Cycling Brands Under Scrutiny in Gun Control Debate

Feb 28, 2018 at 13:29
by Mike Kazimer  
Giro Montaro helmet

Blackburn Toomanator 16 review
Camelbak s updated Mule LR

Savage Arms
Vista Outdoor's brands include Giro, Camelbak, Blackburn, and Savage Arms.

Amidst the heated gun control debate that's currently taking place in North America in the wake of a mass shooting in Parkland, Florida, sporting goods retailers and consumers are facing difficult decisions concerning the brands they purchase from.

Vista Outdoor, the parent company of Bell, Giro, Blackburn, and Camelbak, also lists Savage Arms, a rifle and shotgun manufacturer, and Federal Ammunition among its brands. This, along with Vista Outdoor's support of the National Rifle Association, has spurred a social media uproar along with boycotts and petitions urging retailers and consumers to cease their support of the company and its affiliated brands.

After a petition on Change.org that was created with the goal of convincing Mountain Equipment Co-op (MEC) to stop selling products made by Vista Outdoor received over 50,000 signatures, MEC, Canada's largest outdoor retailer, decided to stop any orders with the Vista Outdoor brands (Bollé, Bushnell, CamelBak, Camp Chef, Jimmy Styks) that they carried. In an open letter, David Labistour, MEC's CEO, wrote, "I hope that you will see that the decision we made today is balanced and considered and positions us to inspire a wider discussion throughout our industry and North America."

Vista is a relatively new owner of Bell, Giro, and Blackburn – they purchased the companies in 2016 from BRG Sports for $400 million, while Camelbak was purchased in 2015 for $412.5 million from Compass Diversified Holdings.
Vista Outdoor

Many of the employees of the cycling-related companies worked for the brands before they were owned by a parent company with ties to the NRA.

On the other side of the debate, the NRA released this response to the growing number of companies who have cut ties with the organization: “Some corporations have decided to punish NRA membership in a shameful display of political and civic cowardice. In time, these brands will be replaced by others who recognize that patriotism and determined commitment to Constitutional freedoms are characteristics of a marketplace they very much want to serve.”

Along with the petitions, several bike shops have taken steps to support the boycott. Erik Tonkin, the owner of Sellwood Cycles in Portland, Oregon, issued the following statement: “Sellwood Cycle Repair will support a boycott of Vista Outdoor. This means we will not buy products from Bell, Giro, Blackburn and CoPilot — and that we could even return existing inventory, which is substantial.”


Editor's Note: the gun control debate is an extremely contentious issue. Comments that devolve into name-calling, trolling, and hate speech will not be tolerated.


Updated 3/1/18, 9:00am PST to reflect MEC's decision to stop carrying Vista Outdoor brands.

Author Info:
mikekazimer avatar

Member since Feb 1, 2009
1,716 articles

2,046 Comments
  • 729 78
 As a consumer, I'm interested in the kind of hijinx the companies I buy from get up to. So, thank you Pinkbike. I think this is relevant.
  • 37 25
 Me too
  • 133 618
flag brandwinnie (Feb 28, 2018 at 14:54) (Below Threshold)
 Your prime minister is Justin Trudeau, bro.
  • 759 13
 It’s nice to see Pinkbike report on something mundane like gun control instead of something inflammatory and polarizing that people are overly-passionate about, like E-Bikes or UCI Downhill.
  • 448 71
 @brandwinnie: and your prime minister is Donald Trump. What's your point?
  • 113 371
flag brandwinnie (Feb 28, 2018 at 14:57) (Below Threshold)
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: Nah I don't have a prime minister.
  • 151 46
 Cheers to that. I can’t change anybody’s mind but I can be the change I wanna see in the world and not buy this shit.
  • 246 402
flag theminsta (Feb 28, 2018 at 15:11) (Below Threshold)
 Gun control: taking guns away from legal/law abiding citizens in hopes of decreasing gun misuse by evil/crazy people.

Y'all crazy. The same people that want to give up their guns are the people that think Donald Trump is "literally Hitler".
  • 531 229
 @ninjatarian: I like how the US is facing a Mental Health crisis, but blames "gun control" for the violence created by those with mental health issues.

Literally, we could ban all guns tomorrow, yet, people with mental health issues that want to hurt a person or persons will follow their feelings through, as witnessed recently.

In the last 50 years the majority of "mass homicides", with and without guns, were created by people with mental health issues. Of that, the majority of those cases were violent crimes without a firearm.

The media is just good at steering non-critical thinking people in a particular direction.

Maybe if our government had not been gutting funding to mental health programs the last 40'ish years we might have more people NOT losing their coping mechanisms, and then killing a person or persons?

--We can only put so many band-aids on the wound before we bleed out.
  • 86 70
 @XCMark: Honestly, the fact that anybody can now 3D print objects in their house kind of negates the theory of being able to ban anything, guns or otherwise. From a purely logistical standpoint, how do you take something away that somebody can right click and print out another? Welcome to the future.
  • 101 69
 @XCMark: most intelligent thing I've read on this thread thus far
  • 74 21
 @DanPlante: just letting everyone know... savage brand firearms are absolute garbage. I am not sure how many gun enthusiasts are on pinkbike but for god’s sake do not buy savage.
  • 143 195
flag jclnv (Feb 28, 2018 at 15:31) (Below Threshold)
 @XCMark: So the US is (allegedly) a nation containing many mentally ill people. Then answer this simple question:

1. Guns should be legal to own in the US.
2. Guns should not be legal to own in the US.

If the question is correct then the only logical answer is (unless you want never ending masscares of innocent people) is 2. If not, and you still think people should have the right to own guns, then you are in someway responsible for the deaths.

Simple as that.
  • 296 30
 @jclnv: Heres the thing. The guns that Savage makes are the least restricted type in Canada. A 12 year old can have his license to have a shotgun, and many do. So... why aren't there hundreds of mass shootings in canada, where such a weapon is very easy to LEGALLY obtain? It's the people, the culture, not the guns.
  • 34 30
 @XCMark: very good argument buddy!
  • 242 29
 @XCMark: Why is it one or the other? Can't two factors be to blame? And can't we work to fix both? Will someone with mental health issues ultimately carry out their plan? Maybe, but wouldn't a few road blocks to buying an assault weapon help? Maybe in the weeks or days longer that it would take, someone notices something and get them help.

And its not just about mass shooting (even though thats what drives the news). Its about all shootings. Yes some are carried out by people with documented mental health issues, but many are not. Many times people just snap. Do you think there aren't people out there who have killed someone and regret it? Who if even given even a few days before being able to act on their aggression would have chosen not to do what they did? Or people that commit suicide? Same thing.

To act like the easy availability of guns isn't a major contributing factor all the gun related deaths we have in this country is a cop out.
  • 96 13
 High school kids need love, guidance, roll models, goals, friends, hobbies etc....last thing they need to be dealing with is politcal bs and gun control. Its a shame, a real fricken shame.
  • 190 65
 By boycotting any of the products, you aren't hurting the Vista corporation. By doing so hurts athletes, freelancers, and people who work for these companies who are mountain bikers just trying to make a living. Vista could give a flying fuck about anything else but themselves and unfortunately these kind of things only hurt the bike industry more.
  • 85 29
 @XCMark: And yet the NRA continues to support politicians who refuse to create and fund a federal mental health program based on science. Until the gun lobby gets behind an effective program, I'll always vote to restrict the proliferation of semi autos and high capacity magazines. And no, I'm not happy with that decision. Guns are fun, and most owners are fine.
  • 11 6
 @sino428: Very good points. It is not just one factor, so multiple factors, including gun control/restrictions, need to be implemented as measures/roadblocks.
  • 16 7
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: As I said, if that's the case then would you want them to be legal in a country with that culture?
  • 127 26
 @XCMark: So other developed countries have similar rates of mental illness as the US. If the heart of this problem is mental health why are mass murders by guns only a problem in the US? Oh right, because we have different gun laws.

Oh and also
"various epidemiological studies over the past two decades show that the vast majority of people with severe mental illnesses, such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or severe depression, are no more likely to be violent than anyone else."
www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/health/guns-mental-health-texas-trump/index.html

Wamp wamp
  • 66 34
 Watch out for that suspicious unsavory with the green neon Giro helmet with orange camelback, might have a Savage Arms loaded with Fed ACP's. Honestly I never knew those awesome brands were under the same umbrella. I use federal in all my firearm's , have owned multitudes of Giro and Bell products, and have multiple Camelbaks ,all outstanding quality. Honestly if you looked at "big Business". umbrella Corps. you would be surprised what companies fall into them. Does that mean stores should take a negative stance against Giro because Vista owns Federal ???? Can't see the logic there, these interest groups have me looking for a very small violin for target practice tonight. Honestly thats a hell of a portfolio of high caliber companies,,, no pun intended. I will continue to support each,,, Savage is high on my list for my next riffle. Can I get a job at Vista Outdoors ,,,,Please!!!! now that's my favorite umbrella Corp hands down.

Bad events are always going to happen. Awesome events happen when Giro, Camelbak are there.
  • 24 16
 @sino428: @sino428: You know assault weapons aren't availible to the public right? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban
also what changes would you suggest?
  • 10 3
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: They also make semi-auto rifles. Found this under the category of "tactical and defense": www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/MSR15Patrol

Pretty sure you can't buy that in Canada.
  • 28 27
 @freestyIAM: Gun education is lacking. Also do you think someone will commit a crime in front of armed people or unarmed? Not saying there is a major problem with mental illness but i dont believe it is due to gun laws either.
  • 89 23
 @foxxyman: To me, that reads like a paranoia manifesto.

Arming yourself to protect yourself from people who are armed and want to harm you.

Absolute insanity.
  • 28 8
 @parisgore: I agree with this. This only hurts camelbak and its athletes and employees.

@XCMark: it's both. The fact that there is a mental health crisis in the US is the reason we need control. and by control I don't mean ban them, because lets face it, they're fun as hell, but we do need to figure out a way to stop people who do this from getting their hands on guns.
  • 29 37
flag ybsurf (Feb 28, 2018 at 16:08) (Below Threshold)
 Agree happy I don't own those brand and will boycott them right now the less sales they make the less money they have to support nra and other association for guns.
  • 17 15
 @jclnv: well guns as a backup, what we really need is our schools, and really our families, to teach that shooting a bunch of people because you are mad, does not solve problems, no matter what you see in the movies and tv, and what you do in video games (i.e. fortnite: battle royale)

prevention is the best weapon
  • 4 8
flag spaceofades (Feb 28, 2018 at 16:09) (Below Threshold)
 @jclnv: It's a double edged sword. Take em away, people will be shoot one another in anger. Leave them, and well, that's where we are now.
  • 3 0
 @Rattles: you can. It's just behind another licensing wall.
  • 20 3
 @thehardtail: You know the assault weapons the expired in 2004 right? You should considering its right there in the link you provided.
  • 23 16
 I agree completely on gun education as I'm a product of it and have always operated safely. Raising the age to 21 for riffles is the only change I can see applicable in this situation. How can you buy an AR at 18 but have to wait till 21 for handguns?????? They have to sort a few things but bad people are always going to do bad things dictated by 1000 years of history.

BTW Savage makes a pretty competitive line up,,, def check them out.

I'll come up with 340,000 signatures to squash MEC by the weekend without leaving my county.
  • 53 5
 @pedrosalas7: The problem is that to many paranoid people they see no difference between the words "gun control" and "guns banned".
  • 54 14
 @XCMark: Agree. Was the Florida shooting (and all the other shootings) horrible? Yes! But, within one day of that shooting, in a single evening, you had more handguns killing people without the "news" reporting anything. Chicago alone is a war zone. Baltimore, New Orleans, Detroit, DC....since Florida, hundreds (literally) have been shot, and dozens murdered. No media, no news. If this is about saving lives, then we must focus more on real statistics, and real strategies. Just as a random example, In India, rural farmers have committed suicide (the numbers in the thousands) because one bad crop (from crappy GMO seeds) has laid them out financially. Then they have to take out loans (at agregious interest rates) to stay solvent. But, most can never pay the debt, and eventually just kill themselves. Florida is nothing compared to the sadness and horror that 'agriculture' is creating. How many articles on Pinkbike have there been about boycotting Monsanto (or any firm such as General Mills or McDonalds) from buying there GMO products? Florida was bad. Innocent kids getting blasted is bad! The sadness for the families is unconscionable, BUT...the truth is...way more people are dying from handguns (on a nightly basis) in America, and there is zero talk. Agree we need bans on certain firearms, and much tougher sentences for those caught carrying illegal arms. But, as usual, the media is going nuts with this (and it is also being used as a tool for politics).
  • 5 7
 @fecalmaster: Handguns are easier to sneak around and you have a record of what decisions you will make im guessing would be the justification. Cant really sneak around a rifle in your pants.(unless youre a world record holder for that type of thing) lol
  • 25 14
 @XCMark: " I would LOVE to see some evidence of "mass homicides" being committed with something other than a gun. Boy supporting NRA is not doing very well for your brain. Please share how your math is adding up. Funny how you on the same sentence said something about non-critical thinking....LOL

"In the last 50 years the majority of "mass homicides", with and without guns, were created by people with mental health issues. Of that, the majority of those cases were violent crimes without a firearm."
  • 14 9
 @thehardtail: Ummm, you mean they weren't until 2004 when Republicans in their infinite wisdom decided to overturn the assault weapons ban?
  • 26 6
 @XCMark: the mental health issue can't really be solved completely there have always been psychopathic and "mentally ill" people and there always will be x amount of them it's a natural human trait that can be beneficial in certain circumstances if the person is nurtured properly. If they''re nurtured in another way it can lead to problems and it's impossible to guarantee every person who has these kind of mental traits is nurtured properly. Guns can do a lot of harm very quickly so if access wasn't so easy then that would obviously decrease the damage done. Also what about all the gang related gun crime and shootings by police officers alot this is done by people who are considered to be relatively sane. If guns weren't as available then there wouldn't be as big a black market for them. Also police officers wouldn't be as paranoid that they're going to have a gun pulled on them.
Couldn't people wanting guns to feel safe or free be looked at as a mental health issue.
  • 16 3
 @ryanm189: Your argument boils down to "we can't save all the people, so we shouldn't save any of them". Why would anyone waste their time trying to dialogue about handgun solutions when they can't even get past bump stocks and high capacity magazines? You're calling Chicago a war zone but arguing for the status quo.
  • 4 3
 @sino428: whoops didn't see that but also it says it wasn't useful at all, guess i thought automatic weapons were banned cause they aren't allowed in my state.
www.quora.com/In-which-states-is-it-legal-to-own-a-fully-automatic-weapon
also what would you define as a assault weapon?
M1 garand?
  • 9 1
 @ryanm189: Good point. So far in 2018 the USA is running at nearly 40 gun deaths per day. www.gunviolencearchive.org
  • 5 4
 @bvd453: Yeah i know i didn't read enough there. but also it did say that the ban had no effect on the criminals which why would it if they're gonna do something illegal they'll do it with anything
  • 5 8
 @fecalmaster: also yeah looks like savage makes some sweet stuff. but still gotta wait a few years till i can buy due to age and location plus money
  • 40 15
 Bell/Giro, etc... none of them have anything to do with fire arms so what sort of hijinx are you referring to?

This is just fueling the fires of misinformation and damaging sales of good brands... and the jobs of good people.
  • 74 12
 @XCMark: Hard to be a mass shooter without a mass shooting weapon...

I'm always surprised how many Americans are willfully blind to the patently obvious solution. After the Bosnian conflict the UN, funded by the US, built a bunch of incinerators in Bosnia and Croatia and went door to door and gathered up all the weapons and destroyed them. It was the only way to stop people, who were formerly neighbors, from killing each other. Guess what? It worked.
  • 5 0
 @Rattles: of course you can. And any other AR15 variant.
  • 12 32
flag thehardtail (Feb 28, 2018 at 16:43) (Below Threshold)
 @Otago: you know you could say any semi auto weapons is mass shooting weapon. the world record holder can shoot 8 bullets in a second www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzHG-ibZaKM and a mass shooting is defined by 5 or more people injured or worse.
Also do you actually prefer having to wait on someone to get to you and also having to call them instead of being able to defend your own life from ill-intentioned people / corrupt governments?
  • 37 59
flag c0d3-br3ak3r (Feb 28, 2018 at 16:44) (Below Threshold)
 @Otago: i will NEVER give up my gun. I love hunting. I don’t want my country to have have total militarian control. I will become a criminal if the order is to give up my gun.
  • 2 3
 @thehardtail: people do just that don't they? They put it down the leg of baggy trousers and walk with a limp. Or is that just in movies?
  • 5 5
 @nouseforaname: because they're semi autos not full or burst only difference is looks a m1 garand will be as deadly as a ar 15 its all in the intention of the user.
  • 38 37
 Thanks. I know that. I’ve owned half a dozen AR15s. People going after a ban on AR15s are either

A: Idiots who don’t know what they’re talking about

B: Actually wanting to ban ALL guns but don’t have the balls to say that upfront. @thehardtail:
  • 28 36
flag onemanarmy FL (Feb 28, 2018 at 16:52) (Below Threshold)
 @Otago: The U.S. is not Bosnia. Not even remotely close.

Beyond that... wtf is a mass shooting weapon? Because... hand guns, hunting rifles, home made explosives, shot guns and kitchen knives have all been used in mass homicides.

Amazing me how many people that don't know wtf they're talking about preach like their opinion is gospel.
  • 34 3
 @onemanarmy: would you rather fight an angry man who has a knife or a gun? I know which I'd choose
  • 66 10
 @krashbc: I'm not sure that's my argument. I'm saying...the media (and politics) is levering the hell out of this, and ignoring reality. Where the hell was CNN (and now Pinkbike) when Chicago 1.5 years ago had like 10-15 people dying a night with handguns? Where is the media (or even the general public - you and I) when atrocities are happening in India, where farmers (in the thousands - not just 17 kids at a school) are resorting to suicide because "agriculture" is forcing their death. Florida was sad, totally agree. But it was dramatic. It gets the headlines, and worse....it fuels the fire of scapegoating. There are already dozens of comments on here from righteous people who want to toss out their Giro and Camlebak equipment and go buy something 'honest.' It's wrong. It's immature. Our bike alone is false! "False." Whatever that is, right? Imagine all the mining to create bike parts? Alloy, titanium, steel etc. How bout electric cars that people in California feel so proud about? A typical car uses 50 pounds of copper wire. A Tesla or equivalent uses 150-300 pounds, and then cobalt (mostly from war torn Africa), lithium, nickel. E-cars, i'd argue are WORSE than conventional automobiles. I'm saying, people are hypocrites, and like a typical tribal community, we love playing the shame game, and then enforce mob rule. We've been doing this for thousands of years, and it's insane. We must address mental health, the laws, and also personal responsibility. Why do parents buy Xbox's for their kids where they can practice killing people all night long, as 'entertainment?' Hollywood is a joke, with all these egocentric, narcassistic actor/actresses holding guns thinking they look cool. And, we the people, gobble it up. I'm arguing that life is full of paradox, contrast and irony. We must really study the facts, and not allow hysteria and politics to lever situations.
  • 32 21
 @Hoob93: If an angry man comes into my home with a gun you're damn right I'd rather have a gun. No criminals give a crap if guns are illegal or legal.
  • 7 9
 @XCMark: well said.
  • 49 7
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs:

It’s absolutely the culture here. Americans suffer from a variety of previously unseen, hard to diagnose spiritual (not religious, but the core spirit of our country) ailments, hence our current President.

It’s not the guns, it’s something far more insidious. Common sense gun control will help. But the sickness will remain for some time I’m afraid.

That’s what happens when you raise a people to think they deserve everything without having to earn any of it. We’ve somewhat lost our way, and it will take another generation or two to find it again.
  • 36 5
 @onemanarmy: in my country you'd have to be crazy to worry about a criminal breaking in with a gun they're controlled well
  • 20 40
flag onemanarmy FL (Feb 28, 2018 at 17:00) (Below Threshold)
 @MasterSlater: Common sense gun control is already in place. You have to be certain ages, pass certain tests, background tests and wait... etc.

If people want to kill people they're gonna find weapons through any means they can. Sometimes that's legal, sometimes that's stealing family members legal fire arms... sometimes that illegally purchasing fire arms.

You don't see europeans banning delivery trucks.
  • 30 17
 @onemanarmy: nicely avoiding the question the nra has taught you well lol
  • 23 12
 @onemanarmy: delivery trucks are useful tools not weapons designed to kill
  • 19 32
flag onemanarmy FL (Feb 28, 2018 at 17:05) (Below Threshold)
 @Hoob93: avoiding your pointless stupid question.... what does me fighting an armed person have to do with this... at all... or the NRA? You're just latching on to media hyped directives with no information or opinions of your own.

But just so you're pleased... neither. I'm not armed. Why the hell would I fight someone armed with anything? And beyond that it depends on conditions.

Seriously man... that was a ridiculous question.
  • 36 4
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: Yup, American culture is something else. Americans don't respect guns. They have a fascination with it that's bordering on a love affair. Oh shit, I live here!
  • 19 5
 @onemanarmy: its a rhetorical question designed to make you thing do you even know how to. No it wasn't a stupid question. You said "Beyond that... wtf is a mass shooting weapon? Because... hand guns, hunting rifles, home made explosives, shot guns and kitchen knives have all been used in mass homicides. " I was trying to get you to see that a maniac intent on mass suicide with a knife is no where near as dangerous as the same person with a gun.
  • 20 30
flag onemanarmy FL (Feb 28, 2018 at 17:15) (Below Threshold)
 @Hoob93: That's your country.

In mine... dude got shot right next to the damned hospital last night. Pretty sure it wasn't an AR-15 and not a legally purchased gun.


I'm all for regulating fire arm purchases. But selection one type of weapon and making it illegal isn't the way to go about it. Forcing law abiding citizens to turn over weapons isn't the answer.

Things that work on one populace won't always work on another.
  • 14 8
 @uphill-blues: I wouldn't make a blanket statement like that. I think the issue is much deeper than fire arms.

This generation is screwed up.
  • 11 13
 @fecalmaster: please dont leave your country. We do not want your type here.
  • 6 15
flag onemanarmy FL (Feb 28, 2018 at 17:19) (Below Threshold)
 @Hoob93: B.S.
  • 11 2
 @onemanarmy: but have hope that one day the black market can be controlled. If the guns weren't available legally there wouldn't be as big a black market.
  • 14 9
 @Hoob93: Do you know how many fire arms are in this country? It would take you 30 years to functionally institute that.


I'd love to disarm American gangs and criminals. I have tons of friends in law enforcement who I'd love to know weren't facing armed criminals daily.

Believe me... I do believe there's a better solution. But what's being proposed now isn't it.
  • 24 6
 @onemanarmy: 30 years that's not bad better start now to save your children
  • 6 10
flag onemind123 (Feb 28, 2018 at 17:27) (Below Threshold)
 @Hoob93: stop that logic. Arm em up for their own protextion.
  • 6 5
 @parisgore: exactly! Withholding business from bell, giro, camelback may hurt them. But the holding companies/investors will sell them or back out before it ever hurts them.
  • 10 9
 @onemanarmy: you hit the nail on the head, the company has nothing to do with the NRA, big media is telling pepole to boycott them so people jump on the bandwagon and go at it!
  • 10 9
 @Hoob93: i will fight the angry man with my pistol in my hand weather he is armed with a knife gun or what ever he may have.
  • 12 7
 @brncr6: yeeeee haaaaaa!
  • 12 15
 @Batipapo: Did you not see what happened in France? It was absolutely terrible.....done with a vehicle
  • 23 7
 @onemanarmy:

No. Common sense gun control is not in place. I guess calling it “common sense” assumes that all people hold the same amount of sense. Which is increasingly less evident with each passing day.

Why do people not understand this? Why are you committed to boiling it down into something so simplistic?

It’s about REDUCING the number of people killed. Is that really that hard to understand?

If a kid has a handgun, sure, he’s gonna kill people. But he sure as hell isnt going to be able to kill as MANY people as quickly.

Do you contend that the Vegas shooter could’ve killed that many people with a handgun?

Having an opinion is fine man, but at least be informed as to what’s being talked about.
  • 22 5
 @Hoob93: It's difficult because America isn't Europe (and never will be). They have the 2nd ammendment and people want their guns. They can make improvements, but not like Europe or what the 'left' wants. Just not going to happen. Americans are a proud and rowdy bunch. Honestly, I used to laugh when I heard Americans wanted guns in case they had to fight their own government. Just look today how corrupt "democracy" became under the last decade. Totalitarianism always breeds nice and slow, when nobody is looking - and even worse, in times of 'prosperity' when people are a bit lazy and dumb. America (not unlike Europe or Canada) is fraud central and democracy is just a joke - all bought and paid for. So, if you're in Texas, with beef jerky and whisky...you certainly want a little ammo in your quiver.
  • 14 12
 @alee90: and one of the biggest mass killings in the US was done with explosives. Bath school massacre in 1927 that killed 38 children. This was done before the AR-15 was made.
  • 19 14
 @onemanarmy: Well, we also have gang members, hells angels, mafia, etc. that like to kill each other in the street but... if I'm not a target, why would I need a gun to defend myself!?!? I know you're a pretty f*cked up country but pretty sure that guy knew the one that he shot... You must hide something if you're afraid to be shot!?


Pretty funny that you can't drink alcohol before 21 but you can buy a gun at Wal-Mart !!! lol In Canada, wal-mart is for cheap clothing, food, sport goods, etc but no damn f*cking guns!! You crazy mericans! :O lol
  • 11 6
 @XCMark: Yes, mental health needs more attention, but that doesn't mean that more serious gun control isn't part of the problem, and it needs to be multi pronged. We need to reduce the overall ability for any individual to commit mass murder, and there's no civilian use for a gun like the AR15, its variants and other similar weapons. They need to go away.
  • 23 2
 @Batipapo: I am vehemently anti-gun but you're misguided here dude.

Remember when a truck ploughed through a crowd in France? Or when some dude went on a stabbing rampage in a Chinese school? Bad people will always find a way...BUT the easiest way to kill en masse is a firearm. They are killing machines, nothing more. America's obsession with them is beyond unhealthy, it's pure insanity now.

I'm only calling you out on this point because, as someone who I agree with, it's important you've got all the facts straight in this debate!
  • 10 25
flag TRG22 (Feb 28, 2018 at 18:01) (Below Threshold)
 @foxxyman: I with you! I will never be a sheep, pry it from my cold dead hand...
  • 7 4
 @Timo82: in America guns are sporting goods
  • 44 16
 @dockboy:

Yes. This is what many gun owners can’t seem to grasp. ‘Cuz yer tryin’ to take there guns derrr-duh-derrr!

There is simply no sound argument for any civilian to have an assault weapon. “But we need our guns to fight the gubment derr-duh-derr!” Never mind the fact that these exact people (generalizing here) put a man in the White House who is committed to destroying our day to day civil liberties that actually mean something.

So the people who are afraid of their guns being taken away by a fanciful tyrannical government, are the ones who elected the actually real (in real f*cking life, not in some gun nut’s rebellion fantasy) autocrat!

I’m sorry, but this is how ignorant these people are.
  • 4 0
 @foxxyman: difference between hunting rifles and assault riffles and hang guns
  • 1 0
 @ryanm189: well put, so it's a deep set cultural difference.
  • 4 0
 @MasterSlater: so trues it's the culture and it will take decades if not never to erase that fight fire with fire and eye for an eye mentally in usa
  • 5 9
flag weebleswobbles (Feb 28, 2018 at 18:11) (Below Threshold)
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: not my president
  • 15 4
 @onemanarmy: not sure what you're talking about. We don't let 18 year-olds buy beer, but they can buy an asault rifle most places. Independent polls show that 70% of US citizens do NOT have their penises confused with their guns and favor some reasonable controls on who gets what kind of gun and how they get it.

Completely aside from the gun issue, I will boycott any companies associated with the NRA because of their ever more hateful, anti-American false patriotism and demagoguery.
  • 10 4
 @TRG22: Paranoid much? Which first world country in the 21st century has been overrun by a tyrannical government hellbent on establishing a dictatorship? It's not the 1770's anymore.
  • 11 0
 @ryanm189: We're no longer proud and rowdy, but have successfully been separated into two loud,arrogant and stupid tribes.

If it comes to fighting our government, I'll be much better off stopping sending them money than taking on the twelve biggest standing military complexes (the totality of the US military) than with an AR-15.
  • 30 18
 @codypup:

The NRA is just like Evangelical Christianity. A rabid, uncompromising, hate-filled ideology that is much more in line with Nazism, and Communism than it is with “freedom” or love for one’s fellow countryman.

But it is through these ideological portals, which hold so much sway for the small and weak minded, that they do become cancers in society.

There are good gun owners and good Christians. But man, these gun nuts are giving y’all a bad name.
  • 4 5
 Here we go...

@freestyIAM: "So other developed countries have similar rates of mental illness as the US."

Good point! Now I ask, have those countries been "gutting the funding to mental health programs" the last 40'ish years like the USA?
  • 31 8
 what's so hard to understand? this has nothing to do with mental health, this is common sense...

One country has access to weapons including assault rifles. This country had 18 school shootings in the first 2 month of 2018.
The rest of the civilized world like the whole of Europe or Australia has highly restrictive regulations when it comes to guns. Neither Place had a single shooting. Neither place had dead Children.

So what's saver for people to live? More guns or Less?

Well anyway, thanks for pointing it out. i am going to stay away from vist brands for now.
  • 1 5
flag c0d3-br3ak3r (Feb 28, 2018 at 18:29) (Below Threshold)
 @ryanm189: exactly
  • 1 6
flag c0d3-br3ak3r (Feb 28, 2018 at 18:29) (Below Threshold)
 @onemanarmy: damn right
  • 6 6
 @ryanm189: Not just those thing that you mention, but if I might add... 'How f*cking hypocritical do we need to be as a country to look at the deaths caused by firearms and have a debate about that, while never talking about the amount of brown people we kill over there, with rockets and bombs and soldiers; for their resources?'

If we are going to talk about that, and not fix our foreign policy, I believe scarier times are coming!
  • 5 3
 @Batipapo: Well, Mr. presumptuous, I stopped supporting the NRA when Turd Nugent became a mouth piece.

But thank you for making things up for yourself to believe. It's always comforting, 100% of the time.
  • 4 5
 @Batipapo: 911 attacks, 1993 world trade center bombing, Oklahoma city bombing, a recent rash of rental truck terror attacks, ect
www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/new-york-terror-attack-authorities-struggle-to-prevent-attacks-with-rented-trucks
  • 5 8
 @michibretz: 8 out of the 18 actually injured or killed people, the other ten were suicide or just guns fired
www.abc15.com/news/data/school-shootings-in-u-s-when-where-each-shooting-has-occurred-in-2018
and yes australia did a good job not completely due to lack of gun acess it will also be because they raise people correctly there.
And Europe they had the bombings and the truck rammings etc. people finding ways around it because they're raised wrongly and by islam not saying all are bad just that most who follow it strictly will be more violent.
  • 8 3
 @dubod22:

It’s not paranoia so much as it’s a narrative that has been built and sold by gun makers here in the US. That the mostly poor and uneducated have bought into.

The NRA isn’t interested so much in gun ownership, as they are in controlling the minds of those gun owners.

The kind of person who buys again either needs to for their profession, or by someone who has decided they are prepared to kill something, whether or not they ever do. It’s the latter set that feeds off the narrative of needing an enemy to defend against.
  • 4 3
 @Hoob93: " the mental health issue can't really be solved completely"

Maybe we should stop cutting funding on mental health programs? Though, you are probably to young to realize that the US government has gutted social mental health programs...

... But by all means, please give me another example of how you would fix things and not upset those that believe in the constitution, for protecting you and the rest, from a government that is blowing up brown people so you can have opium and oil.

This country is on the wrong path, as many are letting the media make their thoughts for them!
  • 6 2
 @theminsta: I find it kinda ironic that a Candadian such as yourself is arguing against American gun control laws, since your own country implements many gun control laws and regulates firearms much more strictly than the US.

Most Americans who want more regulation do not want to "take all the guns away", we simply want laws similar to those you have in Canada: background checks and licensing, waiting periods, and magazine capacity limits.
  • 11 2
 @parisgore: If vista sees their revenue going down the will do something. I work in this industry to and per your definition boycotting them would hurt me. Vista will give a f*ck if bell s helmet sales plunge. They own 3 outdoor brands and one gun brand. If they don't hit their target at the end of their year their investors will want to know why and they will have a hard time explaining...

Anyway neither you or I will lose on this because people wont stop riding with bike helmets. They will just buy their backpacks and helmets at companies that don't sell guns as well. So those company will earn more and will hire more freelancers, more athletes and employees...
  • 7 2
 @XCMark: @XCMark: It's a complex problem, fueled by culture (movies, games etc.), the lack of viable health care options for those families with mental health issues, but ultimately exasperated by the ridiculous availability of assault rifles and ammunition (in the US). Guns become an easy means to an end, they are part of the equation.

Press blames the NRA?! they are a collection of gun manufacturers who want and need to sell more guns. They actively smear any candidate who dampens their prospects and promote (fund) candidates who share their interest. If US citizens want gun control and health care legislation, then vote out your representatives in congress/senate who do not take action. Data suggests gun-control legislation does deliver material results, but US citizens have not been willing (or to your point; able) to hold their representatives accountable, so the death spiral continues...
  • 3 3
 @dthomp325: Wait you're saying there aren't background checks, waiting periods and magazine limits in the U.S.? and also how is a magazine limit gonna help if someone with 20 more bullets than you walks in?
  • 5 6
 @michibretz:

I don’t think anyone’s job is at stake here. Either Vista will lose a handful of gun nut customers. Or they’ll lose a shit ton of people who care a lot about gun control. I don’t personally care about that specific company either way.

But generally, corporate social responsibility is something that needs to be taken more seriously and if Vista takes a stand I will be more likely to purchase from their brands.
  • 5 0
 @parisgore: you make a good point, essentially were hurting decent companies and people in an attempt to hurt a much larger company. Arguably the number one cause of killings in general is a lack of feeling accepted and loved. Despite the ridiculous arguments, that happen here on PB, MTB can bring people together and has created some amazing communities. If anything we need more communities like the ones created by mtb, not less. I understand wanting change but I don't think hurting good companies and people is the best way to go about it.
  • 4 1
 @jclnv: Yes, I want to save my own life. Don't know about your country but mine was founded on running from a tyrannical government.
  • 11 1
 @XCMark: We have mentally ill folks in Canada and don’t have monthly mass shootings. We just make it harder to buy a gun than a Kinder Suprise.
  • 11 5
 @Otago: "Hard to be a mass shooter without a mass shooting weapon..."

James D Walk 1956. Blew up a school because he was fired. Killed 28 staff and self.

Charlottesville truck murder. Killed 7.

Then I also have the BATF report on violent altercations since 1995. Where since 1995 there has been 1928 violent altercations from people with a mental illness. Of that, 386 were with a weapon. Of those weapons used in violent altercations by people with mental illnesses as reported by the BATF, only 108 have been with a firearm. In that 108 violent altercations with a firearm, only 64 had multiple victims... So in 23 years there has been 64 reported incidents of violence with a firearm by a mentally ill person toward multiple people...

... The media is just really good at getting non-critical thinking people to think what they want them to think.
  • 14 2
 @parisgore: Vista cares about consolidated net income and earnings per share. If Bell, Giro, and the others went without a sale for the next year, or a steep decline in sales, or even share price, it would cut Vista pretty deep. These companies ARE Vista, and Vista is Bell, Giro, etc.

Unfortunately yeah, boycot also hurts innocent employees. But consumers have the right to, and have to, do what's right for them. That is free market capitalism. And it can be very effective.
  • 7 9
 @dubod22: There was this war called world war II in the 20th century and this guy named hitler killing a bunch of unarmed people
  • 5 0
 @thehardtail: as you stated correctly, there has been terror attacks in select countries in europe over teh last couple of years.

but what has that to do with americans gunning down americans on a weekly bases? even if it was "just" eight where people got killed. Its end of February now. That means every week children are dying somewhere in teh United states. how can any sane person think this is normal??????
  • 6 3
 @foxxyman: Exactly the issue lies in the people committing these killings, not the instruments used to commit them. Even if we could make all guns disappear what's to say mass killings wouldn't be committed using cars, or kitchen knives. For the issue of mass killings to be completely solved you have to help the people doing the killing.
  • 5 5
 @ikaika: "If US citizens want gun control and health care legislation, then vote out your representatives in congress/senate who do not take action."

Judging by our foreign policy, Americans are not going to do shit, but blow up more brown people for their resources; opium & oil.
  • 3 3
 @RyanAF:

Or, as is becoming increasingly evident, we need to at least minimize the number of people killed. A handgun vs. an assault weapon/small magazine vs. larger magazine is what ultimately needs to happen to REDUCE the number of deaths, because clearly avoiding deaths is entirely fanciful.
  • 3 0
 @sino428: I agree, gun control can mean not giving guns to people on the no fly list, or outright only giving guns to the military and law enforcement. It's a very broad phrase used so differently by so many people, it almost means something different to everyone.
  • 2 0
 @Batipapo: there has been a few using cars
  • 7 7
 @XCMark: Don't quote me out of context, read it again.
I'm young but I do realise the cuts that have been made in mental health funding across all of the western world in the last ten years. I know you're a bit old but do you realise we've had the same cuts in this country lol. From that first comment you made about mental health I can see you have little understanding of the reality of it.
I don't profess to have an answer to please everyone you talk of, I think it's naive to think there is such a thing.
If anything you're the one believing the media stuff about it being a mental health issue that can one day be solved and not a gun problem.
  • 7 3
 @RyanAF:

That’s the problem. The first reaction from all these reasonable, sane gun owners is “you’ll never take my guns!” When all people are asking for is to limit the lethality of these instances. Not take away anyone’s guns...
  • 9 4
 @gabethebabem8: this guy called Hitler had a populist agenda. It literally was "make Germany Great again" after WW1 and Germans (Arians) first! He gave the people guns and told them everyone is their enemy and wants to take stuff away from them. sounds familiar? watched any fox lately?
  • 4 3
 @RyanAF: Well, I don't trust government. I have every reason to not trust government. So I think it reasonable for citizens to have much of what the govenment has to keep it in check.

Seriously, if my gov can go over 'there' and blow up brown people for resources, then it's highly likely that our lives mean just as little to the people creating and maintaining our foreign -death- policy.

And, we(US of A) have been cutting social mental health programs for the last 40 years. What we are witnessing is a symptom of derailing social mental health programs for four decades.

... You see, our[sic] problems will eventually catch up with us!
  • 5 5
 @XCMark: what are you going to do against the government with an AR15?
If they were to come for you the would send a drone in the middle of the night and bomb down your house just like they do it in countries that have oil.
Seriously, government forces would be equality impressed if you throw old tomatoes at them
  • 3 2
 @XCMark: 50 mass murders or attempted mass murders in US schools since Columbine. 141 dead. Per FBI statistics.
  • 8 3
 @codypup: Yeah but what about my infantile desire to own a gun? Surely that makes those deaths somewhat acceptable?
  • 6 4
 @codypup: "50 mass murders or attempted mass murders in US schools since Columbine."

I'd like to see that list? Linky?

@michibretz Put down the rifle and use what they use. However, the majority of service personnel would not go against their countrymen. So, it would be like a few thousand bootlickers against, what, 170ml to 250ml people in opposition.

We could literally take our government back from an illegal insurrection with 2x4's that have 4 penny nails in them.

----The lack of education from the opinionated young here is getting out of hand. So, there may be intelligence on the net, but there is no wisdom to keep it from hurting itself.----
  • 11 4
 @michibretz:

Yes, but the gun nuts NEED to believe in these absurd Red Dawn fantasies for some reason.

I don’t care if you give every single person in the US a rocket launcher. It’s not gonna be worth spit.

But they’ll never stop trotting out the same tired notion that they’d be able to regroup in the woods somewhere and stage a resistance against this fanciful tyranny. Never mind the fact that they’re the ones who put a legit tyrant in the white house.
  • 17 11
 @sino428: Agreed it is about all shootings. Especially good ones.

Respectfully, you and so many others commenting here are not informed in regards to the number of shootings that occur in defense of a crime.

The number of lives saved because a legal gun owner legally used his weapon to scare away, injure or kill a violent criminal FAR OUTNUMBERS violent crimes committed with guns. By a factor of roughly 16:1.

Doing away with guns is simply throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

But because the whole gun control argument is not really about saving lives, but rather stripping freedoms and exercising control, the following Facts won’t matter, and the proponents of gun control will continue with emotional rhetoric in the face of facts to the contrary:

The following statistics are taken directly from the FBI:

* Roughly 16,459 murders were committed in the United States during 2016. Of these, about 11,961 or 73% were committed with firearms.[17] [18]
* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone “almost certainly would have been killed” if they “had not used a gun for protection.” This amounted to 162,000 such incidents per year. This excludes all “military service, police work, or work as a security guard.”[19]
* Based on survey data from the U.S. Department of Justice, roughly 5.9 million violent crimes were committed in the United States during 2014.[20] [21] These include simple/aggravated assaults, robberies, sexual assaults, rapes, and murders.[22] Of these, about 600,000 or 10% were committed by offenders visibly armed with a gun.[23]
* Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[24] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[25]
* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun “for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere.” This amounted to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This excludes all “military service, police work, or work as a security guard.”[26]
* A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[27
  • 2 3
 @thehardtail: no, we don't have those laws in the US.

