You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Fair play to ST for running this story, it's tricky to potentially piss off some big advertisers.
Would it affect your purchasing decisions?
On this occasion I genuinely think it might.
More for the NRA sponsorship than the gun manufacturing if I'm being honest with myself.
I think the continued NRA bribery of US politicians is an act designed to perpetuate murder by firearm and as such is beyond the pale. If politicians won't act then it's down to consumers to.
I realise that this is a 'US problem' but I don't want profits they make on my purchases being part of the £30 million Donald Trump receives from them.
If I ran an LBS and stocked these products what would I do? I don't know, tbh, I hope my sense of moral right and wrong would mean I'd review stocking them but, equally, if it were my business losing money it would be a tough call.
I certainly won't be buying Giro,Camelbak or Bell products. It also bothers me that I have already contributed to NRA supporting companies.
The advertising software on the front page did put all the related product reviews under the story.
Ultimately their gun laws don't influence my life but this will influence my purchasing choices. Simply because I detest the 'greed at all times' attitude of American business.
"continued NRA bribery of US politicians is an act designed to....."
Make rich people even richer despite the murder of innocent people 🙁
Yes, that's me out.
I'm not usually that principled, but this is one of the few times I could actually do something about it, and not just moan.
Frankly I've stopped commenting on the latest US mass shooting threads - what's the point? Yeah it's terrible, yeah a few posters will trot out "guns don't kill people" Jim Jefferies gets another million views, we move on. We're (mostly) Brits, the US Pro-Gun Nutters care even less about us than they do their fellow Americans - and they'll often threaten to kill them if they make them sad, Lord only knows what they'd do to us.
But no, I won't willingly give a penny to anyone who sells Hand Guns or Assault Rifles to civilians. (I don't particularly like Shot Guns or Rifles either but, I will concede they do have a practical use over and above killing people) or passes it onto the NRA to further their Death for Cash scam.
The only way to change things in America is with money, nothing else works.
**** 'em and the horse they rode in on.
Won't touch them. They have some good products but like JAG says, it seems odd decrying the killings and the inaction of politicians whilst propping up the companies supporting the NRA
It's a hard one, also hard one for Mag/singletrack etc as well, just scroll down on the page and there is Camelbak pack been giving top awards to!
Also Does all you money/profit go to that "arms" company?
or does it stay with Camelback etc for more research development/wages etc.
I think with out more info it be hard to say!
I prob not buy those products as I stock other brands so it does not really effect me,
Plus I think it be just like USA, "call for change", "we do this/ban this", then in a few weeks it be forgotten not passed by the people in power.
Pus when those products are in a "sale" prob not going to worry to many people even if they know about the connection.
+1 for the above. I wont be supporting those brands any more for the same reason as wwaswas - NRA sponsorship.
I'll be trying not to buy these products now I know this.
Not sure how successful I'll be as Giro helmets fit me really well. And of course if these companies were to change their policies I would reconsider.
Edit - glad to see from the dates I bought the products I currently have that I didn't buy them under the current ownership 🙂
I have a camelbak, and have always used giro helmets.
not any more though.
The only language some understand is their wallets so it's a valid way to apply pressure. A good resolution would be enough negative press for the company to change it's stance. It depends for them which is more important guns or bikes?
Sorry no, not even slightly concerned by this.
All that can happen here is that the brands are sold off to someone else or shut down entirely, I would imagine that they represent a very small portion of the sales of this group, they will dispose of them and stick with their shooting sports brands, they might even make a profit on the sale of the brands.
I presume Source are out as well then, due to their ties with the Israeli military and what’s happening in Palestine (they supply British army too) ?
Can Vegans still buy Shimano? (Fishing)
Well as someone who has just bought a Giro snowboard helmet i wish id read this last week 🙁
I presume Source are out as well then, due to their ties with the Israeli military and what’s happening in Palestine (they supply British army too) ?Can Vegans still buy Shimano? (Fishing)
I don't know, do they make guns?
I'll keep using the Giro helmet and Camelbak backpack that I already own, but I'll be looking elsewhere when replacing for as long as they continue to support the NRA.
The responses here are somewhat different to the ones on the Singletrack Magazine Facebook article comments section
REALLY different.
