CYCLINGFORUM.COM - Where Cyclists Talk Tech --- Return To Home

 

    Register FAQ'sSearchProfileLog In / Log Out

 

****

cyclingforum.com ****

HOMECLUBS | SPONSORS | FEATURESPHOTO GALLERYTTF DONORS | SHOP FOR GEAR

Return to CyclingForum Home Page CYCLING TECH TALK FORUM
          View posts since last visit

Vista Outdoor; CamelBak,Giro,Bell,Blackburn and more.
 Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Author Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 16861
Location: Portland, OR

2/25/18 2:11 AM

Vista Outdoor; CamelBak,Giro,Bell,Blackburn and more.

Boy oh boycott...


https://bikeportland.org/2018/02/21/corporate-ties-to-assault-rifles-and-the-nra-have-some-thinking-boycott-of-giro-bell-camelbak-and-blackburn-268969

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4189
Location: Nashua, NH

2/25/18 8:37 AM

So what?

Sales in the shooting sports are down, but that's from unprecedented high levels during the Obama administration . It makes perfect sense that after years if incredibly high sales of both firearms and ammunition, there would be a significant drop-off once gun owners no longer felt they were under threat from the federal government. Some companies over-committed to increased production to meet the demand and are having to readjust. That's business.

Are people really going to stop buying the high-quality products made by Bell/Giro, Blackburn and Camelbak because their parent company - something over which they have no control - sells guns and ammunition? I seriously doubt it, at least not to any significant extent. The boycott talk is just a bunch of noise that will quickly fade away.

On a more positive note, the weather was actually nice enough yesterday that I got out for a road ride! Unfortunately, today's weather is another matter entirely.

 Reply to topic    

April
Joined: 13 Dec 2003
Posts: 6453
Location: Westchester/NYC

2/25/18 9:14 AM

"Are people really going to stop buying the high-quality products made by Bell/Giro, Blackburn and Camelbak"

If they feel strongly enough about the issue. Yes!

However, most people are lazy. Stop buying their favorite brand will means they have to go research competing products, which may be more expensive or not yet in existence. Majority of people aren't sufficiently motivated to go through that much trouble.

Part of the lack of motivation is people don't see a short and direct route out of the gun violent circle. The problem only partly the number of guns. The bigger problem is the gun culture, which the NRA pushes!

(in a British based message board, a poster describe the american gun culture: "penis extension")

Too many people still mentally stuck in the by-gone world in which their "right" to carry rifle is somehow going to stop the government from imposing their will on the population. When in reality, the government only need to control Facebook and Instagram to render their prized rifle totally ineffective. Look at how little interest people show on the repeal of Net Neutrality in comparison to gun control!

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 16861
Location: Portland, OR

2/25/18 11:50 AM

I am just pointing out at least here the cycling industry's position on the boycott.

But yeah, the industry sure would like another 'the DEMS are going to take away you guns campaigns.

It would not surprise me in the least this 'movement' will not have exactly that effect if it should take off, again.

"On a more positive note, the weather was actually nice enough yesterday that I got out for a road ride! Unfortunately, today's weather is another matter entirely."

And on that same note, same here. I also got in a nice ride, hit 50^ just and zero wind. That is until midnight. The winds last night woke me up several time as freight trains went by 500-1000' AGL. ;)

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4189
Location: Nashua, NH

2/25/18 2:00 PM

The problem is not the "gun culture"

That has existed for most of the life of this country. It's not access to guns, either. When I was kid, you could buy guns through the mail, but people weren't going around killing each other the way they do now. The problem isn't semi-automatic firearms or high capacity magazines, as those have existed for over 100 years and there are millions of them in the country that will never be used in a crime.

The problem is that we have devolved as a society into the current situation where some marginalized and/or mentally ill people apparently feel that the only way to settle a grievance with a person or an institution is to kill someone. You can also add religious zealots to those roles (and it's not just Muslims).

Our culture glorifies violence in virtually every medium, exposing us to incredible amounts of blood and gore that were never part of the culture until recently. Yes, back in the day we had TV shows about "cowboys and Indians", and wars and such, but they weren't bloody or gratuitously violent. We played with toy guns, but we knew that it was just play and never thought that we would actually shoot someone for real.

The 24 hour news cycle and it's endless, droning repetition turns killers into celebrities. How do you think that affects people who are desperate for attention or trying to make a statement that won't be easily forgotten?

