Contributors to this thread:
Update on dicks sporting goods
I hope this stays up as it has to do with our rights as hunters, not all but most. After weeks of waiting to hear back from Hornady ammo on thier position in regards to dealing with Dicks I ended up calling this morning to inquire again and was told they have no comment, really? So a ammunition manufacturer has no comment on doing business with an anti gun company like dicks, pathetic. I told Horandy I was done supporting them until they decide to support the honest gun owners and stop supporting the antis like dicks. The girl I spoke to, Danielle ,told me there was going to be no comment and then said she was going to end the call. Just wanted you hunters who use firearms and pistols to know that if you continue to buy hornady products then your cutting your own throat. Still waiting to hear from Winchester and others, will update when I hear back. Kudos to Mossberg and Springfield armory for standing on the side of gun owners. Pass it along to your gun buddies.
You need to settle down a bit or you'll give yourself an ulcer. As far as I know, Dicks still sells guns. I fail to see why Hornady would quit doing business with them, and expecting them to do so is a bit ridiculous.
So is Hornady still selling ammunition at Dicks ?? I wouldn't hold anything against Hornady for selling ammunition to Dicks....... They are in business to make money.
Field and Stream still sells guns too.... Same owner.
I am ulcer free lol. The fact that dicks sells a pump shotgun or two , big deal. They have hired lobbyists to lobby for stricter gun controls, they are trying to violate my rights and yours. If you don't have a problem with it fine, I do, and I am sharing with other hunters the info I have. If they choose to support a anti gun company like dicks that's on them, for me, anyone who supports dicks doesn't get my dollars, period. Mossberg and Springfield armory took a stand and sided with gun owners, and have discontinued to do business with dicks, I would think other gun/ammo manufacturers would do the same. Why do business with a Company that's trying to kill your business?
Which of your gun rights are they trying to violate ?? The right to bear arms ??
I’ve never been to Dicks and try to stay away from Hornadys overpriced ammo and ammo components. That said I agree with LBshooter.
Not selling guns to those who are legally allowed to buy is a violation. Actively lobbying for tighter gun restrictions and the outright banning is a violation. Who are they to decide what gun I choose to defend myself with. if they choose not to sell certain guns, fine, but to actively try and ban guns is unacceptable. Like I have stated, you do not have to do anything if you agree with dicks positions, sit on your hands, fine. But when you have a sporting goods company taking up with the anti gun crowd the damage it does is unmeasurable. Big bear, are you a gun owner? Do you hunt with a gun? Should gun manufacturers continue to deal with Dicks?
Will never step foot in Dick's again. If chipping away at your gun rights doesn't bother you, you're pretty short sighted.
I also agree with LB. ...... Yesterday I went past the new Dick's (opened about 2 months ago, just after Gander went out) here in Brainerd MN and the lot was almost completely empty - for them to support anti-hunting goes against my grain and for any "hunter" to support them just puts another nail in "our" coffin.
It seems like any time something happens that's anti-liberals, it gets media attention for weeks and weeks - the media just doesn't let it die. Wish they kept this up front in the news.
Not selling guns to you is a violation of your rights ??????
Yes. I am a gun owner. A hunter. And I'm in favor of our right to carry and own guns......
But they aren't violating your rights by not carrying the scary black rifles...... Go buy one somewhere else.
I just got this flyer in the mail from Field and Stream..... Same company.....
Using your logic....... All firearms manufacturers and ammunition manufacturers should quit selling their products through Field and Stream too..... if not... we should boycott them......
Big bear , maybe your not aware that they will not sell a long gun to 18 year olds. Now, if the government can give a 18 year old an m16 and say kill them that 18 year old should be able to buy a long gun. The flyer you posted, not one of those guns can be purchased by a18-20 year old law abiding citizens. The crack in the wall and it will only continue if we gun owners don't stand and fight it, if we choose to lay down then we are screwed. Field and stream company is also the same policy so screw them too.
So we should boycott Remington....Ruger..... Mossberg.... Bergara......Stoeger..... And Winchester...... and any other firearms or ammunition company that still sells their products at Field and Stream.....
You must have missed the part where they, Dicks, have hired a lobby firm in DC to have "black guns" banned among other things. That they don't sell them is one thing. They can do what they want to do, I can choose not to give them my business because of it. Freedom. It's a wonderful thing.
To actively attempt to restrict MY rights to buy one is another. That is an attempt to infringe on my rights, any way you slice it. An attack on my freedom.
Yes.... Dicks and any other company they are can die like a rat as far as I'm concerned. If they are negatively effected by this..... great, that's the aim. Maybe it will send a message to some other spineless CEO in some other company.
Oh..... and I entered the U.S. Navy at 18 years of age.... I couldn't buy a beer until I was 21.
I work with cops who were cops before they were old enough to buy bullets.... This is nothing new.
I do not go in Dicks Spt Goods
I really dont care what Dicks sells.... I wont step foot in the place, not even for a jock strap ...
That's fine Jeff.... That's the logical thing to do if you don't agree with what they are doing........
But would you boycott every single ammunition manufacturer and every single gun manufacturer that still sells guns in Dick's........ AND at Field and Stream (same company)....???
"But would you boycott every single ammunition manufacturer and every single gun manufacturer that still sells guns in Dick's........ AND at Field and Stream (same company)....???"
No, but I'll support the one's who pulled out first.
Have you ever ran a business? Who cares if dicks sells their ammo? It's great stuff and shoots like precision without the high cost.
II shoot Hornady in my 22-250.... to me this isnt about Hornady, its about staying out of Dicks, and we dont have any F&S here anyways..... Ive got other places to go to get my jock straps ;0)
That's reasonable...... But LBshooter said that Mossberg and Springfield Armory sided with gun owners.........
Yet there is a Mossberg gun for sale in the Field and Stream flyer I posted........
So Mossberg is in fact doing business with Dick's company..... as are Remington, Ruger, stoeger, Winchester,,,, Etc. Etc. Etc.,,,,,,
EXACTLY Jeff !!! This isn't about Hornady or any other manufacturer..... It's about DICK's.........
I agree to boycott Dick's, they suck anyhow. However I believe Dick's carries ammo from most if not all ammo manufactures. So what are you going to do for ammo? If you boycott Hornady, you have to boycott them all. Are you going to boycott every manufacture that sells anything at Dick's? Come on man, you are really reaching.
Won’t spend any of my money in a place like Dicks.
Foolish to think “as long as they’re not violating my rights, I don’t care”
To each his own...
is it OK if I buy a treadmill at Dicks?
WRT Mossburg, I would guess they had an inventory of them. WRT Hornady the more pressure brought on them about Dicks the better.
