ryan in maine
Member
case 1:
I shop @ an online distributor. they can be found @ Digital Gravel.com. they make a lot of clothing I like, and I own several pieces of custom/limited production shirts, jeans, hats, and bandannas purchased thru them.
recently, they've seemed to have developed an anti-gun slant, and support politicians who are mind-bogglingly anti-gun (Obama). all of this has been a surprise and has, personally, rubbed me the wrong way.
so my question is, @ what point do you separate their opinions from your support?
the offending materials can be found @ these links:
http://store01.prostores.com/servlet/digitalgravel/the-1086/the-hundreds-self-offense/Detail
^ quoted from link:
http://store01.prostores.com/servlet/digitalgravel/the-885/hoodman-chicago-obama-t-dsh-shirt/Detail
^ quoted from above link:
there are a number of other products from them that I find borderline offensive, but don't really get a reaction from reading, personally.
but I really don't know if I want to support an anti-gun, Obama-supporting company. well, I know I don't. but are these two examples grounds for referring to them as an "anti-gun, Obama-supporting company"? I've been doing business with them for a good time now, and this stance is news to me. in the past they have openly supported liberal and conservative views alike. but this? I dunno.
case 2:
there is a website that I frequently use to research medical conditions and prescription medications. this website can be found @ Web MD.com. I've found the site to be pretty helpful.
they have in the past, posted articles from writer's with a seeming anti-gun bias (an article on gun possession boosting testosterone and yeah, you can see where that goes).
more recently, they posted this article.
^ quoted from article:
so all in all, between these two sites, I'm torn between "who are they to tell me what the cause of gun crime is" and "who are they to push socialism on me and this country" and "who are they to tell me what proper gun safety is" and "who are they to tell me <etc.>" and ceasing all support of the sites, or if I should just smile for their 1st Amendment rights and continue doing business.
it feels like grounds to withdraw support, but should I? am I funding anti-gun companies with my business and subscriptions and visits to their site? I have no idea if either site donates to anti-gun organizations/causes.
Web MD is easy enough to stop supporting. Digital Gravel, however, makes too many things I like. it would be tough to stop purchasing from them. and I don't exactly think they have an anti-gun agenda.
yeesh. I dunno. all I know is that all three of those examples gave me bad feelings.
I shop @ an online distributor. they can be found @ Digital Gravel.com. they make a lot of clothing I like, and I own several pieces of custom/limited production shirts, jeans, hats, and bandannas purchased thru them.
recently, they've seemed to have developed an anti-gun slant, and support politicians who are mind-bogglingly anti-gun (Obama). all of this has been a surprise and has, personally, rubbed me the wrong way.
so my question is, @ what point do you separate their opinions from your support?
the offending materials can be found @ these links:
http://store01.prostores.com/servlet/digitalgravel/the-1086/the-hundreds-self-offense/Detail
^ quoted from link:
now, do I feel offended by such a remark as "the more guns are out there, the more people are just killing themselves", or do I just chalk it up to them having their opinions and continue purchasing products thru them? I don't even know if it's the entire site that has that opinion, or the author who wrote up the description of the shirt.This graphic is based on a kitschy vintage gimmicky novelty toy called a Polish Starting Pistol. But The Hundreds tweaked it and made it into a police gun. It's not only a commentary on gun control (the more guns are out there, the more people are just killing themselves), but can also be a statement about how The Hundreds feel about those who "Serve and Protect" us. The Hundreds think they should shoot themselves. Bomb logo print on the top back. by The Hundreds.
http://store01.prostores.com/servlet/digitalgravel/the-885/hoodman-chicago-obama-t-dsh-shirt/Detail
^ quoted from above link:
now, do I feel offended by such comments as "the upcoming election is our chance to set things straight and right some of the wrongs of the last 6 years, and we think that the US Senator for Illinois might just have exactly what this country needs", or do I just chalk it up them having their own opinions and continue conducting business with them?The upcoming election is our chance to set things straight and right some of the wrongs of the last 6 years, and we think that the US Senator for Illinois might just have exactly what this country needs. Hoodman show some love for Barack Obama, who happens to have spent much of his career in Chicago, having moved there in 1985, hence this Bulls-style "Chicago 08" design with the jersey-style 'Obama 08' print on the back. by Hoodman.
