Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Wounded Warriors Project doesn't deal with companies involved with Firearms?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by firstater, Nov 7, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SSN Vet

    SSN Vet Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    5,758
    Location:
    The Dark Side of the Moon
    sounds like a Zumbo moment coming on....

    the attitudes expressed by The WWP certainly sound like bigoted anti rhetoric to my ears.

    too bad... it will only make pro 2A guys look like they are anti-vet.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2012
  2. Double Naught Spy

    Double Naught Spy Sus Venator

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    9,565
    Location:
    Forestburg, Texas
    That would depend on your perspective. Not all wounded warrior folks are pro gun.
     
  3. TheJ

    TheJ Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2010
    Messages:
    8
    Location:
    Georgia
    But do they have to be anti gun?
     
  4. basicblur

    basicblur Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2003
    Messages:
    2,637
    Location:
    VA
    Yes it does!

    Wait...a Zumbo moment for whom? :confused:
     
  5. vito

    vito Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Messages:
    636
    Location:
    Northern Illinois
    Not to sound petty, but after being a sponsor for the Wounded Warrior Project for a few years, meaning I have sent them at least several hundred dollars, I would hope that they are not really some anti-gun, i.e., anti-2nd Amendment organization. Years ago when Sturm Ruger excluded medical coverage for its employees if they suffered a motorcycle accident I vowed to stop buying any Ruger product. When they reversed their position on this medical insurance exclusion, under great pressure from the Americam Motorcyclist Association and riders in general, I again became a customer for them. I'm sure many wounded veterans enjoy hunting, and/or value the owning of a firearm for personal and family protection, and if the WWP treated guns in general negatively I would have to reconsider my ongoing support to that particular organization. BTW, I bet more wounded servicemen and women were wounded/disabled by IED's than by guns.
     
  6. Kingofthehill

    Kingofthehill Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,806
    Heard this at HAVA last weekend and just heard about it this morning on the Tom Gresham podcast.

    I am totally blown away and researching it for my own peace of mind but i have pulled my donations that were on an automatically monthly donation cycle. Also sent them an Email along with WHY i have pulled my donations and will not return until they repeal their decision to associate with firearms related companies.

    Simply unreal how they are against probably their largest sector of donations! The Firearms world. I thought Khar arms donated something like $50,000 a month ago or something? How dare they just keep accepting the money without being "Associated" with us?

    JOe
     
  7. Apachedriver

    Apachedriver Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    598
    Location:
    Central Texas
    So, if an organization wants to remain apolitical in order to advance its apolitical cause, it's automatically supporting the other side of the issue.

    This is all about supporting the Wounded Vets, not about who likes guns or not. Not to mention, they accept all sorts of firearms-related activities already for those WOUNDED VETS.

    It's all about supporting an organization that supports WOUNDED VETS, people that have sacrificed for a greater cause than themselves. It's not about using that support or those WOUNDED VETS to further a political stance.

    I'm pro-2A, pro-Bill of Rights for that matter, all the way. But I won't support an organization or company that places self-centered stipulations on allowing its support to those that have sacrificed of themselves.

    What I'm seeing from some of you is screw the organization, and in turn the WOUNDED VETS, for not openly giving you what you want from them.

    They chose to avoid getting typecast into a political stance. So what??

    If Mr. Gresham got his feathers ruffled, or his ego bruised, because they weren't chomping at the bit for his show, then he can go suck an egg.
     
  8. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    There's a critical difference between staying apolitical and simply refusing to have any connection with anything firearm-related. You can stay apolitical and still organize hunts, go on various talk shows and coordinate funding drives with gun makers or clubs.

    With their apparent position refusing to have anything to do with anything gun related, they are in fact taking a strong political position. When they justify this position by endorsing the anti-gun mantra that firearms lead to suicide, and indeed implying that wounded vets are DANGEROUS, then I think they've gone over the edge completely into partisan hackery.

    I hope that WWP changes its position on this. A simple google search shows that the outfit has had many contacts with guns in the past, which makes sense. If they think they're going to get a lot of support for the vets on the anti-gun left, I think they're nuts. And if they think there's major damage associating with us vermin, I'm afraid the damage has already been done!

    http://www.historicalarmory.com/national-editions/wounded-warrior.pdf
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2012
  9. basicblur

    basicblur Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2003
    Messages:
    2,637
    Location:
    VA
    Hmmmm....sounds like mebbe it isn't Mr. Gresham whose feathers are ruffled!

    I listen to his podcast every week - I think his stance (after being completely dumbfounded) was (and I'm paraphrasing a bit), that's fine...if you don't want to associate with me, message received and understood....
     
  10. TheJ

    TheJ Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2010
    Messages:
    8
    Location:
    Georgia
    WWP is not the only way to support wounded veterans. There are many ways and other organizations to support vets that do not take an anti-firearm position.
     
