There are companies in the firearms and shooting sports market that I boycott because I consider them to be Traitors to the Cause. Companies that attempt to profit from the firearms market while at the same time taking actions that advance the overall gun control agenda. There are also companies that are not part of the firearm industry but provide services to the firearm industry and attempt to use their influence to advance the overall gun control agenda which I also boycott.
But exactly which businesses should be boycotted and for what reasons? I recently had this discussion with a friend. I was genuinely surprised at the amount of disagreement we had on the subject. For example, we both agreed that no money should ever be spent at Dick's Sporting Goods but we disagreed on why. I contended that Dick's removal of modern sporting rifles and normal capacity magazines from the shelves and refusing to sell firearms to 18-21 year olds were plenty enough justification for a boycott. My friend contended that they are a private business and could sell what and to who they wanted. It was only the fact that Dick's hired DC lobbyists to lobby DC politicians for more gun control that made my friend feel a boycott was justified.
To be frank, I lost a good amount of respect for my friend that day. I shamed him by saying "First they came for the 18-21 year olds and you said nothing because you are over 21?" We are still friends but I hope that the conversation we had shifted his views.
I take a hard line view of gun control and practice a zero tolerance policy. All my life I have listened to the the mantra of "common sense gun regulation" and at a fairly early age I came to understand that this was nothing but the top of a slippery slope. Gun grabbers would never be satisfied. Every gun control victory only emboldens them to tackle more aggressive goals. I came to understand that one side of the "debate" was acting in bad faith. Everything was an incremental step towards an end goal of total gun bans. It has only been in the past few years that the left has been bold enough to be honest publicly that this is their end goal. So I oppose any and all gun regulation even if on the surface it seems to make sense (not that any of it makes sense to me but some of these things resonate with the common American voter).
I take the same tact with my purchasing habits. If a company shows any hint of compromising with the gun grabbers they never get any of my money again even if their compromise does not effect me. Many of these will not surprise you. I do not bank with Bank of America for their refusal to give loans to firearm manufactures. I will not use Intuit software (Quicken) because of how they closed the merchant accounts of gun businesses without notice. I will never shop at Dick's again.
But some of the companies I boycott might surprise you. Palmetto State Armory does not get my business because they refuse to ship to Massachusetts. Bravo Company (BCM) is on the list for similar reasons. My friend was shocked by these two. "But we don't live in Mass!" and "The MA AG threatened them with lawsuits, you cannot blame them!" and "boycotting them hurts the overall firearm market!" Yes, yes I can blame them and I do. There are many companies that ignored the MA AG's toothless threats and will happily ship both ammo and firearm components to Massachusetts. But BCM and PSA both took the cowards way out and when the MA AG barked they cowered. They are private businesses and they can run them how they see fit... and I am a private citizen and i can spend my money how I see fit. I probably spend more actual dollars in the exaggerate market because of this philosophy and this is a good thing.
So if you come to me and are all excited about some super deal on bolt carrier groups from PSA, don't be surprised if I call you a lazy sheeple who is to cheep to spend a few dollars more to buy from a fellow patriot.
There are companies in the firearms and shooting sports market that I boycott because I consider them to be Traitors to the Cause. Companies that attempt to profit from the firearms market while at the same time taking actions that advance the overall gun control agenda. There are also companies that are not part of the firearm industry but provide services to the firearm industry and attempt to use their influence to advance the overall gun control agenda which I also boycott.
But exactly which businesses should be boycotted and for what reasons? I recently had this discussion with a friend. I was genuinely surprised at the amount of disagreement we had on the subject. For example, we both agreed that no money should ever be spent at Dick's Sporting Goods but we disagreed on why. I contended that Dick's removal of modern sporting rifles and normal capacity magazines from the shelves and refusing to sell firearms to 18-21 year olds were plenty enough justification for a boycott. My friend contended that they are a private business and could sell what and to who they wanted. It was only the fact that Dick's hired DC lobbyists to lobby DC politicians for more gun control that made my friend feel a boycott was justified.
To be frank, I lost a good amount of respect for my friend that day. I shamed him by saying "First they came for the 18-21 year olds and you said nothing because you are over 21?" We are still friends but I hope that the conversation we had shifted his views.
I take a hard line view of gun control and practice a zero tolerance policy. All my life I have listened to the the mantra of "common sense gun regulation" and at a fairly early age I came to understand that this was nothing but the top of a slippery slope. Gun grabbers would never be satisfied. Every gun control victory only emboldens them to tackle more aggressive goals. I came to understand that one side of the "debate" was acting in bad faith. Everything was an incremental step towards an end goal of total gun bans. It has only been in the past few years that the left has been bold enough to be honest publicly that this is their end goal. So I oppose any and all gun regulation even if on the surface it seems to make sense (not that any of it makes sense to me but some of these things resonate with the common American voter).
I take the same tact with my purchasing habits. If a company shows any hint of compromising with the gun grabbers they never get any of my money again even if their compromise does not effect me. Many of these will not surprise you. I do not bank with Bank of America for their refusal to give loans to firearm manufactures. I will not use Intuit software (Quicken) because of how they closed the merchant accounts of gun businesses without notice. I will never shop at Dick's again.
But some of the companies I boycott might surprise you. Palmetto State Armory does not get my business because they refuse to ship to Massachusetts. Bravo Company (BCM) is on the list for similar reasons. My friend was shocked by these two. "But we don't live in Mass!" and "The MA AG threatened them with lawsuits, you cannot blame them!" and "boycotting them hurts the overall firearm market!" Yes, yes I can blame them and I do. There are many companies that ignored the MA AG's toothless threats and will happily ship both ammo and firearm components to Massachusetts. But BCM and PSA both took the cowards way out and when the MA AG barked they cowered. They are private businesses and they can run them how they see fit... and I am a private citizen and i can spend my money how I see fit. I probably spend more actual dollars in the exaggerate market because of this philosophy and this is a good thing.
So if you come to me and are all excited about some super deal on bolt carrier groups from PSA, don't be surprised if I call you a lazy sheeple who is to cheep to spend a few dollars more to buy from a fellow patriot.
(post is archived)