there are a number of other products from them that I find borderline offensive, but don't really get a reaction from reading, personally.
but I really don't know if I want to support an anti-gun, Obama-supporting company. well, I know I don't. but are these two examples grounds for referring to them as an "anti-gun, Obama-supporting company"? I've been doing business with them for a good time now, and this stance is news to me. in the past they have openly supported liberal and conservative views alike. but this? I dunno.
case 2:
there is a website that I frequently use to research medical conditions and prescription medications. this website can be found @ Web MD.com. I've found the site to be pretty helpful.
they have in the past, posted articles from writer's with a seeming anti-gun bias (an article on gun possession boosting testosterone and yeah, you can see where that goes).
more recently, they posted this article.
^ quoted from article:
now, once again, I'm left wondering if I should continue visiting their site and chalk it up to personal opinions, or if I should stop subscribing to their news letters. the medical field in general has an anti-gun agenda, but I don't often see it reflected on that particular site.Firearm Safety Often Lax Around Kids
Only 1/3 of Families With Guns Store Firearms Safely
By Jennifer Warner
WebMD Medical News
Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD
June 4, 2007 -- Only a third of U.S. families that own firearms store them safely, locked away out of children’s reach, research shows.
The new study shows nearly one in four families with young children own firearms, but only a third of them report safe firearm storage, such as storing guns in a locked cabinet.
Researchers say children who live in a house with guns are at risk for firearm-related injuries, and previous studies have shown how the firearms are stored is directly related to the risk of injury. Robert H. Durant, PhD, from the departments of pediatrics and social science and health policy at Wake Forest University School of Medicine in Winston, N.C., was among the researchers.
To reduce the risk of firearm-related injuries among children, researchers recommend the following firearm storage practices:
* Store firearms in a locked cabinet/gun safe or with a gun lock.
* Store firearms unloaded.
* Keep bullets and shells stored in a separate location.
* Lock ammunition.
Firearm Safety Around Kids
In the study, researchers surveyed 3,745 parents who brought their child (aged 2-11) in to see their pediatrician for a well-child exam about gun ownership and storage in their household. The office settings were in 45 states, Canada, and Puerto Rico.
The results, published in Pediatrics, showed 23% of families with young children reported gun ownership, which is lower than found in previous studies.
Of those families who owned firearms, 60% reported making decisions regarding firearms storage. Only a third of parents reported safe gun storage habits.
Researchers found the type of gun owned was related to the type of storage used.
For example, owners of rifles and other long guns were more likely to keep their firearms in places other than a locked cabinet. Handgun owners were also more likely to store guns loaded and use gun locks.
In addition, the study showed adults who had been raised with firearms in the home were more likely to report safe firearm storage habits. Families with young children aged 2 to 5 years old were also more likely to store their guns safely than those with older children.
so all in all, between these two sites, I'm torn between "who are they to tell me what the cause of gun crime is" and "who are they to push socialism on me and this country" and "who are they to tell me what proper gun safety is" and "who are they to tell me <etc.>" and ceasing all support of the sites, or if I should just smile for their 1st Amendment rights and continue doing business.
it feels like grounds to withdraw support, but should I? am I funding anti-gun companies with my business and subscriptions and visits to their site? I have no idea if either site donates to anti-gun organizations/causes.
Web MD is easy enough to stop supporting. Digital Gravel, however, makes too many things I like. it would be tough to stop purchasing from them. and I don't exactly think they have an anti-gun agenda.
yeesh. I dunno. all I know is that all three of those examples gave me bad feelings.