UPDATE: Sheriffs sue over COLORADO gun laws

[whacker1]

How did the biycott against Chick fil-A work out? How much did it hurt their business?

Why it did not work is because there was a motivated plurality that used their economic power to support the position and/or the expression of the rights of Chick fil-A (actually the president's freedom of expression).  I think you misunderstand the situation or the comparison between Chick fil-A and the proposed CO boycott, because the Chick fil-A situation leads one to conclude that the Chick fil-A outcome actually supports the notion that CO should be boycotted.

Chick fil-A: A small but vocal minority was in favor of compelling the company to act in its favor (suppress the free expression of its president).  A large plurality disagreed with this bullying and expressed itself through economic activity in support of the company.  Many companies tried to jump on the bandwagon, and hilarity ensued, as Chick fil-A's economic windfall exploded.

CO: A group of legislators bent on control of the masses and restriction of individual liberty pushes through a law that will have no effect on crime or safety.  A large plurality (relative to the funds at risk in a boycott) threatens economic boycott of the state, which depends on hunters and Second Amendment support for a large amount of tax revenue, directly and indirectly.  Note that withholding economic activity, in this instance, is also more easy than undertaking to engage in economic activity (if you choose to support CO's recent 2A restrictions). 

If you are suggesting that there is some large group of people that is going to spontaneously support CO's recent 2A restrictions by undertaking to engage in economic activity that, without such a proposed boycott, they would not have undertaken, I would suggest you identify these group(s) that are actively looking to counteract such a boycott.  Or at least suggest that, for the levels of revenue that we are talking, identify groups inclined to counter-boycott, that have the disposable income to counteract the effects. The only groups income-wise that come to mind may be the marijuana tourists or the gay-marriage/honeymooning patrons.  But even among them, I would not expect that 100% could be counted on as counter-protesters intent on bringing revenue to CO to counteract a pro-2A boycott.

Thanks for the response. What I am suggesting is simply this: boycotts often work, and often fail. I don't know that a boycott of CO by hunters will cause the gun rights situation to improve, to worsen, or if so by how much. I'm asking the question.

I do suspect with a higher degree of probability that a hunter boycott would harm some good, hard working gun rights indviduals. It appears to me this thread is suggesting that we "do something" without taking some time to think the situation through. Just because someone does not want to immediately join this boycott does not make him a mindless individual, a "closet liberal", or someone who excretes male bovine waste material. For the record, I don't hunt CO so this I don't have a dog in the game. I do like to see hunters make wise, informed choices - that's all.

Hey Bob 33, I see my "closet liberal" comment left a mark and for that I do appologize. We are all on the same side here, we just have different theories on how to handle the situation. I see the majority of my money going to the state when I hunt in Colorado,( probably 75%) and its the state I am boycotting, not the private businesses.  Trust me I have thought this through, wasting 5 years of collecting points in what I feel is the best mule deer state, is a big deal to me. I am probably losing more than anyone who has posted on this thread.

Bob, I think your comments about "thinking this through" is very real.  The heavy lifting with regard to changing the public and political official opinions changed in Colorado needs to come from within Colorado.  Several have mentioned in small components that recall efforts for certain individuals are already moving forward, public outcry to vote out some democrats at the 2014 election, as well as the businesses themselves moving to new states.  Our component will not be huge, but needs to be consistent with what is going on within the state, and support what they themselves have initiated.  With regard to Colorado, we can only vote with our dollars and recruit their businesses and make sure that those businesses know why we aren't going to go there.  Those businesses need to be able to relay to their elected officials how many customers they have lost due to the decisions made by those and other elected officials.  Boycott with no information is a recipe for failure.  Boycott with information may still fail, but has a better chance of long term success.

Will there be opportunists that take advantage of the lower than usual Non-resident participation?  sure, but we can only influence those that are willing to stand up for what they believe in.

I myself was planning a trip for 2014, which has been shelved, while that won't be an immediate impact, it is all I can do in the way of my own dollars.  I will be purchasing about 1500 worth of gear this spring and will only be supporting those in 2nd Amendment friendly states, and will let those that are front runners within the state of Colorado why I chose not to purchase their products. 

On the sidelines, I have been in touch with a couple different companies including MagPul to let them Spokane & North Idaho would be very interested in having them relocate here.   I have also exchanged e-mails with the CEO of Greater Spokane Incorporated explaining which companies have expressed interest in leaving Colorado, and he two is making contact with MagPul and others.

