Jump to content
REGISTERING FOR MEMBERSHIP ON UPLAND JOURNAL Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Boycotting Gander Mountain

Recommended Posts

Almost Heaven GSP's
The upcoming election here in WI reminds me of a time long ago when a friend of mine was going hunting for the day and he had to "vote" on two options.

He only had two dogs, both of which he admitted were idiots.  As he stood by the kennel, trying to decide which one to pick, he said to himself, "I can't take them both - they're always fighting.  If I take old Sam, he'll eat half the birds I shoot.  And if I take Jake, he'll most likely run off and I'll spend the day looking for him."

"I'd be better off hunting dogless"  he thought, but quickly realized he'd rather hunt without a gun than without a dog.  So he flipped a coin and took Jake.

At the end of the day, he came home after shooting five grouse with a brace of grouse for the table.  And smiling as he kenneled up Jake, he thought to himself, "At least I got supper and don't have to feed Jake tonight!"

The moral of the story?  No matter who you vote for - at the end of the day, he, or she is probably an idiot.

I don't have any dog in this fight, but just had to say; that if a fella(or gal) can't pick the wisdom out of this lil gem, then there is no hope for them!

:laugh:  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spin

Smart rule for conducting business. Avoid two topics, 1 politics and 2 religion.

                                                   

    P.S.   I'd be happy to discuss Walker's policies, record,

associations, goal's, methods etc - off the list. Amazing how many people know so very little about candidates yet stand stead fast in thier support.

                                                      Spin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SteelerBrit

I'm a Union Carpenter. Most Union Tradespeople I know her in Pittsburgh hunt, fish, or trap.

The NRA came to town here to back Santorum in his first run at Office. Charley Heston called us paid union thugs, due to a informatioal picket line.

I doubt Santorum ever touched a gun, his opponent was a hunter.

I'll continue shopping at Gander. No use for the NRA!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob Blair
If you are a gun owner and a reasonable thinker, I can't imagine why you would not be an NRA member regardless of your politics unless you have someone telling you what to do about things like this. If you aren't a member or at least a supporter, you are part of the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WindyHills

Bob there are some very solid good people who would disagree with you.  

It can be said--with good documentation readily available--that the NRA is NO Friend of hunters or game habitat.  They do not and have not restricted their activities to gun issues alone, and often dive into direct politics and issues having nothing to do with guns--taking positions that hurt hunters-- thus giving reasons to not support them.  

I've pointed out that even on gun issues of importance they have taken some eyebrow raising stances, such as working against ever taking the Heller case to court--then jumping on the bandwagon after it was going well and claiming credit.  

But back to the original issue--the big problem and mistake was approving an event with a big political goal.  At a time when politics are extremely, bitterly divisive in the state, as well.  Someone was really asleep at the wheel at GM I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobman

the rest of the story...

the Heller issue was a disagreement about tactics NOT POLICY the NRA is very conservative and didn't want to risk losing because it would of been a devastating loss. They were fearful about the strength of the case and the makeup of SCOTUS

Turned out they were correct in that fear.... the thing only ended up winning by ONE VOTE in SCOTUS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Felix

But back to the original issue--the big problem and mistake was approving an event with a big political goal.  At a time when politics are extremely, bitterly divisive in the state, as well.  Someone was really asleep at the wheel at GM I think.

X2

In politics (and on UJ) no matter what side you take on an issue, you're going to pi$$ off about 1/2 the people. :<img src=:'>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3dogs
If you are a gun owner and a reasonable thinker, I can't imagine why you would not be an NRA member regardless of your politics unless you have someone telling you what to do about things like this. If you aren't a member or at least a supporter, you are part of the problem.

They lost my support many years ago for a number of reasons. But, I will give you one that should alienate a million or so bowhunters:  about 4 years ago the NRA was supporting the use of crossbows during the regular archery season.  

I guess because the crossbows have a trigger and scope they felt it needed protection.  I've asked a few NRA reps at booths but never got an answer as to why the NRA would stick its nose in this issue.