  11. Apachedriver

    Apachedriver Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    598
    Location:
    Central Texas
    As far as I've read, WWP refused the invite to Tom Gresham's show, not to anything else you've listed regarding hunts and such. And the only source i've seen as to what they said is Twitter:

    That's hardly taking an anti-gun stance.

    I agree but then again, those with whom you keep company with is how you're judged. I'm guessing that the libs donate as well and why offend them with a falsely assumed perception of being a right-wing pro-gun organization.

    Holy Shnikees!!...How did you arrive at that conclusion? I'm not seeing it. The only quote I've seen is Mr. Gresham's on Twitter. If you have more on that, I'd surely like to know. Those are serious implications against WWP and they would lose my support as well.

    Are you a firearm company? Or any form of media? If not, then you're entirely personalizing their choice to not go on a gun show. That's all they have turned down...a Gun-Related Media venue...they didn't turn you down.

    BTW, thanks for that link to the rifle. I like it. I'll have to look into that further.
     
  12. Apachedriver

    Apachedriver Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    598
    Location:
    Central Texas
    His feathers were ruffled otherwise he wouldn't have even bothered to mention that he had a guest request turned down. He tweeted it and spoke about it on his show. It smacks of "the nerve of them not wanting to associated with me." Typical media response.

    And yes, my feathers got ruffled too. Well, my one feather anyways...I'm not a big man in the gun business. But I do associate with gun related activities and visit gun stores often.



    I agree but I'm must be missing something here. Where did this conclusion of an anti-firearm/anti-2A position come from??

    Let me in on it and I'll pull me CFC support for WWP as well.
     
  13. Tim the student

    Tim the student Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,426
    Location:
    IA
    I checked with my buddy about his experiences with WW.

    Turns out he goes to Perry with M1s For Vets (which is a great organization, IMO, and in his experiences).
     
  14. 25cschaefer

    25cschaefer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    942
    Location:
    Flathead Valley, MT
    I have seen several WWP gun raffles in Montana; maybe it was just rouge fundraisers.
     
  15. jhvaughan2

    jhvaughan2 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    182
    Why is not supporting one side, considered supporting the other.
    We need not vilify those who are not "with us"
    We need to accept most people do not take a position in this "argument"
     
  16. Tom Gresham

    Tom Gresham Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    Messages:
    15
    Location:
    North Shore, Louisiana
    Hi, Guys,

    Here's how this came down.

    We invited the WWP to be on our Veteran's Day show. They declined, saying they don't do events or media appearances with anything relating to guns.

    I was pretty surprised. Like most everyone else, I knew they took money from gun companies, etc. So, I wrote them back and asked them to confirm this policy. The PR director confirmed it.

    My take is that they will accept our money, but they don't want to be seen with us. Each person will have to make of that what he or she will.

    One person offered that the WWP had gone "mainstream," and that they now don't want to be associated with the extremists. Maybe.

    I just know that after decades of watching gun owners being marginalized, demonized, and basically labeled as "undesirables," I'm able to recognize an outfit which doesn't want to be associated with "those people."

    Each person can make his or her own call, but it's good to make an informed decision.

    The entire email exchange is on our Facebook page. Each person can read it and decide if I "got my feathers ruffled."

    I really don't care if WWP comes on the radio show. We have plenty of guests and callers. I do have a problem with their policy regarding firearms, and I don't understand how they can have that policy while participating (?) in fundraising shoots. Something just doesn't add up.

    The email exchange is here:

    http://www.facebook.com/notes/gun-talk/wounded-warrior-project-email-exchange/10151354082553313
     
  17. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    This is coming straight from their FAQ:

    http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/general-wwp-faqs.aspx

    Hopefully this is a misunderstanding and will be cleared up.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2012
  18. Formula94

    Formula94 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2011
    Messages:
    89
    One of the primary treatments for PTSD is CBT with prolonged exposure therapy. Exposure is exactly that...exposure to stimuli that generate a negative response in order to correct that cognitive malfunction.
     
  19. 12131

    12131 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,541
    Location:
    God's Country (TEXAS)
    Direct quote by Leslie Coleman of WWP, from Tom Gresham's email exchange:
    When did this start? I know BCM is a corporate sponsor of the WWP. Or maybe it no longer is, because the prominent WWP display is no longer on its website? Hmmm. Time to donate my money elsewhere.
     
  20. HorseSoldier

    HorseSoldier Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2006
    Messages:
    5,297
    Location:
    Anchorage, AK
    Wounded Warrior Program supports wounded veterans, it doesn't provide them medical or behavioral health treatment. So whether or not they are interested in gun raffles or whatever else they mean with "exchange of firearms" is unrelated to anyone's treatment for PTSD.