Background checks are performed by licensed firearm dealers, but private sellers can sell without background checks, including at "gun shows". If the check takes longer than 3 days, the purchaser is allowed to buy the gun, even if the check has not returned a verdict.

There is no federal waiting period, although some states have waiting periods.

There are also no federal magazine capacity limits. A few states regulate, but most do not.

You can also buy ammo unrestricted in the US, compared to Canada, where you have to obtain a license to both own a gun and purchase ammo.
  • 2 5
 @XCMarkBig Grin onald, is that you?

Allowing the use of assault weapons can only enhance the damage of this "Mental health crisis".

Go check out #oneless folks. This is how change happens
  • 5 0
 @MasterSlater: www.ecclesia.org/truth/fame.html just some random fantasy yeah
"Those who cannot remember their past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana
  • 5 3
 @MasterSlater: Well said.

It's bizarre what these yahoos think they're going to achieve against the most militarized police and advanced military in the world if the shit really hit the fan.
  • 7 5
 @thehardtail:

Cmon man... you’re referencing things that happened 80 years or more before drones, attack helicopters, night vision, etc etc.

Please provide a more recent example that actually applies to reality. Because a bunch of guys with AR-15’s isn’t gonna accomplish anything in the face of a modern military.

Do yourself a favor and go read about the Russian mercenaries that just got literally pulverized in Syria a few weeks ago. Oh wait! They all had assault weapons, so they must’ve really put up a good fight! No, no the did not. About 200 of them were literally turned into hamburger meat by US forces.

So hit me with something else that actually is based in reality.
  • 9 3
 @Batipapo:

As others have posted: France, truck. 9-11, box cutters and airplanes. Bombings. Or in China and Japan, mass murders with knives are not at all uncommon.

For example Kunming, China in 2014... over 130 stabbed, 28 dead in a ....knife ....attack
  • 1 0
 @MasterSlater: when is the last time we won a war?
  • 2 2
 @brncr6:

That we actually belonged in?
  • 11 4
 I carry a gun in my Camelbak on every ride, along with my Blackburn Wayside Multi-tool. Just because it is illegal for schools to defend themselves against active shooters (yay gun control...), doesn't mean I have to be unprepared.
  • 2 1
 @melled74: True, but Federal ammo is great
  • 10 7
 @Thustlewhumber:

There was an armed resource officer (ex-cop) at the school in Parkland. Which accomplished exactly NOTHING.

So your point was what?
  • 1 2
 @giantrider56: take an economics class.
  • 6 10
flag MasterSlater (Feb 28, 2018 at 19:42) (Below Threshold)
 @brncr6:

The company owns a company that sells assault weapons to children.

Nothing bandwagon about it. People are tired of all this and if boycotts on social irresponsible companies helps, then so be it.
  • 2 1
 @MasterSlater: any we have been in? North Korea we lost that one. Vietnam we lost that one to. How about the one we have been fighting the last ten years. All of the above we have had the upper hand in advanced weapons and still lost.
  • 2 1
 @dtm1: the bath massacre that killed 38 children in a school in Michigan with explosives.
  • 7 7
 @michibretz: no it wont. Those boycotts will effect those companies before effecting vista as a whole. The arms companies if anything will see a surge from this crap. Its massive money, government contracts, etc.

The boycotted companies will be forced to adjust on their own. They're held responsible for their own performance. All vista is going to do is lay people off, cut r&d budgets, etc. They wont be able to sell the companies because their sales will be down. And there is no guarantee another company you dont like wont buy them.

This boycott is neive as hell. Its media controlling the puppets.
  • 7 3
 @MasterSlater:

You want vista to take a stand againt fire arms when the majority of their money comes from that industry?

Bell. Giro. Blackburn. Camelbak. All if them have a history if supporting great causes... not the nra.

Doesn't make any more sense than boycotting them because you dont like football.
  • 3 3
 @brncr6:

Ok, so ignoring that you didn’t answer the question that disqualifies your argument let’s just list some even if we weren’t entirely justified in our participation.

Iraq... twice

Lybia

World War II

Korea was a win if you consider the fact that the North didn’t succeed in taking over the south.

Afghanistan is completely different by the way. We’re not there to utterly crush an entire people. Which is what the conspiracy oriented gun nuts think is gonna happen.
  • 5 0
 Come to the Pinkbike comment section for all of your non-sequitur needs
  • 1 0
 @Thustlewhumber:
  • 3 1
 @melled74: I have a bolt action .308 Savage rifle. I'm actually surprised at how much I like it as it was cheap and a savage. Lol
  • 8 2
 @RyanAF: While the term "gun control" can mean many things, there is no reason for anyone to think that in the US it means "banning guns". Why? Because no one proposes banning guns. No lawmakers, and not the vast vast majority of citizens ever suggest that. The only people that propose banning guns completely are fringe extremists. Anyone who really thinks that discussions about "gun control" mean anything remotely resembling taking away guns from law abiding citizens is frankly just extremely paranoid.
  • 3 0
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: Your comment is so on point. I just want to point out one thing. A 12 year old cannot "own" a firearm. They cannot purchase them, or acquire them by any means, they can however borrow them for defined purposes and buy ammunition if they posses a Minor's licence. www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/fs-fd/minor-mineur-eng.htm
  • 5 3
 @MasterSlater: Its called willpower if you wanna change something better to have to ability to. The colonials were weak compared to the British they still won.
  • 2 2
 @sino428:

Well, that just makes you another one of the sheeple man! Can’t trust the government man!

(note sarcastic tone)
  • 3 3
 @freestyIAM: Well actually the NRA has a lot of control over the whole entire U.S government by stopping the CDC from being able to do studies on guns. Therefore the thing to do - is to go search other countries which have put new laws i.e.. Australia to prohibit machine guns or guns similar to them. The result? less deaths, and the normalization of deaths because of guns like the rest of the first world countries (excluding the U.S). And the thing is quotations? Well normal people who have a normal mental profile have been mass murderers, so again-know all of what you say before you say it please. Thank you.
  • 2 0
 @Rattles: You can buy this in Canada, it is a non-restricted rifle. The Magazine would have to be pinned at 5-rounds instead of 30. These rifles are excellent modern hunting rifles with exceptional accuracy and effectiveness.
  • 2 0
 @dtm1: This is the problem. When did I, or anyone else ever say that we should "do away with guns'? When did I anyone ever say that people shouldn't be able to own a gun to protect their home and property?
  • 2 1
 @MasterSlater: Didn't answer because it made no sense to me because no one belongs in a war. We lost Korea plan and simple. And we were never in a war to utterly crash an entire pepole. You originally said armed civilians cant win against a technology superior force.
History has prove many times over that it can happen.
  • 3 1
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: Donald Trump wants to get rid of guns from black market. Racist piece of shit.
  • 6 3
 @thehardtail:

Great history lesson! Thanks!

Oh, and the colonials, who you so modestly compare yourself to in terms of courage, were aided extensively by the french.

Also, colonial troops outnumber British soldiers by about 30,000.

And the weaponry was mostly similar.

Anything else I can shoot down for you?

(See what I did there?!)
  • 6 5
 @MasterSlater: Considering that the government has drones now, one has to conclude that however well-intentioned, the 2nd amendment been a national disaster. Meanwhile Japan has no guns and hardly any gun deaths; That's good law and order.

Violent culture, combined with lack of social services and easy access to attack weapons means attacks will continue. The NRA is the only one winning, gun sales and membership go up with each attack. Their strategy has increased attacks thus increasing gun sales, they won't change unless forced.
  • 3 3
 @MasterSlater: Well you just supported me more so. If it's a correct move you can gain support from great allies plus what would you say let your government go corrupt or go absent and you get murdered by rampant people or gov with no way to fight back or fight some what and not die without puttting up a challenge.
  • 4 1
 @MasterSlater:a veteran army against farmers and store clerks.
  • 4 1
 Interesting history: During WWI the Germans tried to convince Mexico to invade the USA and reclaim former lands in order to divert Allied resources. For a few reasons, Mexico refused. One of those was the large population of heavily armed civilians that would be difficult to control even if Mexico won. Google 'Zimmermann telegram'.
  • 19 1
 In our sh*thole country South Africa, gun control has become extremely strict to the point where it's just not worth owning a weapon anymore... However we are still one of the most violent-crime ridden countries in the world... My point is, if people want to commit crimes they will find a way to get their hands on guns, whether those weapons are legal or not... And almost every single time, the crimes are committed with illegal weapons... So gun control has not worked here, if anything, it has just put more power in the hands of the criminals
  • 5 1
 @Rucker10: I'm dumbfounded trying to understand how buying "this shit" as in a Bell helmet or Giro shoes from such companies with a deep history in cycling means you support mass shootings?? Last I read, pretty sure the product developers are researching safer bike equipment and not teaching kids how to kill people.
  • 1 0
 @michibretz: He didn't give the people guns, he gave his soldiers guns. He killed the people instead. The second amendment applies to all citizens bro.
  • 4 0
 @dtm1: Please share your reference for this information. I would like to read it.

The statistics and information you are referencing is not an accurate representation. "A 1993 nationwide study of 4,977 homes". In 1993 there were approx. 96 million homes in the US, in 2017 there were approx. 126 million. This proves that the numbers don't add up, you cannot extrapolate numbers like this from such a small sample size and call it representative of the whole population. The math speaks for itself, 4,977 homes out of 96,000,000 = .0052% of the population... Catch what I am saying?
  • 1 2
 @fecalmaster:

So much f*ckin eh.
  • 1 0
 @thehardtail: "This article is about the U.S. Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 that expired in 2004."
  • 1 0
 @thehardtail: Bah. Didn't mean to pile on. My bad.
  • 4 0
 @sino428: Could you please explain what an "assault rifle" is?
  • 1 0
 @Pynchonite: it's all good lol i overlooked i deserve to be reminded of missing that. lol
  • 2 2
 @MasterSlater: modern military is not allowed to operate on US soil. Armed citizens would make a hell of a fight. I'm not sure your MO: "they're too strong so don't try" is a good one.
  • 2 0
 @jason342: alot of people think the ar in ar-15 means assault rifle-15
  • 3 0
 @MasterSlater: The colonials weren't pussies...
  • 1 0
 @theminsta: “Theminsta” haha the name was just too perfect for what everyone was talking about above.. “Prime Minista” lol anywho..
  • 3 1
 @theminsta: You must be a fake account. What about rocket launchers, Handgrenades & Sharks with freaking laser beams attached to their heads?!? Why is it illegal to have those as citizens but yet we all truly know that Dr. evil and other crazy/evil bad guys Still have those kinds of weapons? Yet we never hear anything in the news about those kinds of deaths especially at schools!
  • 3 1
 @codypup: That's a pretty short-sighted idea. I can guarantee that if you stop sending the government money that you will definitely be in a situation where you have to fight them (or be imprisoned). And that's not in some future dystopia, that's the way things work today. You do know that if you stop paying federal taxes you will be arrested and imprisoned right? So your plan to fight the governement by refusing to pay taxes will only escalate the need to fight them physically. Isn't there some precedent for this? Oh right, the Declaration of Independence that lead to the American Revolutionary War, a situation where a people's choice to end allegiance and stop paying taxes to their government directly resulted in those people fighting that government with firearms. Oh gosh, sorry for rambling but I'm having a hard time getting past your ridiculous and unintelligent idea.
  • 2 1
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: Well said. We know our sh*t is at an all time low. Just look at our dip sh#t leader.How in the f@ck does that happen? It's hard to say, "nothing is f&@ked here dude". It's f@cked.
  • 1 0
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: Great comment, I agree 100%
  • 4 1
 @melled74: this is not the place to get into a peeing match over firearms brands, but since I'm here, the Savage BVSS rimfire is an excellent target rifle.
  • 2 0
 @thehardtail: To be fair the Brits were busy colonizing the rest of the world.
  • 2 1
 @Batipapo: many mass homicides have been comitted by people using totally legal motor vehicles as a means to take innocent lives. Some of the deadliest mass homicides in the past few years have been vehicles. And look at the Oklahoma city bombing. Fertilizer was the main ingredient. Evil humans will find a way to inflict suffering on others unless they are imprisoned or counselled. Hopefully the latter.
  • 3 1
 @freestyIAM: in other countries they use IED's, cars, suicide bombers etc.
  • 1 0
 @XCMark: I have never agreed with something more
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: So if several 5 megaton nukes were dropped on Korea the US wouldn't have defeated them?

Extreme example but if you throw enough munitions at a country you either wipe it out or demoralize the people enough that they don't think it's worth fighting for anymore.
  • 2 1
 @fecalmaster: its great isn't it? i now feel better knowing that theres no contradiction in my gear when i'm using my camel bak for biking or as a range bag filled with federal premium ammo! wish i could work for such a company as well
  • 4 1
 @michibretz: Not all of Europe has harsh gun laws. The Czech republic has some of the most lenient gun laws in the developed world, yet a lower homicide rate by firearms death than more restrictive countries like Canada. It is a culture thing I think. Some in the US see the gun as a be all end equalizer all in a society that is morally bankrupt. Stupid media doesn't help.
  • 4 0
 @woofer2609: Yes, but that has nothing to do with guns. If we cure AIDS, people will still die of cancer. Doesn't mean that we shouldn't cure AIDS.
  • 1 1
 @jclnv: we did that to japan and it worked but i dont see our goverment using nukes on citizens in this country.
You actually think the United States government will nukes its own citizens and country to stop a armed uprising?
  • 4 0
 We should just ban all people from living mannnnnn
  • 2 1
 @Pynchonite: i didn't say states shouldn't look at tighter gun regulations, which many states might consider. I'm merely pointing out that guns are not responsible for all mass killings. Evil finds a way. It is always easy to eradicate what is conveniently evil as opposed to what causes people to act on evil impulses.
  • 1 2
 @MCMbiker: You won't have to if they all get shot and killed due to gun ownership in an insane culture.
  • 4 0
 @MasterSlater: many people have guns for sport with no intention of killing anything. There is several shooting disciplines in the olympics.
  • 3 0
 @brncr6: No, that's why I said it was an extreme analogy.

Could I see a bunch of yahoos in an ad hoc bunker getting flattened by a drone strike?

Yep.
  • 3 0
 @woofer2609: Fair enough, but I would also invite you to try and buy a ton of ammonium nitrate after the Oklahoma City bombing. Or cough medicine, even. Lots of people point out that anything can be a weapon (including lots of folks on this board) but that has nothing to do with the particular evil that the petitioners are trying to remedy, which is the over-availability of guns in the US leading to otherwise preventable harm. (Interesting fact: the cartels in Mexico used to buy their guns in Texas from citizens who would buy them legally.)
  • 1 0
 @thehardtail: in most places such regulations do exist, I don't know if that was meant to be rhetorical.
  • 10 0
 @jclnv: speak truth to nonsense around here and you get downvoted. Blame mental health and not easy access to auto and semi auto weapons for mass murders and you get a cheer. This is partly why there are more mass shootings in the US than anywhere else.
  • 1 1
 @jclnv: we have been doing that for ten years in Afghanistan and there is no end in sight. 10 + more years of drone strikes to go.
  • 1 0
 @XCMark: I'm confused, are you saying you don't believe the gov when they they just want to regulate guns.
  • 1 0
 @XCMark: This country loves its silver bullets, huh? or at least loves to sell them to you with buzz words. Maybe we could not say mental health issues, but just say antisocial personality disorder.
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: but on the other hand, I would rather defend myself with legal AR15 against mental Guy with legal AR15 than defend myself with a knife against a guy with illegal AR15...
  • 1 0
 @Beez177:

How do you print gun powder?
  • 1 0
 @XCMark: NBC reference to official FBI statistics. Google is your friend
  • 1 0
 Certainly that must be respected. We will only be safe when the infantile are fully armed. @jclnv:
  • 2 0
 You’re a hundred more times likely to shoot yourself in the ass than you are to defend yourself from a Trail Pirate @Thustlewhumber:
  • 9 0
 @XCMark: people around britain and europe have mental health problems too....we generally don't shoot each other in schools.
  • 2 1
 You’re correct. If I quit paying taxes,I go to prison. But if 20 million of us quit paying, then what’re they going to do?even as an individual, I find myself weighing the cost/benefits of civil disobedience. Ali was one man, but when the Greatest Fighter of all time said “I ain’t got nothin against those Vietnam Cong” I hat meant something @robw515:
  • 4 0
 @ninjatarian: yep, good luck printing an AR at home, they ain't no 3D scan of your face. Whilst the moving parts of a rifle are very simple, they are very precise and need to be up to task.

Going to print your own ammunition as well?
  • 1 0
 @dtm1: Hey those are interesting stats. Where'd you find them?
  • 7 2
 @woofer2609: Not long ago a "lone wolf" terrorist went on a rampage in Edmonton. He stabbed several people, then stole a truck and hit a police officer. He then tried to drive through a crowd downtown but couldn't hit anybody before the police stopped him.

What if he had been able to pick up an AR-15 at Canadian Tire and just unload on that crowd?
  • 4 2
 @vanmtnbiker: What if? That is a very open ended statement. What if he had a bomb strapped to his chest? What if he had a IED in his van? What if he just stayed home and got stoned instead?

Just so happens, you can buy an AR-15 style rifle from Canadian Tire. Only thing is, in Canada you need to undergo security clearance by a CFO (Chief Firearms Officer), including reference checks, only after taking and passing a firearms safety course, to get a license to do so.

What if?
  • 4 1
 @XCMark: bit of a pointless argument seeing as anyone who kills someone else, clearly has mental health issues! You don't kill people with a sane mentality period.
  • 1 0
 @sino428: You did. In reply to xcmark’s statement on addressing the mental health epidemic: “Literally, we could ban all guns tomorrow, yet, people with mental health issues that want to hurt a person or persons will follow their feelings through”...

You said, “Why can’t it be both?”

That reads pretty clear to me.

And yes there are plenty of politicians and laymen who would love to do away with guns - it is not paranoid to recognize that, rather it is naive to think otherwise.

Again, if the issue for a large portion of the gun control crowd was truly saving lives, how does one explain the loss of life that would occur without guns (used by civilians, not police) in stopping crime? Thats 163,000 violent crimes that would not have been stopped vs 11,000 gun murders. Those numbers aren’t even close.

To put it more simply, has the “war on drugs” prevented their illegal use? Why would a “gun ban” do anything different? It would just “ban” them from the law abiding, and the law breakers would continue to use them, only with less potential of being stopped.
  • 1 0
 @MasterSlater: Dude such an entertaining comment.
  • 1 0
 @badpotato: As would I but try and imagine the situation without guns
  • 1 0
 @thehardtail: If you've ever been to Whistler on Australia day you wouldn't say that.

jk aussies! looooove yooouuuu!
  • 7 0
 @XCMark: well, you know, people with mental health issues live in every country in the world, but you arm them with semi-automatics ... Don't bring a knjfe to a gun fight ;-) It's really sad that the right to carry is still so deeply rooted in american society ... well ... hmm ...
  • 3 4
 @Batipapo: yeah there is this new thing with trucks and terrorists. Oh, and bombs, suicide vests, poison gas... should I keep going?

Lots of evil in the world. I don't know about you, but I want my guns just in case some evil shows up in my neighborhood, even if it is a simple and unfortunately common home invasion.

And, I want my friends, my former military, ex-policeman, well trained concealed carry buddies to have their guns too. I want them to be my neighbors and ride with me, and work with me and be at the mall and movies and church sitting near me.

It seems pretty simple - good guys with guns can prevent/deter/stop the few whacko's and evil people out there when they decide to do horrible things.

I feel very safe out in the woods mountain biking, and in the mountain biking community. You all are great folks - but there is evil in the world, and that is why I will keep my gun.
  • 2 2
 @Batipapo: yeah there is this new thing with trucks and terrorists. Oh, and bombs, suicide vests, poison gas... should I keep going?

Lots of evil in the world. I don't know about you, but I want my guns just in case some evil shows up in my neighborhood, even if it is a simple and unfortunately common home invasion.

And, I want my friends, my former military, ex-policeman, well trained concealed carry buddies to have their guns too. I want them to be my neighbors and ride with me, and work with me and be at the mall and movies and church sitting near me.

It seems pretty simple - good guys with guns can prevent/deter/stop the few whacko's and evil people out there when they decide to do horrible things.

I feel very safe out in the woods mountain biking, and in the mountain biking community. You all are great folks - but there is evil in the world, and that is why I will keep my gun.
  • 3 0
 @dtm1: I'm still curious where you got those stats from. Your argument hinges on the idea that guns prevent the loss of life so show your work.

Also, it actually is pretty paranoid to think that people want to take all your guns away. I'm a left-wing vegetarian and I still think that people should be able to kill deer with rifles if they have a hunting license.
  • 1 0
 @dtm1: and somehow all of the deaths on the few incidents you listed justify the monthly mass shootings in the US (which far surpass in numbers of deaths and are of a preventable nature). It’s a very incoherent logic the NRA loves to use but only makes sense to the nuts that buy into the NRA agenda.
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: Who's the enemy there? Do the weapons corps (and there powerful lobbyists) want that war to end? What would be the consequence of them leaving now V's 10 years?

Jack shit.
  • 2 0
 @thehardtail: oh just like the kid in Florida a few weeks ago who killed 17 despite the armed officer. Right that was a long time ago!
  • 2 0
 @badpotato: Insane logic. Where does that arms race end?

Here's a better idea, nobody has semi-auto weapons.
  • 10 0
 @XCMark:
The rate of murders per capita in the US is 5 in 100,000.
In Canada it is 2 in 100,000.
In the UK it is 1 in 100,000.

If you think the UK has excellent mental health care then you are sadly mistaken. However, after a mass school shooting we decided that although owning and shooting hand guns was fun, we would prefer our children to be safe.
It is infantile to suggest that guns=liberty.
  • 3 0
 @willycpc: I can't imagine what it must be like to live a life in fear.

Rather sad really.
  • 2 2
 @sino428: Classic NRA tactic to divide and conquer. The NRA offers this hyperbolic paranoia around the argument while offering no solutions and simply pushing for more guns in classrooms, colleges, stock bumps....
  • 3 2
 Was considering one or their full face because of the ability to have headphones but will pass until they offer some explanation on their misguided support of the NRA. Let’s not forget the NRA directly attacks mass shooting victims who speak out against their agenda. If you don’t believe just google their president Wayne Lapierre and read up.
  • 1 0
 Agreed@ybsurf:
  • 3 0
 @Drewnose: Thank you for helping to illustrate my point. Mentally disturbed guy was not able to buy the assault weapon due largely in part to common sense gun laws.

He wasn't able to buy an IED or bomb at a store either (I wonder why you can't buy bombs or IEDs or hand grenades or rocket launchers in stores?).

Sure, it is possible that highly motivated, highly skilled, crazy people will use the internets to research how to make a bomb and go and do so. Crazy people also can buy guys in Canada, that shooting in Montreal not that long ago the guy had legally purchased guns. The point is the laws are there to REDUCE the likelihood of shitbag scummy losers from obtaining highly effective human murdering devices.
  • 9 0
 @XCMark: From a different stand point, something like this happened in a village called Dunblane in Scotland 20 odd years ago. That resulted on tighter gun control and there hasn't been a similar incident since.
I totally agree with your view on lack of funding for mental health being wrong, we have the same issues here, but without consequences so severe.

However, it's hard to hear about constitutional rights and so on without despairing.
Not sure if you have it in the US, but in the uk, there has been application of a sugar tax as obesity is becoming a severe problem. Everyone is being penalised and paying more because some people can't manage their diets.

If "punishing the masses" to control the few to avoid tooth decay, diabetes and obesity is legitimate then using the same principle surely guns should be banned or better controlled to stop them falling in the wrong hands? That guy killed 17 and injured how many more mentally or physically for life probably, a bottle of coke and a mars bar can't do that.
The masses would be effected but is the pain families keep suffering worth other peoples rights? If those who become victims believe it's legit to own weapons that can slaughter multiple people a minute then that's one thing, but I would guess they don't and they suffer the ultimate cost.
Not looking for a Uk vs Us keyboard war, just putting a point of view across.
Sadly its getting to a point where I don't think many people find it as shocking as we should as it's happening so often we're desensitizing to it, and that is equally dangerous as it is sad.

I'm not trolling, looking to offend or disrespect anybody or there views, but, as a brit it's like watching a person keep headbutting a wall, then asking them why they are doing it to be told, by someone with a smashed up nose blown pupils and black eyes, it's their right, even though its severely harming them?
  • 1 0
 @ryanm189: great comment!
  • 2 0
 @onemind123: Too late I've already been all over the world , specially Canada and ignorance is the one common factor as displayed Soo perfectly by you.
  • 1 1
 @RD63: I'm sorry your on your period and everything is an issue right now. Have you ever bought soap or gas,,, ok your an insensative asswipe supporting the devil.......bugabugabuga!!
  • 1 0
 @michibretz: On point.
  • 1 0
 @XCMark: If you were a goverment, would you like to have people capable to defend themseles of ever growing sickness of militarized law enforcement?
  • 2 0
 This is the most replies I've ever seen on a pb comment.
  • 2 1
 @Hoob93: will they stop being produced and remaining one destroyed? ...NO, so I cannot imagine this without guns, as they will not disappear.
Sorry to say that, but all this situation comes from tense society, kids not tought to cope with stress cause eitriger they were beaten or they were just allowed to do whatever (no stress policy). Add to this competitive (you must be the best) and showing off kids, looking to show off easiest way - saying crap to weaker or troubled kids. They crack. So Ok, I am overreacting - sure, limiting guns could help, but it would not heal the system and will not cause magic - there is work to do!
  • 6 4
 From wiki: "Approximately 1.4 million people have been killed using firearms in the U.S. between 1968 and 2011". Have a critical think about that, 2nd amendment fanboys.

Based on this, I'm not sure Americans have got their heads around the skills required to "defend themselves". Attacking others doesn't seem to be a problem though, so 1 out of 2 ain't bad!

@midasdj: Non-partisan sense. It'll never catch on...
  • 5 1
 @jclnv: I'm giving you an up vote because I'm not a blinkered Septic.

"guns don't kill people!"

Yeah, but c*nts with guns do...
Fewer people with guns and more control when it comes to the sale of guns/ammunition means fewer people are going to die.
  • 1 0
 @fecalmaster: right there with you!
  • 4 2
 @jclnv: so if I punch you, you won't make fist and defend yourself? See how that works. Or let's go riding, and I'll take your new bike from you, because you won't do anything about it.
  • 4 0
 @Batipapo: 9/11 and just about every true mass murder are committed by other means. The gun is a personal killer. You can only shoot one person at a time. With explosives, gas, or fire you can kill multitides. While guns are the choice of weapon of this era, so swords were of era's past. I'll agree we live in a culture that glorifies gun violence, but few realize the reality of taking lives. Which in my opinion would stop 90% of this. Once you see and smell the death of another, and have to live with taking someone's life away from them you won't want to do it. That in my experience is our real problem. People live in a fantasy in our country.
  • 1 0
 @sino428: problem, reaction, solution....your controllers don't want you having guns....it's a set up
  • 1 3
 @Otago: you don't have people blowing up buildings, and running over otbers with cars. I guess BBC is the fake news then. The UK is a far more uncivilized place than the US.
  • 1 2
 @onemanarmy: exactly. 9/11 and the holicaust weren't accomplished with firearms. Bombs and gas have though.
  • 1 1
 @Hoob93: the rule of defense is charge a gun, run from a knife. Just so you don't get gutted, not understanding the mechanics of range.
  • 2 0
 @XCMark: we have no more of a mental health crisis than any other country! That is absolutely not unique to us! Fewer guns really equals fewer gun deaths. There's a saying- I don't lock my house to keep out the 5% of criminals that are determined to break in by any means possible- I do it to keep out the 95% that might be tempted or reckless or careless to do it otherwise
  • 5 3
 @Websterminator: Except @Otago is in NZ, clue's in the name and flag. Easy mistake to make.
And the Nazis didn't have guns you say? How did they get the people on the trains, by asking nicely?
  • 1 0
 @onemanarmy: yes it actually is
  • 2 0
 @Batipapo: Bombs I'd imagine. Oklahoma etc. Are the deaths from Sept 11th included in that statistic? Would certainly skew the data in that direction.
Also, with gun ownership being heavily restricted in the UK, Germany, France, Australia etc vechicles such as cars and trucks are frequently being used as weapons for mass killings. And a higher incidence of stabbings.
  • 5 2
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: Define frequently. Is once every few years frequent? Stabbings are also infrequent enough to be reported on national news in the UK. Does the US media even bother to report isolated gun deaths anymore?
  • 5 1
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: Exactly! You mow down dozens of people by ramming a truck through a crowd but does that mean one should ban trucks? A trigger doesn't pull itself... Psychological, socio-economic, political etc factors all need to be addressed... The guy in France who drove a truck through the crowd couldn't get a gun, so he used what he could... If people want to kill they will find a way... The gun control problem is not a gun problem, it's a people problem... Solve that first... Stop the bullying and other social ills then incidents like Columbine, Florida etc won't be an issue
  • 2 0
 @BenPea: I meant there is an increasing number of such incidents in recent years. It was a colloquail term rather than definitive.
  • 1 0
 @BenPea: On the issue of gun deaths in the US, I don't have the answers. I could speculate why the wouldn't report them (bad press for the city, inflaming racial biases etc.). I do know the murder rate in the US is approximately three times higher than it is in the UK. But to say that's because of US gun laws is a gross over-simplification of the issue; The US population, which is many times larger than that of the UK is concentrated mainly on the east and west coasts; the average population density is not dissimilar but 'on the ground' the story is very different. That aspect could go towards explaining the higher murder rate (proximity breeds contempt while simultaneously providing opportunity). Again, not a comprehensive argument, but what I would hope is a considered response to the infantile, superficial wailings that 'Gunz R' badzzz'.
  • 2 3
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf @Spark24: " Psychological, socio-economic, political etc factors all need to be addressed... " Are they being addressed? People sometimes need a hell of a lot of support to live a safe and fufiling life and many are not getting it. Because that shit is complicated my friends and the inertia is strong. Who's going to get the ball rolling?
Meanwhile there have been 1.5 million gun-related deaths since 1968. What haven't we tried to sort this out?
  • 3 3
 @dtm1: Couldn't agree more brother!!!!!

@michibretz , @MasterSlater, and others who see folly in the idea of self defense.

Some truth about Gun Control.

How it allows tyranny and genocide.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN0vkSO9n8Y

So what some are saying is that they would rather have the state, which has slaughtered well north 150 Million people in the last 120 years, control access to guns? That's like letting pedophiles be school counselors.

It's racist origins here in the states.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-l7TO01-Sg

On how gun control leads to more crime or conversely, how more guns equal less crime.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpyLpIjEESM
www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMZtPj9xdN8

All of the above is based on historical fact.

Are we supposed to just lay down and accept being victims? The history and research above shows that criminals and governments alike prefer the unarmed.
  • 3 2
 @jclnv: dont really care, I care about my gun rights and having those rights to protect myself and my family from people that would want to do us harm.
No matter who that could be.
  • 8 2
 @XCMark: @XCMark: Sorry you are completely wrong. I am a psychologist and work with the mentally ill persons for 25 plus years and in a forensic environment....violent offender and people are anti social and narcissistic not mentally ill and the tend to be very sensitive and uneducated.....there is absolutely no correlation between violence and mentally ill....please read a book published by respectable scientists in the field of metal health and its history. if that is too much trouble than take a look at all other first world nations who have the exact same amount per capita of mental heath people and see none of them is any where close to the mass shootings' and gun culture for which you believe to be true!
defend your rights to guns is cool but do not place a blanket blame on a disenfranchised community of people for which it does not pertain or belong to!!!
  • 5 2
 @JLopez149: read the article and comments in your link. It was far from one man and one knife. To be a source of information you must be credible. You've done yourself a disservice.
  • 2 0
 @BenPea: second paragraph, four of the attackers were SHOT dead. What did they shoot them with?
  • 1 1
 @XCMark: well said.
  • 1 0
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: good point, and also well said.
  • 1 0
 @Bird-Man: Slightly off-topic but otherwise relevant- would you say the kind people who commit these kind of atrocities are likely to feel less accountable than the general population for their actions? Are they more likely to blame others for their failings and seek revenge for exagerrated slights against them? Put another way, do they exhibit a tendency to absolve themselves of their responsibilities for their failings and blame others? Is it possible to evaluate/ identify such individuals psychometrically?
  • 3 3
 @brncr6: dude, we have troops on our streets with Famas assault rifles, but I wouldn't want everyone in my building to have one. I trust professional killing machines to handle a gun and intervene according to their training as and when necessary. The average Joe? Not so much. Joe cannot be trusted to that degree. What if the separatists had had guns? What would it have been? 100, 200 dead?
  • 1 1
 @Bird-Man: So what you are saying is narcissists ARE NOT mentally ill? My research so far seems to indicate that a narcissist is usually also a psychopath or sociopath.

Additionally, your use of the term "anti social" does seem to indicate Antisocial Personality Disorder. This is important because while some say it's the same as psychopathy or sociopathy, other's just say that there is "considerable overlap". Regardless of which a person merely chooses or arrives at, "anti social" is (to some CONSIDERABLE degree) psychopathic or sociopathic.

So you seem to be suggesting that psychopathy and sociopathy are not mental illnesses.
  • 5 6
 @BDKR: The narcissism point is moot, given that you have a textbook case in the White House. Is he mentally ill?
  • 1 0
 @XCMark: probably you don't need gun control, that's the natures way to adjust population in the us. Natural selection is the key here, to many psychos, got to find a way around it in't ?
  • 4 2
 @BenPea: Come on dude. We could argue or talk based on facts.

Are you choosing just to argue because you have an agenda?

Or are you actually interested in a conversation that doesn't include a slight of some sort but instead gaining understanding?
  • 4 4
 @BDKR: Is he or is he not a narcissist? It seems relevant to me seeing as he is the figurehead of the USA, which is the epicentre of this debate. Not to mention that he has some influence on the old gun control issue. I don't think that focusing on evidence (his quotes and actions are well documented and information about his personal behavioural history is abundant) and perpetuating an agenda based on fluff is the same thing. As an aside, DT said he would have gone into that school unarmed to tackle the killer. Out loud. If you don't find it nuts that someone so cowardly would make such a statement then f*ck it, yes I have beef.
Long story short, if I get you right, then DT is a sociopath. So if this is true of the PUSA, surely nobody in the whole country can be trusted with a fire arm. Just to prove I have no agenda, I suspect that Hilary may be a psychopath.
  • 2 0
 @Spark24: incorrect. Look at all the countries who have banned or put strong restrictions on gun and look at the percentage of gun deaths. There are opinions and then there are raw data and facts
  • 3 2
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: I still don't understand why anyone would need an AR15. Legal or not. What is your day like if you need an AR15? or a shotgun. Its not that gun or dangerous or can kill people, cause you can also kill someone with a hammer. But, a hammer is a tool and some people need it in their daily lives. Not an AR15. I don't really have a strong opinion for or against guns. I also understand some people feel safer and need to defend themselves in certain places in the world. But again, why would anyone need to purchase an AR15..its that question that boggles my mind.
  • 5 0
 @MasterSlater:
@MasterSlater:

Ok, here's your reality.
The inbred poppy farmers in Afghanistan have been ripping us a new one for more than a decade, killing my friends left and right.
The Vietnamese did a good job of kicking our rears for nearly a decade, with jack crap weaponry.
The Afghans drove out the Russians decades ago, with WWII weapons and camels.

You have no concept of what guerrilla warfare can do to a standing army.

Not even to mention, you wanna use that drone against civilians?
First, it's not legal to use the military against a civilian population. Ever.
Second, you're going to have to convince 14-20 people to go with your plan. That's how many bodies, between the ground crew, ops team, and analysis/targeting team that you'll need to run ONE DRONE.
Tanks then. They take a crew, and mechanics, and fuelers (they're thirsty), and a supply line to keep them running.
Same for bombers.,and fighters, and gunships.
Same for EVERYTHING in the military...

So you'll have to convince ALL those people to attack their own families and NOT turn those weapons on the leaders that gave them those unconstitutional orders.
As someone who did a couple jobs in the military, I can tell you that this will be a massive failure.

Also? There are no ROEs here. We can do whatever we need to or want to here. This is our soil, and anyone that stacks up against us to remove our rights will be an enemy combatant, day one.
  • 5 0
 @BenPea: sorry to hear you live in a country where you have to see armed killing machines walking around at all times. Here we have a second amendment that allows me to own a pistol or a rifle. Why do you have armed troops in your streets? Honest question not trying to be an ass.
  • 6 3
 Snowflakes...snowflakes everywhere.
  • 3 1
 @Spillner: why would you buy a 29er when you own a 26er? Guns are to some people like bikes are to us.
Some pepole loves shooting guns its a sport/hobby to a lot of people. Not sure if you have ever gone out and shot guns but i can say its a kick in the ass.
  • 2 1
 @BenPea: Who are you or anyone to say? No one has clinically evaluated him and found him to be anything but competent. Forget the hit pieces a few months ago, no credible medical evidence exists that the man is unhinged. He could simply (and more plausibly) be acting out a very awkward kind of political grandstanding. I don't like the man, he lacks many of the leadership qualities I would hope for but like it or not he was elected.
  • 4 0
 @mustbike: You do realize that every gun except a bolt action, pump, or single shot is a "semi auto" right? And what good does restricting high capacity magazines do? what instead of a 30 round clip, someone can have a 15 round clip and have 20 of them on them at one time? This whole gun debate is laughable, it's not the guns fault. You do realize that ALL, ALL mass shootings in the US have occurred in "gun free zones"? Before these places were "gun free" how many mass shootings where there? Chicago still has the highest gun homicide rate, and the strictest gun laws. Maybe if we started enforcing current laws... that would be a start. But this whole gun control debate, is just the tired old "blame the gun" arguement and an excuse by a group of politicians that use "safety" and our "children" as an excuse to take away our freedoms. Sorry, this is about more than that. You have 4 sheriff deputies in this case, that DIDN"T DO THEIR JOB! sorry, rant over. This last tradgedy had warning signs a decade old and NOTHING, was done about it, maybe we should start reform there before bringing up the same old gun grab debate that democrat politicians start screaming about as soon as their is a tradgedy to push there adgenda...
  • 4 4
 @brncr6: Because we have all turned the world into a big fat sorry mess (leading to attacks such as those in Paris and Nice) and having a few squads strolling around the place must make people feel safe (it makes no tangible difference though). I honestly don't mind and my kids think it's cool. Why would the government not make an effort to make those who feel insecure a little less so. I know that in America, people like to feel in control of their own protection, but I'm not sure enough of you are qualified to do so. I refer you to the numerous examples of accidental self-inflicted gun wounds, toddlers shooting siblings, etc. I don't doubt that the majority of Americans can be trusted to own a weapon. Unfortunately that majority isn't big enough to be worth the downsides. 1.5 million since 1968.
  • 8 3
 @BenPea: Well, you've proven your mettle. But your response shows a lack of understanding.

1) Gun ownership has nothing to do with Trump. It's something that's built into our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Therefore he (or anyone else) can't just dismiss them. Pegging this on Trump therefore is a straw man or distraction.

2) Influence on gun control is ultimately the domain of the citizens of the US. Not politicians alone.

3) So DT said he would rush in and tackle him and you are offended by this? You are offended that someone would be interested in saving children while running the risk of losing their own life? This sounds like a collectivist. Like something the Khmer Rouge or Stalin would say because they both killed millions of unarmed people.

4) If you are basing DT being a Narcissist on his behavior alone, you surely woudn't have liked the alternative. This is the woman that attacked and shamed women that were raped by her husband, called blacks super predators, stole the primary from Bernie Sanders, refered to people in general as useless feeders, and took campaign money from international contributors like Saudi Arabia who has one of the worst human rights records on the planet.

5) Prove DT is a narcissist "if you can". I don't really care about Trump one way or the other, but I'm not going to say something like that unless I could place him before a panel of peeps like Bird-man and have them perform a diagnosis.
  • 1 0
 @Spillner: Here you go.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN0vkSO9n8Y

This, btw, is exactly what the founding fathers of the US were talking about.
  • 2 1
 @BDKR: thanks. Bookmarked and will watch this tonight!
  • 4 2
 @BenPea: 1.5 million since 1968 is nothing compared to 150 million plus killed by governments alone since 1900. As a Frenchman you should understand that having had your a55 kicked on two separate occasions between 1900 and 1950.
  • 3 1
 @BenPea: you seem to care an awful lot about people dying in the u.s. from guns. Do you speak up as loudly on other issues such as all the deaths that are caused by drug abuse which has a higher death rate for our kids then guns?