I don't know why any gun or ammo maker would continue to do business with them. I know I would no longer do business with a company that was actively trying to restrict my industry. But many of these companies, Remington, Etc..... are no longer owned or run by "gun" people who understand the culture so to speak. They are mostly run by spineless CEOs such as Dicks. They have no passion for the industry much less peoples rights. Maybe it's a big reason why so many small shops are backlogged with orders and others like Remington are on the verge of bankruptcy.
You would think it was a no-brainer for gun owners to support that which supports them and their rights and actively resist those who act to restrict or eliminate those rights. Pretty easy thing to do really, just takes a bit of paying attention. Might even have to drive a couple more miles..... maybe voice to someone why you are..... such sacrifices......
So will you boycott the stores that don't boycott Hornady for not boycotting Dicks? You are really stretching for someone to be angry at here.
At a minimum it looks to me like you'll also have to boycott Remington, Federal, Winchester, Hevi-shot, Browning, Kent, Blazer, and a whole lot of other manufacturers. If I were you I'd be learning to manufacture your own brass, powder, and bullets if you want to keep shooting without a guilty conscience.
"is it OK if I buy a treadmill at Dicks?"
Sure you can. It's your free will. Hopefully you know what they are doing politically that effect you. Or doesn't effect you. That seems to be a big criteria these days.
I would not. I will never set foot in one again.... much less by anything online. That is my free will.
I would think that if Mossberg pulled out of Field and Stream.... They would pull all of their stock out of the stores and no more Mossberg guns would be sold there. But Mossberg guns are still being sold at Field and Stream...... So Mossberg is still doing business with Dick's.
Mossberg can't pull stock from a store. The store owns that stock. They may also still have some contractual agreements they have to honor. Their statement says they will not accept any future orders from Dick's.
Does their statement say they will not accept any future orders from Field and Stream ?? Same company..... Just saying.
Companies like Hornady get a 100 calls a day from weirdos who are both for and against guns and 10X's that in email. The girl did the right thing hanging up on you. Good for her. She shouldn't have to hear you crazy rant. What do you matter? It was her "right" to end the call.
I went into a Dick's once, didn't see much to interest me, so I guess I've been boycotting them ever since that time. :-)
As for Hornady, the only thing I shoot their ammo in is .223/5.56, and I probably have a couple thousand rounds of that bought when The High Muckety-Muck was dicta........uh, President, so.........I guess I'm boycotting them too ! However, everyone needs to vote with their wallet on these issues, whichever way that falls. I assure you that you don't want to know how the sausage is made, lest you never eat sausage again.
"Does their statement say they will not accept any future orders from Field and Stream ?? Same company..... Just saying."
Here, let me look it up for you...
NORTH HAVEN, CT – O.F. Mossberg & Sons, Inc., a leading American firearms manufacturer, announced today its decision to discontinue selling products to Dick’s Sporting Goods, and its subsidiary, Field & Stream, in response to their hiring of gun control lobbyists in April 2018.
Effective immediately, O.F. Mossberg & Sons will not accept any future orders from Dick’s Sporting Goods or Field & Stream, and is in the process of evaluating current contractual agreements.
“It has come to our attention that Dick’s Sporting Goods recently hired lobbyists on Capitol Hill to promote additional gun control.” said Iver Mossberg, Chief Executive Officer of O.F. Mossberg & Sons. “Make no mistake, Mossberg is a staunch supporter of the U.S. Constitution and our Second Amendment rights, and we fully disagree with Dick’s Sporting Goods’ recent anti-Second Amendment actions.”
Consumers are urged to visit one of the thousands of pro-Second Amendment firearm retailers to make their purchases of Mossberg and Maverick® firearms. Firearm retailers can be found through the Mossberg Dealer Locator by visiting http://www.mossberg.com/dealers/.
That answers that.
Now you only have to boycott Remington.... Winchester......Ruger.....Stoeger..... Leupold... Bear Archery..... Ameristep..... Primos... Yeti...... North Face.... Old Town Canoes.... Columbia......Coleman......Etc.,,,,,,Etc.,,,,,,,Etc.,,,,,,,Etc....
Why those companies Big Bear?
I've boycotted a few "conservation groups" like NMWF and Back Country Hunters and Anglers for their continuous support for liberals and their views. A few more boycotts won't hurt my feelings.........
Because they still sell products at Field & Stream...
Nobody said anything about boycotting any of those other companies. Not sure why you keep bringing it up.
Mossberg, MKS Supply, and Springfield Armory pulled their business from Dick's and for that decision, I would give these companies first look if I was shopping for a firearm.
The original poster said he was done supporting Hornady because they still sell ammunition at Dicks.... So if he's going to stop supporting Hornady the only logical conclusion is that he's going to stop supporting any manufacturer that continues to sell their products at Dicks...... or Field and Stream.....
His choice. Good for him.
So now we’re punishing people on our side eh? Brilliant.
The OP's position is similar to anyone else interested in activism. Samantha Bee.....never listened to her and no desire to. Some folks are calling the sponsors to her show complaining about their continued sponsorship of her show. The OP doesn't like Dicks so he calls Hornady and complains about their continued support of Dicks. Pretty much the same situation to me.
BTW and FWIW.....the new Gander Outdoors in our town has a good selection of ammo and their prices are very low. If you get the Good Sam Club membership you can also take an additional 5% or 10% off the price. They also have a price match guarantee too.
I'm sure that dicks has inventory of Mossberg and other guns that they will sell. For me, yes, I am tired of being seen as the guilty one when it comes to the gun debate and tired of being blamed for whack jobs committing acts of evil. So yes, I have calls in and emails in to a lot of the outdoor companies who do business with dicks, and I will not support them if they continue, period. Beer is not a constitutional right and rights cannot be taken away, they can only be violated. As mentioned, there are plenty of outlets that these products can be sold through, and if a manufacturer wants to do business with dicks then I will find another manufacture to buy product from. It's simple, we are at a pivotal point in the gun debate and if we don't fight with everything available tool in the Arsenal then we are stupid. Making an example of dicks and manufacturers who continue to support dicks will go along way the next time a company feels like jabbing a knife in our back. Buy a tred-mill there if you want , buy ammo there if you want, support dicks if you want, but when more and more gun laws are passed then you'll be able to look in the mirror and see whose to blame. This whole thing with dicks would be like Matthews supporting a ban on hunting over bait, or lobbying for a ban on hunting on sundays, I guess they would have plenty of support from some on this site, yes? So big bear, just to summarize so you know where I stand, yes I will not support any company who continues to support a company that is trying to violate my 2nd amendment right, and I will encourage others to do so. If I have to pay a little extra for a different brand of ammo I will, if I have to buy a different brand of firearm I will, boots,yep etc... The line has been drawn and crossed by some and it's time that sportsman get pissed and fight back. Are you all not tired of being lumped in with these nut jobs who kill children and have politicians pass laws that Penelize the law abiding? I certainly am, and I will let all of them know exactly where I stand.
