The decision by tech giant Salesforce.com to compel the companies that use their services to stop selling semi-automatic rifles has struck a nerve with many in the pro-Second Amendment community.
Here’s a press release from the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms denouncing the high-handed move . . .
BELLEVUE, WA – Breaking news that a San Francisco-based business software company is dictating to certain retailers what they can or cannot sell at the risk of being unable to use its software was slammed today by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms as a form of “corporate coercion and social bigotry.”
The Washington Post reported that Salesforce.com advised retailers such as Camping World to stop selling certain types of semiautomatic rifles and ammunition magazines or face losing the use of the company’ business software.
“This is outrageous,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “Here are companies selling perfectly legal products according to the requirements of federal law, and just because those products happen to be a certain class of firearms and accessories, the companies are essentially facing being black-balled. Our friends at the National Shooting Sports Foundation, an industry umbrella group, rightly call this ‘corporate policy virtue signaling.’”
According to the published report, the new Salesforce.com policy “bars customers that sell a range of firearms – including automatic and semiautomatic – from using its e-commerce technology. The policy also precludes customers from selling some firearm parts, such as “magazines capable of accepting more than 10 rounds” and “multi-burst trigger devices.”
“Some people may think this is a great idea,” Gottlieb observed, “but if it is allowed now because the targeted product is a particular type of firearm, what’s to prevent this or another company from deciding sometime in the future to essentially blacklist another product it doesn’t like? Suddenly, we’re not talking about an affront to the Second Amendment and millions of law-abiding firearms owners, we’re talking about possible restraint of trade.
“When social justice warriors become corporate bullies, maybe it’s time for Congress to step in and provide some adult supervision,” he added. “We’re disturbed by this report, and we hope the software company takes a deep breath and re-thinks this idea. Denying an essential service to a company because it sells some products that may be offensive to some people should be setting off alarms throughout corporate America.
“Your business may not be affected today,” Gottlieb noted, “but there are a lot of tomorrows over the horizon, and this sort of thing can become insidious really fast.”
With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (www.ccrkba.org) is one of the nation’s premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.
When a business begins to have the reach of government, that business needs to have the same limits put on it as government. The alternative is a 21st century British East India Company.
Or even just some goddamn consistency. These assholes hide behind government protections while claiming one status of neutrality and then act as another. No monopoly has ever existed without some degree of government backing
Agreed. What would be the response of the left if a business said they are no longer going to process transactions for items / literature related to “trans” or “disabled” stuff? I’m all for freedom of association, but I don’t think you get to build a monopoly (or something close to one) and all the sudden have a change of heart regarding Constitutionally protected items and activities.
Or abortions.
Good bet the maggots don’t object to Planned Murderhood or the local pot dealers using their crap.
Regretfully there are a great number of “tech” and other companies vying for just that position. As woke private companies they think they can get away with it and maybe they can. Google, Facebook, Twitter, now Salesforce and many many less recognizable ones along with some big banks. Some of these in the Social Media space are the envy of the likes of Joseph Gobbels, with MORE reach than governments. We live in scary times!
As said in the other thread, just wait until the sesame credit system is implemented here. It’s the leftists ultimate wet dream.
According to The theverge.com
The new restrictions in Salesforce’s policy can be read below:
“Worldwide, customers may not use a Service to transact online sales of any of the following firearms and/or related accessories to private citizens. Firearms: automatic firearms; semi-automatic firearms that have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any of the following: thumbhole stock, folding or telescoping stock, grenade launcher or flare launcher, flash or sound suppressor, forward pistol grip, pistol grip (in the case of a rifle) or second pistol grip (in the case of a pistol), barrel shroud; semi-automatic firearms with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds; ghost guns; 3D printed guns; firearms without serial numbers; .50 BMG rifles; firearms that use .50 BMG ammunition. Firearm Parts: magazines capable of accepting more than 10 rounds; flash or sound suppressors; multi-burst trigger devices; grenade or rocket launchers; 80% or unfinished lower receivers; blueprints for ghost guns; blueprints for 3D printed guns; barrel shrouds; thumbhole stocks; threaded barrels capable of accepting a flash suppressor or sound suppressor.”