 

[Fl0und3rz]

http://www.bob-owens.com/2013/03/what-bloomberg-hath-wrought-colorado-gun-control-blowback-accelerates/

Everyone knew Magpul was going to take its jobs and nearly $90 million in taxes elsewhere  as a result of the state’s recent gun control laws. That was just the beginning of the rebellion. The blowback that has begun against Michael Bloomberg’s Colorado gun control bills is so massive that even the Washington Post is noticing it.

United we stand . . .

[JJD]

How did the biycott against Chick fil-A work out? How much did it hurt their business?

Why it did not work is because there was a motivated plurality that used their economic power to support the position and/or the expression of the rights of Chick fil-A (actually the president's freedom of expression).  I think you misunderstand the situation or the comparison between Chick fil-A and the proposed CO boycott, because the Chick fil-A situation leads one to conclude that the Chick fil-A outcome actually supports the notion that CO should be boycotted.

Chick fil-A: A small but vocal minority was in favor of compelling the company to act in its favor (suppress the free expression of its president).  A large plurality disagreed with this bullying and expressed itself through economic activity in support of the company.  Many companies tried to jump on the bandwagon, and hilarity ensued, as Chick fil-A's economic windfall exploded.

CO: A group of legislators bent on control of the masses and restriction of individual liberty pushes through a law that will have no effect on crime or safety.  A large plurality (relative to the funds at risk in a boycott) threatens economic boycott of the state, which depends on hunters and Second Amendment support for a large amount of tax revenue, directly and indirectly.  Note that withholding economic activity, in this instance, is also more easy than undertaking to engage in economic activity (if you choose to support CO's recent 2A restrictions). 

If you are suggesting that there is some large group of people that is going to spontaneously support CO's recent 2A restrictions by undertaking to engage in economic activity that, without such a proposed boycott, they would not have undertaken, I would suggest you identify these group(s) that are actively looking to counteract such a boycott.  Or at least suggest that, for the levels of revenue that we are talking, identify groups inclined to counter-boycott, that have the disposable income to counteract the effects. The only groups income-wise that come to mind may be the marijuana tourists or the gay-marriage/honeymooning patrons.  But even among them, I would not expect that 100% could be counted on as counter-protesters intent on bringing revenue to CO to counteract a pro-2A boycott.

Thanks for the response. What I am suggesting is simply this: boycotts often work, and often fail. I don't know that a boycott of CO by hunters will cause the gun rights situation to improve, to worsen, or if so by how much. I'm asking the question.

I do suspect with a higher degree of probability that a hunter boycott would harm some good, hard working gun rights indviduals. It appears to me this thread is suggesting that we "do something" without taking some time to think the situation through. Just because someone does not want to immediately join this boycott does not make him a mindless individual, a "closet liberal", or someone who excretes male bovine waste material. For the record, I don't hunt CO so this I don't have a dog in the game. I do like to see hunters make wise, informed choices - that's all.

Hey Bob 33, I see my "closet liberal" comment left a mark and for that I do appologize. We are all on the same side here, we just have different theories on how to handle the situation. I see the majority of my money going to the state when I hunt in Colorado,( probably 75%) and its the state I am boycotting, not the private businesses.  Trust me I have thought this through, wasting 5 years of collecting points in what I feel is the best mule deer state, is a big deal to me. I am probably losing more than anyone who has posted on this thread.

Bob, I think your comments about "thinking this through" is very real.  The heavy lifting with regard to changing the public and political official opinions changed in Colorado needs to come from within Colorado.  Several have mentioned in small components that recall efforts for certain individuals are already moving forward, public outcry to vote out some democrats at the 2014 election, as well as the businesses themselves moving to new states.  Our component will not be huge, but needs to be consistent with what is going on within the state, and support what they themselves have initiated.  With regard to Colorado, we can only vote with our dollars and recruit their businesses and make sure that those businesses know why we aren't going to go there.  Those businesses need to be able to relay to their elected officials how many customers they have lost due to the decisions made by those and other elected officials.  Boycott with no information is a recipe for failure.  Boycott with information may still fail, but has a better chance of long term success.

Will there be opportunists that take advantage of the lower than usual Non-resident participation?  sure, but we can only influence those that are willing to stand up for what they believe in.

I myself was planning a trip for 2014, which has been shelved, while that won't be an immediate impact, it is all I can do in the way of my own dollars.  I will be purchasing about 1500 worth of gear this spring and will only be supporting those in 2nd Amendment friendly states, and will let those that are front runners within the state of Colorado why I chose not to purchase their products. 

