Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Taylor Kalashnikov]

the boycott has been around as a tool of political statements for as long as there has been politics. However, its effectiveness is unproven at best and at worst, just ineffective. However, I saw the term "boycott" recently in reference to the recent story about the singer, Joy Villa, who wore a MAGA dress to an awards show. In a very short time, she went from being a virtual unknown to the top of the charts.   So I ask, do ya'll think that the "boycott" idea is an effective one and will you use it.

[mouse]

There's no such thing as bad publicity.

[MamaLiberty]

  So I ask, do ya'll think that the "boycott" idea is an effective one and will you use it.

I "vote" with my feet and my wallet every day, for one reason or another. As individuals, that is the major moving force in any market. That is very different than trying to get a large number of people to participate with a "boycott," but such a thing can be very effective too. Think of what happened to Smith and Wesson. They have never really recovered from it. I don't own one of their products, and  never will, so the mass boycott was successful as far as I am concerned as well. Then think of the massive boycott of the very idea of "smart guns." That has, so far, been so successful that no gun dealer will even stock them. The few that tried it were promptly run out of business. Now there is a successful boycott. And the people of the gun are not at all against those being sold, actually, but seriously against the idea that these might become "mandatory," and nothing else available... which is what the prohibitionists want.

I can't imagine being the least interested in what some movie star wears, or doesn't wear. But that's just me.

[Taylor Kalashnikov]

 I do like the idea of boycott to show support for those who take stands that aren't exactly popular in certain circles....like if I did buy I-tunes, I would have downloaded a couple of Ms Villa's songs.   and even though I'm not a fan of his music, I would go see ted nugent in concert(or buy a ticket for someone who would enjoy it) to show support for him standing up for our rights and using his public voice to support the constitution.

You were referring to S&W supporting the clintonian rifle ban?

[MamaLiberty]

You were referring to S&W supporting the clintonian rifle ban?

You know... I don't even remember exactly what it was all about... but that sounds right. I never owned an S&W product, and probably never will, so I wasn't involved with that directly. It was just one of the better examples of a successful mass boycott. Another is Zumbo and the almost immediate economic and personal destruction of his career after he made false and derogatory statements about certain rifles in his articles.

Words and actions, especially in public and the media, do have meaning and can have very powerful consequences. 

[Taylor Kalashnikov]

agreed...but I do think its an interesting take on that  tactic to , rather than make it a point NOT to spend money with companies/people who take a stance we don't like, instead make it a point to spend money with those who take stands that you agree with.   The example I gave of Ms Villa, for instance.  after she publicly showed support for Pres Trump, brietbart readers,  and trump supporters in general made her wealthy overnight, literally  buying her music.

[DiabloLoco]

agreed...but I do think its an interesting take on that  tactic to , rather than make it a point NOT to spend money with companies/people who take a stance we don't like, instead make it a point to spend money with those who take stands that you agree with.   The example I gave of Ms Villa, for instance.  after she publicly showed support for Pres Trump, brietbart readers,  and trump supporters in general made her wealthy overnight, literally  buying her music.

That would be the exact reason to NOT buy her music. She supports a politician. While I personally agree that Trump was the lessor of two evils, he's still evil. I would never support a brainwashed statist. Now if she wore a dress that read, "Screw em' both. I own me." Well.....then she'd have my support.

[MamaLiberty]

agreed...but I do think its an interesting take on that  tactic to , rather than make it a point NOT to spend money with companies/people who take a stance we don't like, instead make it a point to spend money with those who take stands that you agree with.   The example I gave of Ms Villa, for instance.  after she publicly showed support for Pres Trump, brietbart readers,  and trump supporters in general made her wealthy overnight, literally  buying her music.

Of course. Each to their own. I don't generally pay too much attention to that sort of thing... I don't look at much "news" to start with.

I shop for quality, price and availability for the most part. Once in a while I'll avoid certain manufacturers for specific reasons, but it has to be something major. As an example, I will now completely boycott anything to do with the NRA, probably no matter what they do in the future. I gave them the benefit of the doubt for a long time, even knowing their crap history, but the destruction of the training program was the very last straw.

[Taylor Kalashnikov]

agreed...but I do think its an interesting take on that  tactic to , rather than make it a point NOT to spend money with companies/people who take a stance we don't like, instead make it a point to spend money with those who take stands that you agree with.   The example I gave of Ms Villa, for instance.  after she publicly showed support for Pres Trump, brietbart readers,  and trump supporters in general made her wealthy overnight, literally  buying her music.

That would be the exact reason to NOT buy her music. She supports a politician. While I personally agree that Trump was the lessor of two evils, he's still evil. I would never support a brainwashed statist. Now if she wore a dress that read, "Screw em' both. I own me." Well.....then she'd have my support.

I didn't say I agree with her sentiments, and to be honest, I'm not convinced President Biff is much if any better than a president Cruella, but my point in bringing Ms Villa up, was that she took a stand in a public place, and was rewarded by consumers who agreed with her, 99% of whom probably don't even like her genre of music, much less have heard of her before.
The heart of this thread is in the question, is it more effective to withdraw financial support of company or person for a stance you object to, or is the buy-cott option the more effective one: putting your money toward a product or whatever for the purposes of supporting that person or organization's stance?