"There's been a number of people who have started shopping us, or said they're going to shop us more, because of the policy," said Chief Executive Officer Ed Stack on an earnings call with analysts Wednesday. "There's definitely been some benefit of people who joined us, so to speak, because of the policy."
What Pat said..........
You might as well add PSE, Mission and Diamond Archery to your boycott list LB..... Field and Stream carries them too.......Nikon..... Bushnell..... Irish Setter.... Muck Boots..... Shakespeare..... Fenwick.... St. Croix........ ScentLok.....Carhartt..... Under Armour..... Sitka.......Muzzy.......Rage......NAP.......G5.......... the list goes on and on and on.....
And you should extend your boycott to any and all mom and pop shops that carry any of the merchandise on your boycott list..... since they sell products from manufacturers that refuse to get on board with your boycott....
Well said LB! Sheeple will be sheeple ;)
I don't need to boycott those bow manufacturers, I shoot traditional. As far as the other brands, I will if they choose to deal with dicks. It's to bad that sportsman are defending the actions of the anti gun crowd. Imagine if all sportsman stood together , the power we would have would be amazing. I may be alone in my fight but that's ok, I refuse to support these companies who are fighting Against me and my rights, period. I will use my old gear or go without, I will buy boots that aren't sold by dicks. Hell, I'll wear rubber galoshes if I have too.
Your logic is completely flawed....... So if I buy a pair of Muck Boots at Fred's Gun And Tackle shop.........
According you you.....I'm defending the actions of the anti gun crowd........ Because Dicks and Field and Stream carry Muck Boots......... And the Muck Boot company refuses to join in with your boycott on Dicks......
I think you have good intentions but I think your boycott ideas are not going to accomplish a thing.
Big bear, I think it's quite logical. Yes, if these companies who profit selling products to sportsman continue to deal with a anti 2nd amendment company like dicks then I will not support them until they decide to support the gun community. I don't think it's that hard to grasp. If you choose to support them that's your decision, I choose not to. There are plenty of companies out there that sell quality products who don't deal with dicks, I'll start supporting them. My mission is to make these companies choose sides, pro 2nd amendment or anti, it's that simple.
So you should stick to your guns and not shop at ANY store if that store sells any products available at Dicks or Field and Stream..... The ultimate boycott.....
What kind of underwear do they sell at Dicks ?? You might have to never buy underwear again..... Going cowboy in the name of the boycott !!!!!!!!
As stated, Bear archery is sold at Dick's. Get rid of your Bear trad gear. Ad Mountain House, Cliff Bars, Gator Aid etc. to your boycott.
Dicks also sells yoga pants, so you can no longer check out women in yoga pants.
If I already own a product that has no bearing now does it. Underwear? Really? Keep defending the anti 2nd amendment companies and I'll continue to boycott. Like I have said from the start you don't have to boycott, do what you want. defend the gun grabbers and those who support them, your choice. Cliff bars, mountain house, no need for those products, plus there are plenty of others out there who make similar products. Choices are plentiful and I choose to support those who support the gun community. Maybe you all can get a hold of little Davy Hogg and join up with him lol.
As stated above..... those who will no longer sell to Dicks will get my business. And I would make that point very publicly to Hornady or any other gun or ammo manufacturer.
This isn't from some decision to quit selling certain guns. This is a decision made because they are actively trying to infringe on my rights and hiring Washington lobbyists to do so. Dicks management is anti-gun, anti-2nd amendment, Period. I don't care what their words are...... having seen their actions.
WRT sales, their sales are down. Way down. That they have a handful of customers that support their actions means nothing unless those people can replace the numbers that are staying away in droves..... as well as replace the amount on money sportsmen would have spent there...... not only gun sales but EVERYTHING a sportsman that may have shopped there would buy. My hopes is sales continue to fall until they go the way of Sports Authority and just fold up. It would be the only lesson a bunch of spineless urban CEO's may understand......
Many women don’t belong in yoga pants
Two things that don't lie.....kids and yoga pants.
I have never liked Dicks. And don’t think I ever will. I don’t remember seeing ARs in the Stores and they make a grand show of not selling them. Good riddance to Dicks. I don’t see anything wrong with putting pressure on other MFG’s for selling at Dicks. Then when making decisions in the future they might weigh all the input and say they are not worth the hassle. Dicks and Field and stream carry average to low quality Walmart quality gear anyway.
So if I buy a pair of Muck Boots or Mountain House at Bass Pro Shops...... I'm defending gun grabbers because those products are also sold at Dick's.....?????
You're out there dude..........
While we're at it..... why don't we expand this discussion and define what you mean by "Anti 2nd Amendment Companies..........
What does the second amendment say ?? That you have the right to keep and bear arms........... right ????
Do you have the right to keep and bear shoulder launched RPG's ??? Hand gernades ??? Fully automatic firearms ??? How about bump stocks ??
Let's say that someone proposed (hypothetically)..... That the Government restrict your ability to own a bump stock..........
Is that violating your 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms ???
MidwayUSA will take care of almost all your needs. Dick's is for soccer moms.
But wait Missouri......... Midway carries products that Dick's carries........ If you buy a Remington or Leupold from Midway....... you are supporting gun grabbers.......
I get what he was saying. As a LEO you should understand Intent ( mens rea )
Dick’s, went beyond creating company rules. They went out recruiting and furthering their cause, with the Intent of crushing the 2A.
The poster was imagining in furtherance of just a Dick’s boycott, but the boycott of other gun related products who Should have, but Did Not , boycott Dick’s.
Yes it is a long stretch, and i will buy stuff , just not at Dick’s.
But i do get his point. He is dedicated and got real Loyal to the 2A.
I always have been good at thinking what others are thinking based on human nature.
I said that I believe that he has good intentions....... I just don't agree with him that boycotting Hornady or any other company that still sells products at Dick's or Field and Stream is the proper response to the actions of Dick's.....
When EF Hutton posts, people should read. Dick's was one of the first, and in a very visible way, gave some credibility to guns being the problem.
I do not shop there any more, hopefully if enough do this it will send an effective message.
Most of us got what LB was saying.