Dropping Camelbak is easy as Osprey make better packs. However I've always bought Giro Helmets. I bought one, it fitted well and you can remove the straps to wash them, so that's what I've bought ever since.
I'll research other brands next time though.
The responses of the type "Well 100 years ago some arms makers turned to making bikes so lets stick with the bike-related companies who make guns/ammo NOW" puzzle me.
+1 for philjunior and martymac. Spookily I was just thinking of getting a new Giro helmet as they fit me very well. Mine are seriously old (so fall outside the current ownership, as with my venerable M.U.L.E.) and in need of replacing!
I’ve found that Bontrager and some Spesh also fit my head shape too so will be opting for them for the foreseeable. Osprey also front runner anyway as I think they’ve got the best packs these days.
On this occasion I genuinely think it might.
More for the NRA sponsorship than the gun manufacturing if I’m being honest with myself
This.
But I have contributed already with countless Giros over the years and a few camelbacks 🙁 .
Kask are giro-head shaped, aren't they?
Yeah I like my Osprey pack and bladder so thats an easy one. I've currently got TLD and 661 and Salomon helmets, and theres plenty of others to choose from for bike and snow.
I've also never knowingly bought Blackburn or Source products either. So I reckon i'll steer clear of these now as well.
I know the individual company might not support the gun thing but the umbrella company must be making something from them otherwise what would be the point of owning them.
I have no problem with buying from a company that legally sells hunting rifles and ammo. I do have a problem with buying from a company that supports the NRA and therefore is anti rational gun control.
Just tweeted @camelbak
Yeah, hunting rifles I'm almost ok with, but NRA support? Nope.
Also Does all you money/profit go to that “arms” company?
or does it stay with Camelback etc for more research development/wages etc.
I think with out more info it be hard to say!
Not really the point. Camelbak/Giro/Bell's value is on the books of the parent company, so whether any of your money actually goes directly to the NRA, or not, is kind of moot.
I’d certainly give it some thought.
Will we also be boycotting anything made in China based on the boom of Chinese industry supporting a regime where there are no fair elections, political oppression, religious oppression, etc?
In a world where there's any number of alternatives in almost every product space then ethical considerations in general become more important. This is easily enough to tip the scales away from a brand.
All that can happen here is that the brands are sold off to someone else or shut down entirely, I would imagine that they represent a very small portion of the sales of this group, they will dispose of them and stick with their shooting sports brands, they might even make a profit on the sale of the brands.
And that would be fine by me, my sporting goods no longer associated with a company that sponsors the NRA. As others have said, it's not really about being a weapons manufacturer, that's between them and their conscience as far as I'm concerned, it's funding of a lobbying group that has consistently made reductions in gun violence and deaths harder to achieve that is my issue.
There's an article in Outside about this: https://www.outsideonline.com/2282941/should-our-morals-determine-our-gear-purchases
They ask ethicists their opinions on whether boycotting brands is the right thing to do if you disagree with the politics of the holding company.
Interestingly I find the article is very much on the fence and there's no mention of Vista Outdoor's donations to the NRA.
The responses of the type “Well 100 years ago some arms makers turned to making bikes so lets stick with the bike-related companies who make guns/ammo NOW” puzzle me.
Im afraid the argument is more that 100 years ago the greatest technological developments in Cycle manufacture were being made by companies that were heavily invested in military and civilian firearm development - for example reduction in the strength-wall thickness of metal tubing to mass production of parts and heat treatment, and now, 100 years later the same thing continues to be the case, from the development of hydration systems to breathable materials, GPS and optical technology, much of it continues to be led by companies heavily involved in the military and civilian shooting arena.
i also think there’s a certain beautiful irony in a ‘community’ ie. cyclists selecting to oppose and evangelically campaign against a pastime that we might think is undesirable, damaging or even morally reprehensible.... it’s all a bit Michael J Vanderman, isn’t it?
The responses here are somewhat different to the ones on the Singletrack Magazine Facebook article comments section
REALLY different.
Aren't they just, seems 3/4 US based posters, very anti-debate
pictonroad
The responses here are somewhat different to the ones on the Singletrack Magazine Facebook article comments section
REALLY different
Indeed, surely Singletrack should avoid politics to keep their followers up. Revenue and all that.
