen. Art Linares (R) NO.

    Sen. Martin Looney (D) YES.

    Sen. Joe Markley (R) NO.

    Sen. Andrew Maynard (D) NO.

    Sen. John McKinney (R) YES.

    Sen. Michael McLachlan (R) YES.

    Sen. Edward Meyer (D) YES.

    Sen. Anthony Musto (D) YES.

    Sen. Cathy Osten (D) NO.

    Sen. Gayle Slossberg (D) YES.

    Sen. Andrea Stillman (D) YES.

    Sen. Jason Welch (R) NO.

    Sen. Donald Williams (D) YES.

    Sen. Kevin Witkos (R) NO.

  20. glenn hamilton

    Hey, I bet you if the Gov’s election was this week he and his fellow socialists that voted for this gun bill instead of dealing with Lanza’s mental health isssues would be without a job.

  21. Lars Arden

    The deed is done and now we have the strictest
    gun control law in the land. Along comes the Boston bombing and the same team who brought us
    the gun-control-global-safety platform have a new
    challenge; what do we do about these devices? How do we stop these hate crimes? Is there a law we can design to provide us with more safety? Will we now recognize that gun free zones
    are not bomb free zones or arson free zones or…
    “whatever” free zones? I would bet that there are many more police officers being quietly assigned to schools and a multitude of public places! Absolute safety? The horror continues!

Comments are closed.