There are street in every parts of this world you can walk down where drugs abuse is rampant. How about the D.U.I.
death rate. Or are you just focused on guns?
I bet that kid that shot up the school thought walking around with a gun was cool too.
  • 4 1
 @XCMark:

So true:
... The media is just really good at getting non-critical thinking people to think what they want them to think.
  • 1 1
 @BDKR: Meant to upvote. My bad.
  • 1 2
 You're a dumbass if you think political bullshit for little triggered babies like yourself can be more informed about bullshit that has nothing to do with cycling - then sure - be an ignorant dumbass - your tax dollars go into arming you military in Canada - so don't pay taxes - let the irs come to you - see what hijiinx you get into with that logic - if you don't buy from these companies you're the problem not the solution to gun control. As a consumer - wtf is that bull shit - as a human I know not to believe bullshit shoved down my throat - unlike you in this case...
  • 2 0
 @MasterSlater: They'll gain more with the gun nut customers - not less - and the triggered babies who can't think for themselves can dig themselves a hole to cry in for all I care...
  • 5 3
 @XCMark: there are many accessible studies that show a very small percentage of people with diagnosable mental illness are likely to commit violence to others. It's pretty standard procedure with the current administration to blame a group of people for a problem, and then point their fat little fingers at some government institution for failing to do something about it. At least this time they didn't blame "inner city blacks" or some nonsense.

Unfortunately (for most) the states have become a draconian capitalist society where voting for politicians and proposals means very little.
We vote with our dollars.

Now, I love Giro helmets, but they made a decision to sell out to Vista and the only say I have in that is not buying their stuff. Sucks for me, but it's just that - STUFF. Just like AR-15s are stuff. Stuff made to kill people. There are thousands of other guns on the market, but the idea of making a concession to lose just one drives a lot of people mad.
This isn't about the constitution.
It's about a bunch of spoiled babies screaming "I want my toy", and twisting the message into what they think is a more adult context using politics and divisive media.
Social change means sacrifice for everyone. And if the biggest sacrifice I have to make is not buying my favorite helmet, well, I'm one fortunate SOB.

Finally, taking all guns away is a band aid, at least in the US. We are a violent culture regardless. And putting more mentally ill people in padded cells is just that one step closer to subtle fascism. Don't need that either.
We need to cut these issues at the source, which is essentially extreme wealth inequality and to do that we need to inplement CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM.

Now, if any Aussies, Brits, Canadians or Kiwis would like to adopt me, please PM. I also speak cantonese, so Hong Kong is on the table as well.
  • 1 0
 @thehardtail: Pssst...Read your link. "Expired in 2004"
  • 2 0
 @Websterminator: So lets throw guns into the mix and there's a 50/50 one of us will end up dead.

Over a bike.

Genius.
  • 2 0
 @vanmtnbiker: sensible gun laws and background checks avoided this happening. Canadian Tire did indeed sell "assault" rifles" up until last month. SKS's are the predecessor to the Ak47. You could also buy 30 round magazines riveted to hold only 5 rounds. These rivets can be drilled out in 2 minutes.
So what really stopped the terrorist in Edmonton? The fact that he would have had to go through proper training and background checks (which he probably wouldn't pass) to get a gun license. I'm all for strict regulations to be able to have access to firearms here and in the states, but i have little say as to their domestic affairs.
  • 2 0
 @BDKR: Im pretty sure the French were happy they had the French Resistance during the time they were occupied by the Nazis. Armed citizens fighting to free their country.
  • 4 0
 @brncr6: They weren't fighting anyone, they gathering intelligence for the Brits etc.
  • 1 0
 @DiveH: I think you're more right than wrong, but pointing the finger at wealth inequality is as superficial and biased as blaming guns. It *might* help if there were fewer guns and it *might* help if there was less wealth inequality but the problem won't go away entirely even if they did. Inspiration/ motivation to do these things is rarely based on rational thought and tangible experiences.
A democratic society exists to serve the people equally, but that does not mean all citizens will benefit equally from it. Some will go far, others will improve, some will go backwards and the rest will stagnate. If society tried to ensure equal outcomes for everyone the cost (economic, social, personal) would be counter-productive for civilisation and repressive to the individual- thus defeating the purpose of a free society. We see this play in current liberal ideology where the needs of the few are valued above the needs of the many. I don't believe pure capitalism is the right path either. I think we need a healthy mix of both to ensure a harmonious and effective society
  • 2 1
 @brncr6: EXACTLY!!!!

And having this experience in their past should show them that armed citizens are analogs to freedom, or at least the struggle for freedom.

This occurrence is far more recent than our own revolution. It's essentially in our modern time. How can we then say the right to bear arms for the purpose of self protection from criminality and out of control governments is an antiquated thing?

The genocides by the Khmer Rouge and the Indonesians against East Timoor started in '75 and '74! These are modern day genocides! The fact that these occurred within the life time of many of us seems to indicate that there IS STILL a need for the citizen to protect him/her self.
  • 4 2
 @brncr6: So because governments go to war and the Germans invaded half of Europe 80 years ago, everyone should be able to own a lethal fire arm? As far as I know, there is no civil war currently taking place in the US, but thousands of gun-related fatalities take place each year through a combination of greed, poverty, incompetence and all manner of unfortunate events. If war does break out then good luck guys. I'm sure you'll all feel very safe cowering under the kitchen table with that cold steel clasped tight in your hands.
Don't get me started on the war on drugs. But this piece is specifically about fire arms. If PB publishes something about substance abuse, I'll be all over it. Deaths due to guns and drugs are both down to government dereliction of duty. In all countries.
  • 3 0
 @sino428: Homicides by firearms are down historically since 1993. A lot of mistakes by the local and federal agencies there to protect the citizens on this latest school shooting. Lets focus on things that will actually reduce the gun violence. So far I'm on board with firing sheriff Scott Israel, firing the cop on duty who didn't try and put a stop to the shooting, firing the backup from broward county pd who also sat there waiting for backup, raising the age to own any firearm to 21, hardening soft targets, some sort of flag on your record if you get expelled from school and want to buy a gun, and better background checks. I'm not going to punish a company because a social justice warrior at pinkbike told me to.
  • 3 0
 @BenPea: Yes but the FRENCH RESISTANCE!!!

That's why the US needs guns!
  • 1 2
 @jclnv: That's why ALL people need guns.

The fool that says their government would never commit a genocide against it's own people is an ignorant fool.
  • 2 2
 @BDKR: briefly, 1) yes I realise that and I'm not pegging anything on him, bit this is happening on his watch and I'd like to think he would choose to have a benevolent influence on a country he wants to make great again (again? When was it not great?) He can choose to be a part of the problem or the solution. That's up to him.
2) Is it? Or is it the lobbies? Or is the government so scared of it's people that it won't take the measures required to stop them killing themselves through obesity, guns, drugs, etc... Or is that a god given right?
3) Wow. If you think his statement has an ounce of anything other than bullshit, I think your judgment may be a little off. I'm actually quite shocked.
4) As I said, Hilary may well be a psychopath. I've exposed myself to enough alternative media to hear a lot of people say some pretty mind bending things about her with great confidence and some of that has stuck. She has the gloss that DT lacks which makes her a more slippery target of criticism.
5) In point 3 you make me doubt how receptive you would be to what I would consider to be proof. I would just say that the extremely wealthy seem able to get away with behaviour that would ruin them were they not surrounded by lawyers and equipped with the immunity that comes with power. This is a self-confessed sex attacker we're talking about here.
  • 5 1
 @parisgore: completely agree with this comment. I, for one, wont be boycotting brands which I have historically purchased or otherwise ie: Camelbak and Giro helmets. Those are great products and I don't want good people put out of work because of internet/social media heroes.
  • 3 0
 @BenPea: What responsibility do guns have for a "combination of greed, poverty, incompetence and all manner of unfortunate events"?
The whole idea of the 2nd amendment is to prevent tyranny, from governments or otherwise. Take communism in the 20th century for example. It is estimated that communist governments in just 3 countries were responsible for the slaughter of more than 70 million people. And some estimate that figure is as high as 100 million in Russia alone. These things happened. They're not figurative. We continue to kill one another using all manner of methods and technology so there is no reason to think humanity has reached a new plain of evolution and understanding where it won't happen again. To claim otherwise is to admit living in a fairytale.
  • 3 2
 @BenPea: Uhh... Yes! Because governments usually don't stop at killing the government of the nation they are at war with. Ask Belgium how they fared during those conflicts? Ask the Poles and Russians on the Eastern Front (which had a far greater death toll than the Western Front). Ask all those people that were slaughtered by the Mongols under the reign of the Kahns when a city ruler didn't immediately capitulate.

You are arguing in the face of facts. Why?
  • 2 1
 @BDKR: When has that happened in a Western Republic/Democracy?
  • 3 2
 @Hoob93:
actually the answer is "it depends". In my firefighter / medic days I was threatened by an angry woman with a pistol. So I am aware of what that feel like. We were always much more concerned about chemical incidents. People commit suicide in the damnedest ways, so I trained all our people to never open a car door with a slumped over patient until after you have full PPE in place.

I have a friend who used to teach hand to hand combat to law enforcement in the US. His claim was that a knife is a better weapon for close quarters fighting. So is this angry man 3 feet away? I would rather fight one with a firearm. If you grab a knife, you get cut. Grab a pistol o rifle and you may just take it away.

I am also aware that angry people can create other weapons. Aum Shinrikyo killed 13 and injured thousands more in Japan with nary a firearm in sight. They could have killed thousands.

Tim McVeigh killed 168 people. Look at the recent "man with a van" attacks in Europe. How about the bombing of Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina which killed 85 people. If I include the WTC attack, mass murders done with alternate means greatly outnumber those done with firearms.

The real issue we need to deal with is finding the cause of this kind of attack. Restricting access to one weapon will just change the weapon of choice.
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: yes they were fighting and dying,check your history.
  • 2 0
 @dtm1: If you are going to quote me, and even use quotation marks, please copy and paste exactly what I said. Although that other guy made a hyperbolic comment about banning all guns, his post was about mental health being the underlying issue. not banning guns.

I said, in response to his assertion that mental health issues are the problem and not guns:

"Why is it one or the other? Can't two factors be to blame? And can't we work to fix both? Will someone with mental health issues ultimately carry out their plan? Maybe, but wouldn't a few road blocks to buying an assault weapon help? Maybe in the weeks or days longer that it would take, someone notices something and get them help."

I'll ask again where did I ever say that guns should be banned??? Asking for a few roadblocks to buying high powered weapons like more stringent background checks or a longer waiting period somehow equals banning guns to you?

And again you need to stop with the useless statistics. I have no idea if they are correct but they are irrelevant to this conversation because NO ONE is saying civilians should not be allowed to have guns.
  • 1 1
 @jclnv: The simplistic, supetficial fool in me equal to yours compels me to point out it hasn't happened in the US since the 2bd Amendment was enacted.
You're welcome :-)
  • 2 2
 @BenPea: gladly take cowering underneath the table with a gun in my hand than cowering under a table with nothing in my hand. Its called a fighting chance which sounds like is something you dont support.
  • 2 1
 @jclnv: The ad-hoc bunker scenario where the US Government annihilates a bunch of 'Don't tread on me ' revolutionaries is spot on and will happen sooner rather than later.


Here is what will likely happen THIS YEAR: When Trump gets impeached, his ignorant & delusional supporters will start an uprising, likely somewhere southern and isolated like Alabama. They will start planning a attack against Washington DC government facilities. Before the attack takes place US intelligence finds out and confronts the stubborn rebels who refuse to surrender because they thought Trump was God. Drones are sent in to clear up the situation.

This is the what the government will have to resort to, the 2nd Amendment has created a national disaster waiting to happen.
  • 2 0
 @mustbike: The gun lobby will not get behind a program that reduces the number of weapons sold. It's bad for their bottom line.

Still believe nothing will change. Sandy Hook proved that. You have little ones getting massacred and the US Government did nothing. The US government has one key job, protect the people... they fail. The UK did just that when 6 year olds were murdered back in 96 creating a number of reforms to limit the opportunity for someone to be so heinous. That is an example of protecting the people.

I hope I'll be proven wrong about my perceptions of the US government and they seek to value lives over money.
  • 4 0
 @jclnv:

1) A Republic and a Democracy are two seperate things. Rome was a Democracy and failed miserably simply because it allowed greater numbers of people to vote on laws that harmed individuals. A Republic is supposed to protect the rights of individuals but still use democratic processes (voting). We (the US) is supposed to be a Republic.

Democracies suck! The founding fathers knew this as well.

2) It hasn't happened! But the infringement of 1st and 2nd amendments make this possible!

If history is a guide, citizens should never become unarmed.
  • 2 1
 @BenPea: my point exactly you will only debate drug abuse until pb writes an article about! You can careless until its is brought up for you to debate on. Thats called media control. Which all of are doing right now.
  • 1 0
 @redssjerm: Are you, or the majority of american citizens harmed/ shot at daily? I suspect you're not. While not perfect, I'd say that Western governments, including the US do a pretty decent job of keeping their citizens safe. Cases such as Florida, while tragic are thankfully rare. Wouldn't you agree?
  • 2 1
 @BenPea: You're all over the map dude. Are you paid to waste time like this?

This isn't about Trump or Clinton. Sorry!
  • 2 0
 @jclnv:

BTW...

Benjamin Franklin defined democracy as “two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.”
  • 1 3
 @brncr6: "tic tac toe"
Mutually assured destruction. Rolls off the tongue beautifully. But what if the guy knocking at the door has got a hand grenade? Hope you've got shutters on your windows, who knows when they'll come?! When things do go all Mad Max, I might steer clear of the US.
  • 1 2
 @brncr6: that was a response to your "fighting chance" post
  • 1 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: I lost an acquaintance to a shooting, the San Bernadino shooting. That's as close to home as I'd like.
  • 1 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: Also was almost shot while in Denver to catch a baseball game. Didn't dig that either.
  • 1 1
 @Flowcheckers: Yet another post that's long on attack on short on fact. You say this while completely ignoring the facts of history. The governments that commit crime or genocide against the people always disarm them first.

Feel free to prove me wrong as opposed to going on a Bill Maher'esque rant.
  • 1 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: Had a shot gun pointed at me when I was 21 because some guy didn't like me talking to a girl that approached me. That sucked also.
  • 2 0
 @redssjerm: The government has one job. To protect and with hold the Constitution and Bill of Rights. That alone, with no infringement on the right to bear arms would've been a better protector against criminality than the near police state the US would have to become to be everywhere all the time so it could effectively stop shootings.

BTW, this is exactly what the Israeli govt tried for years as a method to stop terrorist attacks. They dropped that and then encouraged all citizens to arm themselves AND CARRY!
  • 2 2
 @BDKR: "not about Trump or Clinton" hey, one thing led to another and here we are...
I am paid to type stuff, but not this. Huge mission creep today. It's my time I'm wasting but it's kind of stimulating.
  • 1 0
 @DiveH: Yup. Even if it didn't make a change (which I think it would) campaign finance reform, and the elimination of lobbyists, would go a long way towards reclaiming democracy.
I disagree on the padded cell thing. That's an extreme case, it might be as subtle as having a home for someone where they can become self sufficient while chemical imbalances in their brain are remediated by proper doses of drugs, instead of self medication with street drugs.

If you're mentally ill, you don't always have the faculties to know what is best for you. It is a fine line between personal autonomy and the common good.
  • 1 0
 @redssjerm: What's your point.
I had a friend who was murdered by his wife with a hammer while he slept and I was beaten into a bloody pulp entirely unprovoked as I walked home one night. I was also left for dead in a hit and run as a kid...
Bad things happen; Bad things happen whether there are guns involved or not. Do you think I cry on about the availability of hammers, or cars, or that the government hasn't locked up everyvaggressive person just in case?
  • 1 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: The numbers are VERY RARE. The chance of being shot in a mass shooting is up there with the chance of dying in a plane crash.

Let's look at some others.

*) You are far more likely to be shot in a gun free zone!
*) You are far more likely to be killed (however intentionally) by a health care professional
*) You are far more likely to be killed by some brain dead person texting while driving.

There are over 60K peep's in LA county alone that are homelss and we want to spend more money that could help on something rates rather low as far as dangers are concerned.
  • 1 0
 @kabanosipyvo: Yeah, but only 7 of them are children (on average)
  • 4 1
 @BenPea: "We"! You're in France on a continent rife with problems of it's own and right on the doorstep of major cultural conflict. There is no "we" here. You have a set of problems that you should be focusing as opposed to ignorantly commenting on problems that are not your concern.

Or is your agenda global?
  • 3 0
 @BDKR: well if narcissists are mentally ill than your president is very much ill and should not get a gun by your reasoning!!!!!! and sociopath is no longer used...its just a psychopath ( which is incurable or and untreatable) where as most other illnesses are!!! such as depression, anxiety, panic attacks, schizophrenia, bipolar, etc, etc, etc...
  • 3 0
 @redssjerm: Where I'm from they just break the nearest bottle over the bar and point that at you.
Why are you playing this game? You're not going to win. Not because I've somehow got a better story in the victimhood lottery, but because my premise holds while yours doesn't: Guns are not the issue, people are. Limit availability of firearms to those who have nefarious intentions effectively and leave decent, law-abiding citizens the hell alone.
  • 2 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: you would use a PCL-R check list and check the axis scores....high narcissist and high antisocial would be needed for psychopathy....lots of people deny responsibility and accountability...does not equate with psychopath....these are narcissistic and or antisocial traits. These are the traits that are very much embedded in the USA gun culture and is very apparent by their politics and current president!!!
  • 2 0
 @colincolin: NRA members come out in droves to defend their guns with their flawed logic. It's no surprise. In America shortly after a mass shooting, NRA folks will go on the attack and will not even spare victims of the attack if they speak out on gun control.
  • 2 0
 @BDKR: Is Australia going to hell and a hand basket?

Adding more guns does not progress society. Having lobbies continue to shape our government is just a legal form of corruption that does not help the nation move forward.

Progress comes with adapting to the changes in society to keep us all moving forward. We all change for hopefully the better as we grow old. I'm will to challenge the second amendment and prevent those that are deemed not mentally fit from having a gun.

Yes, I understand this is a dangerous thing to challenge the bill of rights. It conflicts with mine and I'm sure many of our basic ideology. It scares the crap out of me challenging the bill of rights, that's why I whole heartedly respect everyone's opinion on this board (well mostly, the one's that bring thought) because this is such a dangerous thing that affect society's rights. I'm still questioning my views of myself and I hope me and all of us never stop challenging our own ideas and beliefs.
  • 1 0
 @Bird-Man: Thanks for the additional info. I think it's unfair to characterize an entire population based on your assume prevalence of a single trait though. What evidence do you have to support that claim?
  • 1 0
 @Bird-Man: This is kind of besides the point. If a psychopath IS a mentally ill person, then the concerns over ownership of weapons by these individuals is founded!
  • 2 1
 @Bird-Man: Boom!
@BDKR: yep, a global agenda of love and peace. I'm dual nationality so I essentially have no we, I'm a citizen of nowhere as Teresa May would put it. Haven't noticed a cultural war here yet. Did Fox News tell you that? My kids' godmother wears a headscarf, so I don't have to take what the media says about this impending islamic armageddon at face value. You have government officials who believe Europe is burning because of... Muslims? The Hungarians and Poles will sort their shit out soon enough. The Brits will wake up.
Right I'm going to ween myself off this thread now. Vaya con dios.
  • 1 1
 @Bird-Man: ",, traits that are very much embedded in the USA gun culture..."

And you say this based on what study? A mere declaration doesn't make it so.

Or is it in fact based on stereotype? That all gun owners are white racists republicans? Hence the reason you tied this in with Trump, when indeed the Bill of Rights has nothing to do with him?

Terrible comment.
  • 1 0
 @XCMark: "brown people"? really??????
  • 2 1
 @redssjerm: Nothing wrong with progress and change but you don't accomplish any constructive change when your under the influence of emotion and recent tragedy.

As proven, gun control doesn't stop tragedy. In places where the tragedies as such occur there tends to be more gun control. Proven fact.

Perhaps, a progressive change is to return to less 2 Amendment infringement and empower people to protect themselves.
  • 1 0
 @BDKR: And that's why the US is a constitutional republic!! Woo! Big Grin

"2A - the great equalizer"
  • 1 0
 @redssjerm: BTW...

John Lott looks at Australia to some degree in this article. It's a bit of a read, but if you're interested in fact over agenda then it's worth your while.

johnrlott.blogspot.com/2012/08/some-notes-on-claims-about-australias.html
  • 5 0
 Don't let any of this distract you guys from the fact that if you or a loved one have been diagnosed with mesothelioma, you may be entitled to compensation.
  • 2 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: We share the hit and run incident. Glad I don't share the rest.

My response corresponds to my reply to BDKR. I'm challenging what was written like the old testament.

Some of the thoughts that run through my mind, example: car accidents. Cars are a fabric of society, we try to create laws that limit deaths... such as speed limits and car safety (engineering oversight). Deaths are still occur but less people are getting ejected or burned or all that crazy stuff that may happen in a car accident. So regulation has helped. I look at that as a government coming in and protecting the people. Helping society grow.

Many of us been in car accidents and survived due to car safety improvements. That's why I ask myself can this be done with guns?
  • 2 0
 @willycpc: As you arm yourself with your false security, overwhelming paranoia and barricade yourself with NRA bite points, most other Americans are quietly listening and filtering people like you out of their lives as most Americans nowadays know better not to hang around maniacs carrying concealed weapons because they are constantly paranoid of non-treats.
  • 1 0
 @Batipapo: If this really is an age of reason, respond reasonably. Share facts that prove your position as opposed to ad hominem verbal assaults.
  • 2 0
 @BDKR: Throughout history change has come upon tragedy. Tragedy often has us wake up.

Simply can't agree with your last comment, kind like what has been proposed by arming teachers. The rationality simply doesn't connect.

Okay, I have to get back to work. Will read the article you posted a bit later.

Cheers!
  • 1 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf:
So according to your logic: we should lax the airport screening for terrorists and allow for anyway to purchase and buy bomb materials? Weird right....we did so many things to prevent those type of terror attacks but guns are exempt from the logic and or solution. Odd logic but classic NRA response
  • 1 1
 @Batipapo: Sorry, but history and research proves you wrong.
  • 2 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: 25 years of working in a prison and other forensic settings.....12 years of post secondary education....3 published articles on the subject.....and its 2 traits and combination of dynamic factors as they relate to culture, religion, race, and gender......kinda tuff to really have a discussion on this topic over a keyboard......but basically comes down to people are really stupid and violent and have a tendency to be emotionally attached to their own ethnocentric bullshit to see the tree through the forest!!!!parasite's are we all!
  • 2 0
 @BenPea: It's the classic non-logical argument. In the same logic they would lax the screening at airports, remove airbags from cars, stop motorcyclists wearing helmets and advise people against carcinogenic cigarettes.
  • 2 0
 @Spark24: you feel bullied that 17 kids died last week and you're feeling threatened that there is a discussion around assault rifles? I am sorry how can we make you feel better. Should we also make lax security screening in airports based on your logic because it's been such a hassle going thru those lines?
  • 2 0
 @BDKR: terrible argument.....look up definition of culture.......no mention of racists or republicans....just an example of people who think that their opinion should be everyone's opinion and that rights actually exist in the form of entitlements.......bill of rights is paper that does not protect anyone or everyone if it did .....don't those 17 kids have more of a right to life then you to have a machine gun......belief in the bill of rights is only real if its for EVERYONE!!!! that's the definition of reality!!!
  • 2 1
 @BenPea: So in other words, you're willing to whittle away at the fabric of other sovereign societies because you want to be a "citizen of nowhere". That is the precise kernel of belief that leads to cultural conflict. It has nothing to do with color or religion. Instead, it's when large groups of people decided they want to change the cultural under-pinnings of a given location whether it be city, state, or region.

You brought in race!

That said, Communism and Socialism cast themselves as protectors of the unfortunate and promoted near utopian ideals. Of course, all of those a55hat5 that got in power then turned around and murder large numbers of their populace.

Please study your history. Peace isn't simply an agreement among those that want to feel love and peace. It's a preservation of ideals that protect peace.
  • 2 1
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: With a monthly mass shootings are you that calloused enough to attempt to downgrade the seriousness of the ongoing slaughter. Don't you think it's a little infantile and superficial for you to defend the indefensible? Just saying....
  • 2 1
 @BDKR: Boy you are a creep and delusional. Sad how people are that lost in life.
  • 1 1
 @Batipapo: monthly mass shootings?
  • 1 3
 @redssjerm: While less people are getting ejected or burning to death, are less accidents happening. And of those that are happening, are they because of the intent or recklessness of the driver or the car?

You can't make guns safer. You can make society safer by empowering individuals to protect themselves.

Legislation hasn't proven to stop this kind of stuff.

Societal cohesion on the other hand probably has something to do with it.
  • 3 1
 @JLopez149: So now grab that number, add any other such knife related fatality in that country over the course of 1 year, divide by the number of people in that country.
Now do the same for gun casualties in the US....Guarantee you that is a bigger number. But then again it might require some additional neurons inside your lid.
  • 3 1
 @BDKR: Incorrect. A republic has ELECTED (See democracy) officials and a president instead of a ruling Monarch. I have followed a lot of your posts, most of them have very vague and uneducated points that are not backed by credible sources. I see your arguments as null and void as your creditibity is definitely in question.
  • 1 0
 @Bird-Man: Links to any of these published articles. Not saying they don't exist. I just wouldn't mind looking at them.

That said, the 2nd Ammendment isn't ethnocentric bullshit.
  • 1 0
 @thehardtail: Read your own link, man. That law expired in 2004
  • 1 1
 @Bird-Man: Who's talking about opinion. There are positions that many of us have taken based on historical fact and research that proves gun control to be wrong.

But if you insist on bringing race into it, gun control in the US was founded in racism!

Here are but some of the irrefutables that mine and many others positions (regardless of race) are based on.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN0vkSO9n8Y
www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-l7TO01-Sg
www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpyLpIjEESM
www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMZtPj9xdN8

Fact is fact brother.
  • 1 0
 @Batipapo: You're kind of proving my point. ;-)
  • 1 1
 @togood2die: You mean an ROI (return on investment)? So i would say that preventing a sinlgle 8 year old death far surpasses that ROI if that means banning the sales of assault rifles. So wrong and wrong....BTW, when the US military goes in any country (Iraq, Afghanistan, ..) the first order of business is to confiscate arms because they know it's a direct correlation to US military casualties so somehow, your military training has failed you on your logic.
  • 1 1
 @brncr6: Honest question? I don't believe France is having monthly mass shootings so what are you so proud of? Are you proud of the 17 students who died last week, or the 20 elementary students who died at Sandy Hook? Or the numerous people slaughtered in Vegas? So yeah, you are not necessarily qualified to speak on the matter nor had you offered any meaningful solutions. There is nothing patriotic about your defense of the indefensible.
  • 1 0
 @woody13fox: I'd take you're one of those Arpaio racist supporters?
  • 1 0
 @vanmtnbiker: so true
  • 2 2
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: we dont have a prime minister retard
  • 2 1
 @Batipapo: proud of my constitutional rights, proud of a lot of other things also. But asking someone if their proud of kids being killed in school is a really dumb question. The only thing lm defending is my constitutional rights! We all can talk all day long about gun control but in the end it not going to solve anything.
  • 2 0
 @brncr6: How delusional do you have to be for such arguments? You make no sense and your logic is so flawed and impossible to follow.
  • 1 1
 @Drewnose: "I see your arguments as null and void as your creditibity is definitely in question.".

So in other words, you choose to attack me as opposed to attacking the facts?

I wouldn't be on here if I was worried about what you thought/think of me.

That said, how about a reasoned argument against the things I'm saying? Or do you prefer to ignore history and research that shows gun control is wrong. I've posted links to various documentaries. Be a reasonable person and attack those as those have more to do with the conversation at hand than I.
  • 1 0
 @redssjerm: I think we agree that any improved legislation should target the tiny minority who use their firearms for evil, reprehensible acts and not place additional, undue burden on the overwhelming majority of gun owners, who are generally normal, law-abiding citizens, without very compelling reason to do so.
  • 1 0
 @Batipapo: I don't know what you're talking about. What logic are you referring to and what mental gymnastics did you unleash to arrive at that as the logic conclusion of anything I've said?
  • 1 1
 @Drewnose: And BTW, I'm not incorrect about what a republic is. When I said "democratic processes (voting)", who do you think I was referring too? Hopeful Prices from Jupiter?
  • 2 0
 @Batipapo: No, the initial assertion was ill-informed and the product of very little though (or too few neurons). My response was deliberately simplistic and similarly facile to highlight how foolish and unworthy of genuine consideration it was.
  • 2 1
 @AutumnMedia: Based on the logic "if you don't buy from these companies you're the problem not the solution to gun control." so if i chose not to buy cigarette products or cars with poor safety ratings then i am contributing to tobacco use and or car accident fatalities? Sheesh....that is hard to follow. Sounds like the NRA shoved some hard to follow logic down your throat.
  • 1 0
 @Batipapo: Dude I don't even own a gun - literally I'm a total pacifist - not even a knife- I just don't believe bull shit - simple as that - People that make cycling safe have nothing to do with guns...
  • 4 1
 @BDKR: Wow...you must watch a lot of Info Wars and bunker news to be this paranoid. Referring to East Timor issues to justify your guns? Hummm........what an illogical argument.
  • 4 1
 @BDKR: Presented to you by Fox News, NRA and InfoWars
  • 1 0
 @Batipapo: Bombs dummy
  • 1 1
 @BDKR: That hasn't been the way your postings have been.
  • 2 0
 @Bird-Man: I wasn't questioning your professional competencies, I was interested in the references of your assertion.
If those traits are recognised in the general population, as fundamental characteristics of human nature then why call out members of the NRA and Trump as anything special?
I'd be interested to read your papers too, if you have them to hand and no objections.
  • 2 0
 @BDKR: Your NRA agenda has worked out really well with the ARM ALL. Oh yeah, our mass shooting have been in decline as gun sales have dramatically increased...NOT...so your logic is far an non-factual.
  • 3 2
 @Batipapo:

Above you said, "So i would say that preventing a sinlgle 8 year old death far surpasses that ROI if that means banning the sales of assault rifles"

Apparently you don't believe the life of an 8 year old Timoorese is worth protecting? How many of those were killed by the invading Indonesians because they couldn't get rifles?

I guess it's cool with you that 30K plus blacks were hung during Jim Crow and you don't agree with Rosa Parks who sat on her porch with her father with a Shotgun to stop the KKK from pulling 5h1t on them.

I guess you agree with Stalin that those 2 million plus Ukranians he starved to death didn't need their rifles to use a protection against state theft!

You're doing a good job of proving you're dumb phuck!
  • 2 1
 @Batipapo: trolling?
  • 3 1
 @Batipapo: delusional to be proud of one's constitutional rights? How so?
  • 1 0
 @Batipapo: Funny that. I'm not in the NRA. ROFL

You're still failing. ;-)
  • 1 0
 @dtm1: and what has any of this to do with kids shooting kids with assult wappons?
  • 2 1
 @Hoob93: I’d rather fight someone with a gun. Referring to many law enforcement trainings and such, it’s easier to fight someone close quarters with a gun, than say with a butcher knife or any knife really. Can’t hear a stab wound, but you can hear a gunshot.
  • 2 1
 @onemanarmy: It will make a difference if a lot of people do it. i work in this industry. i am fine with it positive change hurting a bit if its necessary. I rather make a few bucks less than see children slayed.

if you are cool with kids being killed go on supporting vista or other gun manufacturing companies. Its your choice
  • 2 1
 @Drewnose: yes but they can easily take it out of their dads closet...
  • 1 1
 @Batipapo:
"our mass shooting have been in decline as gun sales have dramatically increased...NOT."

That's a dumb comment. I'll rephrase it for you.

"our mass shootings have been on the increase with gun control"

www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAXZFTzquaw

The above is by a guy named John Lott. Well known researcher that's been associated with numerous universities and spent better than a decade researching this. Should I believe him or some dude tossing about pejorative terms on the internet?
  • 2 0
 @XCMark: except D-BAG 45 signed a bill in February 2017 blocking Obama-era background checks on guns for people with mental illnesses.

Making it easier for people with mental illness to purchase a gun. Also, why is that you have to be 21 to buy a handgun in the US, but rifles, shotguns and assault style rifles can be purchased when you turn 18? (Yes.. i know it's the concealment factor, but AR-15 is far more efficient at killing people than a handgun.

P"
  • 3 0
 @gabethebabem8: Its just a really bad comparison. Bringing Hitler into the discussion about school shootings has absolutely no relevance whatsoever,

But to your point: He armed up his buddies first, formed his own militia and armed them (SS) to protect his party. He used his buddies to start suppressing any opposition or resistance and killing or jailing up anyone that spoke up against him and his policies. He went on killing millions.
Little Fritz with a gun would not have not changed anything. In fact my grandfather told me everyone had guns anyway because they had them from WW1.

To me the shocking point is the policy similarities to what is going on on teh right side of this country.
Germany wanted to be great again. Germany wanted to be first. The rhetoric in today's America is freaking similar and that's scary but a gun wont help with that because its the gun folks that buy into it...
  • 1 0
 @Rattles: You sure can. Anyone with an RPAL and a thousand bucks could own one by the end of the week.
www.wanstallsonline.com/savage-msr15-patrol-223rem.html
  • 1 1
 @peewho: No gun is more or less efficient at killing people. If I were going through classrooms to murder kids I'd want a shotgun and a sidearm. If I wanted to sit on a hill a hundred yards away I'd take the AR. Or better yet the best weapon would be just driving through the playground. I guarantee I could kill more people quicker with a vehicle then a gun.
  • 2 1
 @michibretz: The analog to Hitler and the SS today is Antifa!
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: according to teh international red cross teh US and their few European allies also killed about 1.5 million unarmed civilians in these countries over the last 10 years.

Doesn't surprise me people are susceptible to being radicalized and taking measures in their on hands.
Over a hundred years Military interventions Guns and violence created this problem in the first place. As you can said guns didn't solve it in the last 10 years and the won't solve it in the future either. Guns never solve any problems. They are made to kill people not help them... anywhere in teh world.
  • 2 2
 @BDKR: Take it easy, don't skin that smoke wagon just yet boy. I am not attacking you personally, this is a place for discussion and debate. The fact that you think I am attacking you is funny, make sure you have a loaded concealed carry weapon online. You never know when you will be attacked, and let's not forget a good guy online with a gun, will stop a bad guy online with a gun.

I am glad you pointed out that you don't care about what I think of you. I don't have any thoughts about you as I don't know you personally. You pointing that out tells me that you are a different person online than offline. All I have to go on is your posts which are essentially your opinions. As right as you feel they may be, opinions can never be allowed to outweigh fact.

The fact is, firearms are lethal. Any situation where a firearm is brandished as a weapon usually ends in tragedy in the form of homocide. The less guns that are available and the more control you have over those who have them will net less tragedy. It is good you referenced history, as history has dictated we as humans have undergone many changes in how we handle things. We have progressed from being ruled by tyrannical dictatorships and Monarchs to a free speech democratic system. Keep progression in mind when talking about firearms control, change is difficult and it is always hard to start with, but once it happens your society will be a better place.

It is difficult to present a valid argument to a person spewing antiquated rhetoric, uninformed opinions and referencing "YouTube documentaries" as credible sources of information. Therefor, see my previous statement, "I see your arguments as null and void as your credibility is definitely in question."
  • 2 1
 @Batipapo: same here, was about to buy a Bell Moto 9... No thanks!
  • 1 0
 @Websterminator: Oh my god... really? You have to bring the holocaust into a debate if guns should be easily accessible or not? thats so bad.... unbelievable!
  • 3 0
 Boy... what happened to the mods removing pointless/offensive/etc comments? Lol... I can't believe some of the stupidity/lack of critical thinking/lack of historical knowledge in here. I was going to comment more, but forget it. I can hardly scroll down far enough to comment... well over 1k. Boy. Yeah, I've got opinions, but spouting them obviously won't change anything.
  • 2 0
 @michibretz: And...

I have kids, my firearms are stored properly as per our firearms regulations. If a child can simply grab a fully operational firearm out of a closet then there is a huge lack of education and respect. If you as a father, mother, brother, son, sister, daughter, family member, citizen cannot take action to protect against the unauthorized use of a firearm then you need intervention in the form of tighter regulations by your government. Plain and simple.

Our firearms regulations are designed to protect against tragedy.
  • 4 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: Feel free to also boycott MAN trucks which have been used to run over people in germany... these comparisons are just soooo wrong.
  • 4 0
 @BDKR: i prefer the unarmed, i can run from them.

and by the way, i did not watch your youtube videos... i worked a summer in Mauthausen concentration camp.
People that have been their told us stories. My grandparents told us stories.
Nothing in those whiteness accounts of 2oth century history made me believe a gun or a war would ever be a solution to anything. rather the opposite...
  • 1 0
 @michibretz: I think you mean someone else. I'm not condoning boycotting anything. I'm trying to get certain individuals to stop boycotting reason and suppressing their intelligence for the sake of facile ideological dogma.
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: they were not fighting with guns...
  • 1 1
 @Drewnose: You've really proven nothing there. Your dismissing facts based on location or source. So what, it's on youtube. If someone showed up on youtube and said 2+2 = 4 we could dismiss it because it's on youtube?

You are dismissing better than a decade of research and over century of historical fact because it's on Youtube?

Nice try, but that's the most unreasonable thing I've yet seen today.

That said, you've not proven what I'm saying is opinion. You are just saying it's opinion. Big difference.

Is the fact that gun control in the US for years was borne or racism opinion or fact?

Lastly, stop trying to smooth things over with a veneer of 5h1t.
  • 1 1
 @Drewnose: And, for the record, what exactly is antiquated? Think carefully before you answer.
  • 5 0
 @BDKR: of course it is!!! not too smart but ill give it to you, you are very angry, which indicates you are very defensive and hyper sensitive when you perceive to be threatened by those with a superior intellect or different opinion. In most cases a person would not be defensive in such a benign and obvious facts that people with power corrupt absolutely......and people with guns have been shown to escalate little perceived slights as the gun gives them more perceived power. The argument of protection is moot at best....you do not live in a war zone, such as Syria, Nigeria, south sudan , Iraq, etc etc etc.....so your argument for assault rifles is just asinine!!
  • 2 0
 @Drewnose: good to know your firearms are safely locked! A lot of people are sadly not that responsible.
  • 2 0
 @BDKR: Hold on bub. I called you out for not having credible sources for your facts. How is this for a nice steamy coat of veneer.

- Provide me with a peer reviewed scientific study backing up your firearms control facts, I am not talking about the facts in your auto induced YouRube rat hole.

Have fun finding one.
  • 2 0
 @BDKR: You tell me, you just had to look it up on Google.
  • 2 1
 @Bird-Man: And yet another strays off topic into the realm of personal attack.

A learned person such as you should be able to stick to facts and not resort to questioning the quality of the individual you are debating.

Fact is fact!

That said, by saying the argument for rifles not making sense outside of a war zone has a temporal focus. In other words, it looks at our current condition in comparison to places such as Syria and ignores the fact that our current condition can change over time.

How many people prior to Hitler thought Germany would ever wind up where it was in 1946?
How many people in the roaring '20's thought they would find themselves in the Great Depression?
How many 7 year olds anticipated being slaughtered in East Timoor in 1973?

You know the answer to this, but instead you're arguing in the face of facts.
  • 1 2
 @michibretz: "i prefer the unarmed, i can run from them."

Not at 96. LOL

Seriously though, that's called a fantasy.
  • 2 1
 What does Bell/Giro/whatever have to do with guns? They're BICYCLE HELMET manufacturers. Yep, one big parent company owns lots of other companies, often unrelated. That's the world of business... it's a money-making thing. Is a Volkswagen Passat the same thing as a Bugatti Chiron (or Porsche 911 GT2 RS, Audi R8, Lamborghini Aventador, or Bentley)? Would you take your LaFerrari to the local Dodge/Jeep whatever dealership for a service? Or race it against a Fiat 300? While we're at it, a Scion tC is the same as a Lexus LFA, right? And using Paypal (maybe to buy a bike on PB Razz ) is the same thing as SpaceX or a Tesla Model S/X/3/Roadster? Ok... car rant over. But seriously, I think that hating on Bell etc because of the NRA is missing the point.
  • 1 0
 @michibretz: just looked at a picture of a French Resistance fighter with a British sten machine gun, photo was taken in 1942. There are many photos and videos of the French citizens in street battles with the Nazis towards the end of the French occupation.
  • 2 0
 @Drewnose: Prove that they're not?

If you can prove that numerous genocides didn't happen and that John Lott's research is bunk, I'll give you that. I won't even call you names and get pissed.

But let's be real here shall we.

Did Communism kill millions?
Did National Socialism kill millions?
Did the KKK during Jim Crow kill thousands while legislating for gun control against blacks?

How many of those might be here today if they could shoot back?

And those three examples above just can't be refuted. Sorry.

And you can keep that Google comment. I've studied Empire, Geo-Politics, and International Finance for nearly a decade now. You can't wash the 5h1t stains out of history. ;-)
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose: Thank you! Another level-headed person who can safely store firearms! Smile
  • 3 0
 @onemanarmy: in that case, keeping with your logical arguement that banning a single type of gun would be a stupid waste of time (I agree), then the only logical solution would be to ban all types of gun.
Just like Australia did - No more mass shootings since.
Just like the UK - No more mass shootings since.

Glad we've agreed on that.
  • 3 0
 @onemanarmy: if it's going to take 30 years to sort out then now would be a good time to start.