Hope that helps your imagination.  Yes, I own a closet full of guns (not as full as I'd like).

Respectfully,

Brian Breuer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jack L

If you are a gun owner and a reasonable thinker, I can't imagine why you would not be an NRA member regardless of your politics unless you have someone telling you what to do about things like this. If you aren't a member or at least a supporter, you are part of the problem.

As we know the NRA throws its support behind anyone who supports their pro-gun platform, regardless of what their other views may be.  

It's been pointed out in earlier discussions that NRA politicians are not, by and large, environmentally friendly or conservation minded, they may not even hunt.

I'm hunter, not a gun collector. I care about the environment and habitat.   By supporting the NRA I would be giving support to politicians who are often anti-environment and anti-conservation.  I'd rather support a politician who would be in favor of CRP and river protection, than one in favor of right to carry.  Probably not the same view as the NRA.

Put another way,  the NRA could care less and wouldn't raise a finger to stop legislation to plow under every blade of prairie in the midwest.

I prefer to throw my support to those groups, PF, DU & Delta who support my core interests..hunting and habitat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brad Eden

Smart rule for conducting business. Avoid two topics, 1 politics and 2 religion.

                                                   

Ya think? This from the board guidelines posted/pinned all over the board forums and from links from the site itself. Been there for over 10 years but I've come to realize some members could give a hoot. This topic being about the NRA and a hunting retailer has been given some leeway.

The Administrator and Moderators of this board have the responsibility to provide a safe, yet thought provoking "Covert" for members to visit and participate in. Topics should stay within the subject matter of bird hunting or other sporting related interests. Topics outside the sporting arena will be reviewed on a Topic to Topic basis as to their suitablity to this BB's Forums. Political and sometimes religious Topics have proven to sour the tone of the board and will be locked or deleted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WindyHills

Bobman you have stated the NRA's take on the matter well.  The problem is the people who have really been doing yeoman's work in cases like Heller, McDonald etc. don't agree.  They think the NRA is not acting in the best long term interests of advancing protections under the 2nd amendment through case law--and they are instead taking actions for political and fundraising gain.

There's a big difference.  

Here's a great take on it.  This is one of the lead lawyers from Heller and Mcdonald.  He's speaking here after Heller and before Mcdonald was decided--after the NRA's case  plea on the chicago ban was tossed by the court--and Gura and his legal team's case was approved for a hearing.  NRA was able to successfully petition to speak to issues in the case that was heard--thereby costing the lead law team a precious amount of time in front of the SCOTUS.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob Blair
I understand that some have some heartburn with the NRA because of their single issue views. I wouldn't argue that that is not the case. In fact I seldom argue because I never feel I have to win anything anymore. All I have to do is be right. The 2A is part of the Constitution of the US and, therefore, has to be defended. It comes before CRP, wetlands, prairie, or even hunting. Without that amendment the people have zero power to talk to their government about conservation or anything else. The founding fathers worked a kind of magic back then that I feel compelled and have sworn to help preserve. The 2A is a vital part of all that and that is why I am an NRA member.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jack L
Without that amendment the people have zero power to talk to their government about conservation or anything else.

Like all parts of the constitution the 2d amend is important, no disagreement here, but the amendment that guarantees our rights to "talk" to or about our government is the 1st Amendment.

Windy, very interesting discussion on the video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobman
Without that amendment the people have zero power to talk to their government about conservation or anything else.

Like all parts of the constitution the 2d amend is important, no disagreement here, but the amendment that guarantees our rights to "talk" to or about our government is the 1st Amendment.

Windy, very interesting discussion on the video.

the second amendment is what guarantees the first and all the rest

As Bob Blair stated perfectly the 2nd amendment is all the NRA is interested in... its a single issue organization.

While it usually supports hunters it will not in the rare instances that the two interests collide....and thats fine with me.

Its interesting that the same people that would criticize the NRA for not getting into some conservation issue would never expect some group like the Sierra Club to promote guns rights

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob Blair
The second is the teeth of the first Jack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×