Boycotts and doing the Anti's dirty work for them

[ZeSpectre]

To be clear, I wholeheartedly support those companies who are joining the LEO/Gov't boycotts in places where regular civilians are being disarmed. I also have a "slow burn" on for those companies (REMINGTON) who are acting like nothing is wrong. Because of that I'd LOVE to see a HUGE boycott of certain companies (Remington), however I also try to consider the law of unintended consequences and the following thoughts have popped into my head.

1) Do you think that non-LEO/Government boycotts cause enough financial stress to get the attention of huge gov't contract companies like Remington?

2) Can we boycott without harming the local gunshop? For example, buy the stock that the gunshop has already paid for, but let said gunshop know that you won't be purchasing any more of company "X"'s products so they shouldn't put that into overhead unless they want it to just sit and gather dust.

3) If we are powerful enough to affect things via a boycott, are we doing the anti-rights folks work for them by inhibiting pro-gun companies?

4) If we did manage to seriously impact someone like Remington, are there other small, hungry, companies in the wings willing and ready to fill in the void on a more Constitutionally conscious basis?

Just some food for thought and I look forward to seeing what the rest of you think.

 

[Owen]

I have a few problems with this.

1.) Are we really going to attempt to punish a corporation for doing something the law allows? Especially the giants?

2.) It won't be effective.

3.) damaging the big guys is playing into the anti's hands, by decreasing the overall supply of guns.

If you want to support the companies that have chosen to not sell to LE in restrictive states, fine. Boycotting the companies that decide to do otherwise seems awfully counterproductive. When you have companies like Colt and FN (owns Browning and USRAC) whose major profit is from the government, all you are going to accomplish is pushing them out of the commercial market. How is that a win for us?

 

[danez71]

1) Do you think that non-LEO/Government boycotts cause enough financial stress to get the attention of huge gov't contract companies like Remington?

2) Can we boycott without harming the local gunshop? For example, buy the stock that the gunshop has already paid for, but let said gunshop know that you won't be purchasing any more of company "X"'s products so they shouldn't put that into overhead unless they want it to just sit and gather dust.

3) If we are powerful enough to affect things via a boycott, are we doing the anti-rights folks work for them by inhibiting pro-gun companies?

4) If we did manage to seriously impact someone like Remington, are there other small, hungry, companies in the wings willing and ready to fill in the void on a more Constitutionally conscious basis?

1) Yes. Certainly. If Remington ONLY sold the the Govt, and assuming the didnt increase their market sahre of Govt much, they would be a much much smaller company.

2) Yes, I think you outlined a decent compromise. IE: OK to buy what they already of the targeted company but nothing more of the targeted company and let the owner know your intentions.

3) I dont think so.

4) Probably... maybe... I dont know the financial strength of 'smaller' gun companies. It doesnt have to be a smaller company that fills the void. A larger gun company that is pro 2A could also come in.


ETA: I'm not one to formally boycott much. I base my purchashing decisions based on many things. One being 'do I think the company is a responsible company' (in relative terms). For example, I wont drive 5 miles out of my way to save $5 on some products from a company that pays their employees like dirt and is one of the most profitable companies in America..... unless ist gasoline

 

[M2 Carbine]

I've been boycotting S&W ever since they put the ugly lawyer lock in the side of their guns.

Doesn't seem to have hurt S&W too much.


I think boycotts are mostly ineffective and do nothing but maybe make us feel good.

 

[ZeSpectre]

part of my thinking is "If I can't be part of the solution, maybe I can avoid being part of the problem"

 

[Owen]

Yes. Certainly. If Remington ONLY sold the the Govt, and assuming the didnt increase their market sahre of Govt much, they would be a much much smaller company.

Right, but all of these companies are completely flush with cash right now, and what fraction of gun owners are actually paying enough attention to affect a boycott. So Remington's sales go down 3-4% lower than they are right now. Will they even notice? Will they realize its caused by the boycott, or will they just think the current silly level of demand is moving back to historical norms?

It's one thing to boycott a single company for taking an action that gets into the news. Its another thing to boycott a company for doing business as usual.

 

[JRH6856]

I generally do not boycott any company that is the only source of what I need. OTOH, if a company is not the only source, they may drop much lower on my list of options. That might give them the incentive to do something to improve my opinion, like improve quality, lower prices, or even change their 2A support policies.