On the sidelines, I have been in touch with a couple different companies including MagPul to let them Spokane & North Idaho would be very interested in having them relocate here.   I have also exchanged e-mails with the CEO of Greater Spokane Incorporated explaining which companies have expressed interest in leaving Colorado, and he two is making contact with MagPul and others.

There must be another Spokane somewhere?  Considering the crackpots the west siders keep voting into office, why in Gods name would anyone in that industry want to relocate to WA?
They will likely be facing the same issues in the near future, plus they would be moving into a state with a hostile business environment.  Businesses like Boeing would have pulled out of WA a long time ago had they been allowed to do so.  Probably the only big ones that would be left would Microsoft in the head and that outfit that sells crappy coffee.

[magnanimous_j]

There must be another Spokane somewhere?  Considering the crackpots the west siders keep voting into office, why in Gods name would anyone in that industry want to relocate to WA?
They will likely be facing the same issues in the near future, plus they would be moving into a state with a hostile business environment.  Businesses like Boeing would have pulled out of WA a long time ago had they been allowed to do so.  Probably the only big ones that would be left would Microsoft in the head and that outfit that sells crappy coffee.

Oh look, another Eastsider whose entire half of the state is carried by the west is criticizing the side of the state that has some of the biggest and most important companies on the planet.

Isn't that new and different.

[whacker1]

How did the biycott against Chick fil-A work out? How much did it hurt their business?

Why it did not work is because there was a motivated plurality that used their economic power to support the position and/or the expression of the rights of Chick fil-A (actually the president's freedom of expression).  I think you misunderstand the situation or the comparison between Chick fil-A and the proposed CO boycott, because the Chick fil-A situation leads one to conclude that the Chick fil-A outcome actually supports the notion that CO should be boycotted.

Chick fil-A: A small but vocal minority was in favor of compelling the company to act in its favor (suppress the free expression of its president).  A large plurality disagreed with this bullying and expressed itself through economic activity in support of the company.  Many companies tried to jump on the bandwagon, and hilarity ensued, as Chick fil-A's economic windfall exploded.

CO: A group of legislators bent on control of the masses and restriction of individual liberty pushes through a law that will have no effect on crime or safety.  A large plurality (relative to the funds at risk in a boycott) threatens economic boycott of the state, which depends on hunters and Second Amendment support for a large amount of tax revenue, directly and indirectly.  Note that withholding economic activity, in this instance, is also more easy than undertaking to engage in economic activity (if you choose to support CO's recent 2A restrictions). 

If you are suggesting that there is some large group of people that is going to spontaneously support CO's recent 2A restrictions by undertaking to engage in economic activity that, without such a proposed boycott, they would not have undertaken, I would suggest you identify these group(s) that are actively looking to counteract such a boycott.  Or at least suggest that, for the levels of revenue that we are talking, identify groups inclined to counter-boycott, that have the disposable income to counteract the effects. The only groups income-wise that come to mind may be the marijuana tourists or the gay-marriage/honeymooning patrons.  But even among them, I would not expect that 100% could be counted on as counter-protesters intent on bringing revenue to CO to counteract a pro-2A boycott.

Thanks for the response. What I am suggesting is simply this: boycotts often work, and often fail. I don't know that a boycott of CO by hunters will cause the gun rights situation to improve, to worsen, or if so by how much. I'm asking the question.

I do suspect with a higher degree of probability that a hunter boycott would harm some good, hard working gun rights indviduals. It appears to me this thread is suggesting that we "do something" without taking some time to think the situation through. Just because someone does not want to immediately join this boycott does not make him a mindless individual, a "closet liberal", or someone who excretes male bovine waste material. For the record, I don't hunt CO so this I don't have a dog in the game. I do like to see hunters make wise, informed choices - that's all.

Hey Bob 33, I see my "closet liberal" comment left a mark and for that I do appologize. We are all on the same side here, we just have different theories on how to handle the situation. I see the majority of my money going to the state when I hunt in Colorado,( probably 75%) and its the state I am boycotting, not the private businesses.  Trust me I have thought this through, wasting 5 years of collecting points in what I feel is the best mule deer state, is a big deal to me. I am probably losing more than anyone who has posted on this thread.

Bob, I think your comments about "thinking this through" is very real.  The heavy lifting with regard to changing the public and political official opinions changed in Colorado needs to come from within Colorado.  Several have mentioned in small components that recall efforts for certain individuals are already moving forward, public outcry to vote out some democrats at the 2014 election, as well as the businesses themselves moving to new states.  Our component will not be huge, but needs to be consistent with what is going on within the state, and support what they themselves have initiated.  With regard to Colorado, we can only vote with our dollars and recruit their businesses and make sure that those businesses know why we aren't going to go there.  Those businesses need to be able to relay to their elected officials how many customers they have lost due to the decisions made by those and other elected officials.  Boycott with no information is a recipe for failure.  Boycott with information may still fail, but has a better chance of long term success.

