‘Are You Now or Have You Ever Been a Gun Owner or Member of the NRA?’

Delta Edward Bastian Corporate Gun Control

Delta CEO Edward Bastian courtesy amuserr.com

“The left has figured out that it is impossible at the present time to actually get rid of the Second Amendment. It is not going to be successful to use the government to confiscate weapons. They have made the judgment that going after people’s guns using the power of government or the efforts to eliminate the Second Amendment will fail.

“And so they are employing new tactics, and they’re not advertising this. They’re not bragging about it. They’re not discussing it. They’re not beating their chests when it succeeds. And the name “corporate gun control,” it doesn’t mean that it is all exclusively corporate strategy and behavior. It’s just to distinguish it from government. They’ve given up on the idea of using government to get rid of guns, to find them and confiscate them to get rid of the Second Amendment, and instead they’re using the private sector to do it.

“The way they are doing it and the reason why it’s being called corporate is that participating CEOs will take their companies out of business relationships with any entities that support the Second Amendment or donate money to the NRA, have firearms training classes. So if the CEO of the ABC Widget Company learns that one of their prime customers heavily supports the NRA, they will cease doing business with them. They may even get to the point of firing and not hiring employees who own guns, who use guns, or who contribute or donate to the NRA or any other gun rights group.” – Rush Limbaugh on corporate gun control [via rushlimbaugh.com]

comments

  1. avatar Stereodude says:

    He’s correct. It’s already at work and in play.

    As usual the right is 10 steps behind and doesn’t know how to respond or fight back. The left wants us to beg for more gov’t regulation that they can use against us later when they retake the reigns of power.

    The right needs to employ some of the tactics of the left and practice heavy lawfare. Sue, sue, sue, and sue some more. Tie them up in court with lawsuits. Bury them in lawsuits.

    On top of that there are a number of real business opportunities here but we need some conservatives with deep pockets to start them. Not conservative targeted or themed businesses though. But businesses that simply operate with something like the slogan of, “We’re not those guys. Don’t break the law and we don’t care about your politics.”

    1. avatar Barnbwt says:

      No he isn’t. Rush has never known dick about guns. It’s always been a blind spot for him.

      Federal and state gun control efforts are alive and well (dude, he says something like this from FL? Idiot.) and have made big recent progress toward turning FL into another high-population stronghold like kali.

      Gun control has spread to the corporate sector since places like CA have damn near run out of gun control laws to pass, and the budding tyrants that own companies there still want to push the envelope. The next step is banning semi autos outright, which Trump himself will have laid the groundwork for when the federal bump stock ban is implemented.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        Well Barndick has obviously attempted to restate what Rush articulated clearly. But Barn adds dick

        1. avatar barnbwt says:

          And what did you add?

          “They have made the judgment that going after people’s guns using the power of government or the efforts to eliminate the Second Amendment will fail.”

          That’s what he said, and what he said is incorrect. Specifically in Florida. Rush has never had a good handle on gun policy issues, it is what it is.

          Virtue signal, nothing. I pointed out Rush is saying we’ve won the game when we’re ahead by one point in the third quarter, and can now focus on the next game. In reality the leftists just opened another front and blind sided our flank.

      2. avatar Lugnut says:

        No – he is right. How much do you have to know about guns to understand the politics of gun control? Besides not missing an opportunity to virtue signal that your knowledge of guns is unsurpassed and that Rush pisses you off, you have no point.

      3. avatar Kyle says:

        Whether Rush knows ‘dick about guns’ or not is irrelevant. He is spot on on his analysis of that going on with regards to guns and gun rights groups in america today.

    2. avatar Craig in IA says:

      “As usual the right is 10 steps behind and doesn’t know how to respond or fight back.” Well, shoot, if you know so much why aren’t you out there leading? It’s ludicrous to think only “the right” owns guns or cares about the @nd Amendment (and the US Constitution) as well. Tactics must be exposed to be fought, we’ll win this one as well, with or without the crop of nay-sayers and crybaby cynics.

      1. avatar Stereodude says:

        Don’t be daft. The left doesn’t care about gun rights. There might be people who haven’t left the democrat party yet who care about guns, but they’re the ones not paying attention. They’ll continue to support people trying to take their rights away until it’s too late.

        1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          The old blue tick dog Dems Fudds will keep voting for the new progressive Dems like Ocasio Cortez and not even notice that the party has taken a hard left. My grand pappy was a proud Democrat, my daddy was, and I am too. All people need is a double barrel shotgun for duck season.

        2. avatar Craig in IA says:

          “There might be people who haven’t left the democrat party yet who care about guns, but they’re the ones not paying attention.” Not exactly true- I work about 22 weekends per year as an NRA recruiter at gun shows in IA and MN and there are several dealers, as well as a fair number of people attending who are democrats as well as gun owners and they’re not ready to give up their guns. And there are also a fairly hign number of people who claim to be either Republican or conservative (and they are not mutually inclusive) who could not be counted on to support the 2nd Amendment let alone the entire US Constitution. Some of them even sit on our county’s Republican Central Committee with me…

          You’d be more intelligent to sort folks out as individuals first. Of course there are key issues that seem to be owned by one party or the other (or more correctly-stated: one political outlook or the other) but if one doesn’t at least work on those at the edges rather than just toss them aside, he/she/it is losing a fair number of potential allies. As per the Millenial leftists, for example: as a college prof myself at a very liberal arts college, I have to believe that a fair number of our little snowflake activists will soon ditch what they were fed by their old hippy profs fairly soon after they start earning some real paychecks and start paying attention to how much they make never reaches them. Ditto when they try to buy real estate or partake in the better things and find out how much the government penalizes them in taxes and fees for the privilege of doing it, or for just being an American. Not all of them will make the connection but I’ll bet a hell of a lot of them will, and those are the people we should be courting rather than bitching about. Why would they ever want to hook up with us and our beliefs if we mock them or toss them aside withut even trying? Go ahead and puff up and beat your chest but you really aren’t doing much to affect anyone’s decision process that might be swayed.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Your comment was/is nicely done. But, I disagree with almost all of it.

          – Democrat gun owners are not 2A supporters. They take advantage of 2A for their own purposes, but given a dilemma to put money behind protecting an enumerated right, or put money behind a made-up “right” to murder unborn children, Dimowits will support abortion every time; especially if given a stark contrast that only 2A, or abortion are to be permitted protection of law.

