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.