You could make the USA a better and safer place for your grand children
  • 2 0
 @BDKR: according to your profile you are 50...

seriously though... it's a peaceful fantasy over a violent one and i still prefer it...
  • 1 0
 @ryanm189: you can change amendments for the good of the people.
That's what an amendment is. It is when something has been changed.
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: and I bet you now have quite strict control on explosives as it doesn't seem to happen much anymore.
  • 5 2
 @CustardCountry:

I want my daughter to be able to walk at 2am wherever she wants. That's possible if she carries.

f*ck your feelings. There will always be bad people and disarming law-abiding citizens is absolutely retarded.
  • 2 0
 @XCMark: True but you can't have mass shooting if there aren't any guns.
  • 3 2
 @michibretz: Yes sir! 50 years old.
Old punk rocker / skater from back in the day! That was difficult as a black kid in the 80's.
Worked for the California Dept of Corrections Through the mid '90's.
Traveled a lot during and after that. Spent time in Central American and lived in South America for four years. Eventually lived for too short of a time in Turkey before coming back and discovering DH!

I'm with you. As a writer, I envision peace and I just adore love, amazing places, and the people in those amazing places. But as someone that studies history, I know those are delicate and willingly broken by people that have no compunction. History is chock full of the slaughter of unarmed citizenry.

That said, clinging to the fantasy of peace without the acknowledgement of evil is a tragedy!
  • 3 2
 @BDKR: wow...you make NO SENSE!
  • 3 0
 @Dangerous-Dan: I don't see how you can deny there's a serious gun problem. They seem much too easy to get hold of.
  • 2 1
 @Batipapo: "wow...you make NO SENSE!"

LOL!

So here's a guy that's 42 years old, but argues and sounds like a 12 year old telling me I make no sense.

I guess your dad can beat up my dad too right? LOL
  • 4 2
 I like guns, they are fun to use on a target rang with friends. But would I want to own my own one, no. Would I want myself or others to have easy access to them, no.

Most pro gun owner I recon they would say they own a gun for safety of themselves and the family, but how many of them have been on a first aid course. A gun won’t save a chocking child or heal a broken bone.

Lastly, if people want to relie on a 220 year old law for their gun ownership then the weapons that they are intightaled to own should be of 220 year old design. Change the laws to suit the modern guns.
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: bell is a business. The money they earn gos into the pockets of Vistas investors.
If the flow of money slows down the investors will want to know why that is.
They will want to change that.
If the reason is the parent company is selling guns and supporting the NRA they will force vista management to do something to do something.

If the guns make them more money than the outdoor stuff they can sell teh outdoor branches to someone who doesn't sell guns, like amer sports for example.
If the outdoor brands earn them more money they can sell the gun brand and acquire a different business or stop producing guns all together and stop supporting the NRA and we can all buy Bell and Giro again.

It doesn't take much to stir up teh investors... if their revenue goes down only a few percent the will act, one way or teh other. most likely long before they start laying off people at the outdoor brands if the reason is clearly not teh performance of these brands directly.

It's all about the money... if you give them less the will start acting...
  • 2 0
 @Batipapo: He makes perfect sense. It's your prejudices that are clouding your judgement.
I'm reluctant to bring this up but *apparently* (I haven't verified this for myself as much as I'd like) there is a surge of racially-motivated murders taking place in South Africa that is being ignored by those in power. That would constitute Government tyranny.
Certainly this does:
www.news.com.au/finance/economy/world-economy/the-time-for-reconciliation-is-over-south-africa-votes-to-confiscate-whiteowned-without-compensation/news-story
  • 3 1
 @BDKR: You're right, that happened back then. Find me proof that John Lott's research is peer reviewed through an accredited process....

We are talking now... today... the future. We are talking about progressing firearms control, not regressing and worrying about how we got here. Like I said, antiquated rhetoric.

I don't believe Lott's research to be accurate, there are wild reaching statistics and brutal extrapolations from less than acceptable sample sizes for his data.
  • 1 0
 @CustardCountry: owning explosives Im pretty sure was never my constitutional right. Cant really see going duck hunting or deer hunt with explosives but it is my right to hunt with a gun.
  • 2 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: Fortunately that could not happen in the US, given the small matter of what I like to call "no native people left".
I'm going to check out BDKR's youtube vids. I genuinely hope to learn something.
This is all turning into a situation with no possible solution (gun control, not this comment thread).
I think humanity should be aiming higher (pun not intended). Nearer the brain rather than the penis.
  • 1 0
 @theminsta: your daughter will carry a gun everytime she's out at night?
  • 1 0
 @BDKR: John Lott the guy who was paid by the NRA to publish fake studies? The guy who was expelled from his career by his co-workers because of manipulation of statistics in his study. If I were you, I would read up a little more past the Youyube link you sent. I have a feeling you have been fooled in the same way the tobacco industry as it sponsored fake studies to discredit the association of lung cancer and tobacco. Good research. Do you have any more credible data?
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose: on point!!!
  • 1 0
 @Bird-Man: Glad you realize the insanity most Americans have to put up with and pay dearly with innocent children blood.
  • 1 0
 @BenPea: You'd be surprised. Something similar has been attempted in the last year, just not by Native Americans. Will check the vids too. Agreed we should all aim higher.
  • 1 0
 @Thustlewhumber: you gonna pull that gun out of your camelbak if someone's got a gun trained on you? It takes me a minute and a half to get my shock pump out, what situation are you envisioning where it comes in handy?

If you're in Alaska I 100% understand though.
  • 2 0
 @BenPea: The grey history is mostly presented as black and white. To avoid those mistakes from the past, we should decentralize a lot of the power from our leaders to the citizens. The bigger the country, the bigger the problem.
  • 2 0
 @Hoob93: @Hoob93: Just did a quick search looks like cars killed 40000 people in the us on average and guns 13286. Nobody wants to give up there cars or pay attention while driving or even cut down there driving in anyway. In my country once you get a license at 16 your pretty much set they dont ask you to take another driving test as far as i am aware. Nobody wants to change that even though it would probably save countless lives if people had to pass a driving test every ten years people might be better drivers. Cars are now being used as terrorist weapons and they are so easy to get ahold of anyone with the cash can buy a ferrari. Why do you need a car that can go far faster than any speed limit maybe cars should come with governors so people cant speed. You dont need a car that can do 160 but you have the right to buy one. so maybe if you own a sports car you have to have a licence for a local track and your fancy car has its govenor turned off when you are on the track. I only rant about this because the same guy whose arguing about gun control could leave work answer a text while driving and kill someone everyone who drives has a real world potential to kill someone by mistake at any time and we call it an accident and we forgive. so next time your five minutes late and jetting though traffic you could hit a group of people and it would be the same number of deaths as a mass shooting, all so your boss doesnt get on you about being late.
  • 2 0
 @parisgore: I can deeply appreciate this perspective and I really like the products and the people I've interacted with from all of these brands. Unfortunately, I feel like the only power I really have in this democracy is with my dollar and I'm going to use that power whenever I have the knowledge to do so.
It's a shame the these good brands got bought by Vista, but the reality is that they are directly generating profits that are being used to fund the NRA and fight against Public Lands, two things I really don't agree with.
My dollar = my vote
  • 2 0
 @loganflores: what's a car made for? What's a gun made for?
  • 1 0
 @Jfisher77: the person with a gun doesn't need to be close quarters though do they a knife is only effective when you're within arms reach
  • 2 0
 @Jfisher77: Of course knives are more dangerous than guns, armies never use guns soldiers say kitchen knives are much more effective
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: they are both made to be used
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: ye but for what?
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: one to shoot and one to transport.
  • 2 1
 @brncr6: stop being so obtuse it doesn't prove anything apart from you can't bring your self to say a gun is for killing because it undermines your position and your position is weak to begin with
  • 2 2
 Killing in self-defense is okay. We need to arm our women and elderly!
  • 3 1
 @Hoob93: i own several different guns, for the last 35 years and they were made to shoot, not a single one of them has killed a person. The cars and trucks ive owned over the last 30 years have not killed anybody. Its about being responsible. Like logan said being irresponsible can have both things turned in to killing objects. A gun can only be used for killing when its in the hands of a person that wants to kill. There is at least one gun per person in the United States so guns are not just going to go away there here now.
The most important things to us are our kids yet our money in banks are more secure then the kids in a school and thats sad. A lot of people are more concerned about gun control then keeping kids safe, go back to one gun per U.S. citizen, you think changing the age to 21 to buy a rifle will all of a sudden keep the kids safe in a school when there are that many guns out there already. Raising the age limit will not lower the murder rate.
Hell you cant even get on a plane anymore with a pair of finger nail clippers but somehow a kid can walk on to a school campus with firearms.
I dont know how but its time to make kids as safe as most everything else in this country.
  • 2 0
 @XCMark: we are sadly an easily manipulated bunch
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: should responsible people be allowed powerful explosives, land mines and AA missiles? The line is drawn there so why can't it move?
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: Why you trying to take our liberties Hoob? Stop.
  • 2 1
 @Hoob93: last i checked owning explosives, land mines and AA missiles are not a constitutional right. Owning firearms is my right. AA missiles might help me out duck hunting though, now that would be a badass day of duck hunting!
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: heck yeah we should! I would love to recreationally play with some explosives and some surface to air missiles!
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: oh ye I forgot it's your right good point. I would like that stuff aswell really but I accept that if I was allowed it then so would other irresponsible idiots, I wouldn't like that
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: you own a car? Other irresponsible idiots own cars. More people are killed in or by cars every year then pepole killed by fireams.
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: yes and criminals were robbing banks with Tommy guns and bar rifles. Don t see that anymore do you? Because they were banned. Then renamed in the 60s. The difference between then and now is the far right media and nra sucking the gun manufacturers teet.

Calling anyone trying to stop the massacre a socialist.

And you eat it up with a spoon.
Reminds me of big tobacco 25 years ago.

Lobbing ie buying politicians should be illegal and I can't.for the life of me see why it isn't.
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: were back here again. What's a car designed for? What's a gun designed for?
  • 1 1
 @XCMark: 90 well the same conservative politicians that want no gun control also are against education the mentally ill and poor. And two of those things lead directly to crime.
And then in the same breath they back more police so they look tough on crime.
Conservative values are just screwd all around.
No
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: yeh guns we made to kill animals some were made to kill people. Cars are made to move you from point a to point b and its ok that irresponsible kill other people with cars because they were not made to kill.
  • 1 0
 @michibretz: So we're going to hurt innocent employees in the bike business to make a point about the gun business. Yes, a boycott would exert influence, as noted in this article's update, but it seems like a rather indirect, inefficient, and undesirable action.
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: it's not ok how many road laws are there to protect and minimize damage. It has a useful function we've become reliant on. Ideally everything thing would be closer together and we could just ride bikes everywhere and use trains and planes to go long distance.
  • 2 0
 "@brncr6: i own several different guns, for the last 35 years and they were made to shoot, not a single one of them has killed a person. The cars and trucks ive owned over the last 30 years have not killed anybody. Its about being responsible. Like logan said being irresponsible can have both things turned in to killing objects. A gun can only be used for killing when its in the hands of a person that wants to kill. There is at least one gun per person in the United States so guns are not just going to go away there here now.
The most important things to us are our kids yet our money in banks are more secure then the kids in a school and thats sad. A lot of people are more concerned about gun control then keeping kids safe, go back to one gun per U.S. citizen, you think changing the age to 21 to buy a rifle will all of a sudden keep the kids safe in a school when there are that many guns out there already. Raising the age limit will not lower the murder rate.
Hell you cant even get on a plane anymore with a pair of finger nail clippers but somehow a kid can walk on to a school campus with firearms.
I dont know how but its time to make kids as safe as most everything else in this country."
Thank you. Salute
  • 1 0
 @reverend27: another example other then a bank, ever been to Disneyland?
Your kid is safer at Disneyland then in thier classroom. To get into Disneyland they look though your bags and you go though a metal detector. But still a kid can just walk on to a campus with a firearm no problem at all.
Thats my issue.
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: that's a terrible state of affairs when you have to search students like that. That's taking their freedom. Using your logic why should all students have to be searched just because of a few bad ones?
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: well then why should gun rights get hard for everyone because of just a few bad pepole out there? There is a lot of places pepole go and get searched before they can enter, court houses, sporting events, transportation.
What could be wrong doing it at schools. I love my son more than anything and would have no problem with bag searching and metal detectors if it will help keep him and all the other kids safer. Remember money is far more protected then our kids. Money is lock in a vault with alarms, cameras and armed guards.
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: because a gun is a powerful weapon. Do you think you're son will feel safe "don't worry son it's just in case a maniac comes in with a gun and kills everybody"
  • 2 1
 @Hoob93: I'm fine with having armed guards checking all bags and making everyone go through metal detectors at schools. Much rather do that then chance anyone taking guns into my kids schools.
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: You dont really care about the safety of kids do you. If you did care you would take every step possible to protect them insead of arguing about ideas other pepole come up with. You dont have kids do you?
  • 3 0
 WONT SOMEONE THINK OF THE KIDS!! TAKE MY FREEDOMS AWAY IF I "FEEL" LIKE IT WILL MAKE PEOPLE SAFE

You should move to Canada Smile
  • 2 1
 @theminsta: Canada has a more secure border then our schools, gota have a passport and there is a real good chance your car will be searched.
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: I care more than you. I don't want to freak them out with scary ideas and infringe on their privacy. I care about their innocence aswell as their safety something you seem to have no concept of.
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: pretty sure they are freaked out right now. Never saw a kid freak out because there bag was searched and they had walk though a metal detector to get in to Disneyland. Thats what you call scary infringing on their privacy but its done tens of thousands of time everyday.
What is the difference when they go to school?????
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: you have kids?
  • 1 1
 @brncr6: You're the one that won't give up your gun because you want to hunt even though it could potentially make a country that's safer for your children.
  • 1 1
 @brncr6: so because you don't have a leg to stand on your going to say "you don't have kids therefore you don't care about them or understand them"
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: do you have kids? Like i asked before whats the difference? Really would like to know the difference of searchs at lot of places but not at schools. And no I will not give up my guns, ill be passing them on to my son when its time.
  • 1 2
 @brncr6: this is never going to end we couldn't have more polar views on the subject. We both have a completely different idea of what the world should be like. Sorry but have to say your world is f##ked.
  • 3 0
 @Hoob93: I don't think anyone should have to give up their firearms if they're going to hunt for food. The use of firearms for hunting is a vastly different topic. In Canada 38 out of 100 people own firearms, the vast majority would be for hunting. Hunting feeds mine and many other families. Giving up firearms and allowing for more stringent regulation are two different topics. The later being required in the States, but taking them away is not the answer.
  • 2 1
 @Drewnose: Thank you for the response you gave!
  • 1 1
 @Drewnose: I was just playing devils advocate really. People should be allowed to hunt definitely, I fish and keep most of what I catch it's a great feeling catching your families dinner from the wild.
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: my world is just fine. Happy family and a happy life. Nothing f**ked over here. There are hundreds of different views of how the world should be. Dont no where your from but I live in one of the best countrys on this planet. So f**ked i am not.
  • 1 1
 @brncr6: Wales mate it's f**kin ace. I meant your proposed future world. You really don't get it do you unless it's written in plain english.
  • 1 1
 @brncr6: "Nothing f##cked over here"
Apart from kids killing lots of kids
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: So let me get this straight. The trauma of going back to school after a shooting etc, it's been all over the news... that's better than any inconvenience that a quick check might cause? Yeah, I'm sure they'll be innocent; you're super innocent when you're dead. Oh, and don't think no one knows about this stuff. If anything, that kid would be "freaking out" because they know something could happen and no one's checking for it. By your logic, why should anyone or anything be checked? Sure, 9/11 (insert tragedy here) happened, but most people aren't bad. Let me right onto this plane, etc. What the heck? Ignorance isn't really bliss. Closing our eyes doesn't make it go away.
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: "Ideally everything thing would be closer together and we could just ride bikes everywhere". Bro, have you ever tried to commute any reasonable distance by bike?
  • 1 1
 @mtbikeaddict: That's the exact sort of paranoid view that pretty much sums up the 21st century
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: no only about 5 miles. Wish it was closer
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: I did say use things like trains to go longer distance
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: Let's see, does he have kids? He's 24, running his mouth, and avoiding the question. I doubt it.
  • 1 0
 I love the fact that PB is sponsored by these brands...
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: Yeah, but those are like LONG distance, mostly. Anyway, after spending a week with a bike for transportation... 150 miles later, I'm happy to see cars. Smile
  • 1 1
 @brncr6: "Like logan said being irresponsible can have both things turned in to killing objects. A gun can only be used for killing when its in the hands of a person that wants to kill."
"There is a lot of places pepole go and get searched before they can enter, court houses, sporting events, transportation.
What could be wrong doing it at schools"
If they're clever enough to find other things to kill with do you not think they're clever enough to find different places to kill like the school gates.
There are many things that are wrong with doing it at schools, where's the trust? It's a moral thing.
Obviously if guns weren't as easily available it would help solve the gun issue.
  • 3 1
 @parisgore: You are wrong, and your own argument proves my point. If you say a boycott will hurt those working directly for the bike related companies owned by vista, it's because a boycott is affecting Vista's bottom line. You may not have any experience in that world, but for a big investment company like Vista, the bottom line is pretty much the only thing they care about, ( as you correctly pointed out). If this shakes out into an effective boycott, and their bike brands start writing red, you can bet vista will sell the brands without hesitation, likely to someone who does not manufacture weapons of war, then we can all go back to buying blackburn pumps that work pretty well ( but not perfectly) and be happy that we got some good, old school MTB brands out of the hands of someone like Vista.
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: no I don't have kids I did imply that earlier on. Running my mouth lol
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: trains are for short journeys aswell I did say "ideally"
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: I know... I thought about editing it but couldn't think of anything better. Really, aren't we all? Or is there some other reason this article is closing in on 2k comments? Big Grin
  • 2 0
 @brncr6: Your point about there being as many guns as people in America is compelling. You're right, they're not going away and neither is the 2nd Amendment. You may as well try to empty Lake Geneva with a tea spoon. And if everyone can be responsible and stay safe, why not let them have this luxury that they are so attached to.
So I say this: if we assume that guns and the 2A are immovable objects, you're going to need in the region of say $1 trillion to provide education, universal psychological screening, counselling, social care and services, employment support, etc. to ensure that you have a happy, fulfilled population who don't sometimes get the urge to commit gun crime. So... more taxes? This is a genuine point, we all want to eliminate deaths from what is ultimately not a tool anyone in an industrialized nation needs to live, but is a nice toy to have. Hey, you may even enjoy hunting, which is great. People are imperfect though, so you need to get on with the job have straightening everyone out. It'll take time, but I think it can be done. Agreed?
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: "Like i asked before whats the difference? Really would like to know the difference of searchs at lot of places but not at schools. And no I will not give up my guns"
It's a place where children go to learn where they should feel safe, what's that teaching them? That no one can be trusted? It needs serious thinking about before considering implementing that one.
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: would you please stop trying to make the same irrelevant argument... You're getting nowhere....where you going hoob.... Nowhere....
  • 1 0
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: the gun ownership rate in Canada is 1/3 of the USA rate.
  • 1 0
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs:
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: june 2017 Manchester bombing. How did that happen in a country where explosives are not legal to own?
  • 1 0
 @freestyIAM: As a Grad student in public health the credibility of a source is paramount. The problem with CNN is that it is already biased whether you agree with their bias or not. Then to make things worse the "various epidemiological studies" is vague and concealing. The hyperlink does not work and who's to say that these various "epidemiological" studies were peer-reviewed and not just the product of someone who wants to sway people that don't know any better to look at the credibility of the source?
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: That was more of a request than a warning, I think.
  • 1 0
 @scotttherider: it's completely relevant. You just don't like the fact there's a completely logical counter argument to your insanity.
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: if they were legal I guarantee we'd have more problems with them
  • 1 1
 @scotttherider: I don't know where I'm going with it but I do know that you pro gun guys always shout louder than anti gun people so I was just trying to give it some balance
  • 4 0
 @Hoob93 @brncr6

You guys are having a furious debate, and that's great, though you're both demonstrating one of the biggest problems in US politics and culture today. All-or-nothing-itis.

In the western societies we regulate damn near anything dangerous as you've talked about and we all still get along, mostly freely. Autos in the US for example... cars can't be driven until 16 in most states, can't be rented until 26 most everywhere. Why? Statistics show crashes and deaths decrease with driving experience. Semis and motorcycles can't be driven until you prove you can handle them safely with a special license endorsement.

There are a range of possible mitigations to the gun violence problem and only a fool would admit that we'll ever shut it down completely. So how about we try some mix of hardware and software changes?

* securing school buildings with something like electronic badges so only students can walk in at certain times. most all office buildings have this, why don't schools? maybe metal detectors in some places? I don't know.

* make most guns a little harder to get... make some really powerful types of guns really hard to get (legally), like the auto/semi/motorcycle example above. raise the ownership age to 21, this's the same age we require for buying a beer.

* some collective willingness to get behind and PAY FOR mental health services. none of the above matters if someone is disturbed but has no options for help before they reach the point of no return. for many, friends and family aren't available *or equipped* to give the support that's needed to get someone back on track. i'd point out that in the US firearm suicides are 2:1 to gun homicides. that's pretty telling in itself.

I think in combination these small systemic changes would be a whole lot more effective than one big change such as banning guns or arming teachers or posting arm guards in every school in the US (which is so unlikely anyway).

I wish we'd think more in terms of AND... because OR isn't working very well right now. Plus we can only make reasonable guesses about what will work, you can never know (in this case) until you try some combinations, let some time go by, then adjust once we see what's working and what's not.
  • 1 0
 @schnellmann: Hear hear!
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: I will always shout louder when my personal liberties are at stake! I completely understand that the mantis that we would have would be light years behind the us governments military but the second amendment is there for the reason for us to protect our freedom of speech and to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government and with how ourselves politics have been lately and the divide developing between our geopolitical politics I've never wanted to be more armed in my life. My stance also comes in large part with the fact that I travel for work but I at least want a fighting chance to get back home to my kids.
  • 1 0
 @BenPea: Hey man, our national debt is like $20 trillion. 1 trillion would be a piece of cake... like 5%. Big Grin
  • 2 0
 What's the point of adding more laws/regulations when most of them aren't even being enforced?

Government solutions are feel-good talking points for lazy, unintelligent people.
  • 1 0
 @theminsta: that's a bit defeatist. What's your suggestion? A fight to the death between the goodies and the baddies?
  • 2 0
 @theminsta: curious what US regulations aren't being enforced, exactly? because from my point of view - as an American - the ones relevant to this discussion are generally being enforced. the regulations themselves are pretty sparse, though. background checks... not all states/agencies contribute and what they do contribute is only cursory and often not complete.

in the current US system there's no *legal* way to prevent someone like the shooter in Parkland (or the 19yo today in Michigan!) from acquiring a weapon, or taking it away if they become unfit! in the USA you can't jail someone or curtail rights for a crime that haven't been found guilty of committing. you can't be for all for some basic liberties, such as gun ownership, then be selective with other fundamental liberties such as due process (this is the most fundamental of all).

Wild west every-man-for-himself solutions are for people who choose to live in the bush, well away from civilization. That's still possible in Alaska, Northern Canada, I guess.

fact: for the rest of us - nasty as it may be - *some* government and the rule of law above all else are necessary for modern life.
  • 1 0
 @theminsta: bang that's the biggest thing in it all! @Hoob93 this is probably the biggest reason I'd never surrender my guns. When I obey the laws and turn my guns in what's to protect me from the gangbangers and people that didn't follow the laws. More deaths by gun violence happen in the most restricted cities and states by individuals that shouldn't have the guns to begin with. I'll tell you what hoob the day comes that they get all the weapons from all the criminals in the states I'll destroy my weapons. I'm a welder I can destroy them to the fullest extent.
  • 1 0
 @theminsta: LOL, realized I should have included half of Chicago in the "bush" category with Alaskan interior, northern Canada. you'll definitely need a gun there. probably more than one. but that's barely civilization... i doubt you want to live there. and the reason Chcago's wild is because it's out of control, basically beyond legal enforcement, and due process keeps government/police from bombing it preemptively.

good and evil can exist at the same time, and in the same place.
  • 1 0
 @schnellmann: very well said. Im open to trying anything. Im not a member nor have i ever thought of being a member of the nra because i dont think our gun laws are tough enough. I started buying firearms 30 yrs ago an have seen access to guns get harder. But still not hard enough in my opinion.

Myself, getting rid of my guns will not help save a childs life in a class room. Guns are locked in a big gun safe. I dont know what is going to work but im free to make my suggestions that could help solve some of the problems.
And its not just a gun problem in the U.S. it a problem world wide.
We have been killing each other from the beginning of man kind abd will do so till the end, weather its with a stick a knife, gun or nuke.
In the end I just wish we all make it home safe at the end of the day, even hoob93????(even though i do agree with him)
  • 1 0
 @theminsta: Unfortuneatly for that train of thought, those laws and regulations are in place to protect everyone in society, you, me, us. Even the lazy and unintelligent people.

As per an example above, look at motor vehicle licensing and operation. There are very clear laws and regulations governing motor vehicle usage. There has to be a blanket policy like this in order for the laws and regulations to be effective. Everyone has to be given the same rights to be tested, licensed and insured. Until the time when they no longer maintain those rights due to a lack of required cognitive or physical ability or through contravention of the laws and regulations.

The same modus operandi can be applied to firearms control with excellent results(Canadian Laws and regulations). There has to be a mindset, culture and political shift for this to happen in a progressive way. The conversation needs to be about solutions that work for both sides of the debate, not "this is the way it has been, and why it has been this way." The whole point of this article and the boycott of a corporation's subsidiary companies is to bring awareness to main stage.

That awareness being that a huge overshadowing entity like the NRA is being supported by people and corporations. If the voters voice is heard in a democratic referendum then the next step is to vote with your spend. Where you spend your hand earned dollars matters, it matters in all aspects of our Global economy. You buy crap prosessed foods, you support the further commoditization of our global food supply. You buy products from corporations that support the NRA, in a way you inturn end up supporting the status quo of firearms control. Right now the status quo is kids are dying in their schools because of a lack of laws and regulations surrounding the possession and acquisition of firearms. We need progression not regression.
  • 3 2
 @ryanm189: Alaska has the highest firearm death rate, followed by Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Wyoming, Montana, Arkansas and Oklahoma. Illinois' gun death rate is 1/2 of those states. New York's is almost 1/4 their rate. The reality is that, for the most part, the states with the most restrictive gun laws have the lowest gun death rates.

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_death_rates_in_the_United_States_by_state
  • 1 0
 @XCMark: you got that right! And to me its amazing that one or two people abuse their freedom, so to fix it, everyone must lose their 2nd amendment rights? Crazy.
  • 4 1
 @XCMark:

You clearly do not know the numbers.

18 shootings in 2018 so far.
354 in 2017.

since 2013, the number of guns produced in this country has more than doubled.

Not surprisingly, there has been over 1600 mas shootings since 2013.
if you go back to 2004 when the assault weapons ban ended, you can just watch the number of shootings grow exponentially.

People didn't just become exponentially crazier over the past 14 years.

The country has become exponentially flooded by guns, as the result of massively increased gun manufacturing/sales in response to every shooting since.

GUNS are the problem.

The majority of mass homicides in the past 50 years occurred within the past decade.
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict:Thats bad but thats live. boycotting their product hover does not necessarily mean that employees will lose their jobs.

I am not even expecting them to stop selling guns completely.
For my part I would be happy if vista would offer a statement that the do not support and contribute (money) to the NRA anymore and instead will support legislation requiring in depth background checks for gun sales.
I think even the biggest pro gun person should survive to wait a couple of days or weeks waiting for his new toy...

I have served in the military and had to point a loaded gun at humans. The whole experience made me very anti gun. I don not want them around me or my family and the presence of guns definitely does not make me feel safe.
i know i'm not going to change anyone's opinion here and nothing you can write will change mine.
For me buying a different helmet seems to be the only thing i can do (I did today)
I hope it changes something and i hope no one lose his job or life.
  • 2 0
 @michibretz: thank you for your service man! My one biggest regret is not having served in the military but I would not be in the slightest bit mad to have to wait a few extra days to play with a new toy! Honestly if gun control meant going through a process like what they have to do in Canada where it might even take months to find out I still wouldn't be mad. I'm just against completely disarming all citizens.
  • 1 0
 @MasterSlater: Come get mine, if you can.
  • 1 0
 President Trump says no due process when he takes yer guns away!

slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/02/trump-endorses-pre-due-process-gun-confiscation.html
  • 2 3
 @jclnv:
Since this announcement, ill be buying more of these "evil" products.

America USE to have that culture, that culture is on its way out. Back in the day guns were like putting on socks. people still killed each other with them, but for some reason now its a bigger deal? Liberals and the media have created this new gun intolerance, but more importantly they have created an entitled, mentally ill generation that can't handle the word "no". They want the government to take care of them, to them every thing is the governments fault, personal responsibility is out the window The media has created this irrational fear of guns, obviously the threat is real, but not even close to the things that kill us everyday that could easily be prevented, for some reason the guns are the bigger problem. Alcohol kills 25K innocent people in drunk driving accidents every year if that isn't selfish and hypocritical then i don't know what is. Bottom line is we have a new generation of pussies on the rise who are willing to rewrite old laws and create new laws based on their feelings and not facts, its absolute total ignorance, literally everything they have, they have is taken for grated and haven't the slightest clue how America became America, a history book is like a movie to them. The US is doomed, prepare for globalization.
  • 2 0
 @freestyIAM: Wait, so all we care about is "mass murders", we don't care about murders as a whole? Thats a pretty close minded and selfish way of thinking. Mass murders are extremely rare as compared to all the other types of murders, so why not fix those, because mass murders are so "horrific"? Its so much more scary to you so you feel that thats a bigger problem, but the reality is, its a much smaller problem compared to every other murder. Honduras is the murder capital of the world, with the exception of war zones across the world. In Honduras "assault weapons" are banned and have been since 2003. Civilians are only allowed 5 firearms, and they all have to be registered, civilians are NOT allowed to conceal carry. Switzerland has the lowest murder rate in the world, and guns are REQUIRED by the government, no "assault weapons" bans. Its the culture.
Its the people within the country, that are causing the problem, we are losing control, everyone hate each other, political hate is at an all time high, this country is growing more and more divided. No matter what we have for weapons we will kill each other, and one type of killing isnt worse than the other, every death is one to many. Banning one thing will not create this fantasy you dream of, people will still kill.

Right, and you want me to listen to a CNN article thats biased against guns? lol Hey, why do you think they have mental institutes, To keep all the people that are mentally ill safe from normal people on the outside? The problem is they shut the majority of them down over the past few decades, now you have them roaming the streets. I see mentally ill people all over the streets of boston, while they may not be shooting up schools (which is extremely rare, but the media makes it sound like an epidemic) they are violent, i've lived it first hand, the streets are riddled with these people.
  • 1 0
 @Otago: Oh really? So people don't use knives to kill, the criminals just gave up?...lol What fantasy land do u live in?
  • 1 0
 Same
  • 1 0
 @sino428: the ultimate cop out when a cop runs out of a school he’s protecting. Or when the FBI knew over a month in advance and did nothing? Laws and government prevent everything clearly.
  • 2 0
 @MasterSlater: Yes he absolutely could have. Multiple guns with multiple magazines. Handguns kill more people than rifles do x1000 every year, but those deaths are justified cuz it didn't happen all at once? Thats extremely close minded and disrespectful to the thousands that die from handguns, shot guns etc etc. Did you know rifles kill less than ether of those 2 i mentioned?
It doesn't matter, responsible gun owners don't do that shit. just like Responsible drinkers don't kill people drunk driving. Guns have alot more need than alcohol ever will. So you want to pick and choose which deaths are ok and not ok with rifles vs pistols?, If you want to save lots of lives, look else where, don't take away my ability to defend myself when criminals have Ar15s too. Please leave your fantasy land and come on down to reality, criminals aren't restricted by gun control, good citizens are.
  • 2 0
 @Giro423: Clearly 17 people would still be alive it wasn't for "protecting and serving". You cant blame a gun when the Authorities completely failed on all levels.
  • 1 1
 @parisgore: I have to disagree. Ironically firearm sales have gone down under Trump which makes Vista more reliant on other income streams; one of the reasons they've branched into 'outdoor' companies as I understand it. You will be hurting Vista by boycotting.

I know this will hurt people that are involved with Giro etc., but there are other companies making similar products out there – the industry is not limited to companies owned by Vista.
  • 1 0
 @alee90: there's been over 9,000 firearm incidents and 36 mass shootings in the US this year. Over 2,000 Americans have been shot and over 4,000 have been injured since January.

There's been 35 cases of a terrorist using a vehicle as a weapon since 1981 – and none in 2018 – and 30 domestic since 1973.

It's not exactly an equal argument.

www.gunviolencearchive.org
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle-ramming_attack
  • 2 0
 @XCMark: This is about more than mental health. It's about an organisation buying politicians. It's about the interpretation of the 2nd amendment, and people hiding behind it. It's about a set of laws that enable civilians in a 'civilised' country to buy and own a military specification weapon without military training. This includes those with known mental health issues – the Florida shooter was a legal firearm owner.

The other spectre you raise of the media – how come it wasn't immediately released that the Florida shooter had far-right symbolism on his clips? If he was wearing a turban or had darker skin do you think Fox News would have let that pass? There's a lot more going on that just treatment of mental health (although I agree – treatment could do with more funding on both sides of the Atlantic).

To add some figures to the discussion, there's been over 9,000 firearm incidents and 36 mass shootings in the US this year. Over 2,000 Americans have been killed in shootings and over 4,000 have been injured since January.

With regard to other 'mass homicides' there's been 35 cases of a terrorist using a vehicle as a weapon since 1981 – and none in 2018 – and 30 domestic since 1973.

Otherwise – outside a warzone – you're looking at bombs as effective weapons for killing and maiming large volumes of people, and they're pretty hard to get hold of (but actually easy to make). However, it's not a tool of choice – probably due to the effort involved – especially if you can get buy a semi-automatic rifle and a bump-stock online.

If you have other mass homicides in mind I'd be happy to stand corrected. Bear in mind that most mass homicides happen in conflict zones though – not suburbs of one of the richest countries in the world.

In my mind mental health does play a part but so does culture, and it's here that hateful speech by people like Trump and Lapierre are poisoning people. A bad man with a gun may – or may not – be stopped by a good guy with a gun, but that's also two gun sales and two NRA memberships.

www.gunviolencearchive.org
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle-ramming_attack
  • 1 0
 I’ve watched Bowling for Columbine, and i think people who watched that movie should already know the answer to this firearms (not just gun) crisis. Just need to be open minded
  • 1 0
 @PimpmasterJazz: thats 2 gun sales and 2 nra memberships. Hope you dont think every gun owner is a nra member.
  • 1 0
 @Batipapo: You're an oversimplifying, stereotyping idiot. Although I'm a conservative, I voted against McCain and Arpaio because I HATE career leeches and hypocrites...you know, like liberals.
  • 1 0
 www.pinkbike.com/photo/15657637
so what's next should we all stop using silverware because people are getting fat. As people we always want to make excuses but people are the problems not objects.
  • 1 1
 @PimpmasterJazz: Right... because the only type of mass killing, other then by guns, is by vehicles. Rolleyes So people never use explosives, or anything else. The Boston Marathon doesn't count. The OKC bombing doesn't count. The Bath massacre doesn't count. All those other killings (school and otherwise) that had a different WOC don't count. Since an attempted school shooting/bombing (where bombs would be a large part) was just stopped within a few miles of me, that's crap. And if we're talking about lots of killings in general, don't forget serial killers. 3x as many serial killers use other weapons. But I digress. And not every gun owner is a member of the NRA. Hope I've cleared some stuff up.
  • 1 1
 @PimpmasterJazz: Edit: I misspoke/typed. That should've been "3x as many victims". The proportion of killers is even bigger.
www.guns.com/2014/10/10/quarter-of-serial-killer-subgroup-used-guns-in-murders-fbi-study-finds
  • 1 0
 @PimpmasterJazz:" the bomb is not the tool of choice" what will be the tool of choice if guns are not accessible anymore? Weapons have evolved with time. 100s millions of people were killed/murdered before guns and will continue to happen after guns.
A bomb is a much more effective killing weapon with a firearm you have to look at the person you want to kill and pull the trigger. Bomb you leave and wait for it to do the dirty work.
I would much rather face a gun then a bomb.
  • 1 0
 Here's an interesting speech that just happened today
m.youtube.com/watch?v=KqqJKChKRzI
  • 1 0
 Amen to that@XCMark:
  • 1 0
 @Rattles: you sure can. There are an estimated 100,000 AR-15 in Canada. 50,000 documented and many more bought before registry
  • 1 0
 @Batipapo: do you not see the mass murders happening overseas with bombs, suicide vests etc?
  • 1 0
 @Flowcheckers: Japan also doesn't have open borders allowing endless people in. Restricted borders are a great way to control violence.
  • 2 1
 I'd honestly meet a man with a gun. A person willing to drive the blade of a knife into your chest is on another level of crazy.
  • 2 0
 @tcr1: I've always said this!
  • 1 0
 @foxxyman: I agree.
  • 1 0
 @Rattles: oh no not semi autos! Do you need a safe place to hide cause something exists? Lots of them are legally owned in Canada. Get educated before you shoot your mouth off. I bet ya there more Canadian gun owners on here then you think, besides the punk ass kids on there that think they are adults anyway
  • 1 0
 The funny parrt is that this post has 77000 views but Aaron Gwins "top secret" bike covered in a diaper with no info and he didn't even race has over 79000 views.
  • 1 0
 @philo: I know a few Canadians with semi-autos. Honestly wouldn't care if the states ran their background checks and gun buying process like BC did. Maybe make the process so more people can qualify for handguns and semiauto rifles but similar timelines. Don't you guys only offer a certain number of registrations for anything beyond hunting and waterfowl guns?
  • 1 0
 @XCMark: A mentally ill person would have a much harder time murdering 50 people at a concert, or dozens of children at a school if they didn't have access to weapons intended for mass killing. That's what assault weapons are by they way, they are intended to kill many people quickly.
The mentally ill person (since we're assuming all people committing these atrocities are in fact mentally ill) might presumably still manage to kill a few people by using a knife or some other weapon, but the reality is that without the guns many fewer children would be murdered at school.
So then it is simple logic - the pro gun people believe their "Right" to own these weapons is more important than the lives of children.
Since Sandy Hook Elementary in 2012 where 20 six year old children, and 6 teachers were murdered there have been over 260 school shootings in the United States.
Do we really need access to guns at this cost?
  • 2 0
 Just got done checking on my guns to make sure they haven't gone out and shot at any one. They are still locked up and behaving nicely.
  • 2 0
 @brncr6: One of mine is looking mighty shady as my passenger right now...
  • 2 0
 @brncr6: #judgeasmycopilot
  • 2 0
 @Ryanrobinson1984: no, not incorrect... My facts are straight... I live in RSA and it's violent crime stats per capita are worse than the USA ... The point remains that a blanket ban on guns does not always work in every case... Socio-economic factors are the key contributors in our country, and your social ills are what's causing gun violence too... A gun doesn't pull it's own trigger
  • 1 0
 Like Cris Rock said , anyone can have a gun but make the bullets $500 a piece.
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: 1950 - july 2016 98.4% of mass shootings happened in gun free zones...just saying...
  • 1 0
 @baggyferret: Can you stop with the facts? Can't you see that the people in power are simply trying to make stupid laws to slowly restrict/remove gun ownership so they can have a dictatorship in a few generations??
  • 1 0
 @theminsta: i can see that, yes. Pointing out that killers dont follow laws.
  • 1 0
 11 teens die on average per day texting and driving Kids under the age of 18, 7 will be killed by a firearm per day. 1,460 more teens dieing each year from texting and driving then being killed by a firearm. Need to pass a law where you cant own a cell phone till your 21 years old to stop all the deaths from texting and driving.
  • 2 0
 @melled74: Dude the hell are you talking about. Savage makes great rifles man. Im curious to which one you shot because ive only experienced good things with mine.
  • 2 0
 @Rattles: Sure can buy that gun in Canada. And plenty more like it. Hell, here is a package deal for an AR15 and a Glock 22 for like $1300 frontierfirearms.ca/smith-and-wesson-m-p-15-sport-ii-5-56-glock-22-gen-3-40-s-w-combo
  • 1 0
 @kabanosipyvo: yeah its the ones we want to die. gang on gang and suicides.
  • 1 1
 @Otago: those people also wipe their own ass with their hand. here is the US we mill our own guns and build them from scratch. guns are going no where. we don't surrender like you pussies in austraila and bosnia
  • 3 0
 This article posted last month and now you're all long-term debating?

Not an emotional topic at all, and good to see so much open mindedness in the discussions.

Next month Richard Cunningham asks: "Is it a good idea to open carry on group rides?"
  • 1 0
 @melled74: glad somebody said it lol
  • 1 0
 @sino428: just for the record, you can’t buy “assault weapons” legally.
  • 1 0
 @onemanarmy: correct. A lot fewer murders per capita in Bosnia.
  • 1 0
 @ajp1: It's not that simple. All you really did was prove so many peoples points.

They also have 1/6th the drug problems. 15-20% more law enforcement per capita. 1/7th of the home invasions. No gang problems. Etc etc

It's a cultural issue.