OR.. is it not about followers? as long as clickers click on clickbait...
Will we also be boycotting anything made in China based on the boom of Chinese industry supporting a regime where there are no fair elections, political oppression, religious oppression, etc?
One day, there'll be a debate on ethics without some clown rehashing the fallacy of relative privation.
Had a look on Facebook.
Slightly different demographic to on here, I'd say!
i also think there’s a certain beautiful irony in a ‘community’ ie. cyclists selecting to oppose and evangelically campaign against a pastime that we might think is undesirable, damaging or even morally reprehensible….
Totes, loads of shooty death in cycling too
it’s all a bit Michael J Vanderman, isn’t it?
You said his name! Never say his name!
It's very tricky to avoid.
For years I've been trying to move my savings/pension to ethical schemes that don't invest in arms or oppressive regimes.
It's not easy. And they definitely make less money than the less ethical ones.
I always think it's worth the effort though - especially with something as topical as this is. The only reason they support the NRA is because they think it supports their bottom line. If that can be shown to be reversed, things will change.
Ninfan - "development of hydration systems to breathable materials, GPS and optical technology, much of it continues to be led by companies heavily involved in the military and civilian shooting arena". Is once again a load of nonsense.
All of those developments you list we're military funded, surprisingly to be used by the military. They have got nothing to do with the sales of arms to civilians. Nobody in this discussion is debating as to whether the military needs weapons or not, its about if you disagree with the stance of the NRA then should you buy products from brands who (to be fair inadvertently) support and fund the NRA.
It's quite simple really. The NRA are a powerful lobbying group that have the one aim of stopping the development of more stringent gun control in America. Lots of people believe a lack of gun control is why 17 kids died in Florida.
If America stopped selling guns to civilians tomorrow there would still be business's able to arm militaries.
If America stopped selling guns to civilians tomorrow there would still be mass shootings for the next 50 years
and in 51 years there wouldn't be.
Dropping Camelbak is easy as Osprey make better packs
Everyone told me that but mine fell apart. Chest straps break off, the nipples (!) break and keep having to get new ones, the webbing stuff on the side straps disintegrate and a friend's has done the same.
Went back to Camelbak.
I like their stuff. It's hard to ditch them on ethical grounds without a decent alternative, but yes knowing this now I may not buy any more of their stuff. It won't make any difference to them though what a few ethically concerned Brits do.
I've moved away from Giro helmets anyway as they don't do what I want any more and not for a decent price. Found better alternatives.
it's good to know we can always rely on ninfan to play the role of **** in any debate.
I sometimes wonder if he's singletrackmark's brain child in order to boost the number of posts in any given thread.
[Whistles]
If America stopped selling guns to civilians tomorrow there would still be mass shootings for the next 50 years
Best get started then eh?
My first bike was a BSA. The Birmingham Small Arms Company.
The arms industry is morally complex. We need them, absolutely we do, as a country too protect ourselves and other persecuted nations from oppression. But it like so many professions, I'm glad it's not me that has to do it.
Yep, it'll effect my buying purchases. I like Giro shoes, but I'll have to find something else.
The responses here are somewhat different to the ones on the Singletrack Magazine Facebook article comments section
REALLY different.
Some of the comments imply that people don't actually realise what ST is, I'd be interested to see how many of those leaving "LIBTARD SNOWFLAKE" comments have ever followed ST on FB, or for that matter even reacted to a ST post on FB...
The arms industry is morally complex.
Agreed but more simply, for lots of people on here it isn't brands related to cycling being associated with the manufacture and sale of arms for military purposes, but the commitment of that specific umbrella company in donating heavily to the NRA and its lobbying/promotion of civilian gun ownership.
The arms industry is morally complex. We need them, absolutely we do, as a country too protect ourselves and other persecuted nations from oppression. But it like so many professions, I’m glad it’s not me that has to do it.
That's not the moral discussion that's taking place here, though. What's being discussed is a company that provides military-grade weapons to civilians, and donates money to an extremely morally questionable lobby group (like, attacking victims of violence in the media, implying that those who speak against them should be met with violence, etc, etc) to ensure their ability to keep doing so.
Wow - the facebook post has really attracted a lot of comments!