          – The unicorn “undecideds” regarding the Second Amendment do not represent a significant pool of potential 2A supporters. Each convert should be celebrated, but there are not enough of them to make any difference in the near even split regarding private gun ownership.

          – The millennials are not a unique, nor recent advent regarding politics. Their parents, and their grandparents had all the same opportunity to dump left wing BS after they got jobs and grew up. What do you think happened? Who do you think all these left wing groups are? Time does not work in the favor of 2A advocacy.

          – And my favorite…Dimowits with guns are mentally ill. The claim an individual right, acknowledge a need for personal responsibility, then support programs diametrically opposed to their views on gun ownership and personal responsibility. This is called being double-minded, and the double-minded have been declared unstable in all their ways.

          But, I do think your comment was well done.

      2. avatar Craig in IA says:

        Go ahead and disagree… FWIW, however:

        – “Democrat gun owners are not 2A supporters.” … You seem to imply that all democrats are deeply entrenched in the leftist doctrine. Not true, the majority of democrats are probably just that because it seems more palatable to them at this point in their lives than the Neanderthal right. Things change over time, and a bit of prosperity can change many things. That’s why we shouldn’t toss all people who believe they are democrats under the bus, nor give the best seats on the bus to those who claim to be “on the right” at the moment. Continuing to act in a manner that is threatening to them personally isn’t going to do either “side” any good.

        – The unicorn “undecideds” regarding the Second Amendment do not represent a significant pool of potential 2A supporters.”… Actually, this group, especially when one includes females in the mix is a huge demographic which should always be pursued.

        – “The millennials are not a unique, nor recent advent regarding politics.”… Perhaps, but progressive agenda(s) have almost always been initially more appealing to the next younger generation, even before the debacle that was the 1960s. As much influence as the Hippy crowd had on forming a left swing in the political pendulum, most adults who grew up in the 60s still identify more on the conservative side. One is rarely all or nothing.

        – And my favorite…Dimowits with guns are mentally ill. That must be your claim, I don’t remember stating it, although I’ll concede that most humans will attempt to use the law, God, the Bible, and bits of history to their own advantage whenever possible.

        I still believe that “our side” condemning everyone who seems to be, for the moment, sided with our oppostition is missing an opportunity to set the record straight. If things are as bad as you state, why even bother? Just go home, open another bottle and forget about it.

    3. avatar Rswartze says:

      Clearly you listen to Dan Bongino. And I completely agree with both of you. It’s a huge business opportunity for someone willing to take it.

      1. avatar Stereodude says:

        Yeah, he’s one of the podcasts I listen to along with Rush and Buck Sexton.

    4. avatar ams says:

      And that’s the beauty of the free market system. If there is a large population of people with vast amounts of cash and resources, it’s going to be gun owners. If a CEOs want to give up a vast amount of profit, then by all means, let them give it a whirl. I wonder how long that CEO is going to remain CEO when (s)he gets up to announce that profits have taken a hit and EPS is down, market share was lost, there will be no dividends, and layoffs are coming but they don’t do business with those dirty gun companies/owners.

      Business is driven by money and investment. For every income stream you don’t want, there is someone who does.

  2. avatar Scooter says:

    Should this private-sector McCarthyism be called Bloombergism, Wattsism, or Giffordsism? And to the questions, HELL YES and YES!

    1. avatar GunnyGene says:

      Go back farther than that. Go back to Eric Holder’s comment in 1995: “a public campaign to really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way”. You can find the video of this announcement on Youtube, and many other sources.

      Brainwashing, btw, isn’t just propaganda. It very often includes violence and threats of violence or incarceration, loss of income, and many other techniques – anything that will convince people to change their loyalties and behavior can be, and is, used.

    2. avatar BLAMMO says:

      Let’s just call it what it is: Fascism

      Identify and isolate a group of people; vilify and blame them for the woes of society; promote boycotts and disassociation; anyone who associates with or patronizes those in the group will be considered part of the group and treated accordingly.

      (The sign in the window translates “Germany, defend yourself. Do not buy from Jews”)

      https://images.dailykos.com/images/442442/story_image/Nazi_vandalism.JPG?1503980821

    3. avatar neiowa says:

      Any idiot that uses the progtard insult of “McCarthyism” is lost.

      McCarthy was RIGHT. The Russian commie infested the dem/prog party and hollywierd then and they do now. This is what is so laughable about them screaming “the Russians, the Russians” for the last 2years. The dem/progs have had a full on screaming orgasim for Russian communism for more than a century.

      1. avatar Huntmaster says:

        The Russians have infiltrated our elections and politics since the thirties. Anybody with half a brain knows this. What’s new? They saw how dangerous Hillary was to the global economy and stability. The incompetence and lawlessness of Hillary and her minions scared him more than Donald Trump. For the first time he got to play the good guy. By the way, I didn’t vote for Trump[ because of the Russians and I don’t know anyone who did. Nobody voted for Trump because of the Russians. I bet a lot of them voted for him because of Hillary though.

        1. avatar Rocketman says:

          That’s what a lot of people have told me. “I didn’t vote for Trump because I thought he would be a great president.” “I was voting against Hell on Earth Hillary.”

        2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          Well I voted for Trump because he was Putin approved. I do everything the Russians tell me to do. I am the Manchurian Citizen and Voter.
          Now just wait until we get to the Chinese….

      2. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

        The Left has gone to great pains to prove McCarthy correct.

        1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          Tail Gunner Joe may have been more right than wrong.

      3. avatar Ing says:

        You can’t expect anyone to know that, however, when everyone is explicitly taught the exact opposite and you have to drive through crazy town (without remaining there) to reach the truth.

        McCarthy may have been right, but he was a fool. Thanks to his poor tactics, he not only lost, but also took the credibility of everyone else who tried to make the same point down with him.

    4. avatar pwrserge says:

      I prefer… “treason, terrorism, and ground for summary execution”

  3. avatar Illinois_Minion says:

    “…They may even get to the point of firing and not hiring employees who own guns, who use guns, or who contribute or donate to the NRA or any other gun rights group.”

    Interesting point. Can we turn this into the same protected status as LGBQT or religious sects have done? Using a persons affiliations or beliefs to facilitate a discriminating prejudice = illegal action/discrimination?

    1. avatar Barnbwt says:

      No. Logic is not why those groups are protected, it is because they have Democrat political affiliation.

      1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

        Yup.

        1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

          Force it.