Give them another 25 years removed from civil war and unrest and the stats will likely be much closer. Our country doesn't give two shits about they're neighbors. Countries that are or recently have gone through serious issues are often much tighter nit because they're all suffering together. Just a theory though.

The U.S. is jacked up and guns are just the most obvious thing to point out... not by any means the real issue.
  • 1 1
 @PimpmasterJazz: Well guess what, Firearms sales will go through the roof as we speak, thanx to the liberlas wanting a gun ban. Liberals are the best firearms sales group in the nation.
with that being said i will not enter and REI till the day i die, nor will i be the only one.
I'll buy vista products somewhere else to lend my support, and so will plenty of others, REI is hardly bargain central anyway.
  • 1 1
 @PimpmasterJazz: Guess what 2/3rds of those are suicides, That cuts the number down significantly. We have a people problem, a mental health problem, and a government that doesnt do their job, its just that simple. You ban guns or AR15's, the real problem wont magically disappear.
  • 1 0
 @rkwjunior: also if you increase mental health treatment the gun problems won't just magically go away
  • 1 0
 @vicrider:

Do you know how many people die from drunk drivers? 25,000k every year. Do we really need access to alcohol at this cost? Funny we blame the driver, not alcohol, which is the catalyst for the killing of an innocent life or lives, but god forbid, Americans cant live without booze. You simply are to ignorant to understand the importance of the 2nd amendment, and this countries freedom comes at a cost, death, and it always will.
I'm sorry but you cant pick and choose what death is worse the the next , they are all precious lives. The sad part is you think its so simple, talk about a close minded thought process, how about fix the real issues and leave peoples rights the f*ck alone.
The government f*cked up 100% on this situation, nobody else, they answered over 30 calls of violence against this kid and did nothing, you know why? Read below.

Max Eden, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, explained in City Journal how an Obama-era Department of Education initiative designed to put an end to the “school to prison pipeline,” combined with local mismanagement, helped allow the shooter to fall through the cracks.
“In 2013, the school board and the sheriff’s office agreed on a new policy to discontinue police referrals for a dozen infractions ranging from drug use to assault,” Eden wrote.
A separate report by RealClearInvestigations found that Broward County was part of a “vanguard of a strategy, adopted by more than 50 other major school districts nationwide, allowing thousands of troubled, often violent, students to commit crimes without legal consequence.”
This was part of a larger Obama administration effort, launched in 2011, to reduce racial disparities in school discipline numbers, according to RealClearInvestigations.
“Students charged with various misdemeanors, including assault, would now be disciplined through participation in ‘healing circles,’ obstacle courses, and other ‘self-esteem building’ exercises,” the report said.
“We must ensure that school discipline is being handled by trained educators, not by law enforcement officers,” saidformer Secretary of Education John King in 2016. “Some schools are simply turning misbehaving students over to [school resource officers]. This can set students on a path to dropping out or even to prison.”
Florida’s Broward County, which is where the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting took place, was a leader in adopting this new program and was even touted for it by former Education Secretary Arne Duncan.
The number of school arrests dropped dramatically in the years that followed, but that didn’t mean serious crimes weren’t taking place.
The Parkland shooter was involved in a number of alarming incidents, including assault and bringing bullets to campus, for which he was eventually moved to another school.
Yet the police never arrested the shooter or expelled him, which is in part why he passed a federal background check and was able to purchase a firearm.

A life is a life, what does it matter what weapon is used. Its sad that you can decide what deaths are ok and what deaths are not, If its preventable then do something about it? An ar15 death is way worse than any other death cuz you buy into the media scare tactics, its that simple. Don't condemn good people for the acts of a bunch of maniacs.
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: Maybe if the FBI did their job, maybe if the laws on the books were actually enforced, it would shock you how many criminals are let back out on the streets with dropped charges.

"If it saves just one life", that's what the liberals say.
  • 1 0
 @rkwjunior: nobody gave a flying f××k about gun control the day before the shooting, it was all Trump/Russia because thats all news talked about. Now its just gun control until they decide to tell us what to cry about next.
We will all have forgotten gun control just like always.
Ill still have my guns.
  • 1 0
 @rkwjunior: more tax, more resources for the fbi
  • 1 1
 Teen attemps to detonate bomb at Utah highschool. Just happened. Look it up.
Good thing he was a crappy bomb maker.
Were are you focussing your outrage about this???? Still guns right cant be anything else.
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: Explosives are already illegal so they are harder to come by.
you have to make them yourself which requires a lot of knowledge, skill and equipment.
You can't just go to Dicks with your credit card spend a few hundred bucks and start killing people.

that's why you have one attempt vs 18 gun incidents.

I am totally Ok with people having assault rifles if they have to make them and the ammunition themselves at home.

we don't need to discuss this...
  • 1 1
 @michibretz: You're right. We don't need to discuss this, as you clearly don't realize how easily one can make/get explosives/ammo.
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: the example about explosive @brncr6 brought forward cleary said the kid was not successful hence it might not be as easy as you think.

Making a bomb needs to researched, planned and built. Figuring it out and getting all the stuff you need will take you a while. Its not like if someone heckles a kid in school said kid can run over to a sporting goods store, buy a bomb and slaughter his/her classmates. With guns that's possible.

The point is its absolutely insane to argue that we should not do anything about school shootings because there is other ways children can die as well!

40-50 Years ago Airplanes were falling out of the sky on a daily bases killing everybody on board. But after every accident planes are grounded and the cause is investigated. After the reason is found rules established to make sure whatever caused an accident won't happen again. Step by step traveling by plane became one of the safest ways to get from A to B.
Wouldn't you consider it insane if the NTSB would go "well, i guess the people could have died in a some other sort of accident as well, let's fly on as if nothing happened"???

Its time to ground those guns, (stop selling them) and figure out why kids bring them to schools and kill their classmates. I think making sure schools are save and our children can live without having to worry about being gunned down should be more important than some person having to wait for their semi automatic toy for a little longer.

I am really looking forward to your answer. Will it be: "No i can't wait for an in depth background check to be done. I don't care if children die!!!!" ????
  • 1 0
 You guy are really going to beat this one to absolute insanity. My Girl, Bell , CamelBak, Federal ammo and rifle's all still work, even after some Canuckwhipes from 3000 miles try to take a "stand". Girl, Fedral and gun sales stay soaring. Stock buying time$$$$$$
  • 1 0
 @fecalmaster:
Yeah go for it! i like the thought of you having less money for ammunition...
Vista stock was worth about 50$ in June 2015 and is worth around 16 today...
Vistas business was already 11% down for the last quarter before retailers started droping them because of the gun manufacturing and the whole gun market is 10% year to date.

investors.vistaoutdoor.com/Stock
news.vistaoutdoor.com/2018-02-08-Vista-Outdoor-Announces-Solid-FY18-Third-Quarter-Operating-Results
  • 2 0
 @Flowcheckers: I always carry when I ride.
  • 1 0
 @michibretz: You have a lot to learn about ammunition,,, my bank account also evidently.
  • 1 0
 @BenPea: They ignored 39 warnings. tax bullshit.
  • 1 0
 @BenPea: Of course this is coming from france, tax tax tax.
  • 1 0
 @fecalmaster:
i learned a bit in the army, more than i wanted to in fact.
you are right when it comes to your bank account, no clue and also no interest but you might want to double check your balance...

outdoor magazin from march second: " the policy changes by MEC and REI seem to be having an effect. As of this morning, Vista Outdoor stock was down more than 10 percent. Over the last five days, its stock has dropped more than 15 percent."

i am not an expert on the stock market but i don't believe thats how you make money unless you are trading in derivatives...

www.outsideonline.com/2285796/rei-announces-halt-orders-vista-outdoor
  • 1 0
 @michibretz: i may be wrong but dont you want to buy stocks when they are low and then sell when they raise back up again? I dont play the stock game.
  • 1 0
 @brncr6: Valid point. I am not a stock gambler either...
... unless i am looking for a long term investment over multiple years i would not buy shares from a company that is already under stress because of declining sales over the last 2 years and then suddenly faces challenges in its distribution challenges like mayor national retail chains not placing orders any more.

Yes, you can bet on a limping horse for a god quote but it might not make it to the finish line.
  • 1 1
 So the whole boycott is just a stock market scam... figures.
  • 1 0
 @rkwjunior: Ok, so you believe funding is not the problem. So was the FBI essentially a co-conspirator in the shooting? Were they looking for an excuse or leverage to fuel the gun control debate further? So that they could move the dial closer to more stringent regulations? So that they wouldn't have to deal with more of these kinds of incidents in the future as kids feel increasingly disenfranchised and uncared for by society? I don't know, I'm trying to see it from all angles...
  • 1 0
 @michibretz: Thanks for the concern but all accounts and weapons in tact. Fortunately I have $0 stock in any sporting outfits. My portfolio actually went up $4200 last week lol. Can get a nice frame and alot of ammo with that.
  • 2 0
 @Flowcheckers: I actually do enjoy that read. thank you for sharing that link.

I build a lot of motorcycle and bike components for and work and personal use using 3D printing and other rapid prototyping technologies.
Now doubt that it's possible but i wouldn't call it easy or simple or cheap by any means.
  • 1 1
 I wouldn't bust a homemade joint ever. Back to the market,,, Vista is primo buy right now by all my sources. Get in while you can. By next year that's a new bike.
  • 2 1
 @fecalmaster: Vista will drop further. This is the start of public backlash. Buy now, and prepare to lose half your money.
  • 2 3
 @FLATLlNE:

Indeed. They really mishandled this situation. They'll continue to drop but they'll rebound.

I think some folks on the board need to get canned. It was sorely mismanaged... likely because of the sizable egos of many of the folks that are from the Vista gun/ammo side of the business.

I still think these boycotts are absolutely insane... they make about as much sense as students doing walk outs on their schools to voice opinions on gun violence. Yo... your education has nothing to do with this and neither does your school. My opinion... walk out... get suspended just like any other person ditching class.
  • 1 1
 @onemanarmy:
Wtf? So the kids that just survived a school shooting opinion doesn't count?

Vista is the Corporation, Bell, Giro, Federal Ammunition and Savage are Brands this corporation owns the rights to. Just Like general motors sells Chevrolets and GMC's and Cadillacs but its always GM.
It's the corporations board that make the decision what happens. It's the corporations shareholders that earn the money. It's the Corporation that supports the NRA.
The reality is the brands are nothing but a sticker on a product. They might not have been when they were first founded but they are definitely are now.

Don't Believe me? Go to camelback website and click on careers. Click the apply button and watch how you get transferred on the Vista Outdoor Workday website because that's who you are going to work for...
  • 1 2
 Like I said portfolio doing awesome! The day I take stock advice from a Canadian,,,, ehhhhhh. I'd get a job at Vista just because they support the NRA like GM and most companies. Do your kids like Disney,,, lol,,, don't even look at them. Also would like a discount on Fedreral ammo since I've been a customer longer than most here have been alive.
  • 1 1
 @dubod22: Are you completely ignorant of world events? Oh wait, you said first-world. 'Cause all of our less fortunate neighbors don't count. Not being militarily overrun by that type of government is generally part of being "first world" so your argument isn't exactly fair, but whatever. Others have rampant war/military/government violence. We "first world" countries still have corruption and whatnot, you know.
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict:
i am curious.. Western europe would qualify as first world, right?
No one has assault style weapons there, for a fact barely any private person has guns.

when was the last time any western european country was overrun by its neighbours?
and please don't bring up hitler again... that's a totally different thing...
when was the last school shooting with multiple people dead in europe?

America anyway only has canada and mexico neighboring, both rather unlikely to invade. so what are you afraid of?
  • 1 0
 @michibretz: 1. Define "western europe". 2. Are school shootings really the only killings that matter?. 3. I wasn't arguing about shootings, I was pointing out that governments are tending towards corruption/more control. 4. Are you aware of recent politics? There's still plenty to be scared of, even in America, even if we're not talking politics. Speaking of which, isn't this a bike site? Razz
  • 2 0
 @mtbikeaddict: the comment section is "hors catégorie". E-pbiking.
  • 1 0
 @BenPea: Awesome. Just awesome. True dat.
  • 1 0
 It is just a debate,,, in the Pinkest of styles of course.
  • 1 0
 Does anyone know what the record amount of posts is on a topic here? Easily going over 2000 on this one, might break the record.
  • 2 0
 @fecalmaster: Not even close Smile Eliot Jackson (of Giant/ Pivot/ slippers fame) did excellent exploratory analysis on the PB data:
www.eliotjackson.com/2017/11/21/pinkbike-exploration
  • 1 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: Wow that actually really interesting. I would definitely take a dartmoor over a savage riffle any day. 6200 comments,, this one a bit off.
  • 1 0
 Just throwing this out there... anyone heard of the serial bomber on the rampage in Austin recently?
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: And the robot cars killing people in Arizona. They're coming for us.
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: And I don't want to alarm you unduly, but that automobile was Swedish. Just saying.
  • 1 0
 @BenPea: ...And your point is?
  • 1 0
 @BenPea: And I don't want to alarm you unduly, but that automobile had a driver at the time of the accident, and the woman was jaywalking.
  • 2 0
 @mtbikeaddict: What, I can't just say stuff? We need to get this thing to 2000 posts and I don't think anyone else is playing.
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: By the way, your second statement is actually quite worrying and sounds like it makes it ok.
  • 1 0
 @BenPea: 1st comment. Lol. 2nd. I realized that after I posted... my apologies. Clarification: I was pointing out that it was an abnormal situation and there was someone who could have/should have stopped it. Not trying to say it was ok. Just saying that the robocalypse won't kill us all. Razz
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: prove it :-D
Non-autonomous vehicles are a hell of a lot more dangerous, you are correct.

1971
  • 1 1
 @mtbikeaddict: Just seen the video footage. Tough call. I'm not sure I would have avoided her either.
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: 1) Anything that was part of the European Union before the so called Eastern enlargement in 2004 and wasn't not under was under Soviet control prior to 91 i consider western Europe.
2) Nope they are not and there is also issues that have nothing to do with guns. It seems odd though that some folks argue no action should be taken on something that very clearly is a problem that only occurs in this country just because there are other problems as well.
3) yes. some people thought that electing a guy with a background in one of the most corrupt industries there is (construction and real estate in big cities) would result in less corruption in the government. I don't understand how anyone ever would have Goldman-Sachs would have less influence if you vote for the guy that is golf buddies the board of directors...
4) I am very aware of that. I don't see how an ar-15 would ever help me with any of that.

Only thing I thin americans need to be more scared of than said western european citizens are health insurance cost and retirement. Again, unless you plan is to robb banks for retirement a gun is not going to help.
  • 1 0
 @MasterSlater: So you're saying that all of our fellow citizens in the military would turn on their countrymen and slaughter them the moment somebody gave a word. Because servicemen and women aren't part of America. Right...
  • 1 0
 @michibretz:
"America anyway only has canada and mexico neighboring, both rather unlikely to invade. so what are you afraid of?"
Hm. Mexico's got enough problems with the cartels. Depending on how you look at that, they're either a non-issue, or we've already lost that war. Canada.., let's just say if they're military is anything close to their 2018 Olympic hockey (or curling, etc.) teams, we've got nothing to worry about. Wink
  • 2 0
 @mtbikeaddict: The last time America tried to invade Canada they fell flat on their face... That was in 1812. Anyways, Canada would never invade the US, there is absolutely no benefit in doing so. We have an abundance of natural resources and in my opinion a much better Country.
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose: By American Logic that is the problem... If you have a much better Country you will very likely invade some time soon to free the people from the tyranny of a Leader not elected by popular vote... at least that's what america does around the world if there's oil...
  • 1 0
 @michibretz: Canada’s got shit tons of oil! In that regard they’ll probably be our next invasion. The war of 1812 was 106 years ago @Drewnose don’t think you guys would be able to stop the us again.
  • 1 0
 @scotttherider: Well said, you underestimated then and still do now. Nothing has changed.
  • 1 0
 @scotttherider: this is none of my business, but 206 years. My personal opinion is that there shouldn't be a border between Canada and the States and that you should combine your gene pools. Just saying.
  • 1 0
 @BenPea: I am sure glad that is YOUR opinion, starting to sound like a new age Hitler. Why don't we just remove the borders between all of Europe and combine those gene pools while we are at it.
  • 2 0
 @Drewnose: honestly I’ve got nothing against Canadians. If I could live anywhere else it’d be up around Hudson’s Hope BC. There is some truth that drugs are bad but so are head injuries. My arithmetic was only off by a hundred years...Honestly I think how Canadians have to go about getting guns is how it should be done here in the states but I still think that we should have access to the same firearms we currently have access to.
  • 1 0
 @scotttherider: Dude, let's be clear. I have nothing against y'all Americans either. Just stirring the pot.
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose: it’s all good it was funny you brought the war of 1812 up though because when I was up there I had a discussion with one of the millwrights I worked with who served in the Canadian military about if the US invaded Canada and he said the same thing you did.
  • 2 0
 @BenPea: They simply dropped the ball, they didn't follow through. That kid should have been put into a mental facility under the baker act, he had dozens of visits from the police over a multi year period. He threatened to shoot up a school on face book, they did nothing. I dont know how many more warnings you need, funding my ass, do your f*cking job.
  • 2 0
 @Hoob93: It will help it. Less mentally ill, some less shootings, its not a cure all but its a start, "if it saves just one life" A popular liberal quote. How about reducing crime as a whole, gun crime is a sub category of crime, you reduce crime you reduce gun crime, knife crime, etc etc. Stop fixating on just guns, start fixating on the bad criminals that are committing the crimes. England banned guns, now they have a serious knife issue, and they are talking about doing some sort of ban on knives. Its really pathetic, they are completely ignoring the people problem and banning objects used to hurt people well how much shit can you ban? its like they are to lazy to fix the real issues.
  • 2 0
 @Hoob93: And banning guns wont make guns or shootings magically go away. criminals get illegal shit every day. lets not be naive here. Maybe they should ban heroin to save lives...oh wait it is.
  • 1 0
 @rkwjunior: cant ban or take away my gun now, it self identifys as a nerd gun.
  • 1 0
 Nurf gun
  • 1 0
 Ho w does one unsubscribe from a thread? I do not look forward to this thread being rehashed on a daily basis through 2018.
  • 2 0
 Nerf, seems like spell check dose not like nerf
  • 1 0
 @BenPea: 1995
thefederalist.com/2018/04/13/britains-knife-control-bad-parody-gun-control
I saw elsewhere on this forum that if you take away peoples guns, they will *always* find alternative means to slaughter one another.
  • 2 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: yep, nothing's simple. New York has become relatively gentrified nowadays though. The real fun and games are elsewhere nowadays.
I'm starting to understand the rationale for guns in the US and if the conspiracy theories are at least slightly accurate then you're essentially expecting some kind of civil war one day. But I find it hard to buy the fact that all these shootings are false flags to justify disarming the population before then enslaving them. It's a bit too Stalin for me.
  • 1 2
 @BenPea: I know what you mean. The gun advocacy lobby is pretty transparent IMO. They're in it for profit and they extoll patriotism and the necessity to arm people in order to defend themselves and their liberty to achieve that agenda. If they had any agenda other than profit they would sell weapons which don't work. I personally find the idea that left-wing ideologues are out to bring down western society a pretty compelling argument. They're not even shy about the fact anymore, but they are coy about their true intent beyond that goal. The likeliest outcome is a communist totalitarianism whichever way I look at it, and if the US cedes it's commitment to individual freedom then the rest of the world will swiftly follow- I'm 100% convinced of that. So I support the right of US citizens to own guns even though I personally am no fan of them (guns, not US citizens Smile ). The US is almost single-handedly responsible for preventing communism from gaining a foothold in the western world in the decades after World War II, when the Frankfurt School disbanded and dispersed. It's baffling that this same murderous doctrine is being welcomed there now, all in the name of progress and equality for the clincally, physically, intelectually, eternally "oppressed". I'm not saying that capitalism is without it's drawbacks, but it has many confirmed advantages, and it has led to the creation of the greatest, most prosperous, productive and fair society in history, even for those at the bottom. So it should not be done away with entirely and replaced by a new social order which has proven to be so comprehensively disasterous for anyone unfortunate enough to have ever lived (and probably died) under it. Any changes should be carefully considered before they're even suggested. I'm entirely unconvinced by the "equality" they espouse; it's the same poor, genocidal outcome for almost everyone. What are these people willfully ignoring in order to allow themselves to be party to the demise of the very collection of societal mechanism that has given them so much. Do they realise that the same *cough* tactics they employ (protests, demonstrations, monopolising the MSM) will be useless to them (and likely revoked, if not outlawed) under the very system they're trying to install.
  • 3 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: I think the left-wing/right-wrong/communism/capitalism thing is a bit of a red herring in this day and age. The latter is clearly the default system for human civilisation now, in that people will by nature seek to buy and sell things, skills and time on various levels to keep themselves going. None of us know the truth of what lies behind pretty much everything that goes on at a geopolitical level, assuming that we can't just take everything at face value, which is difficult to do if you gain awareness of some of what is going on covertly. The problem is "we" know so little that what "we" do to try and counter it is little more than flailing around in the dark (voting a particular way, protesting in the street, jumping on board conspiracy bandwagons...). So I guess all you can do is keep yourself to yourself, do as little harm to your fellow man as possible, refuse to succumb to prejudice and stereotyping, and be careful who you trust when it comes to the information you consume. The problem is this will not lead to a simple, one-sided, black and white viewpoint or bring you any real answers, which is unfortunately what most people seem to want to latch onto... Hence the success of dogma and demagogues, their ultimate failure to deliver what they promise and the underhand tactics they employ to keep people in the dark and stay in power. The "left-wing protesters" you describe have much less power than they are made out to possess, that's just fear mongering really. At our level (the powerless populace) we all have a common enemy, we just can't be clear what it is, so we pick those we don't like the look or sound of, which is exactly what the faceless overlords want. As has been said so often before, divide and you shall conquer.
  • 2 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: wow dude... what a bunch of BS

Liberal views have nothing to do with Communism. Communism is Dead for 30 years now and no the US Military complex had absolutely nothing to do with that. Communism just did not work and eventually failed all by itself.

Also Communism has nothing to do with a Liberal world view. Do you know that Liberal is related to Liberty and mean free?
I just want to be free of worrying about people shooting with automatic rifles at me. Keep the World free and save.
  • 3 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: Mate, I'd be more worried about the extreme conservative side of things. There's a lot of scared people out there drudging up myths from the 1950s about how communism is out to get you, and the easiest way to stop the evil communism rising up and taking power is to get behind a single-minded government that will 'stop' it.

Obama, Clinton and Sanders are so far removed from communism it's hilarious, but they are still branded as such by hardline conservatives because the word raises historical demons – it's so easy it would be laughable if it didn't get such a strong reaction, probably because a lot of people don't really know what 'communism' means. However, the Republican party in its current state are appealing to people's fears, and what better way to get people scared than bring out the old red bear.

Did you see the video of Richard Spencer nazi-saluting while chanting 'heil Trump!' at a National Policy Institute meet? Fascists currently feel comfortable being fascists in plain sight, whereas I've not seen anyone protesting while waving their little red book or quoting Stalinist doctrine. This leads me to believe that there is a movement with a history of totalitarianism you should be concerned with at the moment, but kids marching because their school friends have been massacred and people adding #metoo to a Twitter post are not it.
  • 1 0
 @PimpmasterJazz: I've never seen anything about supporting government to oppose communism, it's all been about the right to self-determination free from government interference. It's the left that are promoting the expansion of government powers in order to address supposed "inequality". It's also ironic that you cite Richard Spencer as though the guy has any serious political clout on the right beyond his tiny group of acolytes. The guy has zero credibility on the right, mostly because he is not worth listening to. But the MSM, who are overwhelmingly left-leaning devote countless print inches to him (and actually give him the majority of his platform) trying to tar the right with his brand of crap. It's simply not true. It's the same tactic you described on the right to frigthen people into voting conservative in the 50s.
On whether liberal values have been hijacked by communist ideology, just ask yourself which side opposes free speech by countering any reasonable argument with accusations of racism or oppression. Who surrounds (fortifies?) themselves with the oppressed in order to enact legislation that has the net effect of limiting personal freedom. I could go on. Try this for a fun game: The next article/ hit-piece you encounter on Vox, Huffpost, Buzzfeed etc.follow the links that support the argument. See how many don't just reference another opinion piece, or shoddy/ subjective/ cherry-picked research. Cast the same critical eye as you would on Breitbart etc. and see if the argument holds. Find the data for yourself if you can. Don't make the mistake that everyone else seems to: that because they say their objectives are noble, it automatically means their proposals are exempt from criticism
  • 2 1
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: I feel I would enjoy discussing free speech and "whether liberal values have been hijacked by communist ideology", but if you are telling me Breitbart is a good, unbiassed news source which presents a 'reasonable argument' then I really can't take anything you write seriously.
  • 1 0
 @PimpmasterJazz: I didn't say that at all. I explicitly asked you to treat what you might read on Vox etc. with the same scepticism and critical eye you would anything you read on Breitbart, nothing more.
  • 2 1
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: Me and I assume many other liberal thinking people read and see what the right/conservative reports. The problem is that it does not add up. Their conclusions are nonsensical and the facts are most of the time just wrong. It seems to me the Conservative/right side always has "good" slogans you can scream but its just not thought all the way through.

For an example take the trade war the conservative side is getting us into lately;
The conservatives argue American Companies are going to be off better if we retract from all trade agreements and introduce tariffs on goods imported to protect what is left over from a former manufacturing based economy.
For some reason the Conservative never talk about the response caused by this policy. The fact that if you do this other nations will first off all also introduce tariffs which can only further weaken exports. Exports from industries that currently are still Healthy like Farming on the west coast.
So with tariffs on top those Farms will not be competitive any more when they try to export their product and they will sell less.
On the other side American companies will still have to import Aluminium to produce Cars for example. They will have to add the higher cost of materials to the price of the product which again means the prices of goods in the US will increase. Also American brands like Bell or Giro, Burton or Levis, Apple and Dell will suffer from this because they develop and trade so their product will be more expensive for US customers with tariffs and their employees will lose jobs.
Stuff like that just doesn't make sense if you think it through.

If you want to sell more support innovation! help the industry to be more competitive and produce products that people in other countries want to buy. That way the trade deficit changes.
No matter how high the tariffs are you slap on imported cars, People will still buy them because they are more fuel efficient, saver, fancier or what ever.
In return Europeans will not buy Chevy Pick-up trucks but if an American Company would come up with something that is innovative the will.
Take Tesla... They sell 10 times more cars outside of the US than GM and they just started...
If you want to win you have to get better yourself not punish the ones that are better but that the BS that Conservative America first tries to sell us because it easier to scream and get people who don't like to think excited.
  • 1 0
 @michibretz: Thanks for the response. It's a little weird to hear someone on the left say that the right has their facts wrong because I usually find myself agreeing with the conclusions of the right more often than not after looking at the actual data for myself; I wouldn't say I'm conservative through and through- I make my mind up on each topic individually. But the left are, in my opinion/ experience the worst offender by a very large margin for ignoring verified facts or detailed objective analysis. The gender wage gap has been de-bunked many times, yet despite the fact it is has proven to be the result of nothing more than the career choices women make, it has never been more prevalent in public debate. Similarly with institutional racism. cognitive biases, micro-aggressions, hate-speech, etc. These are the claims of a very select few, made without significant supporting evidence that are used to restrict the rights and freedom of the many.
You might be surprised by this, you might not but I'm not a big fan of the markets. At least not in the way they're used currently (and treated with reverence) by conservative politicians. I agree with you- we can't leave it to (unregulated) markets to solve the problems of the world and find the correct price of things. They're too fragile and they can be manipulated too easily because the people who work in the markets are greedy and fearful. That makes them irrational, which makes the markets unpredictable. Take the example you gave- Tesla. A company that has never lived up to its promises. It has terrible fundamentals, wholly inadequate processes, much of it's IP is owned by partner companies and it has failed to achieve every single target it has set. It's irrelevant where it sells the tiny number it manages to produce, if the company doesn't make enough money to support itself it will close. But despite all those facts, only some are predicting Tesla's demise before the end of the year. So what's stopping the rest of the market from seeing the wood for the trees? In a word: Hype- a borderline religious belief that the company will turn around.
My point is this: Economic predictions are not science. The human aspect cannot be discounted. The trade tariffs you point out may be bad economically, but they are "good" politically, which is what the powers that be care about at the end of the day, because it's believed the repercussions you predict can be avoided through negotiation, if they happen at all. There's an element of a calculated risk involved, but I would posit that those in power already have their excuses well practiced if it goes the way you expect it to. Spoiler Alert: It won't be their fault.
I'll leave you with this: In 2001 a number of senators, mainly democratic including Bernie Sanders (Dem) but also John McCain (Rep) pushed for legislation to de-regulate the financial industry to enable low-income families to obtain a mortgage to purchase a home, which is a noble goal and a social good I think you'd agree. They removed the regulations regarding who banks could lend to and enabled a pathway for providing credit to people with low FICO scores, or no incomes. And since "house prices always rise" the banks took on the burden and purchased insurance with the understanding that the collateral in the property would appreciate to cover the increased losses due to increased delinquency. They also bundled up the debt, and sold it on the market as a way of reducing their risk and turning an extra bit of profit, while simultaneously buying the high-risk debt from other banks. Fast-forward 6 or 7 years and those same sub-prime mortgages brought the entire global economy to it's knees, which led to a lost generation across the world, mass emigration and untold hardship for hundreds of millions, if not billions of people. So are you going to tell me that the left has a better grasp of economics and finance than the right? Do you think they do anything other than appeal to their voters at everyone else's expense too? If you think that your side is always right, without questioning their assertions, conclusions and proposed solutions then you are doing everyone, yourself included, a huge disservice.
  • 2 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: I do. I used to follow the UK editor of Breitbart on Twitter, despite him being an unpleasant individual, as I wanted to understand why he believed what he believed. I try and read the press from both sides of the political spectrum to get a more balanced view – mainly broadsheets and the BBC which have some journalistic integrity. I also like Huffpost, but tend to avoid the extremes on both sides. For that reason I cannot take Breitbart with any degree of seriousness; its recent connections with Cambridge Analytica through Steve Bannon have only compounded this.

When you say "On whether liberal values have been hijacked by communist ideology, just ask yourself which side opposes free speech by countering any reasonable argument with accusations of racism or oppression. Who surrounds (fortifies?) themselves with the oppressed in order to enact legislation that has the net effect of limiting personal freedom" I really don't know how serious you are, but I'll bite.

First of all, please define a 'reasonable argument'. For me, I would say women wanting equal pay is a 'reasonable argument'. I would say that Americans of colour wanting the same access to education, health treatment and mortgage loans as Americans of European descent is a 'reasonable argument'. I would say that those campaigning for more stringent legislation around firearms in a country that has a problem with mass shootings is a 'reasonable argument'. If people fighting for these are considered 'liberals' then maybe it says more about those that oppose them. I'm also intrigued as to how you feel these arguments encroach on personal freedoms, just as I'm intrigued as to who you believe is applying communist ideology to centre/left-of-centre thinking.
  • 1 0
 @PimpmasterJazz: I wouldn't trust Breitbart any more that I trust Vox, Huffpost or Buzzfeed for providing balanced opinion. I've visited the site less than 5 times and I've found 1 piece I read there helpful, and that was one source of info among more than half a dozen that I followed to gather the info on the issue (The ousting of Prof. Tim Hunt). The BBC has more journalistic integrity than those I just mentioned, but it still has a discernible left-bias in their reporting IMO. I'd suggest instead you try listening to some well-regarded commentators instead. Thomas Sowell, Jordan Peterson, Camile Paglia, Christina Hoff Somers and Dave Rubin and his guests to name a few are much more considered in their opinions. I'm a fan of Mark Blythe too, who is a left-of-centre political scientist at Brown I believe

A reasonable argument is any argument which is supported by extensive analysis and data. So when you say "women wanting equal pay is a 'reasonable argument'" I don't disagree because to do so would be sexist. But if I point out that women are perfectly entitled to go and earn the same as anyone else, and the gender pay gap exists because of factors other than sex- that is not sexist. The data supports what I am about to say: Women (on average) work less hours, take more unpaid time off, are more likely to work part-time and are more likely to work in less lucrative fields. These are the factors which truly drive the pay gap, and it is nothing to do with women being paid less than men in the same role and everything to do with individual choice. In fact, if a woman chooses to work 50 - 60 hours a week in a lucrative field it is likely she will be paid more than her male counterparts, and I think that is because she is every bit as capable as them, with the additional benefit that the external appearance is good for her employers and hence she has higher economic value in that position. Similarly with the "problem" of access to further education for BLM individuals. There are so many ways for them to get assistance- affirmative action, scholarships etc. and yet so many fail to achieve even the reduced standards for admission and those that do are significantly more likely to drop out because they are unprepared. Admission standards exist for a reason- objective standards exist for a reason. Circumventing standards to help someone achieve a piece of paper in order to improve their lot in life is a very poor solution- because the piece of paper does not confer on it's recipient some special status- it's the knowledge and recognition that is earned by achieving it. Maybe if you see my reasoning you can understand why people oppose the solutions proffered, and subsequently shoe-horned in by the left. No one is opposed to helping those who need it but the logic is all wrong and the "help" is self-defeating, and whats more, it devalues what others have earned for themselves. Any real solution requires hard work- particularly the individual who is being helped. If someone who is unprepared is promoted into a position they are not capable of being effective in, then that it is a loss to society.
What does all this have to do with communism? Well a central tenet of communism is that people are all essentially the same, that everyone has the same potential o contribute and can be taught to do as much as anyone else. It is the fundamental principle and the central argument for racial quotas, gender quotas etc. and equality of outcome. The left cannot stand the idea that there are differences between populations, so they assert privilege, social constructionism and oppression for the variability in outcomes of different populations. And while I *hesitantly* partially agree that social constraints are present, it does not explain all of the differences and I would suggest that they do more good than harm, so we should not dispense with them without fully understanding their contribution to society. The western world is not the pinnacle of modern achievement simply because of colonialism and patriarchy. We must have done something right because if there were no true merit and competency behind, it would have failed or been overtaken centuries ago.
Last thing- I am on the lookout for some sensible thinkers on the left. People who present their arguments and support it rationally and objectively (so, not John Oliver). If you could recommend a few I'd appreciate you sending them on.
  • 1 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: Thanks for your reply, genuinely. I will respond further, but not today as I need to get some work done!
  • 1 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf:
1) i never said regulate the market. AT least not on goods. The example was Old school industry like GM sells a fraction of what innovative product does. Yet Conservatives spend a lot of our Tax money on trying to protect old outdated industries. Do you really think we need to help the coal industry for example? that's the past. What we should do is Enable people to get education and prepare themselves for the future.
Society changed and it will continue to do so at en even faster pace.
No on of our generation will hold the same Job for all their live. It's just not going to happen. Everyone of us including the government has to prep for the future but the right just lives in the past.

2) Tesla might not be as financially stable as one would like it to be However the whole Industry is hurting world wide. How many times have the big 3 been bailed out in the last few years? Just because a company is financially in a tough spot you should not disregard the fact that they managed to outsell any other american automaker by a factor 10. Wat i am trying to say is that their product an marketing is appealing to people outside of the US and that's how you turn a trade deficit around. Not by introducing tarifs.
  • 1 0
 @michibretz: This isn't might particular beef, but I took some time to gather some data on this, albeit rather quickly and this is what I've come up with.
The coal industry is not unique in being subsidized by the government. The majority of subsidies it qualifies for are the same as many of the subsidies other companies (such as Tesla) can apply for. The reason they were a hot topic a while ago, was because Trump wanted to give them and the nuclear energy sector a dedicated tax subsidy to the tune of $10.6 billion, and since the MSM's fav whipping boy is Trump, and anything he does is wrong it was "big news" (I'm no fan of the his, but I have to admit he does get a lot of undeserved flak, especially since the guy provides no end of material for completely justified criticism). That subsidy was rejected in Feb 2018 citing a lack of evidence that such a subsidy was required. I also found that Tesla, along with other Electric Car manufacturers get a subsidy on the first 200K cars which roll off their production lines. So it's just as justifiable (or futile, depending on your POV) to point out how dedicated subsidies for electric car companies are a waste of money, since they can't keep the lights on using just their own money. Also, for Tesla to be in a "tough spot" they would have to have been, at some point in time, in a good spot, Ie. profitability. The fact their customers are 10:1 outside the US is not a success story if they are not making good on their ambition and returning the money that was pored in by their investors. I can't blame you if you feel I'm banging on about this point, I respect Elon Musk greatly for his contribution to science and stellar exploration but you chose the battleground (Tesla) poorly and unfortunately for you his reputation can't (and probably won't) rescue that particular sinking ship.
  • 1 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: Thanks for the commentators; I'll check them out.

The BBC is an interesting one – many on the left complain because, in recent times, less complicated right wing elements such as UKIP and people such as Nigel Farage – both as UKIP leader and as a political commentator – have got an unfair amount of exposure compared to, say, the Green Party, who actually have an elected member of parliament (MP) and a genuine breadth of policies. A recent backdrop of Jeremy Corbyn over the Moscow skyline can hardly be called 'left leaning' too. Saying that, those on the right feel that the BBC is left wing because it is funded by the public through a form of taxation and is a media environment, which is traditionally a liberal one. My understanding is that it traditionally leans toward the incumbent government because it's the government which guarantees its funding. That all said, it also has a history of good reporting so is always worth listening to, and the fact opposing political sides both moan about it suggests it's doing something right.

I'm not going to get into women's pay as it's a huge subject; I'm not so daft to believe these things are black and white – there are so many other elements involved that I'm not going to do them justice in a forum post. But yes, essentially, I think it only fair that a man and a woman with equal skills, qualifications and experience should be eligible for the same wage.

I'm not denying the existence of schemes such as scholarships to help people get through higher education and don't deny that to get there should be tough – I certainly don't agree with 'hand outs'. I am more talking about the basics; access to a quality education, a life-saving health service and the ability to progress through life without skin colour, religion or any other factor that does not affect what the individual is aiming for (be it higher education or a mortgage) being an issue. The process of 'redlining' that was prevalent in the US was an extreme example of this, and it seems the effects are still being felt now: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

"What does all this have to do with communism? Well a central tenet of communism is that people are all essentially the same, that everyone has the same potential o contribute and can be taught to do as much as anyone else." Yes, and no. At its core Communism is an idealistic system that will never work because it is too easy to corrupt. Cambodia under the Khmer Rough is an extreme example: make everyone equal by stripping them of their education and getting rid of money. Kill the educated because they are a threat. Everyone has a job and is toiling for the greater good. The fact that Pol Pot and most of his leadership went to university in Paris would seem to make them more equal than others.

Going the other way, the US is arguably the pinnacle of capitalism, a system that depends on producing goods and selling to make a financial profit. It's also a country with a homeless problem and an insanely complicated healthcare system that is held to ransom by healthcare and drug companies. Life there is great, if you can afford it to be. As for capitalism, it has many benefits: it drives innovation and increases the standard of living, but at what cost? the western world is currently the pinnacle of modern achievement, but how long will that last? Do we need everything that is being produced? How long can the planet supply everything needed for production? And what of China, with its odd totalitarian capitalist-communism and burgeoning middle classes, making plastic crap for everyone else? Surely we, as in the West, need to keep reinventing to continue that momentum, which will require diverting into different areas; the Greeks, the Romans and the Persians were also all pinnacles at one point, but were all overtaken. Where I am going with this is that surely a country that is the 'pinnacle of modern achievement' should also be able to look after its poorest and weakest and create fair opportunity for all, as surely producing a better educated and healthy base is more important than driving forward from a foundation built on sand. It's great that people are working hard and getting rich, but this should be a path available to all, and when does the line get crossed where the 1% should be helping those whose shoulders they stand on? To me a mother country seeking to educate its people in a fair environment benefits everyone, whatever their individual goals or life paths, but that education and ability to think is the key. If this is communism, so be it. Wink

OK, I've ranted enough and suspect I have wandered way off the point. A few left-leaning thinkers off the top of my head: I find myself agreeing a lot with a few London-based members of parliament – specifically David Lammy and Stella Creasey. I'm not actually a Labour voter, but a lot of what they say strikes a chord and they don't tow the party line. Similarly Dianne Abbott should not be dismissed – she's an easy target to mock, but an incredibly intelligent lady. As for writers, Ian Dunt of politics.co.uk is worth reading, and Jon Snow and Cathy Newman of the UK's Channel 4 News are always fun to watch as incisive interviewers of UK politicians. Max Hastings is a war historian and certainly not 'left' but his books are very good and unflinchingly delve into the political, social and economic aspects of specific areas of conflict, which have many peacetime ramifications.

Yeah. John Oliver. Wink Although Jim Jeffries' sketch on guns is pretty relevant to this PB post.
  • 1 0
 @PimpmasterJazz: I appreciate you coming back to me again. I'm doing my best to find time to reply, I hope to have one for you soon.
  • 1 0
 @PimpmasterJazz: I don't disagree with any of your assertions. No one should be denied opportunities by virtue of their sex or racial background (I decline to include religion, gender or sexual orientation in that statement because those are all highly subjective). Practices such as red-lining are abhorrent and I think it's overwhelmingly likely that the damage done by such a system is creating issues that affect those who suffered under it, and their families to this day. I would like to see a system which aims to redress those harmed through such practices, but it must be practical and as immune to exploitation as humanly possible - not simply hand-outs because someone has the *right* skin color. And society should provide a safety net for those who become ill, lose their income etc. but I hope it's self-evident just how dangerous and corrupted these ideas become if they are rolled out en masse and unchecked.