This looks like the same of old gun control crap from the late 90’s who ever wrote this just copied and pasted this. It is clear they don’t even know what they are talking about
By the way when have you ever seen a grenade launcher for sale with live grenades to go with it. ??
Yep that’s that old 90s era list. That barrel shroud shit gets me every time.
So Salesfarce wants to ban the thing that goes up.
Yep, all the way up to the shoulder.
But wtf is “multi-burst trigger device”?
And where can I get 5 of em?
They don’t like flash suppressors that simply help protect a shooter’s vision in low light? Or mags that hold 10+ rounds (now totally legal to own in CA, yay! thanks Judge Benitez!)?
Or 80% unfinished receivers? So now legal hunk of material that cannot be assembled into anything is no bueno? These people truly have no idea what they’re talking about.
It sounds to me like their afraid of running afoul of laws in various states and taking measures to prevent that from happening.
I tried to buy some mags for my dad as a birthday present a couple years ago and I couldn’t order them from ANY website I could find, including Brownells, because even with a shipping address in New Mexico they wouldn’t take a payment with it’s address in Colorado because of the laws.
Clearly they were worried I was buying the mags and having them sent to a middleman who would ship them to me. They wanted no part of that so they simply wouldn’t do the sale. I sent my mom the info and a check to cover the costs so she could use her billing address.
Seems to me that company and new york gov. should be charged with racketeering for forcing companies to do things they normanly do
Is Salesforce a public company? If the CEO is openly using it to push political agenda over profit, he can and should be thrown in jail for embezzlement.
Traded on the NYSE, Symbol; CRM
The “Co-CEO” (how trendy) is a certified prog.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Benioff
I’m not well versed in the world of high finance, but if this is a publicly traded company wouldn’t it be possible for a large group of pro 2A individuals to buy up a controlling interest in the company and throw the CEO and the board of directors out in the street? Or, at least become a major pain in their ass?
Only if we can come up with something like 100 billion dollars — which will never happen since all 100 million firearm owners would have to contribute $1000 each. (The other related article claims that Salesforce is worth 150 billion dollars.)
I thought 51% of the shares constituted a controlling interest. Even 25% could be the pain in the ass I mentioned. Point is, we can piss and moan on blogs that no one but pro 2A reads and not a damn thing will happen. Fuck with their money though. I’ve got a $1000 to throw in the kitty. Maybe I’ll even make some money.
https://www.thestreet.com/technology/what-is-salesforce-14796378
Interesting article (a class action suit tanks their stock)
https://www.barrons.com/articles/salesforce-stock-falls-after-lawsuit-is-filed-51553705541
Perhaps a group of women gun owners sue to prevent being disarmed (vulnerable).
Stock ownership (with the power) is thru mutual funds. A BIG % of the users of this sight have $ in Fidelity which means you own part of this POS.
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/031816/top-5-mutual-fund-holders-salesforcecom-crm-orcl.asp
According to Forbes, their market cap is $120.9 billion…there are varying figures, most come in at around $40 billion…
I work for SF and CC hardeeharhar theres a lot of us that do, they’ll be losing boatloads of pofits shortly.
Just as when Dick’s stopped selling guns for moral reasons, why is this not prime ground for a shareholder’s lawsuit? These corporate officers are legally bound to maximize shareholder value, are they not?
I also don’t see how any existing contract can be bound be these changes after the contract was signed.
But I am not a business lawyer.
Dick’s share price actually went up after the announcement.
Shareholder lawsuits are a response to losing money by owning the stock, and wanting somebody else to cover the shareholder’s loss.
If the opposite happens to Salesforce, all the class action vultures (Milberg LLP etc) will be rushing to file suits.
Can we please just get to the hot CW 2.0 and be done with it?
