Saturday, September 28, 2013

Isn't it past time to boycott anti gun states?



I was watching the above video and it dawned on me.

Zulu Nylon is made in the US!  Good!  But in Illinois.  Bad!

So I wonder out loud here.  Is it time to boycott guns and gear made in anti gun states?  I mean a hardcore, Smith and Wesson back in the day boycott.  Not because the manufacturer did anything wrong but because we're supporting anti gun Senators that will vote against our rights by supporting the state economy that keeps electing them.

I think we should.  The problem is simple though.  We'll end up tagging alot of guns and gear that have been our friends for a greater good.  It'll hurt us and them but pain is weakness leaving the body so its pain we should embrace.

Agree?


13 comments :

  1. If the producers had any brains, and balls, they'd have left already.
    No state government is going to shut an employer, not for exporting gun crime (as they see it) , but they will be first on the list for any and all new taxes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I disagree.

    A.) It's hard enough to find stuff not made in fucking China and I wouldn't boycott a company simply because of the state they are in.

    B.) Illinois is basically Chicago surrounded by rednecks: it's basically rural and fairly conservative. Trust me, there are many, many gun owners in Illinois who detest the anti-gun Chicago-dominated political machine as you can see by the passage of Illinois' first Carry law. There are a lot of shooters and gun-owners in the rest of the state who need support. My father-in-law was a gunsmith and competitive shooter there for a number of years before he passed. He and his shooting buddies were as devout 2A supporters as they come.

    AND with the passage of the carry law, which required bi-partisan support, it shows Illinoisans aren't anti-gun at all. They've just tapped into a 2A goldmine and we should encourage and embrace them.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i said states not just illinois. i used that as an example but anyone in new york, mass., california etc should get the thumbs down from gun owners. sorry but if you live in a state that is anti gun and worse, you own a business in a state whose senators consistently vote anti gun then why should gun people support those companies with their money?

      Delete
    2. It is a politcally losing strategy Solomon. You'll simply end up concentrating gun owners and manufacturers in fewer and fewer states which will result in less support at the federal level resulting in the ultimate failure of your stance.

      Politically, you want as a diverse base in as many states as possible. This provides the best opportunity to increase your political power and does the most to prevent marginalization. All this boycott based on state stuff is simply self-defeating. You are only harming those that support your position while helping those who are opposed to your position.

      If you effectively clean the anti-gun states of any pro-gun opposition, then that merely means that the anti-gun groups can shift all their funds to pro-gun states. You simply help the anti-gun groups and give them less targets to aim at. In addition, you are assuming a statewide financial impact of your boycott that doesn't match with reality.

      Delete
  3. Are there anythings we can boycott from Illinois instead of Zulu Nylon?

    If anyone wants a laugh and likes gun humor: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po4nZTO3ES4

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sure I'll go along since I don't have any money to spend anyhow! Paralus certainly has a point about thing not made in Red China though, I usually have to settle for Bangladesh or India or something to not buy Chinese, much less buy American

    ReplyDelete
  5. Good description of Illinois above in point (B).

    ReplyDelete
  6. in 2000 and 2004, the Democratic National Committee basically wrote off entire portions of the country as Red and didn't put any money into these states and did little campaigning. And they got their asses handed to them. it was an arrogant, stupid stance: If they couldn't be bothered to send stand and recruit candidates, then why should the local Democratic or independents vote for the Democrats.

    Howard Dean became DNC chairman in 2004. He immediately created a 50-state policy that would have money and offices in each of the states to recruit candidates. It paid dividends when states that were considered Red, like Montanta, Colorodo, Virginia, New Mexico, etc. were electing Democratic candidates in state and congressional elections in 2006. By 2008, the 50 state strategy forced the Republicans to spend money in states they once considered safely Red, thereby weakening their stances in battleground states since they could spend the money they wanted. The point here is you can't write off whole areas of the country as pro- or anti- because it is arrogant to assume there isn't a potentially vibrant 2A community.

    I say this because we, as 2A supporters, need to get out of the 'Boycott' mentality and start grassroots organizing in these so-called anti-2A states. Look at Colorado, 2A supporters recalled two anti-2A politicians. Illinois just passed Conceal Carry. The anti-2A establishment thought they had those in the bag, when in fact they failed.

    1.) find the firearms and related industries, organize them to start lobbying politicians to remind them of the jobs they create
    2.) if you live in a battleground state, recruit a friend or family member who is on the fence, take them shooting. get them hooked. Bringing a friend to a Zombie shooting event and BBQ is a helluva lot more fun than an Anti-Gun vigil.
    3.) start talking to politicians. If they are resistant, start recruiting candidates to run against them in primaries and general elections. show up to their town-hall meetings with fellow gun owners, all wearing firearms propaganda.
    4.) start showing up to caucuses and preventing stupid platforms and candidates from being anti-2A
    5.) don't write off people just because they live in an urban area or voted Obama in 2008 or don't look like gun people. I know a lot of people who don't look like gun owners but don't agree with anti-2A laws.

    It's a long-term campaign that targets culture, not politics because placing faith in politicians to protect your rights is like depending on ice cubes to not melt in the sun.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Paralus, wrt #2, when trying to support gun rights, its probably best not to use terminology and allusions to drug dealers. You don't want to get people "hooked", you want to provide them with information, experience, and alternative data that allows them to re-evaluate their position.

      Delete
    2. As Pascal once said, "the heart has reasons which reason does not know".

      While we must present factual, technical accurate information about firearms when we introduce people to them or enter into the debate, if we rely only on facts or technical details, we aren't communicating with people.

      It's liking reading a book about guns versus going to a firing range to shoot firearms. It is a visceral, sensory experience to feel the concussion, smell the burnt powder, feel the adrenaline coursing thru their blood and to have the satisfaction of hitting the target. That is what I mean by hooked. It will be a far more persuasive method than simply presenting them with information.

      Delete
  7. Making guns a conservative thing, instead of an American thing, can come back to bite you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I couldn't agree more. I am truly saddened to see that it has been politicized and guns a scapegoat for far more complex issues. I wish it was de-politicized, but far too many Democrats have taken the bait and given the Republicans ammunition to turn it into a political wedge issue.

      I'm hoping the Colorado recalls have shown the push back the 2A supporters have when their liberties are threatened. I want pro-2A Democrats and Republicans to push back against anti-2a politicians, whatever their origin or party affiliation.

      Delete
    2. yeah, but this is the world of politics we are in now. The "republicans" have been pushing the whole RiNO thing for so longs its gotten infectious on both sides. The problem is we used two have two fairly diversified political parties that generally were open to various compromises to get things done because no two republicans nor no two democrats really believed the same things. We're now at the point that if you don't basically believe the party line and do what the leaders say, you aren't going to get elected, which results in massively stupid and inefficient congress and senate. In large part, both sides are trying to out stupid each other, which while making for some great comedy shows, doesn't do a damn thing for the country. Both sides are diverging to the extremes instead of converging towards the center and its affecting just about any issue that you can imagine, including gun issues.

      Delete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.