I need to bring this back to the original argument because the topic at hand is the dangers of the progressive/ liberal policies of the left, their dubious motives and their duplicitous messages and tactics. The political figureheads of the left are not the biggest danger IMO; they're simply the happy recipients of the support drummed up by the hysteria generated by good marxists in the MSM and social sciences (bear with me).

So I'll start by asking you to consider the following questions:
1) What is the ultimate goal of the left, and what are the consequences and logical conclusions of their policies and actions to date?
2) If the progressive policies and plans of the left are so good, then why have they not been adopted by the majority of the markets, which are forever innovating to gain an advantage? Why do they have to be instantiated into law and forced upon society for them to be accepted? Do you see the peril in allowing this approach?
3) Why do the left continuously shut down the conversations of anyone who is not 'on their side'? Why is free speech and the free exchange of ideas such a bad thing?

I'm probably going to frustrate you a bit by not responding to your examples and counter-arguments. They're good points and worthy of addressing- I literally spent the week looking at them and imagining all the ways and examples I could respond with. But we'll have too come back to them another time.

I want instead to focus on one event in the recent past that you're probably already familiar with. It characterizes many of my (and most people not on the left I would hope) suspicions and issues with the tactics, motives and ultimate goals of the left.
Cathy Newman interviewed Jordan Peterson for Channel 4 at the start of this year. During the interview she consistently misrepresented Peterson's assertions and conclusions, which were designed and delivered in order to to help people, not hurt them, and advance society. Newman overplayed her hand so much that she spawned a myriad of memes beginning with the phrase "So what you're saying is...". This was not an honest mistake, or misunderstanding on her part. She consciously and deliberately chose to ignore what Peterson had said and restate his arguments in the most offensive terms, often completely without a basis in anything that had just been communicated. In simple terms: She lied. And she lied for ideological reasons. Her inability to truthfully repeat back to Peterson what he had just shared is an underhanded tactic used extensively by the left to paint anyone who does not share their dogma as a horrible person unworthy of serious consideration and attention. This tactic will normally result in 1 of 2 outcomes: 1) the target gets frustrated and reacts angrily or 2) when attempting to clarify an obviously odious and false statement the target ends up saying something they don't quite mean and they are pilloried for it.
Peterson did neither. He bided his time, showed remarkable restraint and when the opportunity presented itself he put Newman on the spot and left her tongue-tied and utterly unable to respond for several seconds, while simultaneously promoting a wide-held belief of those who are not on the left (Free Speech). Anyone who has watched the full interview (Channel 4 only played part of it, the full interview can be found here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54) can see how ideologically possessed Newman is, how lazy and superficial her tactics and arguments are and by extension, how superficial and false the assertions of the left are.The fall-out from the (failed- from a left's perspective) interview was all-too predictable. Embarrassed, the channel concocted a story about a security concern to save face and flooded the news with that story, which gave the MSM ample reason to vilify Peterson and his supporters in the prologue before making Cathy Newman out to be courageous and defiant in the main body of their article.
No evidence was given for the existence of a security concern and the police were not involved. It's also worth noting that Peterson and his supporters received approx. 30 times the alleged abuse leveled at Newman (hequal.wordpress.com/2018/01/22/cathy-newmans-feminist-fans-sent-30-times-more-violent-sexist-abuse-to-peterson-his-supporters-than-vice-versa), which the MSM failed to include in their reporting. The evidence the MSM are biased is not not simply what they report on, but what they choose not to report on.
Tell me, do these tactics seem like the methods of an ideology that is 'right'?
  • 2 0
 @PimpmasterJazz: Another issue I have with the left is their inability to accept evidence-based reasoning. The left's persistence in denying statistical realities beyond the most simplistic, self-serving analysis is baffling. If the doctrine of the left is honest and true, why are their arguments so poorly supported by evidence? College Rape Culture is another favorite of the MSM. The statistic that 1 in 5 women will be sexually assaulted while attending third level education in the US has been quoted by Obama, and was used to justify directing universities and colleges (Under Title IX) to use the lowest standard of evidence to find an alleged perpetrator guilty of sexual assault, and withhold legal counsel for the accused during proceedings. Essentially, they created kangaroo courts. Sound familiar? The US government mandated that citizens be denied their constitutional presumption of innocence, legal representation and right to a fair trial. If you're not absolutely terrified by that prospect then you have not thought it through enough. Why are college enacting justice? Who are these people who allow, encourage and participate in such tribunals? What qualifications allow them to adjudicate? What are their ideologies and motives? This is not like a case of an employer holding a committee to decide to terminate someone's employment. These are academics and administrators deciding whether someone is "guilty" of a potentially serious crime, using little or no evidence. Then consider that the same ideologically-possessed people who enacted that legislation want to strip people of their right to hold firearms in order to defend their family and friends against tyranny. You might ask what tyranny? I say *that* tyranny.
Thankfully that mandate has subsequently been rescinded by the Trump Administration, and there are dozens of multi-million $ lawsuits pending in the states because of these proceedings (held on campuses and not in courthouses). But the origins of the statistic are just as unsettling, because it was used to justify these inquisitions and no one bothered to check and challenge the veracity of the claim (I've said before the left surround and fortify themselves in victimhood- who's going to argue with "rape victims"). It was based on a single, self-selecting, anonymous online survey of 7000 respondents, not state or federal conviction rates, or even police complaints. The survey used a questionable definition of sexual assault (direct quote: "including forced touching of a sexual nature (forced kissing, touching of private parts, grabbing, fondling, rubbing up against you in a sexual way, even if it is over your clothes) "). The respondents attended college/ university at 2 separate institutions. This was not a national study, and the number of respondents falls marginally below the minimum required for statistical inference on the population of third level students in the US. I don't know about you, but I would be highly suspicious and critical of any such results. Yet the MSM continues to push these misleading, deficient statistics, published by ideological social scientists. They then subsequently incite and participate in the inevitable trial by media/ public opinion. How could you not infer this is done solely to realize their agenda? If it were done for profit then they would allow the issue to wane in the public consciousness and traipse it out again later for further benefit, not promote ill-conceived changes to legislation to remedy their imagined non-issue. The recent trial of the Ulster Rugby players in Belfast is another example you may be familiar with. None of the accused were convicted, yet hefty legal bills will have to be paid, careers have been postponed and (possibly irreparably damaged) and they have no recourse against their accuser, who's anonymity is guaranteed by the state. At some point it was decided that those who are accused should not be protected, and those who make accusations should be, despite the apparent presumption of innocence. If you couple #MeToo with #IBelieveHer you have a recipe for disaster, as is evidenced in the US. It will lead to accusations without evidence for whatever reason, and the very real possibility of substantially increased false convictions for serious crimes which never occurred. It undermines the seriousness of sexual assault if conviction becomes a foregone conclusion. Surely you see the danger in this? Conviction without evidence- one person's word being better than the other in the eyes of the law. This is in direct contravention to western values of freedom and equality. This is the state going outside its remit to write legislation for the betterment of all citizens and instead deciding who is most worthy in the eyes of the law.

Hysteria leads to fear leads to panic leads to indoctrination. No doubt you could spot when someone on the right uses this tactic, but would you be so quick to see it on the left? I really don't have a side in this argument- I see lies from both sides but they are predominantly coming from the left these days and they are used to justify wholly anti-democratic ends.

If you want to see indoctrination at work for yourself, here's a "fun" experiment (If you don't mind ridding yourself of a few tenuous friendships). Go on FB, or Twitter, or whatever your social media of choice is and post using your personal account the perfectly reasonable words you shared here anonymously. Post the words "I'm not going to get into women's pay as it's a huge subject; I'm not so daft to believe these things are black and white – there are so many other elements involved [Other than sexism] that I'm not going to do them justice in a forum post." (or words to that effect). Link it to the BBC's recent analysis even, and see what happens.
  • 1 0
 @Deuce-DeuceAndAHalf: perfectly written and stated!!! We said!
  • 3 0
 @MasterSlater: I'm curious the civil liberties you think Trump is taking away? Regarding the border, for example, he is doing what YOU do every single night. Do you lock your front door so intruders (or people you don't know) can't come walking into your living room at night? When you park your car downtown, do you close the windows and lock your car doors? Yes you do. Don't be a hypocrite - Trump is just doing the same thing - but with a nation - something ALL intelligent nations do! America (only because it is 'fourth cycle' nation of prosperous idiots, is now lazy and takes things for granted). Go try and sneak into Mexico and you will get mandatory 2 years in prison (mexican prison - have a taste, it ain't nice!). Go to Singapore, New Zealand, Japan, Pakistan, Iran, Argentina, Brazil...and yes Mexico, and they secure their borders with rule of law. It's not racism, or an infringement of civil liberties. It's called law! I was in Bolivia, and they secure their border way more intense than Texas and they are a poor country! Trump is just doing what you, and every other nation does. He wants to know who comes, and who goes, WITH RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL. Full stop. And those that want to come in, ought to wait in line (and be vetted) like every other immigrant applicant. Funny also, that JP Morgan, Microsoft and Apple ALL hire based on 'culture fit.' You won't walk into Amazon or Nike, UNLESS you fit their culture fit and vetting process. Why is it an infringement of civil liberties to say America wants to know who comes (and who is denied) immigration status? America has a culture fit! Stand up for yourselves, and stop crying racism like little babies! You don't just walk across the line into Goldman Sachs - security will toss you onto the street!. Try walking into China after watching a self-righteous episode of Steven Colbert, and see what happens! The Chinese will toss you a dose of reality that makes you wish you were born a dung beetle in Africa. Civil liberties include the right to safety! Do you think having MS-13 gangsters throughout the USA is safe, or a civil liberty? Obama did nothing to go after these Mexican/Central American gangsters, because he KNEW CNN and every other retard media service would cry 'racism.' And race bating works, because the average voter is an emotional twit. That's NOT leadership Obama exempted, it's cowardice. So, the problem with Obama is that he gave democrats and inch, and they ran with a mile. Trump has simply yanked the soother from the babies mouth, and laid down rule of law again - and everyone is crying racism or sexism. Do you think the 'rule of law' being abused is a civil liberty? No, the democrats only kept the border wide open, because every Mexican (or Central American) was a democrat vote - nothing has changed since 'Gangs of New York,' when Dems give an immigrant a shot of whisky and a sandwich for a vote. Trump is also trying to clean up the democratic (democracy) process by investigating the legality of people voting. Real quick - is that a civil liberty gone wrong??! You have double and triple hits (illegal votes) in many states - and California and New York, for example are fighting any investigation into this. Democrats WANT and NEED those illegal votes. An estimated 11 - 30 million illegals live in America - and you can bet your life, most vote D. Massachusetts, as an example, had a huge illegal voter scam going where the DMV was issuing Puerto Rican drivers licenses to Mexicans, so they could vote. So, to investigate this is somehow racist? No, that's a garbage CNN tactic, and just race bating, for the ignorant to wallow up. I've stated to many before, when Trump does conclude an investigation (which I think will happen), he will take the popular vote landslide. Landslide! So, all these dumb Texans you refer to are not ignorant (well, to be fair, some are). But, largely, they are hard working people, who feel rule of law was tossed out under two terms of Obama, who was nothing short of a socialist and communist - a man who never even held a real job! Btw, google this! - 800,000 citizens from California and New York are now FLEEING their state. Why? Turns out, all those hippy hicks are figuring out that socialism costs money - THEIR money, through higher taxes. So, they all vote (and march and protest) with their dreamy hearts, but soon as the bill arrives, they run for cover. That's what's happening, people are fleeing those Dem states because they don't trust the 'sanctuary' status and they all see their states becoming bankrupt. I feel many 'liberties' in America you take for granted or don't even acknowledge. And, it's rule of law (and an honest democratic process) that once made America great. It no longer is. Your country is a gong show now, with complete fraud in the highest levels of government and national security, namely the fbi and cia, which is filled with intellectual idiots and democrat zealots. The election was rigged against Trump - is that a civl liberty? The debate questions were given to Hillary, before the debate - is that a civil liberty you're proud of? To get into the fbi, now...requires a law degree and/or mba at minimum! So - the bureau is attracting bookworm retards, with little courage or any common sense/street smarts. As a Canadian, I'm frightened to watch what's happening in your country - worse, democrats (and the left) are devoid of understanding this, or...if they do, they don't care - they will take their witch hunt, however they can get it. I absolutely support better, and more common sense gun laws. But, mature discussion (and certainly not scapegoating and group shame, group think/mob rule) as being endorsed here on Pinkbike, is not worthy. Consider again all these 'ignorant' people you think live in Texas. Just watch what's happening with your FBI and Govt, and see how quickly you guys are moving towards Totalitarianism and Banana Republic status. The scariest part, is the steeple are all for it! Rome fell for a reason.
  • 1 0
 Giro, Bell & Blackburn are slated to be sold from under Vista's umbrella.

Vista itself will stop manufacturing/selling firearms, but continue to manufacture/sell ammunition. Vista will retain CamelBak and their camping equipment brands.

www.bicycleretailer.com/industry-news/2018/05/01/vista-outdoor-sell-firearms-and-sports-brands-including-bell-giro-and#.Wui-fe8vzDA
  • 2 0
 @kurtz433: Great! Does this mean I can stop getting comment updates in my feed now that the problem is remedied and there is nothing left to discuss?
  • 2 0
 @ninjatarian: of course not. because bell, giro and blackburn didn't have anything to do with this in the first place. So people will continue to argue... regardless.



Side note... I guarantee you that everyone working for those 3 companies are happy about this. Vista sucks.
  • 1 2
 @onemanarmy: like Chevrolet, Cadillac and Buick have nothing to do with General Motors?

How is it so difficult for some people to distinguish between companies and brands?
One Companie can have multiple brands. Happens all the times...
SRAM: Sram, Rockshox, Avid, Truvativ, Sachs Bicycle Components, Quarq
Amer Sports: Mavic, Enve, Salomon, Atomic, Wilson, Precor and more
Dorel: Cannondale, Schwinn, Mongoose, GT, Fabric, Sombrio and more
Adidas Group: 5.10, Adidas, Reebok,Taylormade and more
KTMGroup: KTM motorcycles, Husqvarna Motorcycles, WP suspension.



Well i guess it's gonna sort it self out anyways now and vista can be one happy arms manufacturer not bothering about its outdoor brands any more as soon as the sale is done with.
  • 2 1
 @michibretz: seems like you're the one having issues distinguishing.
  • 1 0
 @onemanarmy: how is that?
  • 206 16
 Funny that we are all concerned with sleeping with the NRA but no one bats an eye when most of our gear and stuff we buy in general are made by children in slave labor camps... out of sight out of mind.
  • 40 4
 Give this man a medal.
  • 34 22
 Modt of our gear and stuff, that sounds like you have some hard data to support your claims.
  • 15 17
 This, This, This, and This.

Unless you buy 100% local made, organic, vegan everything, you are supporting some sort of atrocity. The gun debate is just what's in the headlines right now.

Not that I buy 100% local made, organic everything. Because who has money for all that? (not me)
  • 24 24
 @nskerb: for what - greenie, leftie populism with nothing to back this up?
  • 11 13
 So you're comparing a byproduct of the markets/globalization with the killing of school kids due to someone's right to own guns in a 1st world country?
  • 11 4
 this is far from being accurate.
  • 43 2
 We shouldn't tackle this problem because another problem seems equally insurmountable. Got it.
  • 6 2
 Echoing waki here. Got proof of your claims re: most done by children in slave labor camps? I know it happens and is bad but most of the stuff we buy? If this is really the case then that's very concerning.
  • 4 0
 @jclnv: no he's pointing out that there isn't an article about the morality of buying products from companies who outsource their manufacturing to shady 3rd world factories but there is an article about the morality of buying products from companies whose parent company has a firearm company as a subsidiary company.
  • 4 5
 There is now a new spelling for 'America'...

..."Hypocrites".
  • 2 1
 @Hoob93: With have zero evidence for the former and even if we did, every 10 year old knows two wrongs don't make a right.
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: is this article wrong?
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: I don't believe so.
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: what do you mean by two wrongs don't make a right then? I know you're only 10 but please try
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: Obviously I'm saying child labour AND gun ownership are both WRONGS.

It's a dumb analogy to begin with.
  • 5 3
 @WAKIdesigns: I religiously downvote every Waki post. But now more than ever.
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: ye those are two wrongs but where does the right bit come in. Reminds me of Ron burgundy "when in Rome"
  • 4 5
 Ummm.. I'm not concerned about sleeping with the NRA. I give them money.
  • 2 1
 What about rocket launchers, Handgrenades & Sharks with freaking laser beams attached to their heads?!? Why is it illegal to have those as citizens but yet we all truly know that Dr. evil and other crazy/evil bad guys Still have those kinds of weapons? Yet we never hear anything in the news about those kinds of deaths especially at schools!
  • 2 1
 I think maybe you don't understand how the economy works. People in different parts of the world work for different wages. If a company can outsource and make $, they'll do it. People who have no wakes now have income available. If the outsourcing is removed, they will have NO opportunities available and will be ever poorer. Companies can't afford to both outsource and pay the same wages as in the US - it's simple math. In some cases it's the only way to get a product on the market given the prices people will pay. I've been through all of this with my own company. It's too expensive to mfg in the US. Product is not possible without outsourcing.
  • 3 1
 What nations have a lot of child slave labor? Match those to the "made in" tags. China and Indonesia are not that high. www.globalslaveryindex.org/index
  • 1 0
 @jason342: It's not just the wages it's the ways they treat them aswell. I don't know of any bike companies using these factories admittedly but some factories in India force their workers to work over 12hour shifts and when the workers set up unions they have the guys responsible just disappear. The factory bosses in some cities collaborate to keep wages low.
I'd like to think bike companies would make sure they're not supporting this kind of stuff. If they find a factory they use runs like this they should take their business elsewhere and make it clear to someone like the local government why they're doing this so hopefully the local government will do something.
  • 3 2
 I only buy guns made in Georgia , designed in Austria. The fact is you can't sell foreign made firearms here. This industry has fueled the country for 180 years so taking it away is not a possibility. Get over it, bad shit always going to happen unfortunately.
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: That's a real issue. I don't agree with that, but I also don't fly out and inspect every company I do business with. In those cases, a local workers union needs to be formed. I don't like unions, but there's a place for it.
  • 3 2
 @steve9train: Total straw man. Have to agree with waki on this (exceptionally haha)
  • 1 0
 Local made organic does not mean made by locals. It often means (here especially in relation to farming and food) made locally by people subjected to modern slavery. If not that, it means made locally by migrant workers. Thats how Brexit started. What ever your views, there is no ‘grass is greener’ im afraid. @Buggyr333:
  • 3 4
 @fecalmaster: "This industry has fueled the country for 180 years so taking it away is not a possibility".

That's what they said about slavery in the US. The country was founded on it. Nowadays? All gone (officially). Come on, believing in the impossible is what got us airborne in our first flying contraptions and later to the moon (but let's not have THAT debate).
  • 3 1
 @BenPea: the US was not "founded" on slavery. Yes, slavery was legal, but it did not become widespread and the foundation of the southern economy until the invention of the cotton gin (1793) and it's proliferation in the early 1800s.
  • 2 1
 @fecalmaster: the gun and ammunition industry has not "fueled the country for 180 years". It was a huge industry in the 1800's, but currently is only an $11 billion industry employing 35,000 people. That is fairly insignificant and about the same as the US video game industry.
  • 2 1
 @Rubberelli: Correct, it was founded on genocide and slavery just built the walls and roof. Apologies.
  • 7 7
 Oh Jesus, you snowflakes really need to get off your leftie consipration titty. Your stupid green populism proclaiming opression without any grounds (just pure assumptions that if H&M or Nike makes workers work in terrible conditions means that bike industry does that as well for sure) is doing nothing more but disservice to people who are actually working in terrible conditions. I've been that moron few years ago, chanting leftie bullcrap. Please get into appreciating facts, instead of fashoinable assumptions buying your back slaps from idiots.

Elon Musk shoots Tesla to Mars while children are starving in Africa - Ahwwww Mhy Ghaaawd, so offensive.

I recommend following the work of this man if you see the world in grim colors:
www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence
  • 1 2
 @BenPea: genocide yes, slavery no. The economy of the colonies was not based on slavery. It was merely a factor.
  • 3 0
 @Rubberelli: Fair enough. I was just highlighting that bad things don't have to stay the same just because change is hard. If something can change lives on a huge scale it's worth working for. Thanks for your reasoned responses.
  • 2 0
 @WAKIdesigns: and you need to get over that everything is a partisan issue. Oppression of people inspires both the left (Hamilton) and the right (Jefferson) to rebellion.
  • 1 2
 Thank you for your sanity in this world...
  • 1 2
 @WAKIdesigns: Elon is literally iron man and the dude could put us all on electric grids if our political nightmares would allow it. He made a rocket better than NASA in a heartbeat - no comparison to their ability as a freelance unbounded company that can create concepts and turn them into reality - not just a gimmick.
  • 2 5
 @AutumnMedia: I love Elon, from the start and that bit with roadster was freaking ace. All those superpowers, Trump and China talking about going to the moon, Russians going we'll place weapons bla bla bla, Kennedy like speeches, and here's this dude, doing better job than they are with a fkng cabrio flying towards Mars with "Don't Panic" on the screen. It's just brilliant. It's an unintended finger to World's biggest powers. And those two rockets landing simultaneously... oh my gawd, I jizzed my pants from excitement, nooooowhaaaaaay
  • 2 2
 @Buggyr333: Yeah, that’s probably true. Unfortunately, Pinkbike had to go and make the website I go to (which is Pinkbike) to avoid political bull a part of the group of websites I loathe due to feature articles from huff post, Newsweek, or, even there own attempt at writing news (yahoo). We have our own set of politics in cycling, and for the most part I can read the articles on Pinkbike that have to do with our politics and not get aggravated because it’s cycling! So the leftist dribble that I find in the comments from the thousands of liberals (you can choose to take offense to that title, but it is just a title and is not being used as a derogatory term) that post here simply turns into comments from people involved in the same sport that I love and adore. People whose comments I will take a minute to sit and reflect on because they’re my peers in the cycling community. With all that said, if I buy any new products this Year I will try and MAKE SURE that it’s a Vista sports product because Pinkbike JUST HAD to write this article. All the people I know that ask me about cycling products because they know I have been a rider/racer for over 20 years will be directed to Vista owned brands if a Vista brand happens to make what they’re looking for. What gets under my skin the most is that I can’t help but now feel like Pinkbike is trying to infringe upon MY RIGHT to bear arms, a right I have earned to continue exercising with two tours to Iraq and one to Afghanistan as an infantry grunt, and then as an Infantry Officer (Captain, retired, 2016). I have not fired a shot in anger since AFG 12’ nor do I now own any firearms (which will change once my kids grow up and understand Dad needs to do Dad and wants very much to permanently retire to TX, CO or AZ). If I wasn’t living in the disgusting cesspool that is California I would go out RIGHT NOW and buy as many Armalite model 15s as I could because I might not be able to here in a few years (for you that don’t know, “AR” doesn’t stand for “assault rifle”). Also, if any of my family or friends were killed by a lunatic with a rifle I would STILL support the 2nd amendment and fight those who wish to take my gun-toting rights away. I don’t know how Canada overall looks at the gun debate, nor do I really care. All I care about is that a Canadian website is sticking its big nose in my countries politics and, unfortunately, it’s a website that has to do with BIKES not guns. Shame on you Pinkbike. Stick to bikes.
  • 1 0
 @CaliCol: I just left Cali and move to UT. FREEEEDOM!!!!!! So sick of Cali rubbish regulations, taxes, traffic, cost of living. It's a joke. There are some good trails in SoCal tho...
  • 1 0
 @jason342: trust me bro, I can’t wait.
  • 4 6
 Can we still agree on the issue that if your stance on gun control may dictate your choices when it comes to buying bike parts, you are a fkng moron? No it’s not about whether you are pro or against. It’s about the fact that you can make that connection between one being dependent on another...
  • 2 1
 when have you been in a factory producing our gear the last time?

This comment is just plane nonsens. Minimum legal work age in China (16) is actually higher than in the US (14), Canada (14 with restrictions) or Europe (14) and it gets controlled in any factory that is used by Western companies/brands.

Yes there have been issues in the 80ies an 90ies. Most prominently in Nike and New Balance Factories. However other than with guns after the problem became public immediate action has been taken. If you want to produce goods for any bigger western company these days you will have to pass tedious audition processes at first and then have to deal with inspectors on site unannounced at any time. It will cost you dearly to violate any of the regulations.
As a matter of fact, a chinese worker these days has even more holidays and and vacation time than a US worker with the bonus of free health care.
The only thing they don't have is guns...
  • 2 3
 @WAKIdesigns: stay in your little part of the world where you do not feel strongly about your rights being violdated only because you never really had any to begin with. You can pull some piece of your pacifist history to give an example but I won’t care because you don’t live my life in my country. Here in America we do things like choose to not be patrons of certain businesses because of a business trying to push there political agenda because of said business. If you don’t like it shit your pacifist mouth and accept that not every country is like yours.
  • 7 0
 @WAKIdesigns: can we agree that if you feel strongly about something and you know that a company is actively supporting the opposite of what you believe in, and alternative products are readily available, then if you do continue to buy that product then you are a complete moron?
  • 5 1
 @Rubberelli: Well said. Apparently this Waki person finds it hard to understand core values, integrity and that as consumers we vote with our dollars. Left or right or center, where ever your political compass lies, we get to choose who we do business with. That's the basis of a free market economy.
  • 4 2
 @WAKIdesigns: Snowflakes? You know that term was originally used to describe right wing conservatives that were against the abolishment of slavery, right. It's ok, you go and do you, you tender snowflake wanna be alt-right thug.
  • 1 4
 @WAKIdesigns: you da man bro - great video post by the way on that last thread - very interesting.
  • 2 3
 @CaliCol: Yes and yes more of us in this world the better - I don't even own a gun and I know when not to be fed bullshit. I'm just going to start using www.VitalMTB.com since they don't throw politics into their website. Great job pinkbike - you guys are the lowest of the low when it comes to content now. Dumbasses have been so clouted by their own fame they just don't know when to quit. High horse douches who will slowly creep away from being a good website - I hope a ton of people convert to Vital and we see a huge surge on that site. Anyways I'm going to read some more interesting articles now on Vital - oh yea did I forget to mention VITALMTB.COM -
  • 2 2
 @Drewnose: Its a general term for people who get triggered over nothing - once again a Canadian pretending to know our culture...
  • 1 5
flag rustyhorse (Mar 2, 2018 at 6:36) (Below Threshold)
 @Rubberelli: THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRODUCT!! are you that ignorant? WHEN HAVE YOU BEEN ABLE TO BUY A GUN IN A BIKE SHOP? THOSE PLACES ARE CALLED REI - DICKS - EMS - BULLSHIT GEAR STORES ARE TO BLAME - you'd literally have to be a dumbass with a pea sized brain to think otherwise -
  • 3 2
 @AutumnMedia: Haha, pretending. Once again, another ignorant American.
  • 2 2
 @Drewnose: Wow.. talk about bigoted. Not all Americans are ignorant. How rude #notall
  • 2 1
 @AutumnMedia: As I said, the original use of snowflake.

In the 1860s "snowflake" was used by abolitionists in Missouri to refer to those who opposed the abolition of slavery. The term referred to the color of snow, referring to valuing white people over black people. This usage was not believed to have extended beyond the state of Missouri in the 1800s. [Wikipedia] - The Wiki that actually has some usable wisdom to share.
  • 3 2
 @theminsta: Did I say all American's? No. Don't put words in my mouth.
  • 2 0
 @AutumnMedia: hey Captain Caps Lock, are you ignorant to the fact that no one, including me, are complaining about the products? Bell makes great helments. So does TLD. So, you should choose one over the other if there is an issue you feel strongly about that they support/oppose. If not then choose based on what rider they sponsor. That's how consumers make decisions and why there are marketing departments.
  • 1 0
 Good point. Smile
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose: there is no free market economy!! central banks are pumping money in to keep everything looking rosey...it's all pretend and fake
  • 1 0
 @CaliCol: pacifist history, I come from Poland mate hahaha Big Grin I’m not a pacifist by any means.

@Ruberelli - there is no connection between Giro and arms. And I encourage you to perform a thought experiment where you ponder what boycoting a product does to whom, because I assure you it does nothing to the head corporation, it punches the lowest in the chain. I gibe you an example: let’s say your uncle went to jail for a murder or molesting a kid and it goes on national News, can it then be understandable for your employer to fire you from whatever job you are doing?
  • 1 0
 @CaliCol: I think you've missed the point a little. Boycotting Giro etc. is not a dig at the 2nd Amendment or any sort of constitution. It's an attack on the NRA, an organisation that does good work with firearms training and the like, but is also a hugely powerful political lobbying organisation that 'donates' huge sums of money to politicians and aggressively pushes its own agenda as 'fact'.

I don't believe any politician – including Obama – wants to or has wanted to 'ban guns'; that is all rubbish cooked up by organisations such as the NRA (if you can find evidence to the contrary from a reputable source I will happily stand corrected.) I believe most politicians that are not being paid by the NRA or subscribe to its agenda of a 'bad man with a gun' want to add additional controls to firearms and accessories sales, not ban outright.

Ultimately this is not about taking your gun rights away, it's about fighting pro-gun corruption in government, changing attitudes toward lethal weapons and reducing the likelihood of another Sandy Hook, Vegas or Douglas High School.
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: the answer to your thought experiment is yes if your employer depended on the existence and profitability of said uncle. Like if the uncle was a celebrity and you were part of the organization that generated money off his fame. Thus, Uncle Molestor's organization would have to cut off that which is no longer producing revenue.
  • 1 2
 @Rubberelli: You are overestimating the profit Giro has from being a company bought by Vista. What do Giro or Camelback employees have to do with all of it? And what sort of heroism are you trying to act out here? You buy a helmet and a back pack every 2-5 years and make it a matter of honor, while you have little if any clue where does your food come from, what clothing you wear, how are all these brands, along with their vendors and suppliers related to whatever it is that you believe in?

My exact problem with your high horse virtue signalling @Drewnose. You are schooling me on integrity and core values?! What sort of core values do you have that apply to this discussion? Acting on Knee-jerk reflex guns-bad, owned by same company that owns giro? Read the above. You are posing yourself to be a highly moral person when it comes to buying a fkng backpack - that's not exactly like hiding Jewish family under your floor. Not close,even by parsecs. If you are so scrutinizing, I want to see your daily choices where you vote with your dollars making highly ethical purchases. As if you were choosing a backpack based on business ethics of a company, instead of how much water it takes, how much storage space it has, what kind of harness it has, what color and what is it currently on deals in a particular shop. Get off your high horse mate

So if you do ask me about my integrity and core values, then no 1 in a case like this is put my self in all parties shoes before I pass a judgment. Generally, try not to judge, because I have enough crap going on in my own life, to realize who the fk am I to judge those people?
  • 2 0
 @WAKIdesigns: And you are overestimating the value of a gunmaker. Remington, America's oldest gun maker and it's largest maker of rifles and shotguns, just had to declare bankruptcy and is now controlled by its creditors. All gun makers in the US are hurting now that Obama is out of office. I would bet you that Vista is trying to sell Savage right at this very moment. I would also bet they can't find a buyer and will instead announce they will stop making ARs. After all, REI sells probably 25% of all Camelbacks and they just dropped them. Consumer advocacy is an American pasttime and nowhere is that more evident than with McDonalds, whose menu has evolved massively since the release of "Super Size Me". That being said, those that believe strongly in gun rights should be buying their next helmet, hydration pack and gear right now and it should all come from Vista products. Their companies make great stuff as I can personally attest.
  • 1 1
 @Rubberelli: I’m sorry my brain isn’t working anymore. How can one relate his side of the argument in gun control debate to buying a bicycle helmet? Throw me a bone here... is there a particular wheel size or shirt color that could also go in line with my beliefs?
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: Consumer advovacy. Same way some people in the USA don't buy a fried chicken sandwich because they are pro-choice in the abortion debate. Happens all the time over here.
  • 1 1
 @Rubberelli: This is fkd up but I stand corrected. After all Swedes boycotted Israel for some time...
  • 2 0
 @WAKIdesigns: No high horse or knee jerk reaction here pal. I signed multiple patitions to help affect change. This isn't about you or I, or a backpack, it is about humanity and caring for our fellow people and children.

I am a parent and firearms owner myself, I respect firearms and the laws and regulations put forth by my government. Those laws and regulations are what keep us Canadians safe to a certain degree. Yes, there are extenuating circumstances such as illegal firearms and mental health issues, etc... America needs to see a change in their laws and regulations, anything that can be done to mitigate kids being shot in their schools must be done.

I wasn't attacking or judging your core values, integrity, I was pointing out that you are missing the point and not understanding , whether it is intentionally or unintentionally. You are minimizing the end game of what people are trying to accomplish by boycotting a corporation and it's subsidiary companies. It's not just a backpack, it's a message. The message is that as consumers we won't buy your products if you continue to support the NRA and their antiquated cause. It's time for progression to happen. It's time that kids stop dying from fatal shootings and the effects of PTSD from having to go through a situation like a school shooting.

Open your eyes and your heart, pull your head out of your a$$ and put yourself in the position of one of the affected families. How would you feel if your pride and joy was taken away by someone, because they had access to a weapon that they shouldn't have readily available to them.
  • 1 0
 @CaliCol: Don't you think that there needs to be more stringent checks/evaluations before one can buy guns?
  • 1 1
 You French and Dutch started slavery as if this even pertains to a comment about foriegn firearms being banned for sale in the US. Thank you for bringing slavery to America so we could sort it out, squash it then save France like 35 times. Still waiting for my thank you card or a croissant or something.
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose, I can only respect your way of looking at it but I call your care for family irrelevant. That’s a rather weird way out man, to hide behind your kids in such blatant matter because First off it’s about gun policy in US, not in Canada. Hence I think you are unnecessarily charging it, ideologically drawing what to me seems like highly moralized connections. As if you were trying to hurt someone. But that’s my assumption. After all hearing about a mass shooting in school, vision of your kid being rounded in a corridor crying while some a*shole puts gun to her/ his mouth and pulls a trigger laughing, can be terrifying. Wakes up dark, dark emotions. Killed with menace... I fear my kids dying of cancer or being killed by a car or worse a cyclist breaking my daughters spine... but why would I like to burn half of the world for it or imagine that some silly purchase could change it? Why should I live in fear, inevitably projecting it on my child?

Now according to my core values one does simply not politicize a choice of a bicycle helmet or a back pack. And the reason for it is A if it sounds that ridiculous then I assume it actually is a ridiculous thing to do. B that seems quite smallest to me. So if you want to blend politics into it here, where will you venture next? Will you find out what party does the CEO of Sram sympathize with? What if by all sorts of variables, you are against legalization of Marijuana, hypothetically off course, wouldn’t you shake handif Brett Tippie? Wouldn’t you buy Transition bike? What if you hypothetically happen to be an atheist believing in womens rights, and you find out that head of marketing at Shimano is a hardcore Christian against abortion?

Is this the landscape you want to live in? Because identity politics, like religion is a terrifying weapon and everyone believes in something, do you want companies to start throwing crap at each other, undermining, plotting?

There are very good reasons to separate biking from politics, because biking is an escape, one of cures for this war of bollocks.

But well, if you do want to wake up demons in what is a safe space, our utopian idylle, help yourself. As I said I respect your thought chain, but I find it rather ugly and worrying.
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: Hide behind my family? What kind of a statement is that? You know nothing about me or my family, if you did you would know that I come from a military family. While my family has served my country regardless of politics and creed. What exactly have you done to ensure your values, morals and beliefs are upheld in today's world. Probably not a f@cking thing you pansy a$$ little twat. You sit there with your pretty little drawings, all smug with your high and almighty artsy farsty views. I can see your very small minded and quite obviously a serial troll. You know what, I will agree to completely disagree with you. Good day.
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose: Good that you bring up the other part of your family, now I can understand you. I mean it in a good way. You still won't protect your family by choosing bike products depending on which politics it seems to be related to. Let's agree to disagree since we are made from completely different clay. Small minded, comes from a soldier - don't push my buttons I'm much better at this game. No point to get upset, I was just trying to have an intelligent discussion.
  • 2 0
 @Drewnose: and if you can rationalize relation gun control - bike helmet then you are obviously blinded by idological bullshit. You cannot turn it off. This is not war zone. This blindness is what doesn't allow you to see that I am pretty much 90% on your side, I admire soldiers, I wish I was given an opportunity to be in the army when I was 20. I wasn't I had to run from it, Polish compulsory service was absolute demoralizator, 6 months that you may not have survived due to alcohol poisoning or ending up in jail. But you are blind, and because of people blinded by such bollocks, politicians, one of the worst kind of men and women, taking jobs, nobody in their right mind would like to take, due to choices they would have to make, dicks they would have to suck, for a drop of power - awful, disgusting creatures stripped of any morals, who send your brothers in arms to spill their blood for stupid shit, because people blow things out of proportion. Because they can gain power by stuffing people with pseudo values. They will send you to die in crappiest part of the world because they get hand outs from soda maker. And in order to do this they will distort reality, polarizing people, turn on tribal programs in their heads to the point where they can think that buying a helmet means supporting their country or the enemy. So please... take it easy, because I'm not your enemy.

Peace and respect.
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: You're right, you're much better at internet discussions/debates than I. Hold that tightly as an accolade of achievement, it will be a laurel you can rest on for years to come. My eyes are wide open, 20/20 vision physically and mentally. Just because of one's military background doesn't mean they are uneducated and incapable of having original thoughts and understanding the world around them, or in your terms being small minded. I feel it is contrary to your belief. It actually opens one's mind up to the diversities of the world and our sociopolitical and economic systems. You speak of military and soldiers with a certain disstain, but say you wouldn't want to be part of it because you would fall prey to other's plans, goals and/or overreaching agendas. It seems like you don't have the integrity or the fortitude to stand your ground, work hard and create your own success regardless of the events surrounding you, chain of command above you or perceived potential circumstances you could be placed in. Sounds like a victim complex to me.

Anyways, believe what you will. All I know is there is traction being gained in regards to the article we are supposedly "discussing". The rubber is hitting the road, look in to the market and see what stocks are doing for firearms retailers and manufactuers.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/03/02/gun-boycott-rei-mountain-equipment-co-op-stop-selling-major-outdoor-brand-due-to-its-weapons-sales-nra-ties

I bid you adieu.
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose: oh yea, so you tell me how much I don’t know you and then go on a same sort of rave who I am and how I don’t work hard. Piss off mate with your integrity and you may stuff your vaues up your highly raised arsehole. Will save the world by chosing another helmet, fkng idiot
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: Thanks for painting me a picture with the true colors of your intelligence.
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose: I hope you did a lot of hashtags too. that #helps a lot. thank you for keeping me safe.
  • 1 1
 @titoholt: I'm sorry, was I meant to be offended? The only thing offending me is your stupidity. Scientists say the universe is made up of neutrons, protons and electrons. They forgot to mention morons. You're welcome Nancy. What I can't help you with is your Grammar. Dipshit.
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose: #triggeredmillenial
  • 1 0
 @titoholt: Thanks for letting us know how you're feeling.
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose: haha, Justin trudeoux is your hero.
  • 1 0
 @titoholt: Justin is to Canada what Hillary is to the U.S., which is like saying, what dog $hit is to a lawn you are to Pinkbike and the internet. A minor annoying inconvenience that smells horrible and is hard to clean off at times. I will just walk around you and be along my way.
  • 1 1
 @Drewnose: cool 6" wiggle in your photo, at least your commenting skills on pinkbike is on point.
  • 1 1
 @titoholt: Your mom told me you would say that. Good thing she likes my six inch wiggle! She can't get enough of it, hell she is like a double barrelled shot gun... Two cocks and she ready to blow!!!
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose: finally a proper discussion
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose - I'm getting more and more attracted to your integrity and core values coming from a military family. Men like your father fought, bled and died so that we, silly citizens can make ourselves comfortable on the couch and write to someone on the internet: "I fkd your mom in the butt until her poop came out of her mouth".

Thank you heroes. I wish I could look up to you, but I am so unworthy.
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, so your response doesn't at all surprise me. Isn't it interesting, once the real conversation tapers off the trolls crawl out from their sad exsistence of "sitting comfortably on their couches and f*cking their moms in their asses until poop comes out of their mouths..."