Instead of teaching our kids coping skills for the real world, we suppress their natural urges towards settling their peer grievances; the good ol' fashion shoving match or fistfight was actually a great way to blow off steam and reduce tension between people.

If kids act up, instead of making the effort to find out why and correct the problem, we pump them full of mood-altering drugs. Then we pump them full of more drugs to counteract the side affects. When they stop taking them, they're worse off than before as they have no means of coping with the way they suddenly feel.

Mental health care in this country is all but nonexistent and there is nowhere for mentally ill people without substantial means to go, other than prison or the street, which is the worst thing for them. Is is any wonder that some of them end up committing horrible crimes?

Our society is a massive freakin' mess of our own creation. That's the real problem.

As for solutions:

The first thing we have to do is work on mental healthcare, so that people who have problems can get treatment before they do something to harm themselves or others. We have to do whatever we can to reduce the stigma attached to mental illness and encourage people to report individuals who are exhibiting dangerous behavior.

We have to fix the background check infrastructure so that mental health information and criminal records are actually reported by all 50 states and done so in a timely manner. It's already illegal for someone who has been adjudicated as mentally defective to buy a firearm, but it's self-reported on form 4473 at the time of purchase, and who is actually going to admit to that? For the record, it's also illegal for drug addicts, fugitives, felons and dishonorably discharged veterans to buy guns, but again, it's the same self-reporting system (you can see the form here: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4473-part-1-firearms-transaction-record-over-counter-atf-form-53009/download). Unfortunately, anything that doesn't show up in a background check can easily be avoided. It's also illegal to illegal to sell a firearm to anyone who "is not known to you". Consequently, anyone who is participating in the mythical "gun show loophole" is committing a felony. It's illegal to buy a gun for someone else, a "straw man purchase". When you get right down to it, most of the poster issues the anti-gun crowd harps about are already illegal .

We have to hold our police agencies accountable for their actions or lack thereof. What happened in Parkland was an appalling failure on the part of the FBI, the local police and of the security personnel on the scene. Honestly, what would it have taken for them to act? That tragedy might have been prevented with a single phone call, but it was never made.

IF and only if we can get a "clean" bill expanding the requirement for legal transfers through a licensed dealer to private sales, we should do so. This is something that's been optional since 1968 and I've voluntarily done it myself, as it protects both me and the other party in the transaction. To date, all we've seen is garbage bills packed full of insane provisions that would make it a felony to lend a firearm to a friend on a hunting trip or force little kids to go through a background check before their parent could take them to a range to teach them to shoot. People love to use the NRA as a punching bag, but a large part of the problem is the dishonesty and over-zealousness of the anti-gun crowd who try to foist this crap off as "common sense safety measures". Nothing will ever change if they keep doing this, as gun owners and gun-rights organizations will never accept it, nor should they.

As for raising the age to purchase a firearm to 21, I don't think that would pass constitutional muster as long as the age of majority in this country is 18. That's been the rule for handguns since '68, but I don't know if that could legally be applied to all guns. Even making it mandatory for semi-automatic firearms would be problematic, as there are a lot of rifles and shotguns designed specifically for hunting that are semi-automatic. Should someone really have to be 21 to buy a .22 rimfire semi-auto rifle?

While I think the idea of making schools, churches and other public places "gun free zones" just turns them into targets, whether you agree or not, it's clear that schools need to be made into much tougher targets. Nobody should be able to just walk into a school with a large metal object of any kind. There should be metal detectors at the entrances and the doors should be locked from the inside when school is in session. Currently, it's just too easy to access schools in many areas. That is monumentally stupid and irresponsible, and it can and should change now .

This problem didn't happen overnight and there is no quick solution. I don't know if it's even possible to reverse our societal trends that have led us to where we are. Even if we do everything we can, tragedies are not going to end, but perhaps we can make them less frequent.

Sorry for the huge post, but this is a very complex problem.

 Reply to topic    

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 16861
Location: Portland, OR

2/25/18 2:22 PM

I thought I was long winded. ;)

Last edited by Sparky on 2/26/18 12:10 PM; edited 1 time in total

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Pino
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 151
Location: Apeldoorn - The Netherlands

2/25/18 4:43 PM

Brian,
in Europe we (at least a very big majority) think that people wanting to own automatic rifles are criminal idiots. According to your reasoning they should not be allowed to have those kinds of weapons, having a mental illness.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

dfcas
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 2524
Location: hillbilly heaven

2/25/18 5:54 PM

I,for one, will boycott these companies. I've had enough.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

April
Joined: 13 Dec 2003
Posts: 6453
Location: Westchester/NYC

2/25/18 8:01 PM

Dan, it was suggested that one should write to the company to let them lnow why they’ve lost your business.