    My suspicion is that the exchange of firearms issue is that WWP has PR and/or liability concerns about that. Veterans, and especially wounded warriors, as a population are at elevated risk for suicide, PTSD related or otherwise. (Which is not to say that ever veteran out there is a ticking timebomb for self-harm, before anyone reads too much into that statement.) Nobody wants to be the guy or organization that provided a firearm as a prize or giveaway to someone who then kills themselves with it -- which is an unlikely chain of events, but the numbers favor it more among veterans/wounded warriors than among the population as a whole.

    I spent July-October this year as a patient in the WTB at Walter Reed and can tell you from firsthand observation that this is pretty much inline with current military policies concerning wounded warriors who are deemed at higher risk for suicide. Besides making tons of mental health resources available to at-risk personnel, the WTBs (or at least the one at WR) can get pretty invasive and restrictive in their monitoring of those personnel. Some of the other guys I was with in the WTB were restricted to a point where in civilian society people might throw around terms like "house arrest." I don't know that it did anything to help those guys' mental state being under those conditions, but the emphasis was preventing suicides even if it meant curtailing freedoms.
     
  21. Slugnutty

    Slugnutty Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    2
    I've been following closely several exchanges on both Thunder Ranch and Tom Gresham's Gun Talk pages on FB about the Wounded Warrior Project. It seems that after much digging around, Mr. Gresham had indeed discovered the the WWP has a policy in place that deems it against their values to do business or participate with any entity involving firearms and the related industry.

    The hypocritical thing is that WWP routinely accepts donations from the firearms industry, such a very large recent donation from Khar Arms......also, WWP only actually gives about 15% of every dollar donated to use for what it should be used for.



    Below is an exchange between Tom Gresham and the WWP as posted on FB:


    And also now from Clint at Thunder Ranch

    Here is a site that has info and ratings on different charities:

    http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=531
     
  22. Apachedriver

    Apachedriver Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    598
    Location:
    Central Texas
    I'm glad Mr. Gresham got involved in this discussion. Comments on what actually transpired are preferable as opposed to forum reactions based on a single tweet.

    As a current service member, WWP's initial actions were in line with how the Army approaches these things. They don't like to be associated or mistaken as supporting specific brands. It's always been a policy to require the removal brand names and their markings from our personal equipment.

    However, I have to agree that based on the info provided, it does seem that WWP is moving away from simple brand disassociation and into a more issue-based decision to disassociate.

    For myself, I intend to watch this ideology they are moving towards and, if needed, to "spend my money elsewhere." My concern is always foremost for my wounded brothers.

    I'll add that presently, there is indeed a huge issue going on in the military in regards to suicides. It's larger than I have ever seen in my almost 26 years of service and it's frustrating the leadership as they're unable to "crack the nut", NO PUN INTENDED. Firearms ARE increasingly being used, especially by the younger service members.

    Of course the easy answer is always ban everything. But in this case, that's not the solution either so we'll have to see where it goes. I will say, this is the largest concerted effort the Army has ever put forth on one issue and of that I'm glad.

    BTW, Mr. Gresham, I'll take my egg back. Thanks.
     
  23. Yoda

    Yoda Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Messages:
    601
    Location:
    Florida, bouncing between Hurlburt Fld and MacDill
    But they were just on tonight's "NRA News" show!

    I just heard an extended interview with a WWP representative on tonight's (Tuesday's) "NRA News" show.

    Curious...

    - - - Yoda
     
  24. kyhuntsman94

    kyhuntsman94 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    47
    Location:
    Cincy, OH
    This seems all quirky to me. They distance theirselves from gun companies and guns in general, but are more than willing to accept donations from anyone regardless of their business. Actually, hypocritical is the word that I am lookiing for. I support the WWP, or at least I did, now I will have to rethink my stand on this. I would love to heard from someone within the organization speak on this.

    The other thing that bothers me almost as much as this is the quote above that only 15% of every dollar goes to support a wounded veteren. I do not have a lot of expendable income, but I do tithe to my church regularly as well as reputable NPOs. I will have to do some research to verify that 15% number. That seems way ridiculous to me.

    Another thought to cionsider - I wonder if they are having internal squabbles over this policy?
     
  25. Dave Workman

    Dave Workman Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    Messages:
    423
    Location:
    Washington state
    TheJ wrote:
    You could add that it is your right, and Gresham's, to make this known to anyone who will listen. Tom is a good friend of mine. I've hosted his show a couple of times. He's no crank, he's not an extremist.

    I think this simply stunned him and he decided to talk about it. That's what he does for a living...talk about stuff related to firearms. And frankly, I think we have a right to know this stuff. Not that we need to boycott WW or anything like that, but we have a right to know "how the management thinks."

    This tenor might be construed as tainting vets as being somehow not a good mix with firearms. Gimme a break. Millions of vets came home from WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf War I...they hunt, target shoot, work in LE sometimes, own firearms for personal protection and family protection....and they have been good neighbors, friends and even participate here and on other forums.

    Arfin says he doesn't get it. I believe I do... "Hoplophobia" might come into play here.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page