          The only thing Leftists understand is FORCE.

          We now have friends in the very *highest* (SCOTUS) of places. 😉

          This is now a civil rights issue, and needs to be addressed as such…

    2. AmmoSexual? I Identify as a “Rifle barrel cleaning patch….”

      1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

        AmmoSexuals never shoot blanks… 🙂

    3. avatar JeffR says:

      In a lot of states, we already have protected status. There are some laws that explicitly protect gun owners from discrimination but more frequently the laws which grant protected status are buried a bit. For example, a lot of states – including some deep blue states like Illinois – passed laws years ago which were primarily intended to protect smokers from discrimination. But the laws are broadly worded and protect people who use lawful products or engage in lawful activities during their non-working time. I have counseled a few employers over the years to tread carefully with respect to gun owners because of these laws.

  4. avatar Felix says:

    It will backfire, just as all artificial upsets to markets backfire in unintended ways. Here the obvious backfire is the business lost and the ripple effects of their new strategy. These companies are leaving a lot of the market off-limits for no good reason. Just as a bigot who refuses to do business with blacks or Muslims or red-headed step-children leaves business on the table for competitors, so do these companies leave easy pickings for competitors. Businesses will tell you that acquiring new customers is more expensive than retaining old customers; yet these bigoted businesses are throwing away existing customers while reducing acquisition costs for their competitors to pick up these discarded customers.

    As for the government coercion itself, it’s already begun backfiring. Georgia cost Delta Airlines something like $50M a year in tax breaks. No doubt a lot of these coercive actions will be deemed illegal by courts, but that takes time, and there are other, more subtle, ways of continuing the government bigotry. These same tactics can be used against Planned Parenthood, eco-freaks, solar and wind power companies, and anybody else. The lefties will find that they are more sensitive to these outrages than gundamentalists because they don’t have an enumerated right backing them up, and gundamentalists are far more focused on this one topic then the social justice warriors.

    1. avatar HP says:

      “The lefties will find that they are more sensitive to these outrages than gundamentalists because they don’t have an enumerated right backing them up, and gundamentalists are far more focused on this one topic then the social justice warriors.”

      It’s like they think the tactics they are using can never be employed against them. Like the “Harry Reid” rule abolishing the filibuster. Amazing.

      1. avatar Coffee Addict says:

        that’s actually a very astute observation.

        never give the government power to attack and harass your political and ideological enemies. it will only be used against you when the other side is in charge.

        1. avatar FedUp says:

          …and the Senior Executive Service is always in charge.

          Thanks, James Earl Carter II, for updating our government to 1644 Mandarin Chinese standards.

    2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Not to mention that the minority group they’re targeting is 40% of the population. If you discriminate against blacks, that’s 13%. If you discriminate against gays that’s 2%. If the LGBTETC crowd couldn’t persuade the straight community to support their cause they’d be powerless in the face of discrimination. There’s no need to recruit support from outside when you’re already 40% of the population. All you have to do is get the word out to the people who don’t read gun blogs regularly about what these companies are doing.

      There’s also the fact that once profits decline the shareholders will be calling for the CEO’s head on a platter.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Given that these companies are virtual monopolies, with worldwide reach, 40% of the US population means jack shit.

        1. avatar Felix says:

          No, that 40% IS significant. Look at the lengths they go to for the much smaller LGBTQWERTY crowd.

        2. avatar Stereodude says:

          Felix: That’s virtue signalling and caving to the faux outrage of the left’s social media machine. Gun owners won’t get the same consideration.

        3. avatar Craig in IA says:

          I agree with Felix except that I believe that more than 40% of Americans owm firearms. And people who refuse to understand this latent power we have or try to cynically convince others around them that we count for nothing are usually a bigger problem than the one being discussed.

          It takes real work and critical thinking to take on these businesses that believe the majority of the country is behind them in their attempts to do away with the private ownership of firearms. Most people who complain and posture are absolutely scared to death to face up with the other side and have to defend what they believe in- hiding behind the Constitution rather than actually promoting it. Every gun owner should have to sit on a 5 person panel at least 3 times in their lives and defend their way of life to 4 others who vehemently disagree with them. They may actually find out something about whether or not they really care about their own principles, as well as determine whether or not they even understand them and can articulate them. No, you may not change anyone’s mind on the panel but at least they will have learned something.

    3. avatar Barnbwt says:

      We have an enumerated right backing us up? I hadn’t noticed, since the Supreme Court has completely ignored gun rights infringement for over a decade now.

      1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

        And in a recent dissent in denial of cert., Justice Thomas raged on the 2A not “getting the respect it deserves”. That was when Kennedy was on the court. Kennedy is no longer on the court.

        That’s a powerful statement from someone who will soon have the power to do something about it…

    4. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “These companies are leaving a lot of the market off-limits for no good reason.”

      Actually….probably not.

      POTG are gun owners, but…..

      Anti-gun corporations are calculating that the revenue contribution of gun owners is minute compared to all the woke customers.

      We shall see.

      1. avatar PistoleroJesse says:

        “Anti-gun corporations are calculating that the revenue contribution of gun owners is minute compared to all the woke customers.”

        I’m pretty sure engineers have a huge revenue contribution in any business that actually matters to western civilization…

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Not sure where you are going with the comment, but can’t disagree.

          Note….engineers are not renowned for their business acumen. And (my personal fav…) engineers were behind Titanic; amateurs built the Ark.

    5. avatar Unrepentant Libertarian says:

      Surprisingly, it seems as if the people who run some of these corporations know little about what capitalism means. They are more interested in virtue signaling than making a profit!

  5. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    They want to get rid of the box asking if you have ever been arrested or convicted, too…go figure…

    1. avatar Barnbwt says:

      That’s just so they can justify getting the huge minority prison population back into the voting pool & cement their beloved One Party Rule for good.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        More demtard disfunction. “Will abort you but if you live and land in prison we will get you out so you can vote for us. But we will keep you in the plantation ghetto and we REALLY prefer new comer slaves”.

        1. avatar barnbwt says:

          Just wait until we have prison wardens/civil servants voting on behalf of all their illiterate prisoners. Maybe we can just rehabilitate 3/5 of their votes, lol

        2. avatar SouthAl says:

          Barnbwt, been happening for decades with the mentally ill and intellectually disabled who are in the care of the government. I’ve seen caregivers (state workers) wheelchair blind, deaf, non-verbal, people with IQs so low they can’t be measured into the voting booth. But, not adjudicated incompetent and in the care of the state.