I will boycott them too. Just doing my part.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4189
Location: Nashua, NH

2/26/18 6:21 AM

Pino, there's a difference...

...between "automatic" and "semi-automatic" firearms. It's the latter that I was referencing.

People who are mentally ill are not legally allowed to own any kind of firearm here, but the system for reporting mental illness issues is seriously flawed. That definitely needs to be fixed.

Does the "very big majority" in Europe regard the Swiss as "criminal idiots" for requiring that households have military weaponry and ammunition?

Over here, we think people who drive over 100 mph on highways are "criminal idiots". ;-)

I guess it's a case of "pick your poison".


Last edited by Brian Nystrom on 2/26/18 7:30 AM; edited 2 times in total

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4189
Location: Nashua, NH

2/26/18 6:27 AM

Boycott to what end?

Think about it for a minute. You're going to boycott companies because of who owns them? Would you refuse to befriend someone because you didn't like their parents? It's not as if either of them has a choice. Do whatever makes you feel good, but the whole idea seems pretty silly.

 Reply to topic    

April
Joined: 13 Dec 2003
Posts: 6453
Location: Westchester/NYC

2/26/18 8:51 AM

Poor analogy


quote:
You're going to boycott companies because of who owns them? Would you refuse to befriend someone because you didn't like their parents? It's not as if either of them has a choice.

Corporate entities are not persons who have choices. Corporate entities are FOR PROFIT entities.

The "parent", holding company, can see the damage of their support to the NRA caused to their overall businesses. That's why the need to write the company WHY the boycott.

If the fun owners won't reform the idiotic stand of the NRA, non-gun-owners can boycott any companies that supports NRA.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

PLee
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 3613
Location: Brooklyn, NY

2/26/18 10:03 AM

The Swiss "require" families to keep guns???

A simple Google will tell you that's not true. The best survey to date shows Swiss firearm ownership at roughly 24 units per 100 people, about 1/4 the US rate of ownership.

 Reply to topic    

Craig
Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 560

2/26/18 11:03 AM

"The problem is that we have devolved as a society into the current situation where some marginalized and/or mentally ill people apparently feel that the only way to settle a grievance with a person or an institution is to kill someone."

This is the biggest issue we may have to deal with. The "rules be damned" anti-hero of movies and television, the tough guy, sacrifices need to be made, honor above all, rules of the street etc etc approach to everything is creating a world of egocentric, entitled individuals who feel the only way to get compensated for the injustices perpetrated upon them is with the blood of others.

"The 24 hour news cycle and it's endless, droning repetition turns killers into celebrities. How do you think that affects people who are desperate for attention or trying to make a statement that won't be easily forgotten?"

In 2015, 13286 people were killed in the United States by guns. This number excludes suicides. Also in 2015, 35485 people were killed by cars.

Is this an apples to oranges statement? I don't know, maybe. But the relative scarcity and uniqueness of a mass shooting is what makes it so sensational hence Brian's 24 news cycle comment. But, you are nearly 3 times as likely to be killed in a car than by a gun, and yet we drive our kids to school every day. (not all of us, not all of us drive/have kids/drive kids to school if we do etc, I'm talking generally)

More people on bikes get killed by cars than in schools by guns. (mandatory cycling content) So let's ban cars.

There are lots of wrong answers in all this. I don't agree with Brian, I don't think putting schools on lock down with metal detectors and such is the right answer. The shooter will just sit in the parking lot with a sniper rifle, or set up in a hotel across the way at an outdoor concert. Keeping the guns out of the school via metal detector moves the problem to the parking lot. Or to a school outdoor sports venue. Perimeter around the school? It moves the problem to a field trip, or on a bus to school. Or a movie theater. The perimeters get bigger and bigger and really amount to banning guns section by section. Like smoking. First in restaurants you could smoke, then a smoking section, then outside the restaurant, then "not within 25 feet of the door" and then not on the property, then not in parks etc etc. Enforcing the banning guns from schools is the first step of just banning guns everywhere. Metal detectors are just a strict enforcement of that policy of banning guns. Maybe check points every few miles with car scanners and armed guards to make sure you're not on your way somewhere to do some harm? I mean, once the schools are safe, why not make the streets safe too? It's a slippery slope, and all that security bullshit at airports has done nothing but make me buy replacement toothpaste when I land and not feel any safer in the air. (shoe bomber, underwear bomber, the instagram posts of people accidentally smuggling a knife on board)