Will there be opportunists that take advantage of the lower than usual Non-resident participation?  sure, but we can only influence those that are willing to stand up for what they believe in.

I myself was planning a trip for 2014, which has been shelved, while that won't be an immediate impact, it is all I can do in the way of my own dollars.  I will be purchasing about 1500 worth of gear this spring and will only be supporting those in 2nd Amendment friendly states, and will let those that are front runners within the state of Colorado why I chose not to purchase their products. 

On the sidelines, I have been in touch with a couple different companies including MagPul to let them Spokane & North Idaho would be very interested in having them relocate here.   I have also exchanged e-mails with the CEO of Greater Spokane Incorporated explaining which companies have expressed interest in leaving Colorado, and he two is making contact with MagPul and others.

There must be another Spokane somewhere?  Considering the crackpots the west siders keep voting into office, why in Gods name would anyone in that industry want to relocate to WA?
They will likely be facing the same issues in the near future, plus they would be moving into a state with a hostile business environment.  Businesses like Boeing would have pulled out of WA a long time ago had they been allowed to do so.  Probably the only big ones that would be left would Microsoft in the head and that outfit that sells crappy coffee.

Nope, same Spokane...... Buck knives, Cabelas, and several others all looked at Spokane, but ultimately decided that Idaho on the other side of the border was better for them in many respects.  But Greater Spokane Inc, Spokane Valley Chamber, and the similar organizations are what bring them to the area.  I don't think they will move to Spokane, but I would say North Idaho is highly probable.  All this is good for Spokane, as many of the employees for Buck knives and Cabelas live and spend money in Spokane. 

If we can't get what we want in Washington, we can at least get it for our neighbors next door. 

And if you didn't realize it Caterpillar just opened their major parts distrbuition facility just west of Spokane in 2012, which added 150 jobs to the community and many, many more in the construction of the facility.  So, stranger things have happened...

[washelkhunter]

The boycott of Co. is now a nationwide effort. As reported on the blaze, outfitters there understand the reason and are hopeful the effort helps in their efforts to effect change in Co. If you really want to help dont do biz with Co. companies. Contact coors and tell them you're not going to buy their beer anymore.   

[Bean Counter]

yep, it was on Fox's home page yesterday.

[huntnphool]

As reported on the blaze, outfitters there understand the reason and are hopeful the effort helps in their efforts to effect change in Co.

What? Are you saying the outfitters are not blaming the hunters for taking a stand and think it will help? 

[actionshooter]

As reported on the blaze, outfitters there understand the reason and are hopeful the effort helps in their efforts to effect change in Co.

What? Are you saying the outfitters are not blaming the hunters for taking a stand and think it will help? 

AMAZING!!!

[pianoman9701]

I had received a marketing email from Winterhawk Outfitters in CO and responded to them that we'd be looking at other states for our hunt in 2014. Here's their response after I suggested they communicate with their governor on the issue:

"Hey John,

We certainly will. Sportsmen represent a multi-billion-dollar industry in Colorado and none of us are happy about it. That's no small impact. It was a purely emotional response to another unfortunate tragedy here.

Take care,

Ryan McSparran
Winterhawk Outfitters"

A good group of guys who understand they're stuck in an unfortunate situation because of their idiot governor. Pressure applied by business in that state WILL make a difference in helping them see the light.

[huntnphool]

I had received a marketing email from Winterhawk Outfitters in CO and responded to them that we'd be looking at other states for our hunt in 2014. Here's their response after I suggested they communicate with their governor on the issue:

"Hey John,

We certainly will. Sportsmen represent a multi-billion-dollar industry in Colorado and none of us are happy about it. That's no small impact. It was a purely emotional response to another unfortunate tragedy here.

Take care,

Ryan McSparran
Winterhawk Outfitters"

A good group of guys who understand they're stuck in an unfortunate situation because of their idiot governor. Pressure applied by business in that state WILL make a difference in helping them see the light.

[bobcat]

Pman, can I get a phone number and/or an email address for Winterhawk Outfitters?

[Elkaholic daWg]

 My friends in Colorado understand and support it! Guess I need to contact coors.....

[whacker1]

Pman, can I get a phone number and/or an email address for Winterhawk Outfitters?

 

[whacker1]

http://winterhawk.com/