        3. avatar DestroyerOf Worlds says:

          No you haven’t.

  6. avatar Cooter E Lee says:

    ….Sometime in the future after the next civil war….

    “Are you now or have you ever been a member of or supported the Democrat (Totalitarian) party?”

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      Perfect.

    2. avatar Bob999 says:

      I am so pissed at the Democrats lust for this Bolshevik style revolution and the inevitable war they are pushing us toward, I am confident that one day I will be asking suspected leftists that same question. Simple math: (Democrats/Socialism) – 2A = Tyranny

  7. avatar American Veteran says:

    Just get more people involved in shooting, hunting, and the NRA or other gun rights group.

    The more of us means less of them and there goes their profits. Shareholders will be screaming for blood when they find Liberals alone will just not bring in the revenue they seek.

    A reversal of their anti-2A and gun owner shunning would be the only way they survive.

    1. avatar Craig in IA says:

      And this is the answer. I have yet to introduce anyone to shooting over the last 5 decades that has not thoroughly enjoyed it. I’ve also made the offer to the guntard NRA-bashing idiots that if they’d buy a 1 year membership from me at the show (which includes free $7 admission, a cap or knife and a free professional knife sharpening) and were disappointed after 3 months they could come back to a future show and I’d refund their money. Done that a number of times, never had to make a refund. Of course it’s much easier to bitch when one doesn’t have any idea what he/she/it is talking about except that they read something on TTAG.

      Live the kind of life, do the kinds of things and pursue and show your liberties in a manner that will make these things appealing to others. Too many of our “representatives” are slovenly, unkempt and actually go around in daily life in a manner than scares the hell out of most people and their children.

  8. avatar GunnyGene says:

    Rush is just stating what has been obvious to anyone paying attention for the past 10 years or so.

    1. avatar Barnbwt says:

      What an ironic statement.

    2. Rush is saying what might’ve been obvious for years to POTG, but perhaps there are some among his 22 million listeners who aren’t as “woke” but might be sympathetic to this assault on civil rights. I, for one, appreciate him helping to spread the word.

      Speaking of irony, one of Rush’s biggest sponsors is Simpli-Safe, which was among the first outfits to jump on the anti-NRA bandwagon post-Parkland.

      1. avatar KenW says:

        You mean the company that a smart kid with a rtl-sdr dongle and a copy of rtl_433 software is able to get the key codes to or jam or mess with the protection setups? They keep trying to sell me their setup but they are wasting their time as I do not trust systems that broadcast unencrypted signals.
        Here is a bit on the problems that having one of their systems could cause.
        https://www.simpleorsecure.net/2018/05/17/serious-vulnerabilities-in-your-simplisafe-2-home-security-system/

        1. avatar HP says:

          For what it’s worth, any security system is just target hardening. A person dead set on getting into your house is going to do so. The bath salt snorting scumbag who wants to make a quick score on whatever you’ve got lying around isn’t going to hack into your Simpli-Safe system to disable it.

          And someone who is dead set on getting to your gun safe will find a way around whatever company’s system you’re using. People rob businesses and banks, Simpli-Safe, ADT, Briggs, etc, aren’t going to stop them.

        2. avatar huntmaster says:

          The best way to make sure nobody breaks into your gun safe is to store your black powder in it and just collect the insurance.

        3. avatar Bob999 says:

          Yep, I worked for several alarm companies some years back. Ever heard this line “you are 17 times less likely to be burglarized if you have an alarm” claim before. The real meaning is this: You are less likely to be burglarized if you have a sign in your yard saying you have an alarm and your neighbor doesn’t have a sign. In most cities, police are so inundated with false alarms, audible alarms are usually prioritized at the bottom of their call queues for police response . In many cities, it can take 30 plus minutes for a response, and some cities, it can take hours. Oh, and don’t get me started on minimum waged rent-a-cops. Career criminals know all this. Again, making your house appear more difficult to a burgular than your neighbor is all an alarm does…and a reputable looking sign does that. Personally, I will never buy an alarm exclusively for the burgular alarm, but for detecting fires, I will buy one. Fire alarms do work, the fire departments tend to respond fairly quickly, and fire alarms sometimes lower your home owner insurance costs.

      2. avatar barnbwt says:

        We lost florida because the NRA didn’t immediately come out & declare they would destroy the careers of any Republicans who voted for gun control. Instead they either kept quiet or even endorsed some of it.

        1. avatar Craig in IA says:

          This is a ridiculous statement made by someone who has little or no knowledge of how politics (or the real world) actually works. So- NRA makes such a statement (which is pretty much what Marion Hammer made) and the Governor and state legislature still act as they did. Now what? We’ll have to see what the 2018 elections bring but in many cases, neither candidate is worth a damn as far as the Constitution is concerned. So, what it looks like we really need is for the great idealists like Barnbwt to get up from their keyboards and run for public office. They already have it figured out- get out there and lead1

    3. avatar neiowa says:

      The Corp machinations has NOT been going on for 10yrs. It is their newest “we’re out of power and loose” tactic.

      The left progs have NO understanding of Capitalism so they will loose this new assault.

  9. avatar TXShadow47 says:

    Yes, get more individuals involved! Though it’s only one very small step, we contacted every corporate entity breaking from their business relationship with the NRA and not only voiced disagreement but discontinued purchasing their products or services, cancelled credit cards, notified advertisers, etc. This type of step creates inconveniences at time but one has to take the first step if one wishes to begin a journey.

  10. avatar tdiinva says:

    Second Amendment supporters need to adopt a boycott strategy that picks on one target at a time. You can’t spread out the effort among all anti-gun rights corporations. It will dilute the effort. You break them one company at a time. For example, National was the first car rental company to ho abti-gun. Gun owners should announce that they will stop using the National group. When they cave then threaten a boycott of the next in line. It probably won’t be needed as the rest of the industry will get the message.

    1. avatar Craig in IA says:

      I’d agree with making our voices heard but in reality, NRA didn’t lose any membership because a bunch of corporations who do business with large member organizations like AARP or NEA dumped them. I can’t imagine anyone joining a gun rights organization for a rental car, travel or motel perk but then again, I’m in it for the personal right.