You better recognize you unworthy artsy farsty cream puff.
  • 1 0
 @Drewnose: what makes you think that I am sad? For your information: I am very happy. Did a really good job at work today, told a few jokes, made few pretty girls laugh. Played football table with my friends. At some croissants, put my kids to sleep. Sorry, I'm going to work out. Meanwhile please figure out if I am lying. I look through the window of my kids dark room, they are snoring. I look at constellation of Orion wishing upon a bright reddish star in the upper left corner: explode damn it!
  • 1 0
 also thank you for teaching me about comedy and wits - you must be great at it. I can tell it by your posts. Ever thought of stand up?
  • 1 1
 @Drewnose: resorting to mom jokes? I take that back your comments are as lame as your wiggle pic.
  • 1 1
 @titoholt: Who said I was joking?
  • 1 0
 @AutumnMedia: We should let Tippy know that PB is trying to be political. If he sees to much politics on this site, he'll bounce.
  • 148 27
 Oh yikes. Time to sell all of my giro equipment, it might be a gun!
  • 50 16
 Exactly. Knee jerk reactions always provide positive outcomes right?
  • 50 4
 Whips out a multi tool...
"Hey! Have you got a license for that? DON'T POINT THAT AT ME!"
  • 30 3
 don't worry the camelbak is probably bulletproof
  • 15 2
 I'm all for gun control and whatnot but fuck that, I'm not giving up any of my Giro or Camelbak gear. As accurately mentioned above, it really is bulletproof.
  • 8 2
 yup everything can kill, including our hands
  • 10 4
 @scott-townes: I think the idea is that you consider a different brand the next time you go shopping. They could care less about what you already own.
  • 11 4
 @Rattles: What about people sponsored by one of these unfortunate companies? Are they supposed to drop the sponsor, lose their livelihood, but eke out a moral victory?
  • 6 0
 @Rattles: Eh my Camelbak Chaos is now on its 13th year of use. Nah, I'm chill still purchasing from them... if it ever breaks and needs to be replaced of course.
  • 9 2
 @foxxyman: Best comment on here. Boycott the hands! Boycott the gloves that keep the (evil) hands warm. Scapegoat somebody, please!
  • 18 5
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: The point is, they are NOT unfortunate companies. And the athletes should do nothing. Do you think Tesla is an 'honorable' company? E-cars right? Save the world?! Ok, consider that a typical car uses 50 pounds of copper. An electric vehicle uses 150-300 pounds! Next, cobalt (from war torn Africa), lithium and nickel. Seen an open pit mine? The cyanide used for leaching, and the chemicals sent down drill shafts are no good. But mining makes a Tesla, and also all your bike components. Next, have you ever gone to a bike park? Shame on Whistler, or Vail. They use chair lifts powered by electricity - 31% coal in America, 20% Nuclear, green, and some natty gas. What if we 'shuttle' up the hill to go riding? Courtesy of a Toyota Tacoma (made of steel), and powered by gas (thank you Chevron and Shell). If we play the righteous (but naive) game of "shame," it's a crazy circle, going nowhere...but eventually back to you. Guns need laws, yes. But, more people died in a weekend (yes, just a weekend) than the last 3 school shootings (all by handguns, not rifles). Therefore, we must study our facts and come up with real strategies. The only people to shame right now are the media and politicians - where the hell were they last year, when Chicago was losing about 10 people a night from handguns!? Nobody cares, it's snooze button. I do support tougher laws, but we must also study all the true, relevant facts. I said in an earlier comment, that (not hundreds) but thousands of rural farmers in India are committing suicide because of farmer debt (GMO product etc). So, we all better get used to never eating boxed cereal or crackers again, or going to McDonalds - because they all use GMO. The shame game is dangerous. We want truth, facts, and then real legislation. I for one, will support Giro and Camelbak, because I know so many souls on here today want to play the 'honest' game and go buy something from 'Who?' Who is honest and clean?
  • 8 0
 @ryanm189: I was just saying it's unfortunate for Camelbak, Giro, ect. (as well as their sponsored riders) that they've been caught up in all this but daaaaaaamn bud.
  • 4 1
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: Word.
  • 2 1
 I'm going to sell my Giro Switchblade and by a gat!
  • 3 0
 @ryanm189: YES, preach! Get educated, know your facts, and shred your bike #MURICA
  • 2 0
 @ryanm189: mic drop sir. Kudos
  • 5 1
 Anyone who boycott's one of the companies better do alot of research. Chances are about 150% you are already purchasing items you have no clue who are partnered with. Ignorance is on sale and I'm giving a 5% discount.
  • 1 2
 I want to write something about Giro scopes but I can't shoehorn this one in...
  • 3 0
 @scott-townes: lol you are obviously boycotting them if you haven't bought a new bag in 13 years.
  • 1 3
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: Earn less but gain respect from about half of the folks around here.
Also they might gain a lot of followers for standing up to their beliefs and if they right person sees it they might be picked up by a new sponsor with a better deal faster than you can can say NRA.
  • 2 0
 @michibretz: haha I'm boycotting their insanely good quality I guess. I'M AN ACTIVIST! YAY!
  • 3 1
 A bunch of Tide Pod eating kids are gonna take away your AR’s. That’s the funny part.
  • 115 15
 I'm sure this will get downvoted quite a bit... but all you folks who will inevitably complain about how you'd rather not be bothered with politics. It's nice that your life is so well insulated that current events may not affect you, but the lives of many are greatly affected by whats going on in politics in recent times. To some people this is extremely important, and may affect their livelihood or affect how they want to spend their hard earned money. If you don't like it just keep scrolling, or go ride your bike.
  • 34 0
 Many of life's choices are guided by politics and your most effective vote is your dollar.
  • 88 6
 Here in Australia we're going to arm all life guards with Sharks to stop the Shark attacks.
  • 14 0
 You forgot our lethal drop bears mate!
  • 4 0
 Bags not having the carpet shark then....

Is there a skill rating or test involved at all? How do they know I'd be OK to handle a Mako, or if I'd be better suited to a Great White, or if I'm a bit mentally ill and shouldn't be given a Bull Shark...
  • 8 0
 @handynzl: "Great White"
white privilege much?
lol
  • 23 6
 That will never work, the only solution is to ban Sharks! Then you have nothing to worry about. Trust us, it works great. It's how we got rid of drugs, stopped underage drinking, and eliminated sexual assault!
  • 1 0
 Ha! Comment of the day
  • 2 0
 Brilliant
  • 87 11
 Personally I am a big fan of Giro and Camelbak products, should the fact that they were bought by gun company really be the fault of all of their employees who've developed products, which countless people enjoyed over many years?

I hate guns and would never buy one, but I don't think I will stop buying Giro and Camelbak products.
  • 18 2
 It’s difficult because they weren’t to blame for being bought out but they are the ones with the consumer base who want to exercise their dismay. Ultimately if giro or bell products aren’t selling then it is the parent company who will have to make changes. There is literally no other way to communicate that between the consumer and the parent company.
  • 7 0
 They weren't even bought by a gun company. They were bought by a massive holding corporation that owns a bunch of separate companies, some of which make guns and ammunition, others of which make cycling equipment, sunglasses, golf gear...I agree, it sucks for the hardworking people at the brands that we know and love.
  • 2 0
 Kinda like how the Jimmy John's owner is a big game hunter. Or Chic Fil A doesn't support gay marriage. Both places make a hell of a sandwich tho. Not sure if I should stop eating there or not...
  • 6 0
 @skelldify: After working at Jimmy John's, the owner could personally give CPR to people dying of Ebola and I wouldn't eat there.
  • 3 1
 I had this discussion with my GF last night and at first she agreed a person should stop buying their gear in order to affect the parent company which also owns a shitty gun manufacturer... then I informed her Giro and Camelbak have always been owned by giant holding corporations and they have zero say over which corporations they're sold to. Its incredibly short-sighted and ignorant to punish two great companies over something they have zero control over.
  • 86 17
 I love guns, bikes and dirt bikes! There I said it!
  • 24 18
 2 out of 3 are hated by the liberal masses. Enjoy them while you can.
  • 12 4
 Tits, targets and tranfers!
  • 14 0
 @ACree: and the 3rd by horsey people
  • 1 1
 @georgy291: Mic drop
  • 5 10
flag codypup (Feb 28, 2018 at 18:29) (Below Threshold)
 But it wasn't the question, was it? The article is about companies associated with and supportive of the increasingly nutty NRA.
  • 12 4
 @codypup: ok then, I am joining the NRA and buying all the camelbak/blackburn/giro products I can afford!
  • 6 6
 Here are some great quotes from the supreme leader of the NRA.... have fun supporting this fear-mongering psycho.

“After Hurricane Sandy, we saw the hellish world that the gun prohibitionists see as their utopia. Looters ran wild in south Brooklyn. There was no food, water or electricity. And if you wanted to walk several miles to get supplies, you better get back before dark, or you might not get home at all.”

“Meanwhile, President Obama is leading this country to financial ruin, borrowing over a trillion dollars a year for phony “stimulus” spending and other payoffs for his political cronies. Nobody knows if or when the fiscal collapse will come, but if the country is broke, there likely won’t be enough money to pay for police protection. And the American people know it.”

“Hurricanes. Tornadoes. Riots. Terrorists. Gangs. Lone criminals. These are perils we are sure to face — not just maybe. It’s not paranoia to buy a gun. It’s survival. It’s responsible behavior, and it’s time we encourage law-abiding Americans to do just that.”

“We have blood-soaked films out there, like ‘American Psycho,’ ‘Natural Born Killers’ that are aired like propaganda loops on splatter days.”

"too many in the national media, their corporate owners and their stockholders act as silent enablers, if not complicit co-conspirators.”"

“There exists in this country, sadly, a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells and stows violence against its own people through vicious and violent video games.”
  • 4 2
 @scott-townes: And the other side of the coin "If we dont ban these assault weapons with high magazine baby killing bullets all of our children will be dead." Both sides prey off fear and you are falling into the trap.
  • 3 2
 @dirtbiker327: Yeah except children are actually being massacred in mass shootings whereas there has never been anything close to an attempt at revoking the 2nd Amendment.... you're seriously messed up in the head if you cannot tell the difference.
  • 3 2
 @scott-townes: www.nytimes.com/2018/02/16/opinion/repeat-repeal-second-amendment.html This is a national publication, there is an attempt after every shooting to remove gun rights. Some leftists say that they only want "common sense laws" when they literally dont know anything about firearms, how can it be common sense when it is completely incorrect. Any gun control law is an infringement on our rights.
  • 3 3
 @scott-townes: good one Scott...it really doesn't take much digging on the NRA to realize that they are just as good as any terrorist organizations.
  • 2 2
 @dirtbiker327: not a comparison at all but the only fact you got right is that kids are dying at a fast pace.
  • 4 2
 @dirtbiker327: That's an opinion piece....... are you kidding me right now?

"Any gun control law is an infringement on our rights."

Welp, I guess normal citizens should own RPGs, Apache helicopters, anti-aircraft missiles, grenades, fully auto M-16s, belt-fed machine guns and of course this includes people who have felonies, right? You're f*cking insane.
  • 2 1
 @scott-townes: www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr5087 wow that was difficult to find......... There have been proposed bans for the last 20+ years. You can own just about everything you listed it just takes stacks of money. Obviously you shouldnt be able to own a firearm if you have a felony you have lost you rights or does the law need more explanation?

Deaths from rifles have been declining over the last few years. Latest I could find was 2014 there were 248 deaths caused by the "assault weapons" If you really want effective firearm legislation look at handguns, 5000+ deaths in 2014. Why are you worried about scary black guns when they are in the minority of firearm deaths. Better yet prevent suicide by firearm which gets grouped in and accounts for over 60% of guns deaths.
ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/expanded-homicide data/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2010-2014.xls
Or better yet lets try to prevent people from doing it in the first place because if they are that hell bent on causing destruction they will do it regardless of laws and will use anything to cause harm.
  • 3 1
 @dirtbiker327: www.buzzfeed.com/bennyjohnson/22-bills-being-considered-by-congress-that-will-bl?utm_term=.rbzXrDgZ#.doAaqK2B

nutty bills are always introduced. Learn something about democracy to know what a bill that has a serious chance at passing looks like. You're seriously paranoid.
  • 3 1
 @scott-townes: Sure some wacky bills might get introduced, welcome to America, but that is in the system and and that is good enough for me to qualify as "an attempt at revoking the 2nd Amendment" And if you really want to tell me how our "democracy" works you really need to do some research on the topic, we aren't a legitimate democracy. O and such things on the leftist list you provided "Drug testing for drug task force officers" "Protecting Elephants" You give me shit for posting an opinion piece calling for the gun confiscation and you come back with that Buzzfeed article?....... bahahahah
  • 3 0
 @Batipapo: Your commie friends are who called tens of millions. NRA killed none.
  • 120 57
 Boycotting bike product companies because the parent company own's a "scary gun company" is just stupid. The people at Giro, Bell ect have nothing to do with any of this. Stuff like this makes me hate living in the Portland area...good thing we have a ton of great trails (when they are dry).
  • 91 22
 Its not though. This is how people get companies to change. For better or worse, if enough people dont like what your parent organisation is doing they can make it change. It is the reason that Oil and Gas and Mining companies changed their behaviour over the last 30 years and the reason that the thermal coal industry is nearly dead
  • 14 8
 @pwadjo: you nailed it.
  • 30 7
 @Mekamonkey complacency is the start of tyranny - these petitions are one of the last few options the general population has to have their voices be heard. Overall conscientiousness of what companies are tied to what other companies and their inherent interests are what makes the general population more informed and therefore able to make smarter decisions on how to vote and pressure the multinational corporations.

I disagree with you 100%.
  • 22 5
 Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but that "scarry gun company" was in the weapons business long before it diversified into other outdoor products. So yes, it does matter. The profits, which all funnel up to the parent company, are used to support the NRA.
  • 12 4
 Sure, but I don't want my money being funneled to the NRA through their parent company.
  • 4 9
flag ledude (Feb 28, 2018 at 15:44) (Below Threshold)
 @pwadjo: tried to upvote you more...well stated
  • 7 7
 @ledude: Do you think that a boycott of two small sections of this company's huge portfolio will hurt anyone but Giro/Bell ect? I really doubt it and it wont change a dam thing we need tighter gun laws and education (yes I'm a gun owner) and not random acts of "old man standing on the lawn pointing at the sun yelling EVIL!!!". Wink
  • 5 7
 Move to Florida so your kids can go to school with armed teachers and you can shoot anyone if you claim "Stand your grounds". The trails will be nice, flat and dry for you.
  • 10 4
 @Mekamonkey: So not do anything about it at all? It's a real good reason to boycott a company. Every little bit helps, and if any company is feeding the NRA, then they don't get my business. That's how things change. To me, it was a poor choice for these companies to sell out to a company that makes guns and feeding the NRA. People pay for their bad decisions.
  • 7 3
 @ledude: The start of tyranny breeds first with scapegoating....then mob rule. All fueled by false righteousness, and hypocrisy. I hear what your heart is saying, but reality includes 'heart and mind.' It's called paradox. We need both. The truth is, America does need some new laws regarding guns. But this Florida thing is being used politically and with hysteria (the dying and suffering is horrific, agree!) The facts are, handguns do the most damage. In one night alone, in DC, Baltimore, Detroit, DC we have more deaths. Every. Night. Nobody cares, nobody talks. It's back to Jimmy Fallon, and set the coffee machine for tomorrow morning. If we want to play the shame game, how can we bike? Steel, titanium, carbon - all from mining or egregious forms of energy. Gone to a bike park lately? Lifts all powered by coal, nuclear, natty gas (and some green). Shuttled? That pickup truck is made of steel and runs courtesy of Shell and Chevron. Maybe we go electric, and feel proud. We can't! I argue that e-vehicles are worse than conventional! A typical car uses 50 pounds of copper, yet a Tesla or equivalent uses 150-300 pounds! Then, cobalt (from war torn africa), lithium and nickel. So, if I post a picture of a kid in Africa dying from mercury poisoning, or missing a left hand from a tribal war, would you sell your Tesla or Prius? So, who do we want to shame and blame? It's a never ending game of scapegoat but mostly hypocrisy. And, as the media is doing right now, the hysteria amps up the wildebeest and zebra and gets us stampeding in a certain direction (mob rule). That is tyranny. Look at America today - democracy is totally rigged (and actually moving towards totalitarianism - ironically at a time when people think they are getting nicer and more honest).
  • 8 4
 I work for one of the world's largest consumer goods companies in a sales roll. It I didn't believe in what we sold, no matter the brand, I wouldn't work for them. Vote with your dollar and support those who have the values you share.
  • 5 0
 @ryanm189: You're actually asking people to have some integrity?
We all know deep down they're all full of shit. It's easy to boycott something you don't want, takes true grit to boycott something that actually impacts you directly.
  • 1 0
 @pwadjo: That is how a countries descends into communist dictatorships.
  • 72 14
 If we all boycot brands which create devises that could kill then I think most corporations would go under. Do you like Kraft Dinner or any other Kraft products? Well too bad they are owned by Philip Morris. Do you like Matel toys? Well too bad they made plastic parts for the M16. How about your Smith or Oakley sunglasses ? Well they have huuuge military contracts. Want to fly to Hawaii well the guys that made your plane also make military vehicles. I am not saying I am for or against the NRA but if we start penalizing every brand because of their parent company then we will be left with nothing but our self gratified smirk all alone with no toys convenience foods or modes of travel. Business is dirty, sometimes your beloved company is bought by a conglomerate that sells everything under the sun. That doesn’t mean that the products are supporting mass shootings. It just means they can sign bigger checks. Cool off SJWs
  • 14 8
 Thank you @AJ420. Common sense & logic is difficult to come by nowadays
  • 30 15
 I think people want to boycott these brands not because they make these weapons, but because they give money to the absolute shitshow that is the NRA.
  • 8 6
 @mustbike: an important point!
  • 14 2
 Amen. Stop with the scapegoating, self-righteousness and mob rule people. I like to remind folks that bike parks are powered by coal, nuclear and natty gas mostly (to make the electricity which runs the chairlifts). And shuttling - that Toyota Tacoma is made of steel and is powered by gas and oil - courtesy Rio Tinto, Exxon and Chevron. Oh...you have electric? Great, your battery has 3 times the amount copper (seen an open pit mine lately?) and cobalt from war torn areas of Africa., then lithium and nickel. If we want to blame anyone, blame Hollywood - these tards have a new movie on Netflix daily, with some actor or actress holding a gun, with a really stupid and important look on their face. Next, blame Xbox for making 'killing' "entertainment." But, mostly...put the blame where it resides - personal responsibility. Some parent bought that xbox, and some kid willingly plays it, and pulls the trigger.
  • 3 0
 @mustbike: i dont think they willingy hand over checks to these higher-ups. and vista makes NRA donations but the MTB brands dont
  • 3 0
 Not to mention anyone with vested/invested retirement funds that you don't personally manage. If you play third degree like this original post about vista we're all in bed conciously or unconsciously with companies we don't necessarily support.
  • 1 0
 @AJ420 I think the reality of it is we live in a world where elected governments don't listen to the people, and corporations have more power then any of us, but those corporations live and die by consumer choice. Squeeze the corporations and make change happen. You can't readily withhold tax money, but you can choose to purchase from a different company. I agree it silly, but it's the best option we have right now.
  • 3 2
 @mustbike: No NRA member has ever committed a mass shooting. Why is so much hate directed at an organization that is protecting a constitutional right? Why aren't you mad at the shooter and the people committing heinous acts while another is just trying to maintain our ever eroding rights?
  • 1 0
 But if we don't then these companies won't change. The dollar is a powerful weapon. This also isn't about companies that produce for the military. This is about targeting companies that donate to the NRA. There is a huge, huge difference.
  • 94 40
 Really? The only political discussion I want to read about on Pinkbike is how UCI sucks. We all have opinions about guns, they vary widely and are unlikely to change by arguing about it with others on the internet. It is nice to come to Pinkbike and just read bike stuff and obnoxious comments.
  • 11 17
flag bman33 (Feb 28, 2018 at 14:55) (Below Threshold)
 ^^^^^^ This and agree.
  • 47 18
 Just so you're aware, Pinkbike isn't a website dedicated to you. Others (also riders) are affected by things like these and therefore are interested in reading about them.

Chill out, and keep scrolling.
  • 17 9
 I would also like to read about how IMBA sucks. People riding carbon products made by oppressed children in China boycotting US companies for supporting the first and second amendments. Priceless.
  • 15 3
 .@ajayflex: No it isn't. However, many of us (on all sides of insert political issue here > _________) also come to Pinkbike to escape the daily deluge of politics everywhere else in the world. Countless other forums for it. Many companies who make the 'toys' we use in biking and elsewhere have military contracts or similar. Do we ban Oakley, Smith, Boeing/Airbus aircraft, Maxxis, Michelin, & other tire companies , plastic companies who make things for both toys AND military etc.? When does it end?
  • 9 5
 @bman33: I'm not sure I'm making the connection here. There is a difference between companies making things for the military (although some may have a problem with how our military operates I guess) and companies that put assault weapons in the hand of civilians. Most people don't have a problem with military style weapons being in the hands of... the military.
  • 8 1
 @sino428: The connection is that many of those companies listed above also make components that go into the manufacture of many weapons (including the AR series). The point is at what point do we stop demonizing? I am not naive enough to think I will change anyone's minds here. However, plenty of good people on both sides of this debate with equally valid perspectives.
  • 2 0
 If you hadn’t said it I was going to.
  • 4 1
 @bman33: You were talking about Military contracts. Oakley? Smith? Why would people care if they provide the military with eyewear?
  • 3 0
 @sino428: I don't and many don't either. The point is, some of those very same companies ALSO make components for gun manufacturers OR are owned by umbrella corps that do. Back to my 'where does it end?' comment
  • 4 1
 @bman33: I didn't understand what you meant, I think I do now. I agree, some people do take it a bit far.
  • 2 3
 @bman33: But those companies aren't feeding the NRA. Quite a big difference, not really comparable. The military need these weapons, civilians don't. That's kind of the point.
  • 5 1
 @dualsuspensiondave: Actually it is directly comparable. We don't know 100% what corps do. And so what if they do? No different that the right wingers barging into a women's rights because they don't like abortion. Don't agree with that, don't have one. Don't agree with semi-auto rifles, don't buy one or support the NRA. However taking away ones rights does NOT give the opposition any moral high ground.
On your point regarding "...civilians don't" is an opinion (granted the biggest issue here). Also, who knows who is "feeding the NRA". I bet even Pinkbike readers are split on NRA membership and donations. Doesn't make them bad or good. Their individual actions do. As I said above, the pro life/choice battle is exactly the same as the pro guns/NRA or not battle. Tragic what happened in Florida. However, binary knee jerk reactions or banning this or that and taking away others rights gets us nowhere.
  • 2 6
flag burt-reynolds (Feb 28, 2018 at 17:28) (Below Threshold)
 @bman33: No civilian needs a weapon designed for killing people specifically. That's what the AR-15 was designed for. In no way are common sense gun laws taking away from people's rights. You totally miss the point that 18 year olds are able to purchase a gun designed for mass shootings, with no problem at all.
  • 3 3
 @bman33: comparing assault weapons to abortions is kind of ridiculous. Agree with abortion or not, we can all agree that it’s largely a personal issue and a choice that doesn’t effect anyone else. Unlike abortion, the availability of assault weapons has many ramifications, such as children in a school getting mowed down. You can’t just say, if you don’t agree with it, ignore it.
  • 3 0
 @sino428: ridiculous? How so? I'm pro choice. However, many who strongly oppose it wish to ban it and look at it as 'murder' in the same light and ferocity as anti gun people. As far as manufacturers, one could view clinics/doctors who perform them in the same light as a gun manufacturer. Both topics invoke the same passions and misguidance.
I'm in NO way saying ignore the Florida or similar tragedies. Hell, I live 10 minutes from Columbine. What I am saying is ban the AR or boycott anything remotely related? Then what? How far to we go down the rabbit hole? Remember Oklahoma City killed 160+ with a box truck, fuel and fertilizer.. ...
  • 4 0
 @dualsuspensiondave: Either 18 year olds are competent or they are not. If they can vote, join the military, be compelled to sign up for the draft, buy tobacco products, have an abortion, and be adults in all other respects, they should be able to buy guns too. And if they need to be 21 to buy a gun, why are we letting these imbeciles vote (other than on pinkbike props)?
  • 3 0
 @sino428: Doesn't effect anyone else, except the potential person. And the other parent.

I am pro choice but can at least understand the argument and objections, and see the relevant comparisons here.
  • 47 19
 Giro don't make guns. they make some of the best helmets in the business. camelbak don't make guns. they make the most well known bike packs in the business. by not stocking these brands you are putting thousands of good people out of jobs. these people didn't choose to be bought by a company like vista. these people make some of the best stuff ever and you don't even take into account what boycotting them will do to the bike industry
  • 32 16
 The owners of these companies sold out to conglomerates. They made that decision and are now dealing with the consequences of their greed, being associated with Savage and Federal Ammunition. The regular employees may not have chosen to be bought out, but they did make the decision to work for/continue to work for a company managed by people who did decide to be bought. A little accountability goes a long ways.
  • 16 4
 Playing devil’s advocate, how else will disillusioned consumers communicate with the parent company? Write a strongly worded letter? Literally every Pinkbike comments section says ‘vote with your wallet’ about standards and parts and gimmicks because corps won’t listen otherwise. Well the only way people can do that here is by not buying products the parent company owns. I’m not saying it’s right, just that the consumers hand has been forced.
  • 11 4
 I doubt that boycotting these companies will decrease industry wide sales of helmets and packs - will just shift purchases to smaller companies who's profits aren't benefiting owners who also profit from the sales of guns. And that's the whole idea.
  • 12 1
 That is true, and think about this: The gun industry is in a free-fall right now and Remmington just filed for bankruptcy. Why? Because Hillary DIDN'T get elected. Gun MFGs do well when the sheep all buy guns because they are fooled into believing that the big bad Democrat is coming to take away their guns. The gun industry bet that Hillary would win and got left holding the bag. Donald doesn't scare poeple into buying weapons, and the MFGs are left with a massive overstock. This has affected their stocks dramatically since DT got elected.

The point is that now Giro and Bell are exposed to trouble because their parent company is in gun trouble. THAT sucks for all the good people that in the cycling industry.
  • 3 1
 @MrFogg: maybe they chose to keep working for a brand because it makes what they believe to be the best
  • 3 1
 @endlessblockades: exactly its like when your new foster parents turn out to be criminals on the down low
  • 2 0
 Iron Horse made some of the best bikes in the business. All of their employees lost their jobs because of decisions made by ownership. Those owners ran the company into the ground, but not before squeezing every possible penny out of it. IH employees didn't choose their destiny, but that is how capitalism works, for better or worse.
  • 1 1
 @MrFogg: well said
  • 2 0
 @rageking123:

It would be great if the workers could buy out the evil foster parents and carry on with their passion untethered to the killing-machine industry.
  • 1 0
 @endlessblockades: if i had 400 million dollars i would in an instant. but i guarantee most of the people there arent millionares and dont have at least 1 million dollars lying around
  • 4 1
 @MrFogg: It's not that easy pal. Mr. Fogg, do you drive a car, or ride in one? Do you ride a bike? Then you support mining and oil exploitation. Full stop. Have you seen mining camps in Africa (or in general)? You can't be honest without being a hypocrite, so it's a paradox and also false. Drive a Tesla? Great, we're ruining the world together - a typical car is 50 pounds copper. E-vehicles are 150-300 pounds copper, and then add cobalt from war torn Africa, lithium and nickel. Even the most noble hippy at the San Francisco farmers market is evil. How? They truck in their perfectly organic produce. The oil to power their truck came from either fracking, Saudi, Mexico or Canada. Animals died. People died in the process. Eat at McDonalds or most chain restaurants today? Great, we support GMO, and not 17 kids in Florida, BUT THOUSANDS of farmers in India are committing suicide from farmers debt. It's a major crisis over there right now, google it. Playing the honest game, or the shame game might make us feel cozy, but it's not right. Yes, we must find ways to do better, including better gun laws (but also study that handguns do all the damage, not assault rifles - and where was CNN last weekend in Baltimore, Chicago and Detroit, where dozens were murdered? It's not dramatic is the point. We must be careful with our activism, lest we be hypocrites and zealots.
  • 5 0
 @ryanm189: Just because AIDS sucks doesn't mean that we should stop trying to cure cancer.
  • 1 0
 @endlessblockades: My understanding is that's why Vista started speculating in 'outdoor' companies.
  • 31 6
 Yea despite being owned by a company that also owns a firearms company I'm not sure how I feel about hurting the individual companies and livelihoods of their employees. I'm not pro gun, I just prefer to approach things with reason and consider the whole picture. I really think it needs to be approached with legislation. Because honestly, the folks making bicycle helmets don't deserve to be hurt to make a point - a point that, by the way, won't be made by not buying bicycle helmets. People in this country buy a lot of guns. Therefore they are manufactured and sold. If this "boycott" were to work, after enough negative PR and financial damage is done and "Savage Arms" is dropped or sold....there are plenty of companies that give zero f's about other sporting goods and are ready to make that sale. I know the intentions are good, but I think the damage outweighs any potential gain here.
  • 13 2
 Wow, how dare you have a thoughtful and considerate reply!!!!
  • 6 1
 On point..extremes are stupid and irrational places people park their mindsets into...
  • 4 4
 @DARKSTAR63 You're missing the whole point. You said: "I really think it needs to be approached with legislation." The NRA opposes ANY legislation related to gun control and actively uses it's money (donating to politicians) to prevent anything meaningful from happening. Vista Outdoors supports and funds the NRA. People who are boycotting these bike gear brands don't want any of their money to end up with the NRA. That's the point. It's not about who makes what gun or what piece of plastic. It's about not funneling money to the NRA. The ultimate goal would be to get Vista Outdoors to stop funding the NRA.
  • 1 0
 @henrifournier: I'm not missing the point at all. I just feel it's ineffective. The NRA gets money from all over. I'm not for hurting several companies that have nothing to do with this to cut off (maybe) a small stream of funds to the NRA. I don't think that solves our problem. I look at the whole picture and weigh the loss and gain.
  • 45 20
 I love my Giro helmets and like guns. Nothing wrong with a piece of machinery in the hands of a law abiding citizen. Semenuk is more dangerous on his slope bike.
  • 28 35
flag Trouterspace (Feb 28, 2018 at 14:55) (Below Threshold)
 Yeah except you never know when that law abiding citizen is going to snap and murder a bunch of kids with their legally acquired arsenal.
  • 11 9
 @Trouterspace: people don’t snap randomly. There are always signs if someone was sain or not
  • 16 4
 @Trouterspace: the police were called over 20 times about him but ya your correct.
  • 16 15
 Never hear about a good married with children church going Republican voting law abiding gun owner hurting people. I guess we should be looking for atheist democrats with no friends ????
  • 11 5
 @willbe19: why don't you hop into your time machine and head back to 1952, gramps.
  • 8 17
flag theminsta (Feb 28, 2018 at 15:19) (Below Threshold)
 Checklist of who to take guns from:
- Democrat/Socialist/Commie
- Atheist
- On psychotropic drugs
- Several reports received by police/FBI/community
- Brought up by single mothers

The above describes 95% of mass murderers..
  • 7 3
 @gnar-shredderz: Like the guy in Vegas, soooooo many signs he was going to do what he did.
  • 5 2
 @Trouterspace: Then move to a country where your 'paranoia' is not a problem for US "law abiding citizens" and get ready to become a victim of US foreign policy!

I'm trying to understand the hypocrisy; lets ban our guns while we blow up brown people for our/their resources?

I don't get it?

Who can explain such horrible hypocrisy?
  • 2 4
 @defineindecline: well apparently facts hurt your feelings
  • 4 1
 @willbe19: You aren't stating facts you are stating opinions. Try not to confuse the two.
  • 1 2
 @XCMark: It's good for the bottom line
  • 4 2
 @Jackson900: Yea, and he legally bought 10 rifles in one year. One of them being an AR-15 at 18 years old.
  • 3 3
 @MrFogg: blah blah typical liberal blah blah
  • 2 0
 @willbe19: blah blah I'm a douche flute that claims to love an imaginary space man that spreads the word of kindness and good but wouldn't be able to reciprocate either of those actions if my life depended on it blah blah.
  • 4 0
 @defineindecline: @willbe19 as if Willbe giving up his liberty is equivalent with actively murdering people.

We need to be intellectually honest. If a person wants to murder people, a gun is not required.
  • 3 2
 @jason342: no it’s not required but it helps much more than a knife or a truck. We have have to be intellectual here Big Grin
  • 2 1
 @MrFogg: talking about Pepe brainwashed by fox and the nra here.
Fox news is 90 percent opinion and they eat it up.
  • 2 0
 @willbe19: Ha ha that's the best you can do is resort to kindergarten techniques?
  • 22 0
 Everyone knows Amer Sports, right? Parent company of Suunto, Mavic, Salomon, more recently Enve...

Did you know that 15 years ago Amer Corp was more known for its tobacco brands than for its athletic/sport brands?

At some point in the late 2000's Amer decided they would be better off consolidating its portfolio of brands around like-minded pursuits and decided to shed the tobacco companies. Sure, there might have been overlap between 1) smokers and 2) skiers but the cognitive dissonance between those psychologies might have been too difficult to perpetuate.

Similar 'guilt by association' and cognitive dissonance in the Vista portfolio; there could be overlap between 1) cyclists and 2) firearm enthusiasts but in the full light of day it could become difficult to justify. Valuations of gun companies have been awful lately too - the threat of regulation went away with DT getting elected - so parent companies like Vista might someday decide like Amer, that its not worth it.
  • 19 1
 Sorry but that petition is stupid as hell.

Bell/Giro/Blackburn are all based in Santa Cruz and operated before being purchased by Vista. Camelbak is in Petaluma. Same deal. None of those companies nor the employees who's jobs will be at risk have anything to do with firearms. They didn't have a choice. Vista is just the company that bought them.

If you're going to punish brands like this you'd have to boycott half the brands you currently support because their parent companies happen to own something you don't like.

Beyond that, most of the folks working for the above brands are more than likely for tighter gun control.

The internet age strikes with stupidity and sheep leading once again.
  • 33 16
 I hope Pinkbike realizes that without well weighed explanation this article potentially hurts companies like Giro or Camelback that have nothing to do with this mess?
  • 3 3
 Well it can also grow a stronger following
  • 4 3
 @gnar-shredderz: yeah, all clicks are good clicks
  • 7 4
 When some amount of the money they make, however small, gets funneled to the NRA, they do have something to do with it.
  • 16 8
 @gnar-shredderz: NO, I think PB f*cked the pig posting this. All it did for me was give me the impression that pinkbike was trying to get the subscribers to pressure the companies in the article. And that to me is garbage!

--If you can't have vocal principles as a company, don't ask your customers to follow what you can't lead.
  • 8 4
 It’s a complicated subject but if we avoided everything that made us uncomfortable we’d be a poor media outlet. It’s news with potential impacts for the industry, so we’re going to report it in as balanced a way as we can.
  • 4 1
 @XCMark: 100% not the case. On a personal level I feel for those companies and employees.
  • 7 2
 @brianpark: In the interest of fairness could you also include companies that have expressed opinions that might otherwise be considered pro-gun? Some of us want to spend our money on the other side.
  • 1 0
 Agree 100% dude
  • 4 2
 @brianpark: or you choose to be media outlet focused on bikes.
  • 1 0
 Thank you waki for not arguing pro-gun anti-gun in this comment. I do think further explanation was needed.
  • 19 4
 Vista owns a great # of brands... including a golf club brand... and they themselves (the parent company) don't support the NRA...their seperately run brands with their own board of directors such as Savage arms and Federal ammunition are the ones contributing to the NRA as they are a lobby group for supporting the second amendment of the US constitution. Camelbak also contributes to lobbying to the US federal government (some 60k last year).. but they're doing it not for gun control issues...but to get the US military to buy more hydration systems.

The parkland school shooter that sparked off the latest anti-NRA fiasco didn't even use a gun made by any of the brands Vista owns. He used a smith and wesson M&P 15, which while an AR-15 style rifle...isn't actually an AR-15 (those are a model trademarked to Colt). It was legally purchased as well. Savage Arms, does make two model lines of rifles that fit the AR-15 'style' which again, aren't actually AR-15s (Colt product). Just like folks here like to say "looks like a session", people who don't know any better about guns like to say "looks like an AR-15". The Savage MSP 15 Patrol and Recon come in 5.56 NATO/.223 Rem and the MSP 10 Hunter and Long Range come in 7.62 NATO/.308 Win.

The reason the AR-15 style is used so often for shootings in the USA that the media actually bothers to report...is because they're cheap as they're domestically manufactured. Imported guns like the IWI Tavor-21s cost a lot more and that's why you rarely hear of them being used in shootings. As it is, the vast majority of gun deaths in the USA are made up of handgun shootings. Rifles are but a small percentage of overall total.

For everyone who thinks buying a camelbak bottle or a bell helmet means you're contributing to the NRA... get your head professionally examined please. If anything, the profits from the ammunition sales is what put Vista in a position to buy out the other sporting brands, and its that money that is paying for the development and production of your helmet, pump or water pack... OH EXCEPT of course... for the fact that all the brands that Vista owns are run as seperate companies still. Just like Dorel Corp, who owns GT and Schwinn and Cannondale and Sugoi and others and all the brands are run seperately.
  • 7 7
 @deeeight They are under the same parent company, so yes purchasing from these companies indirectly funds the NRA. Tell me about this 2nd Amendment. So people think that having an AR-15 or gun like that is going to save them against the U.S. Government that has tanks, bombs, chemical warfare, you name it. They also think that they are going to stop a terrorist attack, yea right. Sounds like ignorance to me.

The Parkland shooter bought 10 rifles legally at the age of 18. One of them being a weapon designed to kill many people at once. 45 .223 rounds in 60 seconds. Now that's all out ignorance and insanity. People use guns like an AR-15 for mass shootings, for the same reason the military started using them. They are extremely accurate, lightweight, and can allow someone to carry more rounds. All while being able to shoot through a M1 military helmet at 500 yards.
  • 6 2
 @dualsuspensiondave:

The moment you typed 45 .223 rounds in 60 seconds I knew you were getting your facts from a recent media report... not from actually knowing anything about guns. A properly trained and experienced shooter can get 45 rounds of .30-06 out of an M1 Garand in 60 seconds and that only holds 8 at a time. Someone with an SAP6 12 gauge pump shotgun can get out easily 30 #00 buckshot shells in a minute...and that'll put FAR more projectiles downrange than some AR-15 clone would.

People use guns like AR-15s for mass shootings because they don't know any better. The military adopted them because they were lighter and the trend was moving to fully automatic fire to make up for a lack of proper marksmanship training. But for "accurate" work, they rely on better guns than AR family ones. A Ruger Mini-14 would be a better choice hands down for a .223 caliber tactical rifle for a "mass" shooter.
  • 5 3
 @deeeight: No actually, a close relative is a Marine Sniper with over 160 confirmed kills, and my father was a D.I. in the Marines. Most of these mass shootings aren't done by tactical shooters. Most are children with little to no training. Sure, anyone with decent training can cause havoc with a run of the mill 9mm handgun. That's not the point, because that's not what's happening. What you're saying doesn't mean shit because the difference is anyone can shoot 45 rounds in 60 seconds with an AR-15, where it takes a lot of experience to shoot the guns you're talking about with that kind of speed and accuracy. You're pretty far off on your history of military use with an AR as well. They were specifically made for accuracy, while being lighter, and creating enough force to pierce through damn near anything at 500 yards. The M16 fully auto was really embellished because not only could it do what I just said, but they could create a wall of fire during combat situations. That's the beauty of fully auto weapons.
  • 2 0
 ARs and the like are being used not just because they're cheap, but also because they're small, light, fire more rounds than a handgun and are readily available. Plus .223 is a really effective round in its intended ballistic role. That's what's making them a good choice for this type of thing.

These qualities are a factor in this particular equation, and these are factors that could be sensibly mitigated to improve this problem should we choose. We being America, looks like you're Canadian.