Honestly, I would love to have an RPG, but I don't know if my local range could handle that. Big bear, I'm starting to doubt that you are a gun owner based on your defense of the companies who deal with dicks. By putting pressure on Other manufacturers to stop dealing with dicks will hopefully send a very loud message. Yes if muck boots know that hunters will not buy their product due to thier loyalty to dicks and sales overall fall for them then maybe they will discontinue dealing with dicks, smart with hornady etc,.. Would not take long for these manufacturers to see sales drop overall and would react to fix it.
So what ammo are you buying, and where are you buying it from? I bet that store also sells Hornady......
I certainly do not like Dick's actions regarding the lobbyist and I do think that a clear message should be sent by sportsmen. They need to be encouraged to stop. However, in the long run it is best for gun owners that they keep selling guns and ammunition. The more companies, employees, families and neighborhoods that benefit from guns the better it is for us. I think that we need to be encouraging as many stores as possible to sell guns and ammunition and the manufacturers to supply them. Getting Dick's out off gun sales is not in our best interest IMO. We want the lobbying to stop not the gun business. I stopped going to Dick's and I have encouraged friends not to shop there at this time. If they change their actions the support should return. I see no need to expand any action beyond Dick's. I see no benefits to damaging manufacturers.
I get what he is saying. I’m just not going to boycott ammo & components. Just never have never will shop at Dicks. They seem to be more of a urban city folk type store anyway.
Goyt x5 ... Dicks crossed red line.
Goyt x5 ... Dicks crossed red line.
Ok big bear, nice shotgun collection. Typical shotgunner, don't own a semi auto rifle and therefore you find no need for them to be sold, my point with the outdoor crowd. Just because you don't own or want you don't care if they get banned. Similar to the crossbow arguments we see out here. Wonder when they come after your duck gun if you'll join the fight?
Goyt, I don't want to damage manufacturers if it can be helped, but they are damaging the gun community by supporting a company who wants to ban our guns. The damage hornady and others would face would be short lived, it's up to them. I guess if we as a community make excuses why we can't withhold support, then it won't work. I for one will not support them and as I have said many times its up to you whether you do.
I still would like to know what ammo you are buying and where you are buying it.
Dicks hires lobbyist to lobby for more gun control laws. Gun owners do not like this.
To combat Dicks moves gun owners boycott Dicks sporting goods.
Wouldn’t it be beneficial to gun owners if Dicks is buying supply of guns and ammunition and Not able to move it? Wouldn’t that be a clear message to the powers that be at Dicks?
I say let manufacturers sell there products to Dicks. Gun owners are the ones that will send the message when there buying elsewhere.
I for one hope Hornady sells Dick’s TONS Of ammo and applaud them for it. Doesn’t mean anyone has to buy it from Dick’s...But I will continue to buy Hornady ammo elsewhere. I won’t step foot in Dick’s...
So now you're a gun snob ?? You doubted that I'm a gun owner and I showed you that I am...... but I'm just a "typical shotgunner" ??? There's 2 rifles in that cabinet..... I'm sorry if one of them is not an AR.........
I have no problem with semi automatic ARs or any semi auto guns for that matter..... There's also a semi auto Browning shotgun in that cabinet........And a semi auto Glock.....
Answer PECOs question.......
I am all about boycotting Dicks for its stance on black guns and min ages, but the thesis for this thread is deeply flawed.
I like Hornady ammo and will continue to buy it. I understand LBshooter not buying it and don’t think he is necessarily wrong. Just his way of standing up for what he believes. I do find it odd that some of us seem to take what he does so personally. I am also a business owner and understand that I can’t please everyone and expect that some folks won’t support me. I’m ok with that too.
Why would anyone take it personally if LB says they are supporting gun grabbers if they don't do what he is doing ?????
If you like Dicks, great. I just wish everyone would stop trying to shove Dicks down our throats!
To answer pecos question, I have plenty of ammo in inventory for what I shoot. None of its hornady. When I need more ammo which won't be for awhile I will look for it and buy it, and it won't be hornady. Big Bear, not a gun snob at all, but I find it interesting that it's the shotgun guys who always seem to jump up and say semi autos rifles (AR's) should be banned, maybe your an exception. So when your browning semi auto shotgun and your Glock are being banned, which is comming then maybe you'll fight a little harder, but then again maybe not.
Nope...... Wrong. I don't think a semi auto AR should be banned.......... it should be perfectly legal.......
But I do believe there has to be a line somewhere..... and don't expect me to fight for your desire to own an RPG......
You still didn't answer PECOs question as to where you will buy ammo when the time comes.......
I don't recall seeing any responses here from anyone who will join you in boycotting any and all manufacturers that are still selling products in Dicks and Field and Stream. You pretty much stand alone...... To me,,, That is a clear indication of how absurd the idea is.
RPG? if you couldn't tell I was joking at your absurd comment them I can't help you. That's like the idiotic anti gunners asking if the 2nd amendment cover neuclear weapons. I answered pecos question, but, just in case it needs to be clearified my local gun shop will order any ammo I want so it's not a big deal. Or maybe I'll just order it on line, plenty of it out there. As far as standing g alone I'm not there are many gunners out there the feel the same as I and if I stand alone that's fine too. You keep supporting the antis until they come after your guns and then maybe you'll join the fight.
I bet your local gun shop carries Hornady. Your boycott requires you to boycott them....... Unless you want to support the antis by shopping at a store that sells Hornady......
I would not boycott Hornady, I bet they are pro guns.
I do agree this is about Dick's. And, to me it is also about any company that refuses to stand with the 2nd Amendment whether they be on "our" side or not. I am so friggin' sick of hunters, that are too blind and dumb to what we face in the future for our way of life, spouting off about these type actions as no big deal. If every ammo manufacturer and gun related business would stick together on this, the message would be loud and clear and, very effective. But, it won't be because we have too many among us that feel the same way about the 2nd Amendment as the outspoken opponents of the 2nd Amendment.
And to clarify, No one wants a dang RPG. Quit being so dramatic. The line is already drawn. If our POLICE, state and government agencies, and the legislative and executive branch's would actually do the job they are being elected and paid to do, instead of make excuses why we need more laws that don't work, this wouldn't be a problem. Yet we make deals with criminals to catch other criminals. slap known and convicted felons on the wrist and repeatedly release them back out to rape and plunder the law abiding citizen, etc..... While further enslaving the law abiding citizen. See the problem yet? It doesn't take a genius to figure this out. It just takes throwing arrogance and, ignorance to the curb.
We are all entitled to our own beliefs. But, I'm entitled to the same Bill of Rights as every one else. And, the fact that some of you want to change that makes me not only sick but, PISSED. You don't get the right to tell me how your idea of it is better then what it's intent is. It's pure arrogance to suggest it. And, I am tired of hearing it
FWIW, I don't need any of these companies. I prepared long ago for this. All it took was a bit of intelligence to see it coming. So, I can and will boycott every firearm and ammo brand that does not pull out of Dick's.