  11. avatar former water walker says:

    Yeah isn’t Limbaugh a felon?!? Of course he’s also rich so he can buy all the security he needs…for once I’m OK being nearly 65. Self-employed,I get SSI and can tell whoever go to he!! If a leftard asks me I am under no compulsion to answer…this BS will backfire bigtime.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      Felon? Never heard that one, but there was this; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh#Prescription_drug_addiction

      ‘…completed an 18-month therapy regimen with his physician, submitted to random drug testing, and gave up his right to own a firearm for eighteen months.’

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “If a leftard asks me I am under no compulsion to answer…”

      This is where gun owners go off the rails, thinking that hostile declarations can defeat people who spend every day thinking of ways to cripple our rights. If you think the “leftard”s are stupid, then there are four fingers pointing back. Here’s the deal….

      If you answer “No” when asked if you have any association with guns, through any means, then you are obtaining services under fraud. The punishment may not come soon, and may not come at all, but when the business provider has reason to discover you lied…well, you earned your outcome. This isn’t a game. This isn’t an episode of, “So’s your old lady”. This battle was long forecast, and long forecastable (my new word). Gun owners (a demographic much larger than POTG) must successfully defend everywhere, simultaneously, 24/7. The grabbers only need to succeed here and there.

      Take a look at the movie, “High Noon”. It is as relevant today as it was when first released. The non-“libtards” criticized the theme as un-American, a lie about the values of Americans, communist propaganda. But, here we are.

    3. avatar Stereodude says:

      Way to be a douchebag FWW… Why would that be your first response to someone looking out for your rights ? Blowing the whistle on the left’s antics earns someone that response from you?

      Not cool… If he was a felon would that invalidate his point somehow? I’m trying to follow your logic…

  12. avatar 2aguy says:

    The way you fight this? Start badgering the companies the way the left does…force them to become neutral again…I called Visa up about their banning payments to David Horowitz’ Freedom Foundation …. start calling them, badger them, we can even start organizing and going to the homes of the CEOs the way the left does……make it hurt and they will have to stop, they are not brave and now only the left is badgering them. Here is an idea…..maybe the TTAG can put up a list of companies that need to be called….organize with other gun sites and gun groups……that is the only way to make this stop.

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      I was going to bring that up but it wasn’t gun related. Visa and MasterCard are a duopoloy. Just don’t badger them. Conservatives should announce a boycott of one of them and start turning in cards and signing up with the other. Both will get the message

  13. avatar SurfGW says:

    Being an NRA member greatly complicates security background checks because the NRA once said “from my cold dead fingers” which makes it sound like the NRA condones antigovernment terrorism.
    Do the NRA round up and donate to them, but don’t become an official member. The NRA needs your money, not your name on a list and the member bumper stickers just make you a cop magnet or robbery target to see if you have a gun in the car.

    1. avatar Lugnut says:

      Barbara Streisand – and a poor job at that. That is one warped view of the world.

    2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

      You are correct about the N R A bumper sticker. I was stopped by a state highway patrolman once and asked If I had a gun in my truck, I replied hell yes you can see the shot gun right here that I carry while going out to feed cows and check fences. He then stated that he stopped me because I passed him and did not use my turn signal while changing lanes. I replied that I was too busy dodging him because he was going about 30 m p h in a 70 m p h zone and weaving from shoulder to center stripe while talking to his ride along. He went away.

    3. avatar neiowa says:

      BS SurfGW. The influence the NRA has is due to organized representation of a large vocal VOTING block. The amount of $ is incidental and merely funds the effort while providing token funding to those pols that represent our interests.

      The political ignorance but “expertize” in this nation (and on our side) is amazing. Like walking into a gunshow and starting a debate if .307 or .244 is better. Get off your ass and get involved in the political process. NO CASH is required, TIME is what makes the difference in a campaign in the US (perhaps not true in NY?NJ or Chiraq). Run for some office or get involved in a campaign or some Constitutional/NOT Demtard politics.

      1. avatar SurfGW says:

        I AM active in local causes. Visible NRA support drives away many local Republicans; most California costal Republicans are red because they like low taxes and are tough on criminals. ALL Republicans like NRA money, but outside parts of the Central Valley or some desert areas, visible NRA affiliation has been a kiss of death for 20 years. Very few California Republican politicians like Carl Demaio or Duncan Hunter (who’s charges are very much the result of a biased investigation) are willing to admit to being NRA members. Time helps, but money sways Republicans who otherwise would go with Dems in gun control.

        1. avatar Duncan Hunters future cell mate says:

          Yes the email exchanges between Hunter and his wife, which are quoted verbatim in the indictment, in which they explicitly coordinate their crimes are very biased against them, that is true. I’d bet they won’t offer either of them a deal, don’t need to, they have them both dead to rights. His father was a crook and he’s a crook. Statistically federal indictments are about 97% as good as a guilty plea. He’s done, tax payer funded vacation to beautiful sunny Lompoc California this time instead of Italy, next.

        2. avatar Scoutino says:

          California must be even more skewed than I suspected.

          Don’t believe leftists’ lies about NRA power coming from buying politicians with money. What power the Association has, it comes from membership, sympathizers and their votes.

          If we sound like we are willing to fight the government it’s because that’s what the 2nd amendment is about. Not defense against crime, not shooting Bambi. If the .gov turns into tyranny it’s our duty to oppose it by any means, up to and including armed force. That’s why letting the same .gov decide who gets to keep and bear arms is so counterproductive.

    4. avatar HP says:

      “Being an NRA member greatly complicates security background checks because the NRA once said “from my cold dead fingers” which makes it sound like the NRA condones antigovernment terrorism.”

      This is pure fantasy.

      1. avatar SurfGW says:

        When is the last time you looked at someone’s background check?
        Unless things changed, last check I saw was in 2010 and NRA memberships were definitely flags. Membership fell in the same category as tattoos of Confederate flags /Molon Labe / Gadsden flag – all of which were not disqualifying but which required explanations and made people less competitive.

        1. avatar DestroyerOf Worlds says:

          Presumably your background check was done somewhere in Russia.

        2. avatar HP says:

          Who’s background checks? It’s not a flag for Federal employment. It’s not a flag for pistol permit background checks. Maybe it’s a flag if you’re trying to get a job at the Huffington Post?

          Pure fantasy. Actually, fantasy is too nice a word. Paranoid delusion is more apt.