I’d wager that a nationwide dissolution referendum would get 50%+.
That’s what a younger relative of mine keeps saying. Then I remind him “yes, but your Internet and/or cell might go dark, your food will be scarce as the trucking industry collapses, and your employer might be forced to downsize or shutter the doors. Then what will you do while the shooting is going on and you get news that someone you know has died today?”
In the early stages of any societal collapse due to warring factions, local LE or even the military will take over the main roadways, railways, airways, etc. Everything will come to a screeching halt, and the only progress made against the anti-2A govt forces in control of a particular area will be after grueling acts of sniperfare and subterfuge in which people would surely die. Not a fun thought.
A hot war is the LAST thing any sane person truly wants. The soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammo box, and in the order for a reason. We’re not quite yet to the final stage yet, and I pray to God we never are.
Oh we are closer to something for sure but not CW 2.0.
This Bearbussjaeger guy has it refined a bit more accurately.
https://bearbussjaeger.wordpress.com/2018/04/09/remedial-practical-civics-100-lesson-4-a-hunting-we-will-go/
“maybe it’s time for Congress to step in and provide some adult supervision”
They’re too busy trying to screw over the duly elected POTUS…
We have screwed up when we allow businesses to dictate terms to customers and there is an awful lot of that going on today.
Until we start fighting back, nothing will change. Start gun friendly banks, gun friendly credit cards, gun friendly salesforce (whatever the hell they do).
The gun community is very loyal. If the NRA started a bank, they’re would be a deluge of people streaming to open accounts, get credit cards, use its salesforce software (whatever it does).
Anyone notice Chick-fil-a doesn’t seem to be having problems with all this BS. They said we are what we are, and a crap ton of people with like minded views went, “BK wants its people to toss milkshakes at conservatives, Chick-fil-A wants its people to be good people….I’ll eat there!”
We need to stop whining about the free market and start joining it.
They need to bake the cake far as I’m concerned.
Anyone using Salesforce should seriously look at using Microsoft Dynamics.
Sounds like a nice sized marked has just opened up for some freedom minded entrepreneurs… G*d bless capitalism!
How about banning sales of those pollution machines we call cars?
We have to save the planet you know.
Treasonous companies should be dealt with, along with the Democratic Party owned by the super rich liberals, over rich young liberals are Americans in name only! and should be classed with the illegals! they take away Social Security and medical from special needs people and give to their Illegals whom they value more than true Americans,
More businesses need to say, “Well, I guess if you really don’t want my sweet, sweet licensing money, that’s fine.” I have worked as a Sales Engineer. If my own company came out with a policy like that, that caused me to lose customers, I’d be shopping my resume’ around to other companies straight off. Making me lose commissions isn’t cool.
Salesforce is a really big player in their space, but there are numerous competitors very eager to snap up customers. It might not happen right away, because changing software platforms is a pain in the butt, but a lot of companies re-evaluate their platforms every five years or so, anyway. Go to a competitor
A vendor that tries to bully your company into compliance with social policies that have nothing to do with your software would be a big red flag.
Here’s a page that lists 20 Salesforce competitors:
https://selecthub.com/customer-relationship-management/salesforce-alternatives/
This is a great inspiring article. I am pretty much pleased with your good work. You put really very helpful information. Keep it up. You might also like vegetables good for the heart<
The phrase “Well, I guess if you truly don’t want my sweet, sweet license money, that’s great” needs to be used by more companies. I’ve held a position as a sales engineer. If my own business adopted a rule like that and I lost clients as a result, I would immediately start shopping my CV around for other employers. It’s not cool to make me lose commissions.
Although Salesforce is a very significant player in its market, there are many rivals that are keen to steal consumers from them. Given how difficult it is to switch software platforms, it might take some time, but many businesses review their platforms every five years or so. Visit an adversary
Here’s a blog that lists 11 Salesforce competitors: https://www.troopmessenger.com/blogs/salesforce-alternatives