Fair play to ST for running this story, it’s tricky to potentially piss off some big advertisers.

https://singletrackworld.com/2018/02/would-you-buy-a-cycling-product-thats-made-by-a-firearms-company-theres-a-good-chance-you-already-have/

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 🙁

[Quote]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)[/Quote]

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