        3. avatar Duncan Hunters future cell mate says:

          Know any Federal LEO’s? Better than 50% of them are NRA members and get re-run now every 5 years. Most Federal LEO’s under 40 are covered in tattoos these days anyway. Unless you got one tattoo and it’s a Swastika on your forearm, they treat it like its athletes foot, “Ibuprofen, water, get outta my office”. Your spreading disinformation intentionally.

    5. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      That was the motto back in the 1980’s,Wayne’s latest motto Stand and Fight when in actuality it’s Kneel and Capitulate,so much for mottos.

    6. avatar Craig in IA says:

      That’s ridiculous. I’ve had to pass a fair number of background checks over my lifetime including 5 state CCW permits, education certification both public ed and college level among other things and have never had a hitch or wait. As for the NRA sticker, I was once let off with a warning near Bagley, MN doing 78 in a 65 by a MN State Trooper because I had an NRA Benefactor Member sticker on my back window. I think some of you just… WAIT MINUTE!!!! I THINK I SEE THAT BLACK HELICOPTER COMING OVER THE RIDGE!!! QUICK!!! TO THE BUNKER!!!

  14. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Life member here. And I donate too.
    I think I get a pretty Big Bang for my buck.

    I used to donate to GOA, but they must have spent three times that amount with mailers to get me to donate more.

    I now keep it on the DL to the Second Amendment Foundation.

  15. avatar Raoul Duke says:

    When the NRA cares about machine guns, lifting import bans even from places like Russia and China, and they stop giving in to enemy demands then maybe, just maybe, I’ll consider joining them.

    Until then, no thank you. No more comprimises, not one more inch.

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      Let me translate your post into plain English for you:. “If I can’t have everything I will take nothing “

      1. avatar Raoul Duke says:

        It’s called the 2nd Amendment, try it sometime.

        Shall not be infringed doesn’t apply to just sporting, American guns. The enemy will never compromise with you so why with them?

        1. avatar tdiinva says:

          You keep thinking that way and you might wake up some day with no rights because you wouldn’t take a less than everything when the tide is running out.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          I lack the research capability, could you point to a reference listing the number of “gun rights” cases that were won by declaring “Shall not be infringed”? Thinking that phrase should be a complete show stopper to erosion of the second amendment.

        3. avatar Raoul Duke says:

          And don’t complain when we don’t stand with you when you decided it was okay to throw imports and machineguns under the bus to protect your Fudd guns you like so much.

          I’m tired of my imports being political scapegoats and having no fucking voice. No one gives a damn about us. We are the red-headed stepchild of gun rights easily trampled on even by the likes of you.

          So at this point I don’t care, you did nothing when we lost our rights so maybe you deserve to feel what it’s like to lose something you like. Maybe then you won’t be hypocritical and stand for the rights of all gun owners not just for the ones you like.

        4. avatar Raoul Duke says:

          Of course shall not be infringed won’t work with an anti-gun, leftist, globalist judiciary but the last time I checked shall not be infringed meant just that and every gun law is an infringement regardless of what a bunch of anti-gun judges think.

        5. avatar Sam I Am says:

          If we cannot enforce “shall not be infringed” in court, then what? How many years have passed since the first successful infringement? How many years have second amendment absolutists had to reverse the slide? If the will of the people is not carried out by elected representatives, who’s fault is that? Or maybe the will of the majority of those voting is being properly represented.

        6. avatar HP says:

          There is the world the way it should be, and the world the way it is.

          People like you are not living in the world the way it is.

        7. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

          Freeloaders like you owe all of us dues paying members money and a word of thanks not absolutist jargon. You sound like a progressive hipster ignorant of facts. There is this thing called “reality.” You should try it out sometime.

      2. avatar Sam I Am says:

        The NRA poses a troubling dilemma. Left alone by politicians, I say let the NRA fail because they are defeatists. However….once government starts interfering in interstate commerce in an effort to financially strangle a group government disapproves, then we have “a whole ‘nuther country” at stake. If government can use its power to shakedown financial institutions, it can use that same power to shutdown any other group government disfavors. For this reason alone, I agree NRA should be supported in its legal battle with Pope Mario The Lesser. I am not supporting the politics of NRA, but the right to exist.

    2. avatar Craig in IA says:

      CRIPES! Only an idiot would toss all firearms and the right to own them because an organization doesn’t seem to “care” about something he/she/it probably can’t even afford in the first place let alone feed it with ammo… I hate to be the one to say this, but there are some people NRA doesn’t need, and you’re one of them if you maintain that attitude. You’d never be able to see how to do things incrementally. (For those who can, haven’t you noticed the huge change in the “acceptance” and promotion of suppressors?)

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        Can we all just get back on point? This posting is not about what the NRA does, or doesn’t do. The activities are irrelevant. THE POINT is that government is coercing private businesses to deny other private businesses the opportunity to serve one group of customers or another. The is the epitome of, “….then they came for me.” Whether NRA is worth a dime is vastly unimportant. Whether these gangster moves of government are going to be accommodated by gun owners (well, actually only POTG) is the dead fish on the table. We don’t get to pick and choose which pro-gun voices we defend. We defend them all, or admit we are no different from the opposition in that some groups get privileges, and others don’t, based purely on popularity.

        1. avatar Craig in IA says:

          “We don’t get to pick and choose which pro-gun voices we defend.” Uh, I don’t know about you, but there are definitely people who believe they are presenting a “progun” argument that I do not allow to speak for me. It often has little to do with the message as much as how they propose going about seeing to the means to gain their ends.

          Actually, there is no real argument in the first place- with ot without the 2nd amendment, my Creator has endowed me with the right to defend my life using the arms I choose. Can I be killed for demanding this right? Of course, many people over history have died for principles, even personal honor. I doubt the Founders believed something written down on paper would be the end of any attempts by a ruling faction or government to take them away, they were just framing those things that should be important enough for all people to fight, and live and die for.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Uh, I don’t know about you, but there are definitely people who believe they are presenting a “progun” argument that I do not allow to speak for me.”

          The point is that the message doesn’t matter in this case. Only the existence of the voice. When we start saying we permit this voice, or that voice to be squelched by government, but not voices we approve of/agree with, we are no different from those supporting the silences of opposition voices.

          The issue is not who speaks for you, but whether POTG are happy to let government shakedown businesses in order to silence a pro-gun organization (or any business). Agreeing to allow first amendment rights of anyone to be threatened out of business is to decide that some groups are deplorable, and unworthy of protection of their natural, human and civil rights.

          Then then government comes for you.