The "mentally ill" challenge is also difficult, creating the monster of the "mentally ill" being dangerous is a way to put a powerful and subjective tool into the hands of the government that can be used to oppress people without scrutiny. How long until any child with a mental illness is kept out of schools and social services programs citing the risks of aggressive behaviour? It all just snowballs into more oppression of people. I've read articles on both sides of the mental health rationale, there's good arguments to be had for both sides. I just rewatched Minority Report on the weekend and can imagine a world where "you've been identified as Mentally Ill, we need to put you in prison now before you commit a mass murder. Your cooperation is appreciated."

As for boycotting companies, I've gone through a big chunk of the companies owned by Vista Outdoor Products. Most seem sport oriented. There are no assault rifles or high capacity magazines. It's mostly gun lube, scopes, bolt action rifles (the antithesis of fully automatic), ammunition etc. Maybe an AR15 is hard to justify, but I think a lot of people are fine with hunting or target shooting (an Olympic sport, after all). This kind of seems like what Vista does for the most part. I'm not going to boycott them.

Knee-jerk reactions can be dangerous. Something should be done, needs to be done. Banning all guns and making schools into fortresses doesn't address the cause of the problem. Just like strapping a bit of foam plastic on my head doesn't solve the problem of cars driving into me. Maybe understanding that an AR-15 has no real purpose in the real world as anything other than a killing machine and banning it is a small step towards removing the tools of killing from the ecosystem. That might be a legitimate step. I mean, RPGs aren't sold at the local Piggly Wiggly, and it's an Arm Americans have the right to bear. And hearing the voices of the kids and parents and families is an important step but it doesn't mean they have the answers. I'm completely against politicians taking money from the NRA (and all special interest groups for that matter). I'm for the banning of assault rifles (though aren't all rifles potentially assault rifles?) My next helmet will be a Giro, because the are the only ones that I can find that fit my XXXL head.

"Our society is a massive freakin' mess of our own creation. That's the real problem. "

Brian is completely right with this one. We're all in this together. And he's also right in pointing out that most of what's being demanded is already in place, just not enforced or easily circumnavigated. Gun control and licensing should probably be a Federal item. I mean, if the government can technically mandate a 21 drinking age (even though it's actually up to the individual States to set a legal drinking age) maybe they should step up and put in one set of clear and enforceable rules for the entire country regarding gun control and registry, and make the NRA pay for it through membership. Canada tried to register guns once. We failed. Did I beat Brian's word count?

 Reply to topic    

April
Joined: 13 Dec 2003
Posts: 6453
Location: Westchester/NYC

2/26/18 11:56 AM

competing for word count

I'm a little suspect of the low gun ownership figure for Switzerland. Though I notice wiki is reporting a drastic decrease of gun ownership (from ~35% to 25% between 2005 and 2016). So something significant might have changed in their militia system during that period?

Because ALL male are REQUIRED to serve in the military. So for 50% of the population, at one point of their life, they were issued a gun and were expected to take care of it so it is functional at all time. Many of them buy the gun when they finish the service, for hunting or what not. So I expect gun ownership to be a lot higher than 1/4

-----

But let's take that example. Germany, France or Finland etc even Canada, also have 1/3 gun ownership. What's the mass shooting rate in Germany and Switerland? Is it about 1/3 or 1/4 of that of the US? Far from it! How about school mass shooting???

So clearly, the number of guns isn't the real problem.

How many times more UNHAPPY are Americans compare to Germans, Swiss or Fins to account for the number of school mass shooting in the US?

No, you can't JUST blame mental illness. Every country has some of those. But only in US these "mentally ill" pick up their guns and charge into a school!

There're clearly more than one single reasons (we love single reasons, because that's easy to "fix", but reality is rarely that). But one of the reason is the "lack of respect" for the lethality of guns. Access to guns is not just "easy", it's also CONVENIENT! All the argument of NOT impeding the sales on gun shows with pesky background checks! Ha! It's just like selling cookies, right?

