Anti Hunter Businesses

[Hilljackoutlaw]

I should add that I dont give to craps if you want to boycott something cause it's not my life.

 

[Art Vandelay]

It's old school hunter chic to be dismissive of brands like those because all the FNG's use them. Doesn't matter if they make useful gear, it's considered overpriced, new wave, and indicative of the demise of western hunting as it has been known. Old school guys find them cliche...which is awesome if you are a fan of irony.

Actually none of the above. But let me guess which brand you wear....

 

[JLS]

Sitka has long been a supporter of 2% for conservation. That, coupled with their support of Randy’s platform is plenty of reason in my eyes to view them as a company worth supporting.

YMMV.

 

[LaSportsman]

You can boycott the NRA. In the WSJ again today for wasting donor money on insiders and their friends rather than supporting the 2nd Amendment per their charter.

 

[RockinU]

Actually none of the above. But let me guess which brand you wear....

Sure go ahead, you get it right, and I'll buy you a new Stormy Kromer...but you have to get it all right.

 

[tzone]

Not sure if this the right place for this but here goes: I’m done with any business that caves to anti gun or anti hunter pressures. Walmart, REI, North Face, etc, etc. I’ll find other ways to source what I need - over and out.

Don’t forget Green Decoy.

 

[88man]

Might be over stating it a bit. To my knowledge Patagonia, REI, Northface etc. have never taken an anti hunting stance. Patagonia doesn't support delisting G-bears, REI and Northface don't want to be associated with companies who make ARs.

There are a lot of sportsmen who support publicly criticize AR's... Jim Zumbo... and there is a wide range of opinions in our community about ethical means and practices of hunting. On this forum and in the greater hunting community, hunters hold a wide array of opinions on baiting, hunting with dogs, predator hunting, hunting tournaments, spear hunting, etc. etc.

I'm sorry the slipper slope argument just isn't a thing. There is not a single example of the argument being carried out to the ultimate extreme, with regard to firearms or hunting, on this planet. I do miss CO spring bear, I do miss trapping, but I'm not worried about ever losing elk season.

What you choose to purchase is fully up to you and there are lots of great hunting and shooting companies to support.

Why are those companies taking a stance on hunting or shooting/firearms in the first place??

 

[fmnjr]

Exactly. The short answer is they are following their left-leaning customer wishes so they can be seen as progressive (communist). To clarify, my original post was not to start a beef about any particular company, although they do need to be pointed out as caving in to social engineering pressures, my intended purpose was to express my displeasure with the constant year-over-year grind on shooting/hunting sports that comes from those with a progressive agenda.

 

[kmott]

I'm a believer in boycotts, and I think it's a solid way to express your political desires by not funding organizations or entities that side with things that are antithetical to your beliefs.

I've not shopped at Walmart for 20 years, mostly because of the reasons that mulecreek lined out. I didn't use Barnes bullets for ages because of their support for anti=public land sporting groups like SFW & Big Game Forever. Same with Cabelas after they tried to get into the hunting real estate market in MT by promoting exclusionary access.

I also boycott all cable news, Papa Johns Pizza (they treat workers like crap, and they're anti-union) and I'm working on boycotting Amazon for their predatory tax agenda & their anti-worker mentality (But let's face it, that's tough, especially in a downmarket area like Helena). GM just made the boycott list as well, due to their elimination of worker health benefits.


I may not agree with your politics, but I encourage everyone to use their dollars to voice their beliefs.

I agree with boycotts also and am 100% on board with your right to do so. I don't much care if someone or some company agrees with me or not, evderyone has their rights to their own values BUT when one actively speaks out against my values ,I will not give them my support . only a fool would.

I do not delude myself thinking any company cares wether or not they have my business but they do care when they lose many customers. they most likely won't change their views but at least I can take satisfaction knowing I am not financially supporting their hatred of me and my beliefs.
well at least I am trying not to. I also do not delude myself into thinking it is possible to weed them all out from those companies I approve of.one can only do the best one can.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Why are those companies taking a stance on hunting or shooting/firearms in the first place??

Depends. In the case of Levi: it was purely marketing, North Face: they didn’t want their logo being associated with certain industries as they felt that might alienate their consumer base. Patagonia: They have always had a strong environmental conscious, it’s baked into the brand.

At the end of the day it was conservative groups who pushed for citizens united, ie, money is speech and corporations are people... so now that you disagree with a platform you suddenly don’t want corporations to speak out. (*you, conservatives, I don’t know how you personal feel about the subject)

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Exactly. The short answer is they are following their left-leaning customer wishes so they can be seen as progressive (communist). To clarify, my original post was not to start a beef about any particular company, although they do need to be pointed out as caving in to social engineering pressures, my intended purpose was to express my displeasure with the constant year-over-year grind on shooting/hunting sports that comes from those with a progressive agenda.