        3. avatar Craig in IA says:

          “The point is that the message doesn’t matter in this case. Only the existence of the voice.”

          No- Again I disagree, for firearms and all places where opinions may be expressed. I, for example, refuse to let a person like David Duke speak for me, even though he may often express 2A and conservative values and opinions. I’ll continue to choose those voices who best-express my values and opinions. There just are some babies I’ll allow to be thrown out with the bath water…

          Now, in a related manner, I have no problem with the ACLU siding with NRA’s lawsuit against Andrew Cuomo but again, I refuse to let them (ACLU) speak FOR, or represent, me.

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          What/who you approve to speak for you is irrelevant to first amendment issues. To acquiesce to government extortion in silencing any voice means your voice is subject to the same infirmity of logic you “speak”.

          Who a speaker speaks for or against is totally irrelevant when it comes to government control of speech. To permit or endorse silencing voices forfeits the moral ground for complaining about limits on the Second Amendment. You are simply saying (like all the anti-constitutionalists), is that our natural, human and civil rights apply only when we approve.

          If you want others to defend your right to own a gun, you must also defend the right of people and organizations to speak, especially when you disapprove of the message or the speaker. Just a person or organization speaks on a topic of interest to you doesn’t mean your support of their right to speak is equal to endorsements. This is a child’s conceptualization of constitutional rights – exactly the position of the left.

        5. avatar Craig in IA says:

          Among all the other things you are misreading or interpreting from what I have written in this ever elongating thread…

          “If you want others to defend your right to own a gun, you must also defend the right of people and organizations to speak, especially when you disapprove of the message or the speaker.” I have never advocated anyone be censored or silenced, and if you were more interested in actually reading what I have been writing rather than taking issue, you’d see it. My choosing not to allow someone to represent ME (there’s the key- for ME) in their POV or my not endorsing them has nothing to do with not allowing them to speak, nor in curbing someone else’s First Amendment right(s). Just don’t include me. Blather on all you want, usually such people as the afore-mentioned David Duke, or even Larry Pratt and/or Dudley Brown tend to shut off more people who’s minds we’d like to at least reach, let alone change, than win them over to the Constitution which has been eroded over time. As much as I believe the democratic socialists, for example, are so far off of the left side deep end that even most cognizant democrats (hmmmm, perhaps an oxymoron) should have trouble defending them (which many don’t), I’m in favor of them going out on every network, writing in every news paper Op Ed column, and even standing on every street corner to express their heresy. Dumb as public ed has made this country over the past 35 years or so, the majority of Americans are still not THAT stupid.

          Click to EditDelete (4 minutes and 25 seconds)
          Reply

  16. avatar pwrserge says:

    The idea that citizen boycotts can influence the decisions of a handful of companies all forted up in 300 square miles of SF is retarded. This is why there needs to be some serious regulation and trust busting going on.

    1. avatar Stereodude says:

      You’re falling into their trap. More regulation isn’t the answer. Legal protections for gun owners might be, but giving the gov’t new broad powers to regulate businesses is a BAD idea. They lefties will certainly abuse their new regulatory powers to further their agenda once they’re back in power and get to decide what’s fair and right in an totally unaccountable commission or panel. Look at what they do at the IRS, EPA, etc. You want more of that?

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Yes… because clearly there is nothing wrong in Silicon Valley that requires government intervention.

        When corporations get in bed with one side of the political spectrum, it’s time to let them know that they only exists at our pleasure. You can either regulate them, or you can break out the torches and pitchforks.

        1. avatar Stereodude says:

          You make it sound like the right will always be at the helm of the gov’t to get even with the lefties through these new regulations. We all know that’s not the case.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          You seem to be under the impression that the right will EVER have a say in how these companies act otherwise. Monopolies are called that for a reason. The blatant trust action against Alex Jones is proof that conservatives have exactly zero other viable options.

          Again, Mastercard just shut down a moderate anti-jihadi muslim on Patreon… Think about it for a second. There is exactly one practical alternative to Mastercard.

        3. avatar Stereodude says:

          And it doesn’t matter to you even if the cure is worse than that disease?

  17. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    ‘Are You Now or Have You Ever Been a Gun Owner or Member of the NRA?’

    Now that’s a stupid question,why of course.

  18. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    The best thing about this is that in the long run it only gives conservatives more power. If BofA and Citibank are dumb enough not to accept your interest payments, someone else will be happy to.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Banks? Sure…

      Credit processing companies like Visa or Mastercard? Much bigger problem. Mastercard just shut down Jihadwatch.

      The reality is that corporations should have no right to discriminate in any business issue based on non-criminal acts.

      1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

        The good news is they’re backing down.

        That’s right. Late last night we got a call that MasterCard and Visa reversed the action and we’d be able to get our donation platform up and running again.
        https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/08/mastercard-and-visa-back-down-will-again-process-donations-to-david-horowitz-freedom-center

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Just because they backed down this time doesn’t mean they won’t flex their power to interfere with legal businesses again. There need to be serious regulatory consequences for actions like this.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Just because they backed down this time doesn’t mean they won’t flex their power to interfere with legal businesses again. ”

          Which was/is the point in that whole “…eternal vigilance” comment.

  19. avatar Rocketman says:

    In high level chess, what you do is to simply place multiple traps for your opponent to fall into. If their queen is trapped and is forced to move one way it will expose their rook will be captured, and if they move it the other way they lose their bishop. If they don’t move at all their queen gets captured. That’s what they are doing. They’re setting up multiple fronts against gun owners and forcing us on constant defense, not giving us the ability to respond offensively. I like the idea of taking a page from the 1960’s civil rights movement and tying gun rights to civil rights. Non violent marches on corporate headquarters of bank and credit card companies showing them that violating our second amendment rights will hurt them badly and expose them to lawsuits. THIS IS THE TIME for Republican lawmakers to aid us by passing laws against their tactics so that gun owners can sue them big time.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Exactly, political affiliation should be a protected characteristic.

    2. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

      ” I like the idea of taking a page from the 1960’s civil rights movement and tying gun rights to civil rights.”

      Why, thank you! 🙂

      We’ll soon have friends in high places (SCOTUS), we need to leverage them to the fullest to get the respect a civil right deserves…

  20. avatar Gralnok says:

    Okay, as much as I’d like to go out and start railing against the corporate CEOs, this whole article needs to be taken with a giant grain of salt. It’s Rush Limbaugh. He’s just as much of a shock jock as Howard Stern, and with the same amount of credibility.