NRA, as an organization that's suppose to represent gun owners at large, had been hijacked. While the majority of gun owners ARE responsible. And many even support reasonable regulation and restriction of gun ownership and sale. The NRA and taken up a position to oppose ANY kind of gun restriction by labeling all of them as just a step in total gun elimination.

That, is why I choose to boycott those companies. It's not because part of the holding company sells guns and ammunition. It's the support to the current NRA position that I object to.

I agree with Criag and Brian in the point that we don't need more sweeping new restrictions. Meaningful enforcement, maybe plugging up a few loopholes, is all I can see should be emphasis.

What needs changing is the mentality that gun ownership is a right, which comes WITHOUT the associated responsibility that comes with owning such a powerful killing tool.

Gun ownership should be a VERY precious right. You will forfeit it if you don't or can't take the responsibility associate withy it.

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

PLee
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 3613
Location: Brooklyn, NY

2/26/18 12:07 PM

I'd be quite happy with the Swiss set of gun regulations.

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4189
Location: Nashua, NH

2/26/18 5:41 PM

I'm glad that we're discussing the complexities of the issue, rather than placating those demanding a quick fix which is impossible.

The point of making schools more secure is to eliminate them as easy targets. Remember, most of these school shooters are basically kids themselves. They're also cowardly, so it won't take much to deter them. There was a very interesting interview with a thwarted, would-be school bomber on NPR today. One thing he said that really struck me was that simply talking with someone rational would probably have stopped him in his tracks. He also spoke of another kid who was literally on his way to kill a classmate when a girl unexpectedly said "Hi" to him and completely derailed his plans. It really makes you wonder if solving a good chunk of this problem may actually be pretty simple.

The true psychopaths like the Vegas shooter or some of the Muslim extremist shooter are another matter entirely, as they are more cold, calculating and better organized. Other than serious police work, I don't know what can really reduce those types of attacks.

Responding to some of April's comments, I think it's important to point out that the overwhelming majority of gun owners in this country are very responsible and do consider their 2nd Amendment rights to be very precious.

I also think that the NRA is so abused and caricatured by the press that most people have no idea what they actually stand for or what they would accept. It's also critical to understand that you will never get anyone to cooperate with you on gun-related legislation by threatening their rights. The would-be gun banners have to get over the fact that it's simply not going to happen as long as we have a functioning constitution. They have historically lied about their intent to the public at every turn and whenever they've been given an inch, they've attempted to take a mile. They knowingly force through legislation that doesn't even apply to the problems that they claim to be trying to solve, and law abiding gun owners get caught in the crossfire. That's what's driven the NRA to take such an uncompromising stand in many cases. They've learned through hard experience that the other side cannot be trusted and that hasn't changed. If anything it's gotten worse.

If you want to have a serious discussion about guns, it must start from a position of mutual respect and a true concern for solving problems, not from hatred of the other side. It requires a rational examination of the problems and an equally rational discussion of possible solutions. Sadly, our politicians don't seem to be capable of it.

Just to put things in perspective, here's a little tidbit from the CDC:

"Cigarette smoking is responsible for more than 480,000 deaths per year in the United States, including more than 41,000 deaths resulting from secondhand smoke exposure. This is about one in five deaths annually, or 1,300 deaths every day."

There are more deaths from second-hand smoke every year than there are from firearms, including suicides. How many of those deaths do you think are the kids of smokers? Seriously, why aren't we all clamoring for cigarettes to be banned?

Yes, we definitely need to address the issue of gun violence, but we need to keep level heads about it. Pointing fingers and screaming at each other hasn't worked and it never will.

 Reply to topic    

April
Joined: 13 Dec 2003
Posts: 6453
Location: Westchester/NYC

2/26/18 9:45 PM


quote:
They have historically lied about their intent to the public at every turn and whenever they've been given an inch, they've attempted to take a mile. They knowingly force through legislation that doesn't even apply to the problems that they claim to be trying to solve

Sorry, that's juvenile speak.

Just because SOME gun-banners are "take a mile" doesn't give the anti-gun-controller to refuse ANY restriction! It's childish to say "you don't let me watch TV, I'm not going to do my homework!"