[MamaLiberty]

is it more effective to withdraw financial support of company or person for a stance you object to, or is the buy-cott option the more effective one: putting your money toward a product or whatever for the purposes of supporting that person or organization's stance?

Depends on what you consider "effective." For what and to whom? An individual may boycott anything they choose, but it won't mean a thing to the manufacturer - or in this case, an artist - unless millions of others choose the same thing, whether or not it is for the same reason. I don't think most of us make our every day purchase decisions based on such things much anyway. I sure don't.

[Taylor Kalashnikov]

is it more effective to withdraw financial support of company or person for a stance you object to, or is the buy-cott option the more effective one: putting your money toward a product or whatever for the purposes of supporting that person or organization's stance?

Depends on what you consider "effective." For what and to whom? An individual may boycott anything they choose, but it won't mean a thing to the manufacturer - or in this case, an artist - unless millions of others choose the same thing, whether or not it is for the same reason. I don't think most of us make our every day purchase decisions based on such things much anyway. I sure don't.

to be honest I don't usually either...although if there is a restaurant that allows open carry and one that doesn't, I will go to the Pro-2A establishment. And I also drik at a bar downtown dallas because the owner is a Libertarian......but they also play live jazz and have good food, so.....

[MamaLiberty]

to be honest I don't usually either...although if there is a restaurant that allows open carry and one that doesn't, I will go to the Pro-2A establishment. And I also drik at a bar downtown dallas because the owner is a Libertarian......but they also play live jazz and have good food, so.....

The more local, the more "effective," of course. But I don't consider your example to be a "boycott" exactly. I'm never going into any business that doesn't welcome my gun. Period. I'm not trying to change their minds. I don't care what they do. Luckily, that's not a real problem here. There have been two buildings with a "no guns" sign on it in the little nearby town. One is a dentist (sign is now gone)... and I go to the other one - who loves to talk guns. The other was posted on the "senior center." I only go in there to the annual gun show... nearly everyone carrying, and once to a memorial service for a friend. I was carrying then too. It is just not an issue here - and also not "illegal" to carry openly, since it is public property and there's no law against it. Nobody asked me to leave...

It would be more of a boycott if anyone noticed. LOL

[knobster]

<snip>I will now completely boycott anything to do with the NRA, probably no matter what they do in the future. I gave them the benefit of the doubt for a long time, even knowing their crap history, but the destruction of the training program was the very last straw.

Wha?!?  When did this happen?  I took an NRA pistol training class about 5ish years ago.  I was hoping to take other training courses through them eventually...

[MamaLiberty]

Wha?!?  When did this happen?  I took an NRA pistol training class about 5ish years ago.  I was hoping to take other training courses through them eventually...

The NRA has been increasingly difficult to work with for a number of years. They stopped actively supporting trainers long ago, and the cost of certification and training materials has gone up substantially. Everything has to be done "on line" now, and they don't answer questions reliably. Their excuse is that they are all "volunteers" and so we can't expect too much. Of course, the NRA spends millions to mail the constant propaganda and demands for more and more of our money.

The final straw was the new "blended learning" thing (look it up) that infuriated almost every NRA trainer, and brought a firestorm of protest. They have scrapped that as a requirement now, but the damage is done. I've talked to a lot of long term certified instructors, and a great many of them have hung it up as I have. The NRA has a long history of grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory. sigh (Also something about "if it ain't broke, don't fix it...)

You can safely take the NRA courses now, if you want. IF you can find a local instructor. Don't know where you live, but there are a great many, often much better courses available in some areas. One of the best is in AZ: http://www.aftt.org/  American Firearms Training & Tactics. I am a graduate of their handgun and self defense program.  http://www.tacticalshooting.com/ is another good school. They offer training in the east, as well as some classes offered other places. I have used their techniques for years, and would LOVE to attend one of their full classes.

[knobster]

Wha?!?  When did this happen?  I took an NRA pistol training class about 5ish years ago.  I was hoping to take other training courses through them eventually...

The NRA has been increasingly difficult to work with for a number of years. They stopped actively supporting trainers long ago, and the cost of certification and training materials has gone up substantially. Everything has to be done "on line" now, and they don't answer questions reliably. Their excuse is that they are all "volunteers" and so we can't expect too much. Of course, the NRA spends millions to mail the constant propaganda and demands for more and more of our money.

The final straw was the new "blended learning" thing (look it up) that infuriated almost every NRA trainer, and brought a firestorm of protest. They have scrapped that as a requirement now, but the damage is done. I've talked to a lot of long term certified instructors, and a great many of them have hung it up as I have. The NRA has a long history of grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory. sigh (Also something about "if it ain't broke, don't fix it...)

You can safely take the NRA courses now, if you want. IF you can find a local instructor. Don't know where you live, but there are a great many, often much better courses available in some areas. One of the best is in AZ: http://www.aftt.org/  American Firearms Training & Tactics. I am a graduate of their handgun and self defense program.  http://www.tacticalshooting.com/ is another good school. They offer training in the east, as well as some classes offered other places. I have used their techniques for years, and would LOVE to attend one of their full classes.

I did search my area for NRA instructors and they are few are far between.  Closest one is 2.5 hours away!  Maddening...
Thanks for the info ML.  I will look into those.