    While what he reports might be true, because of his reputation as a right wing tabloid of the airwaves, nothing he says will hold water. If I tell anyone about this, they will rightly ask me where I got this information. When I tell them that Rush Limbaugh said it, the information is viewed as bullshit. He could preach from the Bible itself and still be rightfully ridiculed.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      One must always ignore the truth when it comes from a source you disagree with. Truth can only be accepted from the pure of heart. That is the truth pathway toward enlightenment, and a shiny victory.

      Limbaugh is reporting what is happening, if this is the first you have heard of corporate gun control, then leverage Limbaugh’s statements to spark your own research. Then you can provide direct references to your audience, bypassing Limbaugh altogether.

      1. avatar Gralnok says:

        It’s called making a solid argument. If I told you that the lizard men are in control of our government, you’d ask me for proof or to cite a valid source. If I reply with The National Inquirer or some other tabloid bullshit, then you’re not going to take me seriously. I’ve not only hurt the argument, but also damaged my own credibility for taking the Inquirer seriously. The same holds true for Rush Limbaugh.

        That said, I do agree it is more than enough to spark my own investigation. I actually wanted to elaborate further on my initial post, but my phone was being a piece of shit for some reason, and I decided to just go with what I had.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          If Al Gore told an audience the lizard men had established a colony on Mars, I would start looking for sources and corroboration. Gore’s claim of inventing the internet wasn’t worth researching as I was actually in on the beginnings, and nobody of importance knew anything about Al Gore. Still, I would give some time to a lizard man claim by Gore. If Gore proved wrong, THEN I would cast aspersions on his character.

          Point being, Limbaugh has discussed a number of government actions through the years where he was ridiculed. However, his track record is not laughable. In many cases, I did the follow-up research, and used those sources to essentially support a paraphrase of Limbaugh’s claims.

          Regards your phone, I always wondered what was so smart about smart phones anyway.

        2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          You mean lizard men are not in charge of the government? Gee….a lot of those strange creatures which were old wrinkly scaly with shifty beady eyes and tongues flashing look like lounge lizards to me.

    2. avatar Don Dycus says:

      Google “carry guard new york,” if you won’t take Rush’s word for it. And just because someone tells you El Rushbo talks bullshit doesn’t mean they actually believe it. Limbaugh lived rent-free in both Clinton’s and Obamao’s noggins, eight years at a stretch.

      1. avatar Gralnok says:

        So you’re saying Rush should be taken seriously? Um, no. Just no. He raises interesting points, but I’m not going to take anything he says seriously.

        1. avatar Stereodude says:

          I don’t know what you’re problem is, but Rush doesn’t lie to his audience. You might not like his point of view, but he’s not a liar. He’s way more honest about the left than they are.

        2. avatar Duncan Hunters future cell mate says:

          Stereo dude
          In what was it? August?, September?, October? 2016 when Trump had closed within, I think 7 points or so, Limbaugh almost non-chalantly with less than 5 minutes lead in explained that he never truly believed that Trump was going build a wall and didn’t believe that it was actually a good idea because it would cost him the election and or re-election in 2020, basically that he’d been shamelessly lying to his audience for over a year. he then proceeded to take about half hour of callers furiously berating him and then never mentioned it again. I remember listening, it was hilarious.

        3. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

          Limbaugh has 25 million listeners. He is generally accurate. The left hates him almost as much as Trump. Listen to him then judge him, not what the leftist say about him.

        4. avatar Stereodude says:

          Duncan Hunters future cell mate: You tell us when it was. You’re the one attributing something to Rush. After you tell us when it was we’ll go check the transcripts and see if you’re right or making stuff up.

  21. avatar Mark N. says:

    Anyone who thinks that governmental gun control measures are ending isn’t paying attention. If you didn’t catch the news, late yesterday the Washington Supreme Court overturned a lower court decision taking Prop 1639 off the November ballot, and now Washington voters can enter the age of fascistic gun law. http://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/washington/articles/2018-08-24/supreme-court-clears-way-for-washington-gun-measure. According to the Seattle Times, “The measure would make several changes to the law. Aside from raising the purchase age to 21 for semi-automatic rifle purchases, it would mandate training, enhanced background checks and waiting periods in order to obtain them.”
    It would also require owners to keep firearms secured at home. Gun owners could face misdemeanor or felony charges in some circumstances if someone prohibited from possessing a weapon accessed the firearm.

  22. avatar Jbw says:

    Llbean has gone to Citibank to supply it’s credit cards. Citibank will not support firearm dealers or manufacturer.

    Don’t buy anything from llbean, they have thrown hunters and gun people under the bus

  23. avatar RA-15 says:

    “Am I now or have I ever ” I think that is my business , don’t like it ? Piss off.

  24. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

    We can fight back too. I’ve noticed that First Data is the name on the card processing unit down at my local store. Where I get my Beer, Milk, Bread, the occasional lottery ticket. First Data is who hung up Rocky Mountain Reloading recently. https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/financial-attacks-franklin-armory/

    I realized that if I pay for my groceries in cash First Data doesn’t make any money on the sale. And this is what we can do to push back against CC processors that are trying to put the squeeze on the POTG. Start using cash for our purchases. Credit card processing companies only get their cut if you use your plastic.

  25. avatar Sam I Am says:

    I don’t think you were/are misconstrued. The subject was government suppression of a legal business, government suppression of speech (as represented by business activity). government coercion of a legal entity (shakedown/extortion). Into that discussion, you posed a statement about who you choose to represent your views on issues. A totally irrelevant comment, but in context of the original posting commentary that can logically be construed as opposing the existence of a particular political voice/legal business. Your commentary would be more germane to a discussion of the suitability of the NRA as a recipient of your support funds.

    If you determine that the NRA should refuse membership to this or that person, fine. Just not relevant to a discussion about whether POTG should support resistance to a government attempt to put the NRA out of business.

    Just trying to keep the discussion on point.

  26. avatar Alan says:

    Corporate executives, when last I looked, can be and I believe have been fired.

  27. avatar BRUCE CLARK says:

    I’m glad I’m retired. No more nonsense. But you the consumers could easily change this type of repression. Simply refuse to do any business, work for, or purchase any product that the offending company produces. It works both ways folks. Regardless of whether it’s a private company, or a public company such as a government job. Threatening discrimination is against the law.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email