Wow WV....... Where did I or anyone else here say that we needed more gun laws ?? I think I clearly agreed with Goyt and others here.... That said not shopping in Dicks is the thing to do here........
But I think boycotting every manufacturer who still has products in Dicks and Field and Stream is ridiculous. Should LB boycott his local gun shop if they sell Hornady ??? I bet his local gun shop has an alarm system....... Should LB boycott that alarm company...... because that gun shop sells Hornady......... and Hornady still sells ammunition to Dicks and Field and Stream ???
I take back what I said...... LB does not stand alone in his crazy notion of boycotting each and every one of the manufacturers who still have hunting, fishing, camping and outdoor gear in Dicks and Field and Stream. Literally thousands of manufacturers. He has you.
Go back and read the brief comment from the owner of this site in this thread.............
So LB is boycotting Hornady, has all the ammo he needs, doesn't plan on buying ammo anytime soon, and doesn't currently have any of the ammo he is boycotting, probably never bought any Hornady ammo and never planned to anyhow. Way to show them!
"So now we’re punishing people on our side eh? Brilliant."
Are they on our side if they support a company who is actively trying to take away your 2nd amendment? I think not, they are on the side of thier profit, and that will come bake to bite them. Many more gunners feel the way I do but maybe bear and Peco and the orhers can help keep thier profits up. I know Pat hunts coyotes with an AR, wondering what he's going to do when they ban them?
I see nothing wrong with trying to persuade a firearm related company to publicly declare they will no longer do business with Dicks, knowing they have hired lobbyists to pressure law makers to violate the current rights of gun owners. IMO continuing to do business with a company that is openly trying to disrupt or eliminate your company is insanity. Knowingly doing so tells me they value their short term bottom line more so than their long term end user customers. All I need to know.
Several other companies have ceased doing business with Dicks, for good cause. I see nothing wrong with putting pressure on others who would continue to as they tried to look the other way at the overt actions from Dicks.
Those are the companies I would go out of my way to give them my business and those who do not...... I would not, if at all possible. The only way to make your opinions heard is with your dollars. And then vocally explaining why.
No Yeti's in my future either..... =D
I'm not punishing anyone, and my NRA membership is current.
If there is any boycotting that needs to happen, it needs to be the IRS.
At least that makes sense...
"So LB is boycotting Hornady, has all the ammo he needs, doesn't plan on buying ammo anytime soon, and doesn't currently have any of the ammo he is boycotting, probably never bought any Hornady ammo and never planned to anyhow. Way to show them! "
I was rapidly scrolling down to post basically this but you beat me to the punch. Way to hit 'em in the wallet.
Hey Matt, nice of you to chime in and attack me lol. I had hornady ammo used it up. You and the rest of the anti defenders don't need to worry about my ammo supply, truely. Worry about what really matters and that is you loosing your rights more and more each day, put your attack effort towards the companies who are working against you and actively trying to limit your rights, I'm certainly not limiting your rights. You a duck hunter like big bear too? Are you of the attitude that since you don't own any of the guns that are being targeted that it doesn't matter?
Duck hunter ?? Nope..... Never killed a duck.....But my rifle has killed moose and elk and caribou and bear in my hands..... I use my bow for deer. Are you a rifle hunter or just a paper puncher ??? Time on the range to me is for sighting in for hunting.... anything beyond that is a waste of time and money..... but if that's your thing cool..... An AR is no different than any other semi automatic rifle or shotgun.
So the reason Mossburg and several others have left Dicks is not a good valid reason? People feel they had no cause to? Can't see why a firearms company would in protest quit doing business with a company actively trying to subvert not only it's business, but it's customers God given rights? Not a worthy fight? They are somehow misdirected???
would love to hear the real reasons why not?
What exactly are the lobbyists hired by Dicks lobbying for ?? In this entire long thread.... it has not specifically been mentioned......
The article doesn't say specifically what they are lobbying for.........
I haven't set foot in Dicks or Field and Stream since this shook out...... But I'll be damned if I'm not going to buy refills for my thermocell from Bass Pro Shops as a boycott because they're still sold at Field and Stream......
This explains the knife in the back better..... with no room for doubt.
It says they were hired to take action on gun control...... Still nothing specific...... I will continue to not shop at Dicks or Field and Stream.......
110 post thread...impressive.
33 posts by Big Bear alone.....even more impressive.
Really...... Who Actually Really Cares
Big Bear, the line you talk about is going to require new legislation. Being a police officer, I know you understand that and, meant it with what you said. If not, you wouldn't have said it because the line to keep people from owning weapons they do not belong owning, is already present. You are also correct, I have zero need for buying ammo ever again. Does that put me across that line you are talking about on what's acceptable for my Bill of Rights? Also, Do I need Pat's permission to believe what I believe. Must I agree with him on what is appropriate here, in order to voice my belief's, because he is the site owner? I don't work like that. However, It's no surprise to me that you seem too.
You took personal task with the OP's opinion. However, your opinion has as many holes in it from other people's perspective, as his did to you. You find his actions stupid. I say if every sportsman was as devout to support the 2nd Amendment as LBShooter and, would do what he has done, this wouldn't be considered so dumb. It would set presidence and STOP business from trying to legislate our freedoms . But, that's just dumb ain't it? It's truly unfortunate that your apathy will affect the dedicated.
I didn't say it's stupid. I said it's ridiculous.
I noticed that Dick’s still stocks bunches of the .223 FMJ ammo that AR-15s use. A bit hypocritical. FMJ isn’t a hunting round.
Dicks could be getting out of firearms sales all together.
Another interesting bit of info from the article. Dicks can still get Mossberg weapons through 3rd party deals.
I will never buy from Dick's again. I will also not use facebook and will never buy anything from Starbucks (that wasn't political until just recently....prior to that it was because of their overpriced battery acid). Hell, I still won't buy Quaker Oats because they sponsored the CBS anti-hunting hit piece (narrated buy Mr. BS himself Dan Rather) "Guns Of Autumn" 43 years ago.
Yes, I'm a crabby old man. But I still have a memory!
I have some Hornady hollow point rounds for my 10mm. Hornady makes good ammo. If someone wants to buy them off of me for $2/round and throw them away, I'll sell them. Otherwise, I'll save them for the first guy to break into my house and shoot them with anti-freedom bullets...pew pew.
