Loyalists Among Us

Matt Landfair

Matt Six Actual
Staff member
Administrator
We have industry influencers, instructors, and manufacturers spewing antigun rhetoric which includes soothing discussion to follow unconstitutional law.

How should this be dealt with?

I have been putting it on blast and in doing so defenders of those loyalists seem to pop up. This helps me figure out who to listen to and who to disregard.
 

HopsCop17

Amateur
The best answer IMO would be to stop financially supporting these people. If their products aren't being purchased, classes aren't being signed up for, etc. then their circle of influence gets reduced and maybe eventually they are forced out of the industry. The only problem with this theory is how do you get the information out and convince enough people to do this that it makes a significant impact? Or convince the people who see the rhetoric but are too stubborn to accept the truth and that will continue to purchase from and/or support these individuals?
 

Bedouin2W

Newbie
The best answer IMO would be to stop financially supporting these people. If their products aren't being purchased, classes aren't being signed up for, etc. then their circle of influence gets reduced and maybe eventually they are forced out of the industry. The only problem with this theory is how do you get the information out and convince enough people to do this that it makes a significant impact? Or convince the people who see the rhetoric but are too stubborn to accept the truth and that will continue to purchase from and/or support these individuals?
Yep, vote with your wallet and then let them know about it as well as your circle of friends and colleagues.

Look at the hit Troy Industries took after hiring Jody Weis then Lon Horiuchi’s partner at Ruby Ridge. Or Team Wendy. Or Dicks Sporting Goods. With social media the word spreads quick.
 

David Mayeur

Regular Member
As previously stated, cut them off financially. It may not impact them in a major way, but if enough people see their BS, it will make waves.

Daniel Defense, Springfield Armory, and many others have been caught in the act. I don't think it did well for their sales.
 

Fatboy

Established
Second on voting with your wallet.

In addition, maybe an actual list of anti2A companies with a quick synopsis of why they suck. Problem is that gun owners are the best at infighting and not presenting a unified front, so any list would be challenged for any number of reasons. (See the Team Wendy/ Hillary debacle or PatMacgate as examples.)
 

Kain

Member
So I agree with taking away the money by not buying from these people. Let's be honest, money talks, and going elsewhere with yours does get people's attention. However, there is still the point of taking the high road here, that we must consider, and I think for Matt this is something near to his heart since his personal beliefs have always held him back from attacking others because of that desire to maintain that higher road. And it is something that I feel is right. In that, to maintain the higher road, we do have to perhaps did a little deeper and not jump to conclusions. Not make our judgements with only partial facts, get the whole truth before condemning someone. Reason being, well if we jump the gun, and christ knows that a lot of places, sites, and a whole lot of people are want to do this, then that is out there and there is no taking it back. Even if you issue further statements saying you were wrong people may not read it at best, at worst your credibility is shot. All that said, if you have a person or company who does make comments or who's actions are counter to the constitution, and the beliefs that the country was founded on, and is counter to the rights of the people, then yes, by all means, let the shunning begin, though perhaps let's not make a martyrs of the fuckers, since we don't need them being used as symbols for our opposition. Pushing them quietly out of the industry, soiling their reputation should be all that is needed unless we are seeing something truly heinous.

There is also the point to which, where do we draw the line? Bill Ruger is famous in some circles for support a mag cap limits. I still run into any forum, well almost any, when a ruger anything is brought up the guys jumping in, "Fuck Ruger, they sold us out with mag cap bans, I'll never buy another Ruger project and fuck Bill Ruger!!!!!" Bill Ruger's been dead for years now. The company he ran ain't what is going on today. So is Ruger good? Or because of their former owner's actions are they still persona non grata? If a CEO makes comments to the effect that private gun ownership should be banned and all current gun owners executed and is then removed from the position and escorted out of the company's main office by armed guards, is the company still to be shunned, or do we now just focus out ire on the now former CEO? It might make sense to some of us, but the internet for all the knowledge out there can be preciously stingy on the facts that they consider and many want to jump to conclusions. So how do we manage to stop the wrongly accused from being burned at the stake of popular opinion, and the righteously assholes from managing to spin their shit into flowers? I don't quite know. What I do know, is that we as a group, and Matt in particular may end having to break one rule and the groups that truly do deserve to be outed as facts, frauds, fair weather friends, or straight up our enemies who feast among us while hungering for our blood need to be spoken out about. Named, shamed, and their crimes enumerated. At least that is my thoughts. But, as with everything the answer just doesn't seem to be as simple as we would wish it to be.
 

5150Magnet

Amateur
As others have said, speaking/voting with your wallet is the only language they will understand. However I agree with Kain above as there are certain boundaries that should be established. If it's a CEO or other high-ranking member of the company, have the community united against that individual. If they're removed (hopefully promptly) following their mistake then establish that the company shouldn't have to pay the stupid tax inflicted by the individual. An example being all of us know it's not the store managers or employees of Dick's Sporting Goods that are behind their behavior, it's the asshole elitists at the top.
 

Gypsy EDC

Regular Member
As previously stated wait for the full picture, if clarification is needed try to get. At the point you find a company is actively working against your worldview you stop paying them to kick you in the balls, and tell everyone else.

Giving a shitbag a pass and not naming names isn't taking the highroad. OTOH NOT reposting/ repeating unconfirmed gossip IS taking the highroad.

Lastly be merciless in actively trying to destroy the profit margins of said companies
 

TacMed

Amateur
Second on voting with your wallet.

In addition, maybe an actual list of anti2A companies with a quick synopsis of why they suck. Problem is that gun owners are the best at infighting and not presenting a unified front, so any list would be challenged for any number of reasons. (See the Team Wendy/ Hillary debacle or PatMacgate as examples.)

If the listing is limited to facts and not opinions and commentary, updated as new/different facts come to light, this would provide the intel without the infighting.
 

Nick29

Newbie
I'm all for shunning the true anti 2A companies/people that try to make a buck off us (Dicks, X Products are two good examples), but listening to the advocacy modcast from a few weeks back made me a little conflicted. I admit I was ready to throw Tim Kennedy under the bus after his comments on Lance Armstrong's podcast, especially since he seemed to double down immediately afterward. That said, it's easy to be taken out of context, and, it's way more productive if we can bring people into the fold than to just say "fuck that guy" and have their million instagram followers see a bunch of "crazy gun nuts" flying off the handle over one comment. It does put us in a tough spot that any cracks or dissent in the pro gun side is held up and used against us by the antis.

As for Pincus, I don't know how he could redeem himself after his article the other day. It seems like he just doesn't get it, and there's really no excuse for that with someone in his position. I wish there were an easy answer.
 
"Be a dick and you'll end up like Dick's."

I think they are getting cocky due to how many law enforcement agencies are allowed to get away with enforcement of unconstitutional laws. You've got industry guys trying to move product for endorsement purposes. If XPD mentions that they like Y product, then other PDs might be interested as well. Then other people get wind: military and private contract guys. It could mean government contracts down the line and the ultimate goal is revenue.

Too many comfortable people. Maybe too many comfortable people with nothing seriously tangible to lose. No family, for instance. So, what's it to them if something happens to this nation down the road? If they take all they can for themselves and leave nothing in this world behind (children) then who cares?

Just a shot in the dark here. I see too much of "it's just business" in the mindsets of the aforementioned.
 

Fatboy

Established
To go along with voting from your wallet, I would also suggest letting them know why they don't get your money.
 
Top