Yep, easy decision to make really. If in doubt, follow the money. Companies make decisions based on financial effect way quicker than moral ones. I realise that it's complex and their main market might be sport but even if I can only send a tiny message, a tiny message it is
That is how it's designed to work, shared once, promoted somewhere else and then it appears on every one of your gun toting, NRA donating mates who will all cut and paste their stock snowflake response etc. it's not exactly a good barometer of opinions. It does however weed out and "friends" you need to let go 😉
Wow – the facebook post has really attracted a lot of comments!
Yes, it’s great isn’t it. There are lots of ‘snowflake’ type comments as obviously the post is a bit of a target now but it just gets the base message out further 🙂
The arms industry is morally complex
In the same way that serial killers are morally complex?
Interesting how different the response is between this thread and the ST Facebook one 😳
I think Camelbak had been a supplier to the US army for a while, and possibly also Bell - so I can sort of understand why they'd have got consumed by this particular parent company. I do love my Camelbak and Giro products, but have equal affection for my Evoc and TLD stuff, so won't have any trouble ditching the former two makes....
Who wouldn’t want to fund such repsonsible filmmaking 😉
What, specifically, would you say was “irresponsible” about that film Dave?
Dave - I think it's the percentage of American fb followers. There aren't that many on the forum.
It's pretty telling that those jumping on the 'won't buy again' bandwagon care so much that they obviously never bothered to check out the companies ownership details before purchasing. What else do you have in your possesion that can be linked to such companies? Where is the money in your pension pots invested? What are your employers and their parent compaines involved in? The person you voted for in local and national elections, what are their beliefs?
If you give a **** then at least go all in. Sick of all this hypocrisy when an easy opportunity to show some mock outrage presents itself.
I dont see any ethical reasons not to buy any of those brands, the STW article doesnt actually say much as to how they support the NRA and the comments on this thread dont either. some could do with a "R u ok hun" response TBH.
For all we know, the company might support the NRA as it has a very large membership base of people who like to be outdoors and dont mind spending the money on items to go with this, sponsor the NRA, reach a wider target audience...
Selling sporting rifles is fine with me, selling equipment to legitimate military users is fine with me, donating money or other support for the NRA is not ok. I've been using Camelbak and Giro for over 15 years, like the products, but won't be buying them again.
It’s pretty telling that those jumping on the ‘won’t buy again’ bandwagon care so much that they obviously never bothered to check out the companies ownership details before purchasing.
So if you've never checked before you can't have an opinion now? Wow. I've heard some pretty stupid comments on this forum but this ranks pretty well in the top 10% (there's a lot of dumb shit said on STW).
As it happens, Vista Outdoor only bought the brands in 2016. I've not bought anything from any of those brands since that date so I guess, by your rules, I get to have an opinion. And it's still "**** those guys"
Just as a sample of how Vista Outdoor supports the NRA...
ANOKA, Minnesota - Federal Premium Ammunition is a dedicated 2017 sponsor of the NRA Whittington Center Youth Adventure Camp experience. The NRA Whittington Center is unlike any place on earth. More than 30,000 acres and 17 ranges are devoted to shooting for any kind of discipline. Plus, they offer exceptional guided and unguided hunts, expert firearms training, lodging, cabins and camping, youth programs, a museum, a Pro Shop, and much more.In 2017, 112 youth attendees will shoot more than 140,000 total rounds over their Adventure Camp experience. They participate in fundamentals of pistol, rifle, muzzleloading, shotgun, archery as well as hunting ethics and other outdoor programs.
To be fair they're also an extensive partner of the Boy Scouts... in terms of firearms and related activity.
To answer the original question, it wouldn't bother me in the slightest. It simply doesnt register as an issue to me.
All we can do is vote with our feet so I'm in for boycotting them
I’ve heard some pretty stupid comments on this forum but this ranks pretty well in the top 10%
Okay. Carry on with the virtue signalling then.
It’s pretty telling that those jumping on the ‘won’t buy again’ bandwagon care so much that they obviously never bothered to check out the companies ownership details before purchasing. What else do you have in your possesion that can be linked to such companies? Where is the money in your pension pots invested? What are your employers and their parent compaines involved in? The person you voted for in local and national elections, what are their beliefs?