The OP and like minded gun nuts that want to turn a blind eye to mass shootings in schools, malls, churches and concerts are doing a huge disservice to responsible gun owners and hunters. The idea that they can own mass assault rifles, RPGs, etc without limitation is absurd. Congrats to Dick’s and all other companies that support reasonable gun control. The wacko gun rights crew is going to ruin it for all of us with their twisted, illogical and incorrect view of the 2nd Amdt.
Go on, Arrowone....please. Tell us exactly what kind of reasonable gun control measures you would take, to prevent all these mass shootings. Keep in mind, its already illegal to murder someone. I'm sure if the government, which you seem to trust so much, would pass just one or two more pieces of common sense legislation in regards to legal, law abiding citizens obtaining firearms, what would they be? Would your suggestions also include making it harder for these same people to obtain ammo, fertilizer, ball bearings, pressure cookers, rental trucks and machetes, as well? Curious to hear your thoughts...
Define “reasonable gun laws” and which one of the myriad of existing laws failed and why it failed, and maybe we’ll have a conversation.
Otherwise go back to licking the boot pressed upon your throat. You’ve already decided to offer up any and all orifices for faux safety over liberty.
Reasonable to me would include the requirement for locked storage (vault type, not glass window gun rack) for all weapons not in immediate direct control of those firearms. Quick access locked storage for personal home defense would fit this definition.
Also federal legislation that would criminilize when firearms are used in a murder or other crime if the owner did not take reasonable steps to prevent access to their firearms by another party. Yes, I will let courts decide "reasonable" which would not include a father giving firearms back to a son they had been taken away from. Civil penalties are not enough of a deterrent IMO.
As far as the original topic of this post, good for you, LBshooter! I don't understand what's so hard to comprehend on this matter. Dicks Sporting Goods continuing to sell guns & ammo, while actively funding measures to prohibit law abiding citizens from being able to purchase certain guns ELSEWHERE, is akin to being fed spoonfuls of $hit and telling us its chocolate pudding! I guess alot of you guys would have no problem buying Sitka or KUIU merchandise from PETA, knowing full well that your dollars are then being used to bring about the demise of hunting, right? How many of you would contact Sitka and KUIU and demand they stop doing business with PETA, or else? Never knew there were so many Dicks Heads on this site....sheesh!
What if I steal your bow and murder someone with it, then your ass goes to jail, the bow manufacturer, bow shop that sold you the bow, arrow maker, broadhead maker, etc all go to jail. Crazy stupid idea, not common sense. Here is an idea, hold the person committing the crime accountable for their actions and stop blaming everything and everyone else. Common sense is not to release the names of these wac jobs, they do not get their 15 minutes of fame.
Stupid anology PECO. Bow versus firearm with multiple rounds.
We have the right to own firearms. Pursuing life liberty and happiness ought to include some common sense protections from stupid people.
Great analogy. More laws won't stop mass shootings. Get to the root of the problem, and hold the people doing it accountable. Blaming everyone and everything else is not common sense.
So place additional restrictions on law abiding citizens? Gotcha. And let a court decide if you provided "reasonable" security. Never seen so many gun owners willing to roll over and offer up their hard fought rights in an effort to appease the gun grabbers.
And when your "reasonable" gun control laws fail to prevent the next tragedy, it will be followed by more "reasonable" gun control measures. Or FF would vomit with disgust.
Libtard mindset of Common sense means if a person is able to steal my weapon and commit a crime, then the said weapon was not reasonably secured. The criminal gets off because it was my fault. Fck that BS. Just please admit we need to hold the person doing the crime accountable and not everyone and everything else.
Thanks for keeping this thread going as I await the Colorado draw, which is suppose to be released today!
PAbowhunter1064... I like the way you think! Well said!
What is irresponsible and wacko to me is suggesting we legislate the effect of a cause. Versus addressing the cause.
pabowhunter1064 well said. Love the PETA analogy. I too would love to hear arrowones' reasonable measures to stop mass shootings. Arrowone you have joined the group of the terminally stupid thought process thinking that a law would stop these mass shooting. Willing to listen, so let's hear it please.
pabowhunter1064 well said. Love the PETA analogy. I too would love to hear arrowones' reasonable measures to stop mass shootings. Arrowone you have joined the group of the terminally stupid thought process thinking that a law would stop these mass shooting. Willing to listen, so let's hear it please.
".....SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED."
What part of the above is not clear?? And it's the right to keep....AND BEAR.....arms, in case that's not obvious. Having it locked away until someone else says I can use it is NOT "bearing" it.
LBshooter, aren't you the same person who was trying to get everyone to boycott Yeti products a few weeks back? How did that work for you? Good for Danielle at Dick's. She's not going to let someone bully her around by demanding that Dick's has to respond to your inquiry.
Ollie, get your facts straight or improve your reading comprehension. As I have said in this post is the same I said about yeti, I will not support any company that is actively trying to violate my rights. And if you read more carefully Danielle works at hornady not at dicks and she is the one I spoke with. Bully, I think not, I simply asked a question and then told her I would not be supporting hornady until they make it clear that they are not in bed with a company trying to violate my rights. You can support the anti gun companies all you want it's your right, but, please get your facts straight before you go shooting your mouth off.
Honestly, good debate!
Is it fair to assume at least some of these tragic events are committed by people with mental/emotional instabilities? I answer in the affirmative. If correct, what are the causes, and as important, the fixes. There is no agreement on any of this, except there is no short run solution.
Harsher criminal penalties, holding the perps more accountable than we do already, probly has very little impact on reducing them as it takes a healthy mind to weigh costs/benefits. I doubt that occurs.
So, what can be done to reduce these heinous acts in the short run? I think about Sandy Hook, and ask if the mom did not share such easy access to firearms, would that event have happened? We own a lot of firearms, which are secured in a vault only two people know how to open. Sure, with the right tools you can get into anything, but unless you are a pro, it would be tough.
Yes, I think requiring firearms not in immediate control to be seured with access limited to the owners a reasonable concession that would not infringe on my rights to own firearms, and has at least a chance of preventing some of these tragedies. With rights come responsibilities. Hunter safety by educating and offering better practices such as trigger locks has significantly reduced accidents. This could have a similar impact.
While you may call me a libtard still, our state legalized conceal carry on college campuses. Our college held a panel discussion/presentation for the pros/cons. I was the only pro carry who responded, and presented to their request to participate.
When our most popular board member, a lawyer, trotted out his Jesuit education to say he was against carry, he knew what Jesus would say about all of these firearms, I had a different response.
I said I also had a Jesuit education, but had received a different message. What I had been taught by the Jesuits and the Marines is that I am my brother's keeper, and that I would be held accountable if I could have prevented a tragedy but failed to act.