As to "legislation that doesn't even apply to the problems", it's a by-product of NRA's refusal to consider ANY reasonable regulation or discussion. As there's no meaningful ways to get to the root of the issue, it only encourages political "quick fix" that are based on the latest shooting incident. Instead of creating a more comprehensive solution to the overall problem, band aids are added to attack a narrow "problem". Yes, responsible gun owners are caught by the band aid legislation without really affecting the real problem of gun violence.

But gun owners don't have the luxuries of playing victims. If gun owners don't take an active part in finding solutions, they're suck with the very same problem just like non-gun owners. One day, it maybe their son's school, or the concert they go to. Just look at what happened to Adam Lanza's mother. Or, when Stephen Paddock fired from his hotel room, he didn't distinguish gun owners from gun-banners in the plaza

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

daddy-o
Joined: 12 Apr 2004
Posts: 3235
Location: Springfield

2/27/18 2:03 AM

What do you mean Hillary lost? What are we going to do with all this overstock, mail order? How's Wayne LaPierre going with that anyway?

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

Andrew Lee
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 83
Location: Anchorage

2/27/18 3:30 AM


quote:
Are people really going to stop buying the high-quality products made by Bell/Giro, Blackburn and Camelbak because their parent company - something over which they have no control - sells guns and ammunition? I seriously doubt it, at least not to any significant extent. The boycott talk is just a bunch of noise that will quickly fade away.


Yes. Boycotting.


quote:
Too many people still mentally stuck in the by-gone world in which their "right" to carry rifle is somehow going to stop the government from imposing their will on the population.


They didn't read the US Constitution, which says that Congress should use the militia to put down insurrections.

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4189
Location: Nashua, NH

2/27/18 6:55 AM

No April, it's not juvenile, it's the truth...

...whether you want to believe it or not. It's also not a case of gun owner's "playing" the victim, they are being victimized. You need look no further than the senseless, Draconian new laws in NY, CT, MA and CA (among others) that have turned law-abiding citizens into felons simply for possessing products that they purchased lawfully. They're being told that they have to forfeit them to the state government with little or no compensation for their value, or face prosecution.

Remember, we're not talking about criminals here. We're talking about law-abiding gun owners. That's really the crux of the legislative problem; the vast majority of gun laws only affect the law-biding people who are never going to commit crimes with their firearms. They do nothing to address crime, because criminals don't care about gun laws .

In all the years I've been involved with this fight, I have never seen one piece of anti-gun legislation that was actually what it was represented to be by its proponents. Not one.

Until we can get honest people of good faith from both sides together to rationally discuss the problem and solutions, nothing helpful is going to happen.

 Reply to topic    

Andrew Lee
Joined: 10 Jan 2004
Posts: 83
Location: Anchorage

2/27/18 7:21 AM

FedEx has discount program for NRA members. I'm boycotting them too.

 Reply to topic    

Brian Nystrom
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Posts: 4189
Location: Nashua, NH

2/27/18 2:16 PM

I'm sure...

...that they're already feeling the pain from your boycott. Oh, how will they ever survive without your business???

I bust out laughing whenever I hear someone say that companies backing out of their member discount programs is going to hurt the NRA. I'll bet there's not a single one of their 5 million members who joined because of perks like the measly discounts that these companies offered them. Really, who cares? You can get the same discounts through numerous other organizations and probably do better simply by shopping around online. If anything, I expect there will be a backlash and more people will joint the NRA. That actually generates hard cash.

 Reply to topic    

Sparky
Joined: 08 Dec 2003
Posts: 16861
Location: Portland, OR

2/27/18 2:27 PM

Blah, Blah, Blah... ;)

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail

dfcas
Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 2524
Location: hillbilly heaven

2/27/18 4:11 PM

So why doesn't the firearm industry work to get democrats elected?

 Reply to topic     Send e-mail


Return to CyclingForum Home Page CYCLING TECH TALK FORUM
           View New Threads Since My Last Visit VIEW THREADS SINCE MY LAST VISIT
           Start a New Thread

 Display posts from previous:   


Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next  
Last Thread | Next Thread  >  

  
  

 


If you enjoy this site, please consider pledging your support

cyclingforum.com - where cyclists talk tech
Cycling TTF Rides Throughout The World

Cyclingforum is powered by SYNCRONICITY.NET in Denver, Colorado -

Powered by phpBB: Copyright 2006 phpBB Group | Custom phpCF Template by Syncronicity