 

[danez71]

Right, but all of these companies are completely flush with cash right now, and what fraction of gun owners are actually paying enough attention to affect a boycott. So Remington's sales go down 3-4% lower than they are right now. Will they even notice? Will they realize its caused by the boycott, or will they just think the current silly level of demand is moving back to historical norms?

It's one thing to boycott a single company for taking an action that gets into the news. Its another thing to boycott a company for doing business as usual.

True.

'Can' it work? Yes.

'Will' it work? Ehhhh... maybe. It would have to be a a hugely embraced boycott to even be noticed.

 

[Nickel Plated]

I've been boycotting S&W ever since they put the ugly lawyer lock in the side of their guns.

Doesn't seem to have hurt S&W too much.


I think boycotts are mostly ineffective and do nothing but maybe make us feel good.

Have you TOLD S&W you're boycotting them and why? Just not buying someone's products is not an effective boycott.
For all they know, the reason they have one less customer is because you died in a boating accident.

 

[HorseSoldier]

1) I think for the huge gun companies boycott ideas are more about PR damage than hitting them in the financial bottom line. It may still produce results.

2) You can just buy someone else's product that the LGS has on the shelves. Some places may respond to the "I'm buying this but not anything more from XYZ" argument, some places may just recognize that product is moving and not be overly concerned with threatened future consequences. Most of use aren't purchasing enough firearms yearly that we can throw our weight around based on our next projected purchase.

3) That is an interesting question, I'm not sure on the answer.

4) There are already plenty of other alternatives to anything Remington markets, specifically. Not to mention that most places if you are in the market for a specific product they make, you can just always find a nice used example, whose purchase does nothing to help their bottom line.

 

[Deus Machina]

I don't just consider the companies that refuse to deal with ban states pro-gun, they are pro-citizen.
It's tough for companies to survive on government contracts alone.

Will it hurt their bottom line to boycott some companies? Maybe. Maybe not. I still won't buy from some company that won't sell to me what they sell to police depending on the state, or neuter it universally.

 

[jbart85]

Right, but all of these companies are completely flush with cash right now, and what fraction of gun owners are actually paying enough attention to affect a boycott. So Remington's sales go down 3-4% lower than they are right now. Will they even notice? Will they realize its caused by the boycott, or will they just think the current silly level of demand is moving back to historical norms?

It's one thing to boycott a single company for taking an action that gets into the news. Its another thing to boycott a company for doing business as usual.

As a former employee of the Freedom Group "Family" of companies, I can tell you that they very much live month to month, and the idea of being flush with cash is foreign to them. They are ALWAYS hungry, and the root cause of any drop off of sales that is not in lock step with the rest of the market will be thoroughly investigated.

 

[ZeSpectre]

See this right here is what I was talking about. Are we really having that sort of effect or is it all BS?

Colt: Gun Guys’ Ban Bill Boycott Threatens CT Jobs

“The president of one of the nation’s oldest gun manufacturers closed down his Connecticut factory Thursday morning and bused 400 of his workers to the state Capitol so they could personally urge lawmakers not to pass gun control legislation that they say could risk their livelihoods,”

Full article at link

 

[Deanimator]

1.) Are we really going to attempt to punish a corporation for doing something the law allows? Especially the giants?

They have the right to do what's lawful.

I have the right not to reward them for it with my money.

Or are you saying I have a DUTY to give them MY money?

There are several local restaurants which I patronize because I like their food. If one of them didn't change their menu or the quality of their food, but changed their decor to one extolling the "virtues" of the Ku Klux Klan and the National Socialist German Worker's Party, should I still patronize them if this offends me? Why? Because they need the money? Because they'll stay open anyway?

At what point do you refuse to endorse other people's choices with YOUR money?

 

[r1derbike]

See this right here is what I was talking about. Are we really having that sort of effect or is it all BS?



Full article at link

Colt may come to Arkansas! We love horses!

If a company takes a stand I don't like, I buy from other suppliers. It won't make a difference in that company's bottom line, but it makes me feel good.

 

[Deanimator]

Colt may come to Arkansas! We love horses!

They should come to Ohio. We've already got Ithaca.

...but only if they start making revolvers again.

 

[joeschmoe]

What boycott? I thought we were just supporting the companies who support us. That's not a boycott.
I'm not aware of a boycott.

LEO organizations have been part of the anti crusade all along. They are doing the anti's dirty work already. We shouldn't help them, but help those companies that support us.