If this makes me a liberal in your eyes, I am comfortable with that. Thanks.
Poor analogue...... Nobody has stolen anything nor murdered anyone. No laws whatsoever were broken. I am not holding Hornady as responsible for Dicks actions in any way, shape or form. I/we are trying to get them, applying our pressure as we can, to join in boycotting Dicks as other firearms companies have. By not doing so they are at best turning a blind eye to what Dicks is doing. By not doing so they are enabling DIcks in their political attack on their business and their customers. Enabling is not against the law. But neither is it protected from criticism......
This is about applying political pressure...... same as what Dicks is doing by hiring professional lobbyists to pressure lawmakers to restrict my constitutional rights.
Except in this manner it is true grass roots pressure coming from the common citizen, not a hired "gun" so to speak. If the actions taken by Mossburg, Springfield, etc. were righteous and justified in the face of a blatant attack on both them and their customers.....why would others joining this action be any less? Why would pressuring to get any and all others to join and take that same courageous action be wrong? To show a unified front to those trying to vilify and extract some measure of retribution against law abiding citizens..... by making yet more laws and meaningless restrictions. If all firearm related vendors united, it would send a loud and clear message not only to those who may follow suit due to the liberal urban pressures brought to bear on them, but to ELECTED lawmakers themselves.
All sides are exerting political pressure, that someone does not choose to acknowledge this reality does not change the reality. If apathy holds back the pressure from the gun owner side...... the battle is lost to those who would take away your rights, as stated in the Bill of Rights, your God given rights. Not just words, an important concept..... these rights were specifically not given the domain of government to "grant" them. They are granted at birth by your Creator and the government is specifically forbidden to infringe on them. But that doesn't mean that they won't TRY......
Well said TD. Got a call from ruger and Henry arms, they both said they disagree with dicks and unfortunately they have no control over dicks selling thier guns. Distributors are the ones who are selling to dicks, however, Henry is erasing all association with dicks as far as labels,signage on thier website. Savage arms stated they were taking a wait and see attitude, which IMO they aren't changing thier sales plan, they didn't say if they work through distributor or direct.
"Harsher criminal penalties, holding the perps more accountable than we do already, probly has very little impact on reducing them as it takes a healthy mind to weigh costs/benefits. I doubt that occurs."
So place further restrictions on others.
"Yes, I think requiring firearms not in immediate control to be seured with access limited to the owners a reasonable concession that would not infringe on my rights to own firearms, and has at least a chance of preventing some of these tragedies."
And when the next tragedy takes place, what other "reasonable" concessions are you willing to make on the behalf of law abiding gun owners? And make no mistake. One set of "reasonable" concessions always, always leads to more.
"Concession" was a poor choice of words. Owned firearms since 1981. Upon the purchase of my second one I have had locked storage.
Seemed like such common Sense on multiple fronts. Protect the firearms from theft etc.
Best way to keep the right to bear IMO is for the public to know we will act responsibly. Arguing against guns being locked up is a losing argument IMO.
Recently an 85 year old friend was pulled over for eractic driving. Officer talked to him, let him go. A few days later Jim received notice in the mail that he had to pass a driver's exam or his license would be suspended.
He failed four times, they took away his license. They made the right decision. Jim could not do what they did.
Obviously there are enough people out there not capable of securing their firearms properly. The rest of us deserve protection as much as possible from stupidity. The argument fixated on my right to bear seems to say that is an absolute right at any price. It is not, the courts have already ruled that.
Again, IMO, one of the best ways to keep the majority of non- firearms owning public on our side is to show we act responsibly. Locked firearms is responsible ownersip.
1)Teaching kids the difference between right and wrong. 2) Gun safety 3) And that you are not always a winner, sometimes life isn't easy. Just a few thoughts.
Nice dodge. Please answer the following:
And when the next tragedy takes place, what other "reasonable" concessions, excuse me, laws are you willing to make on the behalf of law abiding gun owners? And make no mistake. One set of "reasonable" concessions, oops, laws always, always leads to more.
You've already proven your line in the sand is equivalent to Obama's infamous red line. When do you say, "Not one more step back."
"Locked firearms is responsible ownership." Excuse me for a minute intruder with intent of killing me, raping my wife and daughter and stealing my guns to commit further violent crimes, I have to go unlock my gun, then go unlock my ammo from another safe in another part of the house, then load up and defend my family, and guns. You can just take whatever else you want, but not my guns because then I am liable for what you do with them. And yeah, if you could go ahead and not kill me and rape my wife and daughter, that would be great. To me, this is far from common sense and really sounds (insert f word here) retarded when you say it out loud.
Tim McVeigh used fertilizer. More laws more restrictions more government?? Rented vans seem to be quite popular instruments of mass killing lately. It's a social problem folks. Passing a law telling me how to store my guns is not gonna fix it. Thanks for posting that link TD ! I don't read much news so I really didn't know those details . I will not be giving dicks sporting goods any business . And as far as restrictions are concerned, there already are restrictions. Fully automatic weapons are illegal . Hand grenades , rocket launchers and bazookas have been illegal for my entire life , and guess what?? I don't want to own one! But.... Put a black composite stock, some mounting rails and a collapsible stock on my Ruger 1022 and now it's called an assault rifle. And there are more than a few folks posting here who would say I don't need to own it. It's the same rifle when it has it's factory checkered walnut stock. Any corporate entity that sides with those who would infringe on my rights I will refuse to support. And please understand that your rights end where mine begin . Chew on that thought for a minute or so.
I excluded personal defense weapons in your control. I don't have to ask an intruder to wait. lol!
Was not dodging anything. I have believed in secured firearms since first owning them. Maybe it seems reasonable to me because that is what I experienced in the military.
I do not want to restrict ownership, just access by folks who should not have it. If someone proposed a different approach that evidence strongly suggests would help prevent these tragedies without impacting gun ownership by law abiding stable citizens, I would be willing to evaluate and form an opinion. I have not heard any other opinions yet that IMO would meet that criteria.
So, your answer is to further impact the law abiding citizen even though it will have no measurable effect on eliminating mass shootings. That is pretty absurd.
Here is reality, mass shooting will only go away when guns go away. That is not going to happen because criminals will never give them up. So, you propose to retard and hinder the legal gun owner with your "cultured" and "common sense" approach. What is wrong with you?
We have had guns for a long time, mass shootings of the amount we have are a more recent occurrence.
How does locking up firearms effect your right to own guns? What is wrong with you?
No one should have to seek permission to exercise a right codified by law.
Concede, or make concessions, either...
"How does locking up firearms effect your right to own guns? What is wrong with you?"