I don’t disagree, I work in an industry that constantly gets beat up by everyone, despite the fact that literally every single American uses our products everyday.

I’m just trying to intonate that trying to see where people are coming from helps me at least not take it as personally. Patagonia won’t make my company a logo shirt... well at least they want to protect my rivers and forests as much as I do.

I don’t personally boycott very many companies, but I do consider a company’s environmental stance when making purchases. I’ve been getting more and more FL and Sitka clothes for this reason.

 

[kmott]

Depends. In the case of Levi: it was purely marketing, North Face: they didn’t want their logo being associated with certain industries as they felt that might alienate their consumer base. Patagonia: They have always had a strong environmental conscious, it’s baked into the brand.

At the end of the day it was conservative groups who pushed for citizens united, ie, money is speech and corporations are people... so now that you disagree with a platform you suddenly don’t want corporations to speak out. (*you, conservatives, I don’t know how you personal feel about the subject)

I for one love it when folks\companies speak out . helps weed out the keepers from the throwbacks.


besides ,I have much more respect for one with an opinion that is opposed to mine then I do for one with no opinion at all.

with the exception ,of coarse , to those who don't offer an opinion because they are uneducated on topic. if you have given a topic no thought itis probably wise to remain silent till you know where and why you stand.


brings to mind all of those clamoring for trumps impeachment but have no idea what he is even being accused of

 

[kmott]

I don’t disagree, I work in an industry that constantly gets beat up by everyone, despite the fact that literally every single American uses our products everyday.

I’m just trying to intonate that trying to see where people are coming from helps me at least not take it as personally. Patagonia won’t make my company a logo shirt... well at least they want to protect my rivers and forests as much as I do.

I don’t personally boycott very many companies, but I do consider a company’s environmental stance when making purchases. I’ve been getting more and more FL and Sitka clothes for this reason.

what is that product??just curious

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I for one love it when folks\companies speak out . helps weed out the keepers from the throwbacks.

Talk is also cheap right? So it’s not so much who talks the talk but actually puts their money where their mouth is and pays for conservation.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

what is that product??just curious

Oil and Natural Gas

 

[kmott]

Talk is also cheap right? So it’s not so much who talks the talk but actually puts their money where their mouth is and pays for conservation.

talk is cheap and we all(all working individuals anyhow )pay for conservation. wether we wish to or not.

 

[RockinU]

I don’t personally boycott very many companies, but I do consider a company’s environmental stance when making purchases. I’ve been getting more and more FL and Sitka clothes for this reason.

I am also a fan of FL, but have never been able to find where they source their Merino, and would really like to know...if there is even a way to know.

 

[Losing_Sanity]

I'm a believer in boycotts, and I think it's a solid way to express your political desires by not funding organizations or entities that side with things that are antithetical to your beliefs.

I've not shopped at Walmart for 20 years, mostly because of the reasons that mulecreek lined out. I didn't use Barnes bullets for ages because of their support for anti=public land sporting groups like SFW & Big Game Forever. Same with Cabelas after they tried to get into the hunting real estate market in MT by promoting exclusionary access.

I also boycott all cable news, Papa Johns Pizza (they treat workers like crap, and they're anti-union) and I'm working on boycotting Amazon for their predatory tax agenda & their anti-worker mentality (But let's face it, that's tough, especially in a downmarket area like Helena). GM just made the boycott list as well, due to their elimination of worker health benefits.


I may not agree with your politics, but I encourage everyone to use their dollars to voice their beliefs.

I too support boycotts when it is feasibly possible and warranted. But I believe that all companies and businesses have the right to market the products they want to. It's on me to choose to use/buy their product or use their services. What I really don't like and find offensive is when they choose to not market or sell in an effort to make the choice for me or in an effort to force me in a certain direction. For example, if they choose not to carry AR-15s, that's fine. Their choice and business model. But to tell me they are not carrying it because I shouldn't have one or don't need one, now I have a problem. I don't need someone making choices for me, protecting me. I'd rather see them fund research to fix the problem than limit my choices of something that is perfectly legal to own and let me make my own choices. IMO...

 

[Losing_Sanity]

A quote from Ben Lamb found in the "Thoughts on the Anti Hunter Movement" thread:

"A bigger threat to hunting is hunters".

Applicable here.

I really like what @Ben Lamb has to say, usually. And this quote is a good one for reference in most cases. But it does not give big corporations deciding factor on whats best for me or you. They should stick to their business running and let me decide what I want.