If you give a **** then at least go all in. Sick of all this hypocrisy when an easy opportunity to show some mock outrage presents itself.
One day, there’ll be a debate on ethics without some clown rehashing the fallacy of relative privation.
Not today, apparently.
<div class="bbcode-quote">
In 2017, 112 youth attendees will shoot more than 140,000 total rounds over their Adventure Camp experience. They participate in fundamentals of pistol, rifle, muzzleloading, shotgun, archery as well as hunting ethics and other outdoor programs.
</div>
To be fair they’re also an extensive partner of the Boy Scouts… in terms of firearms and related activity.
To be fair it's like giving ciggs out for free or trying to get kids smoking, it's revenue stream for them.
Outside Online have a much better article than the lame STW effort on this particular issue, go read the below and then make up your mind.
[url] https://www.outsideonline.com/2282941/should-our-morals-determine-our-gear-purchases [/url]
Yep, that's me out too. Good to know there is sonething we can do.
Okay. Carry on with the virtue signalling then.
If giving a shit is "virtue signalling" then fine. You carry on with the "**** signalling"
If giving a shit is “virtue signalling” then fine.
But not too much of a shit to actually do anything meaningful about it. Nah, that's too difficult. Far better to wait until someone else highlights it then jump on the bandwagon with the rest of the sheep instead.
jump on the bandwagon with the rest of the sheep
I love the implication that the writer is some heroic lone wolf, hacking their own path through life's complexities, never looking at new evidence and making a decision on their future actions as a result.Eyes fixed on the point on the horizon they originally started for they'll keep pressing on regardless.
I don't see the 'complexity' to it.
For me it's simple - I think the manufacture and sale of Assault Rilfes and Handguns to civilians is wrong, I think it is a major contributing factor in the death of thousands of innocent people, especially in the US.
It's not a moral crusade, one of the best (and perhaps the only) way to influence 'corporations' (especially American ones) to do anything that might result in a penny less profit, is to make them lose more by not doing it. It doesn't matter who works at the Camelbak factory and who works in the Death Machine Works. if enough of us avoid those brands someone somewhere wearing a suit will say 'shit, our sales are down 3% - why is that?' (only in corporate bullshit speech) and their numbers people will say 'consumers are avoiding our brands because some of our other brands make weapons'.
One day, just maybe one day, people who did their own little bit when they can will make the amount of money they lose by making weapons a bigger number than the amount of money they make by making them - and they'll stop.
I think that's a more likely way to try to help America, than trying to fight the NRA and their allies through protest and reason - there's no point trying to reason with them, in a era of 'alternative facts' they've already got that covered - one side says less guns, one side says more, theirs a counter argument for every fact. So cut of the NRAs money supply.
But not too much of a shit to actually do anything meaningful about it. Nah, that’s too difficult. Far better to wait until someone else highlights it then jump on the bandwagon with the rest of the sheep instead.
And don't forget that there are starving children in Africa.
perhaps we should add rapha to the list too ?
Walmart, today, already sends significant amounts of money to strong opponents of gun control. The Walmart 1% blog found that between 2010 and 2012, Walmart gave over $1 million to candidates backed by the NRA. They note that “among politicians with 2012 grades from the NRA, 84% of the Waltons’ 2010-2012 cycle contributions went to candidates with scores between A+ and A-.”
Sick of all this hypocrisy when an easy opportunity to show some mock outrage presents itself.
So wait, if I'm not able to find out something for myself, but some-one else informs me, then I'm a hypocrite? and "mock" outrage?, so in your eyes everyone who has said thanks I'll make an informed decision, is only kidding? Is that not a reflection of your attitude rather than others?
Personally I stopped buying camelbak stuff when they started selling kit to the military ages ago. It just seemed a bit weird to me, so found a different pack to buy; no biggie. On the other hand, Giro stuff is really well made, and fits me quite well (both feet and head) so my choice not to buy it now (as I don't want to contribute indirectly to funding the NRA, thanks) will be a bit of a PITA...
so, no mock, no outrage, no hypocrisy.
One day, there’ll be a debate on ethics without some clown rehashing the fallacy of relative privation.
And on the same day there'll be a debate without some clown trying to sound intellectual by using big words which they don't really understand.