When the courts decide that "reasonable" lock up requires a $5,000 safe. Remember, you said you would let the courts decide what reasonable is.
A driver's license is a privilege, not a right.
Guys, I am going to leave it at this...
I would hope none of us would leave guns laying around that young children might play with, and for good reason.
IMO, there is no difference making it too easy for the disturbed to have access. Yes, I will balance my ownership rights against what most of us probably do already for the sake of parents not having to bury a child from an act that might have been at a minimum made much more difficult to carry out.
In the bigger picture, this is where we are at politically in this country today, neither side willing to concede an inch. Both sides need to give. How about automatic national reciprocity in exchange for secured firearms being mandatory if not in use for personal protection? Congress is currently not capable of this kind of compromise.
This is how I feel on the issue. I get you disagree. Neither of us will probably change our minds. That is OK. Good discussion, but now I feel I am just spinning wheels and have nothing new to add.
Thanks for being respectful.
How has the laws that determine how guns must be stored, contributed to the rise in those shootings? Most gun safes come with master keys. Most gun safes can be broken into within minutes with the proper tools. How is locking them up in storage going to truly stop someone intent on getting them? It ain't gonna stop them. It is only going to hinder the legal gun owners from protecting themselves.
I think the speech about leaving guns laying around children is for effect. No one is that dumb. And, I think I speak for more then myself when i say don't flatter yourself with self righteous feelings by talking down to us common, dumb folk. Just give that dumb crap a break man.
No, Mass shooting of this amount are not just a recent occurrence either. You need to do a little more research too.
"Both sides need to give."
When was the last time liberals compromised on GC? Most of the left is on record calling for an outright ban firearms. A European gun control model. How do you compromise when the ultimate goal is a complete ban?
"How about automatic national reciprocity in exchange for secured firearms being mandatory if not in use for personal protection? "
How about states rights? Feds giveth, feds taketh away. Mandatory secured firearms? Still gonna let the politicians or courts decide what "secure" is?
Someone breaks into my home, steals a bottle of Percocet or Vicodin and od's or sells it to someone that od's, I am responsible. Your line of thinking has a dangerous downward spiral.
HFW, concede an inch? Ilive in Illinois and we have background checks, 72 hour waiting period for handguns and 24 hour for long guns. There are bills right now that may increase the waiting period for long guns to 72 hours. We also have to apply through the state police for a firearms owner identification card(foid) now with all these rules that we have to deal with, which antis say they want and will decrease violence, I think Chicago blows that theory up. Hell, we have had outright bans on ownership of guns since the 70's and yet we have one of the most violent cities. Gun laws only Penelize the law abiding citizens and do absolutely zero to reduce shootings. Remember back during the LA riots, citizens ran to the guns stores to buy weapons to protect themselves and family and couldn't understand why they had to wait 15 days for a gun, did it to themselves. 99.99 percent of gun owners are law abiding and yet our idiots in government want to punish the majority., go figure.
Seems like a "reasonable" compromise. Right?
"How about automatic national reciprocity in exchange for secured firearms being mandatory if not in use for personal protection? Congress is currently not capable of this kind of compromise."
I'd love this as an AK resident who spends a lot of time in CA. There's no way that CA's sea of congressmen would go for it.
'"Locked firearms is responsible ownership." Excuse me for a minute intruder with intent of killing me, raping my wife and daughter and stealing my guns to commit further violent crimes, I have to go unlock my gun, then go unlock my ammo from another safe in another part of the house, then load up and defend my family, and guns. You can just take whatever else you want, but not my guns because then I am liable for what you do with them. And yeah, if you could go ahead and not kill me and rape my wife and daughter, that would be great. To me, this is far from common sense and really sounds (insert f word here) retarded when you say it out loud. "
Or you could just install a single gun safe with a biometric lock in the same place you currently keep your gun and have it secured while still being available to you at a moment's notice.
Suggesting that taking a simple safety precaution by locking up your gun somehow means you need to keep your ammunition locked up and in another part of the house sounds (insert f word here) retarded when you say it out loud. ;-)
Slippery slope.. the line has been drawn. Neither side will give a inch, because they will try for a mile. It is either u like dick or u don't like dick.. we loose our gun rights we all will be ??? Peace
So do you open your home to strangers for annual inspections or do they just randomly pound on your door and ask to see your firearms and inspect how they are stored and what color they are?
Bonus question: Which Communist/Totalitarian country would this most look like?
It is no ones business what guns I have, how many, for what purpose they are designed for and how I use/store them. They are mine. I can't even imagine living in a country where strangers have a mandate to come into your home to "inspect" them. "You don't "need" this kind or that kind." Pound sand. I don't have to ask you what you think about what I "need".
This is exactly the kind of worthless feelgood regulations the "we have to do something about guns" crowd promote because they are "doing something". They don't care to actually do something that would increase protection at schools and such. Just "guns". The best part is, most coming up with these regs are literally so gun stupid they don't have any idea which end the bullet comes out of much less why.
No more. Not one more inch. They will NEVER stop taking freedoms. Not until it is all gone.
Mandating that taking a simple safety precaution by locking up your gun, and letting the courts, politicians and lawyers define "secure" and can mean you need to keep your ammunition locked up and in another part of the house sounds ****ing retarded when you say it out loud. ;-)
'Specially since the gun grabbers HAVE proposed storing ammunition separate from the firearm. Is that one of the concessions we need to make to appease the the anti gunners?
"No more. Not one more inch. They will NEVER stop taking freedoms. Not until it is all gone."
"Gun laws only Penelize the law abiding citizens and do absolutely zero to reduce shootings."
X2. I live in the Land Of Corruption also, and the people in Chicago go on and on about how it's the GUNS coming in from Indiana and Wisconsin that are causing all the deaths. I find it odd though that the EXACT same guns when they are 40 miles west/south of Chicago do virtually no harm to anyone, it's just when they suddenly cross over into "Crook" county that they suddenly become "violent". Hmmm......why the change in personality? Could it possibly the PEOPLE in Crook county that are the violent ones???
Nah.......firearms have minds of their own.
"Suggesting that taking a simple safety precaution by locking up your gun somehow means you need to keep your ammunition locked up and in another part of the house sounds (insert f word here) retarded when you say it out loud. ;-)"
I'm not making this shit up, I'm not the one suggesting it. It's a common sense proposal.
one quick example
Keeping guns and ammo in separate places is pure genius! I can't tell you how many times I've opened my gun safe, only to find my bullets loading themselves into their respective caliber guns...probably on their way to cause mayhem. Damn guns...can't trust em!
They must be the same ones that migrate to Chicago where they suddenly acquire free will and a mind of their own!