I won't punish Vista... the bike brands they manufacture I want to have around. If you want to punish the gun and ammo makers (or the NRA by proxy), don't buy guns and ammo.
  • 3 2
 @dualsuspensiondave:

Yeah what would I know having actually shot the things... and sure you're relatives with a marine sniper... congrats... do you want a cookie ?
  • 3 4
 @deeeight: Cool story. You wanted it, so I gave you the truth. Now you come back with that arrogant piss poor attitude. There's no talking any sense with you, I should've known from your years of useless information.
  • 3 1
 @dualsuspensiondave: umm, spoken like a person who knows nothing about firearms. A .223 (or its interchangable cousin the NATO 5.56) is a 300 yard round, max. At 500 yards a 55 grain fmj has 55” of drop and about 200 pounds of energy. 500 yards is the domain of the .308 (NATO 7.63) which still has 1000 pounds of energy for a 150 graim fmj at that distance.
  • 2 2
 @carym: The Marines were required to hit red dots at 300 meters (about 328 yards) with them to pass their tests. The good riflemen hit 600 meters (about 656 yards) all day long. About 1000 yards is when they run out of elevation. The AR-15 was specifically designed for 500 yards. Do your research.
  • 1 1
 @dualsuspensiondave:

Right there everyone knows you're telling lies, not the truth. The USMC has for decades done all their training / qualifications in YARDS, and were still doing it that way 2 years ago when they finally decided to do a cost-study on converting to meters, which is the global measuring standard.
  • 2 3
 @deeeight I've been saying yards the whole time. Gun nuts frequently use meters to discuss distance, probably because most countries use meters or kilometers. You even think before you talk?
  • 2 1
 @deeeight: If you had any clue about the history of the AR-15, you would realize that the gun was designed in 1959, adopted in about 1964 to the U.S. Military as the M16. These are close to Vietnam days, when my father was a D.I. in the Marines and his twin brother went to Vietnam twice and has 2 purple hearts from it. The Marine Sniper is about 32 years old now and has been on 3 tours.
  • 1 1
 @dualsuspensiondave:

Now who's making up stories... wow you have a marine corp answer for everything. Oh well... americans love to brag about the wars they lost on the internet. I'm done wasting my time on a moron like you.
  • 25 7
 freedom helmet!!! freedom camelback!!! freedom multi-tool!!!! FUCK YEAH!
  • 2 1
 Help yes man
  • 2 2
 Hell yes man
  • 1 0
 @DonaldTrumpOfficial: morons are governing america... there fixed it for you drongo.
  • 20 2
 Great, can't wait to get dirty looks for wearing my pack and helmet
  • 19 5
 "Some corporations have decided to punish NRA membership in a shameful display of political and civic cowardice"

I didn't realize that not giving someone a discount (that they have no reason to get in the first place) is "punishing" someone. There is no good reason most of these companies should be giving NRA members a discount the first place.
  • 35 21
 Pretty sad when the jacked up world of politics get involved in the great world of MTB. I say ride your bike and forgot about the rest.
  • 59 14
 Yeah except it's hard to forget that schookids are literally being slaughtered.
  • 20 4
 It does indeed suck - but since these large, umbrella corporations want my money, I deserve to know what they've got going on before I fork it over. Better would be to just get these jackhat money grubbers out of mountain biking entirely, but that's probably unrealistic.
  • 12 18
flag theminsta (Feb 28, 2018 at 15:15) (Below Threshold)
 How about all the lives that are saved by legal/self-defensive use of firearms? How do you know that "gun control" will result in less crime/deaths?
  • 2 1
 That’s what happens when rampant capitalism allows gigantic parent companies to buy out all like-market company groups. We’re lucky that not ALL brands fall under one single parent company to be honest.
  • 4 3
 @theminsta: Maybe because it does in many other countries?
  • 6 4
 Crime has been dropping naturally in all developed countries, regardless of gun concentration to the police.. Do you have any grasp in statistics?

*Correlation does not equal causation*
  • 13 6
 @theminsta: There is data on this. It is true that guns do save some folks. But on the whole, they cost significantly more lives than they save. You are statistically more likely to kill yourself or a loved one (accidentally or on purpose) than you are an intruder if you own a gun. Personally, I'm fine with reasonable gun ownership, but I do not like the NRA's "everything is a slippery slope" absolutist interpretation of the 2nd amendment. The US is in a position where we just give *everyone* a gun first, and find out who isn't fit to own one after they murder someone with it. That's really the wrong way to approach it, man.
  • 7 7
 @pinhead907:

Cost more lives than they save? Are you comparing murders AND suicides against defensive use of guns? That's retarded.

I don't identify with any "group". I just use my brain/logic/evidence. And the fact is, the US does not just "give everyone" a gun.... There are already EXTENSIVE background checks and regulations for gun ownership.

It's about time we looked below the surface and really find out what the problem is. Stop scratching the surface and use your brain, man.
  • 2 0
 @pinhead907: your statistics are inaccurate. Most home invasion do NOT result of the DEATH of the intruder, rather the intruder being chased off or apprehended until authorities arrive.
  • 4 4
 @theminsta: Care to explain why it's "retarded"? It is a fact - between suicides, murders, and accidents, guns cost most lives than they save - by a lot. This is just pointing out that guns are not a net benefit to society.

And rather than accusing ME of not thinking, how about you challenge your own viewpoint? Why does the US have such an unusually high level of mass shootings versus any other comparable country?
  • 7 3
 @theminsta: @theminsta: exactly right dude. dont know why you got so many thumbs down.
www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/United-Kingdom/United-States/Crime
people less likely to have defense will have more crimes happen around them.
  • 3 2
 @theminsta: Care to share your wealth of brain/logic and most importantly evidence regarding the "EXTENSIVE background checks and regulations for gun ownership"???????????
  • 3 1
 @pinhead907: These companies have literally nothing to do with the current gun issue, they are owned and invested in to produce a product that is not in any way similar to a gun...vast amount of childish comments trying to compare a Bell or Giro product to an assault weapon. A shame that cell phone companies still produce phones after phone use + driving incidents kill more innocent people than anything else in America.
  • 2 1
 Thing is, a boycott could get them to dump Savage. Gun makers are hurting right now. Remington just went bankrupt.i would bet Savage is not important enough to damage the rest of their portfolio.
  • 18 6
 We will keep our second amendment no matter what. The american people need to be able to defend themselves against the rising new world order who controls our world, including me.
  • 3 0
 But you want to take away our guns away today and worry about due process later. You said it earlier today! Keep up with your wildly changing opinion!
  • 1 0
 Was going to make a comment but then i saw your name and i'd figured...he won't understand (LOL at Donald Trump Official).
  • 46 33
 "Remove one freedom per generation and soon you will have no freedom - and no one will have noticed."
  • 12 11
 Amen brother
  • 21 7
 Ironically Americans don't live as long and arn't as happy as people in most other western countries who have much greater gun controls. But they are 'communists' so it doesn't matter
  • 23 2
 My heart bleeds for your loss of freedom to have high power high round semi automatic/converted automatic guns. Really I don't know how you'll go on.

Thoughts and Prayers
  • 16 1
 Let's take a moment to honor the sacrifice of our brave schoolchildren who lay down their lives to protect the right to bear arms.
  • 4 4
 @freestyIAM: Preach! I think that it's hilarious that people claim the 2nd Amendment stuff. Like what is an individual gonna do against the U.S. Military? An AR-15 is gonna help stop the government from coming to get you? Hello! They have tanks, bombs and shit. Foreign attacks? Right, I can see Billy Badass stopping a terrorist attack.
  • 6 2
 Who's freedom is being removed? The freedom to buy and own guns, or the freedom to go to school without the fear of being shot?

Freedom isn't a singular thing, and sometimes one persons "freedom" has to be curtailed in order to enable another's. These are nearly always messy issues without clearcut solutions, but it's honestly really hard to see how anyone can in all faith argue that their freedom to own a gun trumps young people's freedom to attend school without the fear of being shot.
  • 4 1
 It makes me laugh everytime someone talks about freedom! You really think we are slaves in Canada? We're as free as you even if we don't own any guns! Why can't you have bombs, tanks, missiles? FREEDOMMMM guys, FREEDOM !!!
  • 6 3
 Jefferson said something to the effect of "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security, deserve neither."
  • 2 3
 @Rubberelli: DING DING DING!!! This guy gets it!!
  • 3 0
 @jason342: with that said, Jefferson was certainly no idiot and did not believe that people should be able to equip their own private militaries. He believed in the power of state militias to keep the federal government in check.
  • 2 0
 @Rubberelli: To me, that quote from Jefferson is pretty ironic when viewed in the context of today's debate. Most gun owners are clinging to their guns just as a child does with his security blanket - making arguments about self defence, only criminals will have guns, etc. So the NRA types are the ones desperately seeking security. Liberty has nothing to do with every Tom, Dick and Harry having a gun at your kids school.
  • 2 0
 @Rubberelli: Who's liberty to do what? Who's security in what context? Does preserving one person's liberty sacrifice another's?

It's interesting, as just from reading this quote I'm not sure which side of the debate you're on: the quote could be used for either side. Either to argue that we should not sacrifice the liberty of owning guns in order to gain the security of a gun free nation; or that we should not sacrifice the liberty of not being shot in order to gain the security of owning weapons. It's an empty phrase that allows the reader space to transpose their own reading of liberty and security into it.

So, we can tell that Jefferson was far more of a politician than a philosopher!
  • 1 0
 @Rubberelli: "He believed in the power of state militias to keep the federal government in check."

This is such a weird argument for people to make in the 21st Century. It may potentially have had some weight at one point, but what do people really expect a bunch of civilians with rifles to be able to achieve against the current US military? It's unlikely that any nation state on the planet can realistically challenge US military power right now, so what exactly do people think owning a few guns is going to do? Sure, you may have an assault rifle, but that's not going to do much when a drone flies over and bombs your house.
  • 2 0
 @dualsuspensiondave: "They have tanks, bombs and shit." Tell that to the Vietnamese, Iraqis, Afghanis and every other 3rd world country we have lost wars to that only had semi-automatic weapons.....
  • 3 1
 @dirtbiker327: It's not true that those countries were fighting solely with semi-automatic weapons.
  • 1 0
 @Timo82: very good
  • 2 0
 @delusional: it's not an argument, it is a fact that the 2nd amendment is concerned with keeping militias armed. The first words of it are "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state..."
  • 2 0
 @dirtbiker327: We weren't beaten by any of those countries. Vietnam was a wash, and that was a long time ago. Good luck with your toy guns against the U.S. Military. You would be dead before you had a chance to even shoot anything or anyone.
  • 2 0
 @dualsuspensiondave: don't be so jingoistic. We absolutely lost Vietnam. The North Vietnamese and the Viet Comg accomplished every one of their objectives (defeat the South, drive US out, unite their country), while the US failed in every objective we had (defeat the North and VC, unite country under South Vietnamese rule). It could be argued that Korea was a wash though.
  • 1 0
 @pinhead907: *Mostly semi-auto

@dualsuspensiondave Vietnam cost $750 Billion adjusted for inflation and some odd 60,000 soldiers dead more wounded tons psychologically scared and what did the US accomplish? I'll go ahead and throw that in the loss catergory.
  • 1 0
 @dirtbiker327: Ya, we didn't win Vietnam - but the North Vietnamese had plenty of military hardware- as does the Taliban. Additionally, the insurgents in Iraq use lots of IEDs, shoulder fired rockets, and etc. I don't think any of us think that we should legalize IEDs. I hope. But at the end of the day, I agree with @dualsuspensiondave. If the US government decides to forcefully impose itself on the citizens, I don't think they'll half-ass it. They'll all-ass it, and small arms won't be sufficient. They'll cut the interwebz, jam all cell phones, drone everyone they don't like, and you're toast.
  • 1 0
 @pinhead907: You operate under the assumption that 100% of our military and police forces would turn their weapons on their neighbors and other citizens. All the Veterans/Military/Police that I know would be on the same side of the lines, as most of them went into that position because they werent brought up in wealthy households. I believe at least half would defend the constitution and the other half are mindless sheep. You can always confiscate larger arms with small arms. Depending on how informed you are look what ISIS was able to "capture" from the US military, all sorts of armored vehicles and munitions. Even if you looked at it from the point of view that it would be futile that just strengthens the case for unlimited civil arms.
  • 1 0
 @dirtbiker327: I don't think I operate under that assumption at all. And it only takes a single platform to deny communications, and a single platform to drone you - in fact a lot of drones probably already carry EW packages, so a single plane can likely shut off your communications while bombing you. Further, they could already turn over controls of the weapons to machines - but they just don't because it's blatantly unethical. Look, our current interpretation of the 2nd amendment is way out of line with what the founding fathers intended - or even comprehended. And, if you're so concerned, remember that conservatives are attacking the *1st* amendment right now - with their blatant attacks on the FBI, press, and net neutrality. This is a lot more concerning.
  • 1 0
 @pinhead907: And the guys that are trained on drones could just as easily turn them on the establishment and disable a lot of it because how many of the higher ups in the military can operate the drones?

My second amendment "interpretation" is that we are able to own arms in line with what the military owns as that was common place during the revolutionary war. The war was fought with muskets and cannons that were both privately owned. The founding fathers lived in a time where the biggest piece of armament (cannons) were privately owned.

Conservatives attacking the 1st amendment? Questioning the propaganda machine is anti first amendment? Read up on how Obama legalized propaganda via the NDAA and realize why most news networks are putting out legitimately fake news. It is indeed the left who is trying to get rid of free speech by calling everything "hate speech." What about the petition that went around Yale to ban the first amendment, that is clearly coming from the left side.
  • 1 1
 @dirtbiker327: Dude. You're seriously off the deep end. The Yale thing was a deceptive prank, by the way. To suggest that this is seriously the position of your political opposition is ludicrous. Anyhow, I'm done. Whatever is in your head is seriously screwed up, and I ain't the one that's gonna fix it. I wish you well, bro.
  • 1 1
 @pinhead907: When people are actually signing the petition do you think those were right wingers or left? Haha ok bud "The thing about smart people is they sounds crazy to dumb people" Enjoy your bliss!!! Bahaha stalked and saw California, shocked........
  • 41 32
 Editor's Note: the gun control debate is an extremely contentious issue. Comments that devolve into name-calling, trolling, and hate speech will not be tolerated.

-That is why you should delete this story as this has NOTHIING to do with riding bikes.
  • 38 7
 Ehh I get it, politics are messy and not something we enjoy wading into. Tires in dirt is why we're here. That said, we report on industry news and this could have wide-ranging implications for some major brands.
  • 7 5
 @brianpark: this could also destroy the brands we love
  • 4 2
 @brianpark: I look at www.bicycleretailer.com for this crap, pinkBIKE is about riding!!
  • 1 0
 What's hate speech?
  • 1 0
 @brianpark:

Are you alleging that pinkbike.com aspire to be treated as a credible and trustworthy sources for news?
  • 1 0
 @brianpark: Why isn't this policy enforced elsewhere? What's the punishment for it? I do wonder if deleting comments further devolves the offenders.
  • 9 0
 Yes, let's all punish Bell, Giro, Blackburn and Camelbak because the parent company that owns them also owns companies that manufacture firearms. So what's next, are people going to stop buying soap at Walmart because they also sell firearms? How about Diamondback bikes? They're sold at Dick's Sporting Goods, Dick's sells firearms, should we boycott Diamondback too? Oh wait, they said they'll stop selling assault rifles, so is it okay then? Maybe other rifles and shotguns don't count? Let's consult the media to ensure we're in the green and I can continue to ride my DB.

While I realize that the discussion about the legalization of certain firearms in the US and around the world is a serious conversation, knee-jerk reactions such as these do nothing but create further division and potentially harm those that have absolutely nothing to do with the current state of affairs in this country and around the world.
  • 13 4
 This Pinkbike article has generated so many hits, that their advertising revenues are going to go up. PB just made money courtesy of guns. Delete your account? Stay calm folks, study the facts, and don't stampede with the wildebeest - precisely what the media and politicians want you to do.
  • 6 2
 You got downvoted because it’s true Smile
  • 1 1
 @WAKIdesigns: Haha, very true. It's sad that people use 'up' vote and 'down' vote as a way to live by group think and mob rule - nothing more than chimpanzees in a tree yelling, hooting and hollering, and hoping to get the group to move in one direction. PB, Facebook and the like ought to get rid of up and down voting. Why? Because it's lazy, and also nothing more than group think. If somebody really feels inclined to provide encouragement, let them say 'great article,' or thank you. If somebody wants to pull my nose hairs, and say I'm an idiot - step up to the play cowboy, but you better be able to write an articulate rebuttal. Down voting, as you said, is, in this case, just a lazy way for some rupe to really express his/her frustration, stay in denial, and then get chimpanzees to dance with him. Pinkbike! Lose the up and down votes - force people to use their intellect, write their opinions and be forced to actually provide debate. The other falsity of up and down vote is that "consensus = correct." You can have 100 morons sitting around a campfire, all agreeing to go attack a neighboring village. You go attack, and all of you die because the neighbors were actually superior. How smart were ya? Paradox of course....sometimes group consensus does mean that enough vetting has taken place. But, if we get rid of group think (up and down vote/consensus)...we eliminate the risk of mob rule/chimpanzee thought, and FORCE the idea to stand for itself.
  • 17 3
 This is silly
  • 12 3
 To those who are commenting "Keep politics off of Pinkbike" you do know that you have the choice not read the article or comment in the section below right?!? There are plenty of stories posted today that have nothing to do with gun related politics. Go click on those links instead.

I know many will disagree but I think it's important that we stay informed. To not hide in the dark to only complain when it's too late to act. If you don't know what's going on then you stay ignorant and being ignorant is just as dangerous as it is foolish.

As for all the debate going on about gun control I still can't believe after all the mass shootings we've had in the past decade we still haven't done a damn thing about it.

It's the same old argument and it's the same big entity that has the GOP wrapped around the NRA's finger. The NRA is powerful. They have the power to veto and they have the money to buy politicians to do their bidding. So much so that its money over country.

Why do some gun owners think that everyone who wants common sense gun control is out to take away our 2nd amendment?

I haven't met anyone who's for that yet.

Why do some gun owners feel they need and HAVE to have a military grade weapon? To fight against tyrrany? Good luck if the government ever does turn against the people I'm pretty sure the army will take u out no matter how much gun power you have.

Sure a gun doesn't pick itself up and shoot someone as much as a pencil writes on it's own. But that argument doesn't hold up because again we are not talking about taking away our freedom to bare arms. We are talking about making it harder for the bad people to own guns of any kind.

Unless you're talking about military assualt weapons in that case we will just have to disagree completely. No one needs to own a military grade weapon unless you're in the military and active duty.

Why do I keep hearing this question being asked "What's the point? The bad people will find a way to illegally get guns and the law abiding citizens will be defenseless"

That's just a narrow-minded way of thinking.

We have laws for almost everything. People still steal, murder, drive while intoxicated, abuse, sell narcotics and so many other things. But we have laws so that these occurances are kept in check. If you still think "Oh what's the point?" Then why should there be any law if it's just going to be broken? Well then, you may have to ask yourself if you're a closet anarchist.

There are no such laws that can prevent something from happening entirely. Laws see how we keep things under control and to punish and serve justice when called for.

Is this only a mental health issue? Of course not. The United States of America is NOT THE ONLY country in the whole wide world that has mentally ill people. If it were a mental health issue only then please explain how the rest of the world doesn't have as many mass shootings as we have had in the passed decade? America is in the lead when it comes to mass shootings.

All in all I just can't believe why so many gun owners and the people who work at the NRA refuse to accept we need better gun control laws. As the rest of the world scratches their heads thinking damn, them Americans make no sense at all. It's a sad shame.

Let's help keep guns in the right hands instead of the wrong.
  • 1 1
 Biggest thing is gun control is always take take take when it comes to gun rights and then it is called a compromise. We are compromising in the fact that all of the rights aren't taken away? If it were a trade; bump stocks in exchange for national reciprocity for CCP then it is actually a compromise and many more would be accepting of it. The "gunshow loop hole" was part of the last compromise when background checks were enacted it was immune from private, person to person sales. Now that same part of the compromise is called a loophole and is now at risk.

There are studies that show it is nearly impossible to tell if someone that is depressed is going to snap, so how would more background checks help? I am disgusted with what is going on but I haven't seen any "common sense" laws I feel that are reasonable and could actually be effective short of armed veterans in schools. Do you have any specific ideas on effective gun legislation that isnt "banning assault weapons?" Because that is just pure nonsense and if you dont understand why you shouldnt be talking about firearm legislation.
  • 15 2
 E-bikes anyone?
  • 12 3
 I often wear my Camelbak for Hydration and it also fits my ammo perfectly and to be safe I wear my Giro full face to protect myself from flying brass when Im at the range or hunting.
  • 8 0
 You forgot the multi-tool to remove / attach the silencer...
  • 2 1
 @handynzl: that too
  • 9 2
 I've seen this article on other mountain bike sites and all the comments went nuclear.

The gun ownership & gun control laws in the states are absolutely mind boggling to me. I was a child that grew up in Scotland at the time of the Dunblane incident and am not a fan of guns.

What I will say is companies have been buying up other companies for years and years to diversify, increase profits and spread the risk profile of impact of a downturn in a single area wiping them out.

What can we as bikers do if we don't like what a company stands for - stop using them same as every other item we consume whether that is beer, bread or bananas. Have an awareness of what you are purchasing and buy what you feel is the right thing for you.

Realistically will boycotting subsidiary company's of a parent company bring it to its knees and stop it producing it's primary product - I'd suggest this is unlikely.
There is a strong possibility that action like it could come back and bite us as bikers in the ass as the parent company see less profitablity in those subsidiary companies and implements cutbacks to salvage profit margin.

The scenario highlighted by this article is a puzzle the bike companies appear to have no historical ties to the parent company however ultimately any profits made by them now will go to growing the overall parent company and you need to hurt one to hurt the other - rarely a good solution to anything in life.

I appreciate this is mostly irrelevant as I am not a resident of the US but, How do I think those in the US should deal with the ongoing gun control laws - play an active part in the politics, try and read the view points you believe in and those that oppose them to gain a balanced view point then vote in what you believe is best.

Am I cool with pink bike running this article. Yes. Anything that encourages people to think about or look deeper into what they are purchasing is a good thing in my book.
  • 1 0
 THe gun laws in Canada aren't much better, other than the procedures required to actually buy them (since unlike in the USA, you need licenses here, just as you need a license to drive a car). Assault weapons as the media, some politicians, and members of the public who do not know any better, define them... are available in Canada without a restricted license yes. Here are some canadian gun regulations many probably weren't aware of.

Except for handguns (which are restricted to a maximum capacity of 10), all semi-automatics in Canada using any rimfire type cartridge, do NOT have a magazine capacity limit, and the magazines can hold as much as designers want to market, as long as they're not compatible with any models of handguns sold in Canada (which is why the 25 round magazines for Ruger 10/22 platform rifles have now become illegal, after Ruger made the decision to make the 10/22 pistols available here). Also if its a center fire caliber and a magazine is compatible with both handguns and carbines/rifles, even though the later have a normal capacity limit of 5... you can legally use the magazine made for the handgun in the rifle with its higher capacity limit of 10.

Such was the case of the Dawson College shooter in 2006 (who held a valid restricted class license and used legally purchased and properly registered firearms)... Beretta Storm CX semi-auto carbine ..normal magazine limit is 5... but it uses the same type of magazine as some of the Beretta semi-auto handguns, and thus he had 10 round capacity magazines in it when he started shooting people.

Repeating centerfire caliber rifles and shotguns which do not employ a semi-automatic action, do not have a maximum magazine capacity limit either. A magazine fed pump action 12 gauge shotgun holding 11 rounds and looking like an assault weapon from an episode of the Walking Dead... is perfectly legal and a non-restricted firearm.

Magazines designed for semi-automatic rifles for different specific calibers, which happen to also hold a completely different caliber in larger quantities than the usual 5 shot limit are also completely legal. Hence the .50 Beowulf magazines which are meant for AR type rifles, which hold 5 rounds of that caliber, are legal to also load with 13 or 14 rounds of 5.56 and to be then inserted into a 5.56 AR type rifle (or any that uses the same type of box magazines). The reason this is legal has to do with how the regulations in Canada are specifically worded.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVTSVowayL8
  • 4 0
 An assault weapon is usually used to mean an AR15 type of rifle. And those are Restricted. Not just require a license, but require a special license and can only be used at approved shooting ranges. So the opposite of what you said.
Also - magazine capacity. When was the last time a criminal had a pinned magazine? Never. It’s the first thing you’d want to do. Drill out the tiny rivet that is all that is stopping you from going on a shooting spree. :@Deeeight.
  • 2 0
 @nouseforaname:

While Colt AR-15s are classed as restricted here... other "assault" looking rifles... are not. What is restricted and non-restricted generally comes down to what some pencil pusher at the RCMP decided at any particular moment, regardless of what the gun looks like, whether it was previously unrestricted, or what he had for breakfast that morning. Go look at these two links... both are non-restricted lists available at one particular canadian online gun dealer.

www.firearmsoutletcanada.com/rifles/non-restricted/semi-automatic

www.firearmsoutletcanada.com/shotguns/semi-automatic

Notice all the semi-automatic assault rifles which are non-restricted.

You do NOT need an extended magazine to go on a shooting spree. People by and large are pussies...even when they have a gun themselves, in the face of an active shooter. Case in point the armed deputy sheriff outside the high school in florida last month who didn't enter the school while the gunfire was happening. The natural response for most people is to flee...and a shooter has all the time he/she needs to reload a gun... when the targets are fleeing instead of approaching.
  • 1 1
 @deeeight: "The natural response for most people is to flee...and a shooter has all the time he/she needs to reload a gun... when the targets are fleeing instead of approaching."

Really? Where'd you get this info about our natural tendencies? This seems like total conjecture on your part. Not something rooted in, you know, evidence.
  • 1 1
 @freestyIAM:

If you don't know what the fight or flight response is... that's not my problem, or apparently that of scientific evidence. Lemme guess.. you're a climate change denier also right ?
  • 12 3
 "You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." Rahm Emanuel
  • 10 9
 AKA Satan.
  • 12 3
 Lucky I live in the UK so this is largely irrelevant to me.

I’ll continue wearing my Montaro and Kudu while contemplating how screwed we are over Brexit.
  • 22 13
 Old Soros doing his thing. Really hope Pinkbike doesn't turn into a bullshit political site. Most of us come to Pinkbike to escape that crap.
  • 31 2
 I come to Pinkbike to escape work.
  • 2 0
 @mikelevy: Touche sir! Big Grin
  • 3 2
 @mikelevy: Amen, brother!

However, the article is very relevant.
  • 1 0
 @mikelevy: isnt this your work brochacho? Or do you pull double duty as a regular worker like the rest of us peons?
  • 2 1
 You meant old Koch, Mercer's, Trump and the NRA doing their thing?
  • 6 0
 @ledude: jury is still out on if what @mikelevy does is considered work.
  • 1 0
 @mikelevy: Kazimer deserves a bonus for this kind of traffic increase. Destruction for all, yay!
  • 1 1
 you can't blame everything on Soros....especially considering he is congresses favorite weapon/scapegoat.....he isn't a dem or a republican....he;s Zionist trash just like the rest of congress
  • 1 0
 @punknicehole: I don't blame him for everything. But he is shady, just ask the UK. He is very left leaning though. I am not a fan of anyone in the US government for the most part. However, all that said, I didn't go all anti-semitic as you did there. Chill out man.
  • 1 1
 @bman33: never said anything about semites.....? what do palestinians have to do with it.......
  • 2 0
 @punknicehole: Dang dude!! Nazi much?
  • 1 0
 @punknicehole: "Zionist Trash". Every article Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah publish refers to Jewish people as Zionists or a flavor of that.
  • 1 2
 @jason342: it's how I find out who is shilling for Zion......Pinkbike has been infiltrated by US political agenda and these articles are full of paid e-warriors to help control the flow of any real cognitive thought. You can be sure that half of the people with American flags by their handles or the people with no flag.....? beside their handles are exactly that.....shills for a political agenda.....WTF Pinkbike.....?
  • 2 0
 @punknicehole: Sooo.. you don't support the only democracy in the mid east? The only country that has freedom of religion, sexual preference, etc.? You hold others in higher esteem? those who thrown gays from rooftops and murder (or force to pay tax) if you don't agree with their religion? Hmmm...

I don't think it's about political agenda, I think it's about what people believe - and we all have different beliefs.
  • 2 0
 @punknicehole: Okay, let me get this straight. I'm "shilling for Zion" and "Pinkbike has been infiltrated by US political agenda...to help control the flow of any real cognitive thought."?!? Wow.

Do you line your helmet with tin foil? I mean, I don't have any truck with Israel and I hear the food is great. Also, I was told years ago that the Canadian mountain biking was fueled by great trails and killer weed, but perhaps the later has begun to make you a bit paranoid. Maybe try some different strains.
  • 2 1
 @hellbelly: thanks for exposing yourselfs guys
  • 2 0
 @punknicehole: I typically don't expose myself in public, but I'll make an exception for you! Wink
  • 11 1
 Are we going to ban the companies that make the vehicles that mowed down hundreds in Europe and elsewhere?
  • 5 2
 Well as it turns out, vehicles are very good at killing things. However, vehicles have many restrictions that make them much less good at killing things. In defense of vehicles, they also do things other than kill things. There's a reason that grandpa can't drive. He's blind. There are laws. Are we going to get rid of cars completely? No. That would be silly. Are we going to pass legislation making cars safer? Yes. Cool.
  • 6 0
 'Bikes are worthless and no one has any good reason to own one, get a car!' - random driver on a ride to the trail head. I've heard similar things about the fact that I like horse riding. If its not your hobby its easy to completely write it off. And millions of Americans safely enjoy shooting sports... So are we just boycotting because we don't like guns? isn't the argument really about gun laws? If its about gun laws how will boycotting companies of hard working people really address this?

Sounds like we are just falling into the same vein of group narcissism as the drivers that try to road rage people onto the shoulder. I need a better cause to support than not buying Giro, Camelbak etc. when it comes to keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.
  • 6 0
 Over 66 times the Sherrifs Office, and FBI were called/warned about Cruz. 66+ times. Nothing was ever done there for nothing would have appeared on the background check. In 2013 Eric Holders DOJ and Obama’s started the Promise Programe. A program that gave grant money to schools, and law enforcement if they would ignore misdemeanor crimes for kids 13 and up. It appears that the Browerd Country Sherrifs office and Robert Runcie, the schools Superintendent were more concerned with getting a check than protecting their community. Who knows what might have happed to Cruz if he was properly charged for his crimes and domestic abuse of his foster monther. And the officers that didn’t go in were told to not enter the building without body camera’s which non of them had. Parkland was not a gun control issue. It a complete failure of government services. And the NRA and the 5 million plus members have nothing to do with this. I carried a gun concealed for 6 years and it’s never hurt anyone and I have never felt the need to use it just cause some jackass pissed me off.
  • 37 27
 Guns don't kill people.People kill people.As a species,we are the worst.
  • 14 12
 Careful using that kinda logic around here...many paid thousands of dollars to be uneducated otherwise. Rules for radicals is an informative read.
  • 10 0
 Beta fishes are quite possibly worse than people. Give them a gun and they'd destroy everything and everyone, we're just lucky they're so small.
  • 43 9
 And when people want to kill a lot of people, they reach for a gun.
  • 7 10
 Worst species? Go hug a Polar Bear
  • 17 9
 Yep, people kill people. WITH GUNS.
  • 5 3
 @DrPete: Can I give props more than once?
  • 4 4
 @gumbytex: not to mention woodpeckers. That’s like walking into your neighbors apartment and using pick axe on his kids heads to get brains for dinner
  • 11 9
 @Trouterspace: what happens when shit hits the fan and you don't have a gun to protect your family and the other guy does?Maybe you can talk it out????Good luck with that.I think guns suck but there are just way to many out there in the hands of crazy people for me to feel safe.I will protect my family at all costs.
  • 6 3
 @DrPete: exactly, guns don’t kill people, people do
  • 14 7
 @nug12182: Pity that it's a sad indictment that you feel you have to do that. Now, if you'd just had meaningful gun control in the first place, you needing a gun for that would never have crossed your mind. It's something that is very American to think like you do.
  • 10 4
 @gnar-shredderz: but people with guns can kill quite a lot of people, easily. Now I have to give it to NRA, Paris: few armed fkless guys show up and shoot people in the name of Cannondale Prophet for 15 minutes unobstructed. Draw Mohammed contest in Texas, two men show up, open fire at the building, they are dead in 1 minute, 30 seconds. Now... I’m still more likely to die of obesity than a terrorist attack... shoot me now, I’d rather die this way
  • 5 2
 @Trouterspace: and pipes, wrenches, knifes, cars, computers, globes, lamps, literally any object. We should get rid of all of them.
  • 2 0
 @handynzl: Are there no gun shootings where you live?
  • 1 0
 I bet the Misanthropic Front paid you to post that divisive remark. But I agree with you.
  • 5 2
 @Farrar21: thank you

scissors control then, because this happened: www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=46212452

people can kill others with their hands, should we have hand control? should we cut off hands? violent people will commit violent acts with or with out guns, car ram ing for instance, man, anything for instance
  • 1 0
 @nug12182: shit hitting the fan in most cases is very controllable
  • 15 2
 @nug12182: Not many, if any some years, and most of which are hunting accidents. Last mass shooting in NZ was in 1990 when 14 people were shot. Since then, so 28 years for those playing at home, there have been 16 (yes SIXTEEN) deaths where there were 2 or more deaths as a result of a firearm at one incident.

Since 1772, there have been 482 deaths in NZ via "massacre". 250 of which were retribution killings in 1772, 49 deaths in 1943 during a prisoner of war camp riot, and the 14 at Aramoana in 1990.

No one here thinks they need a gun to defend themselves here. That way of thinking is self prophesizing and proliferates weapons.
  • 2 0
 @DrPete: or a IED ! ! !
  • 14 2
 @foxxyman: To paraphrase Chris Rock, if there is a mass murder of 100 people by someone with a knife, then 97 people deserved to get killed.

"Gee, Shirly, that there guy is stabbing people...oh look, he stabbed the person there, and the person next to me, and oh, dang, he stabbed me too, and, oh, look he stabbed you too..."

Stupid argument to say a person with a knife could kill 17 people as easily as with a gun. What you've done there is employ what is known as "deflection"
  • 1 1
 @handynzl: i am talking about all murders in general, such as the one single murder i said above

really, prevention is the best weapon, guns as a backup, and imwould rather not use guns
  • 3 1
 What if they reach for a knife, or a car? Should we ban those too?
  • 1 0
 @handynzl: Well holy shit I'm jealous.Thats pretty awesome.I wish it was like that here.Reality is its pretty scary.Every day I have to worry about some whacko doing something stupid at my sons school.
  • 1 0
 Look you can copy/paste right from the NRA site...Cute
  • 1 2
 @Farrar21: Oh look another MAGA person copied/pasted an NRA bullet point. Oh u so smart!
  • 1 2
 @ibishreddin: U smart like that he?
  • 3 2
 @handynzl: Good people follow laws, bad people don't, aka criminals...meaningful gun law in the first place doesn't mean much since said shooter isn't going to be purchasing one in a legal matter to start with...Just hit up the streets and the local gang hood to get your hands on what your need from criminals who have their inside connections. Alcohol Prohibition sure saw underground sales soar through the roof, impossible to control.
  • 3 1
 @NickyDiNapoli: I’m not completely sure but didn’t the Vegas shooter buy his guns legally?

Again another alcohol point. Anyone can make alcohol. That’s not exactly the case when it comes to guns. Of course there is still a ton of illegal guns out there but if you ban certain guns there won’t be those guns from here on out.....
  • 2 2
 @Airfreak: And all the innocent people killed by drunk drivers? We should boycott phone companies too with the rate of cell phone + driving death rate which exceeds anything else in America.
  • 2 0
 @NickyDiNapoli: there are strict laws against those and two very different demographics. There should be more strict laws against guns and maybe stricter laws against repeat drunk drivers. Drunk driving is terrible but at most one person might kill 5 people in an crash, not 20-60.

I guess it’s why gun laws have never been changed because these age old arguments are brought up. We can’t safeguard ourselves from the actions of others, but why does one need a semi-automatic rifle? The Florida shooter bought this gun legally at 18.

Something needs to change but as long as people think this way it never will.
  • 1 1
 @Airfreak: Yes, the Vegas shooter bought his guns legally. Almost every single mass shooting is committed with legally purchased guns. That fact alone shows that the right implementation of gun control WILL effectively reduce mass shootings. And, I mean, there's also the fact that the US is the only country with this level of gun violence. It shows that if we honestly care about it, we can make a difference.
  • 3 0
 I blame women. None of the shooters got much if any sex in their life. Same goes for suicide bombers. You look at the guys face and you know that this man didn’t get much shagging.

But for real, the meds are a recurring pattern. A depressed, resentful psychopath, barely managing his will to get revenge on the world, gets meds making him less anxious and less caring. At some point he care less about what will happen if he kills a bunch of people.

It is hard to argue though, these are mentally sick people. In a country with as many people as US has, this will happen, considering that according to studies 1% of all the people are psychopaths.

I just can’t see how putting guns in schools will help. You can’t have more than two armed guys, it’s too expensive. What would you do if you are a psycho planning to kill friends for calling him fkless jimmy, knowing there’s a guard? You shoot him first with the hand gun. He could be an ex Marine, there’s just too many kids walking around, you have plenty of perfect opportunities to shoot him right in the face. Then you pick up then automatic rifle and shoot everyone else. Yes that may cancel out a few folks who are too stupid to do it right. But still...
  • 1 0
 @nug12182: It's OK, you can come out of your bunker now, don't forget to turn off InfoWars
  • 1 0
 @foxxyman: Right....and that's why the military trains their soldiers to use their hands and knives when fighting wars.
  • 1 0
 @handynzl: That would make too much sense. I believe the NRA has taught delusions to their members and they live in a constant state of fear and only their weapons can save them.
  • 1 0
 @handynzl: deflection and smoking screens are the NRA's best defense. Instill paranoia amongst their members and then attack, attack, attack any proposal being put forth. The NRA is so nasty that they encouraged their members to harass parents of kids who died at Sandy Hood. The NRA frequently spreads conspiracies that mass shootings are organized by the US federal government as a means to take away weapons. The insanity in all of these arguments are just the surface of the NRA pure evil.
  • 2 0
 @NickyDiNapoli: WRONG and WRONG....check your facts...recent mass shootings were all legal purchases.
  • 2 0
 @NickyDiNapoli: That is why we have DUI laws, that is why text and driving is largely illegal now and why lung cancer is on the decline because of tobbacco laws. Changes in laws making huge differences but i guess guns are not the same.
  • 1 0
 @Batipapo: Didn't know that! So if it's illegal than nobody will do it? Confused why so people are on their phone while driving then?
  • 24 16
 Well I'm officially sick. Typical ignorant liberals. Let's hang the horse now because he may drink and bad water someday. I thought this place was for bikes.
  • 13 15
 "'If Fascism Ever Comes to America, It Will Come in the Name of Liberalism'" -Ronald Reagan
  • 8 10
 @XCMark: did you really just quote Ronald Reagan ? Lol
  • 7 8
 @XCMark: da!n right man. Someone with a brain. thank you fine sir
  • 9 0
 @XCMark: "While we recognize that assault weapon legislation will not stop all assault weapon crime, statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals." - Ronald Reagan

Reagan is not who you think he was
  • 8 2
 haha. Maybe you Regan lovers should educate yourselves before opening your mouths: Ronald Reagan once said that "an AK-47 is not a sporting weapon nor needed for defense of a home."

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt."
  • 9 4
 @XCMark:


Ronald Reagan single-handedly dismantled the mental health care industry. Don't come at me with that Bonzo shit.

"The Mental Health Systems Act of 1980 (MHSA) was United States legislation signed by President Jimmy Carter which provided grants to community mental health centers. During the following Ronald Reagan administration, the United States Congress repealed most of the law.[1] The MHSA was considered landmark legislation in mental health care policy."


Just like all insecure despots (Trump), he couldn't let his predessor's successes stand.
  • 2 2
 Look the NRA people are hard at work copying and pasting bullet points. So cute....
  • 1 0
 Close. Try studying Neoliberism @XCMark:
  • 19 11
 Just paid for 5 more years of NRA membership. Bill of Rights is what made this country great and the rest of the world safe. Every Amendment is worth defending.
  • 3 3
 @Axxe just curious what you think the intention of the original Amendment was, as written, and how that relates to the United States today. In one hundred words or less.
  • 2 0
 @twozerosix: it does not matter what I think. There is Supreme Court to resolve such questions. Just read Heller decision. Done.
  • 1 0
 @Axxe: skimmed it, via Wikipedia. Pretty interesting. Thanks.
  • 2 0
 ...the rest of the world safe....?
  • 2 2
 @DaysToCome: whether they admit it or not.

Though if Hitler or Stalin took over, they would have overturned US constitution and banned all guns like they did in their countries. I guess that is the liberals ideal.
  • 8 0
 Will have zero influence on my purchasing decisions, but it's good to be informed.
  • 11 3
 What a joke - gonna put pinkbike down for a while if they feel the need to stir this kind of stuff up.
  • 2 2
 Agree. Pinkbike has had so many hits today, that their ad revenues are gonna go up! This means PB just made money courtesy of guns. Delete account....delete, delete, delete. I feel so proud.
  • 5 0
 I don't really give a flying f*ck what side of the gun control debate you're on. If a company or person wants to boycott another company that's their right whether it's because they have a division that makes firearms/ammo or because you think the colors on their bikes stink. Free choice to spend your dollars where you like. Period. Don't like it? Tough shit.
  • 5 0
 In 1996 in the United Kingdom a lone gunman armed only with handguns slaughtered 16 children and 1 teacher - rigid gun control was swiftly introduced. In 1996 in Australia, a lone gunman armed with assault rifles slaughtered 35 people in a cafe and injured 23 more - rigid gun control was swiftly introduced. Both gunman were law abiding citizens and legally owned their guns. 22 years on and on both sides of the world, not one mass shooting since rigid gun control was introduced in both nations. USA - are you getting this now. Sadly, probably not.
  • 2 1
 @awm1 2016 in Nice France, a truck was used to kill 86 people and injure 434 others...

Guns are not the issue, murder is. Yes, if you get rid of a tool, it can't be used, but humans are creative. Ever seen a person use a knife as a screwdriver? Any tool can be misused. Petrol is easily obtainable, ammonium nitrate, poisons, etc.
  • 3 0
 @jason342: Point taken. If someone wants to kill, they will kill. It's the restriction of items whose sole design is to kill. So, yes - guns are the issue. It's sad that the typical rhetoric from the USA is that "it's people not guns that murder". Just stop. Look at yourselves and take notice of the world around you. We all watch and shake our heads every time these events make international headlines. We then shudder when we are told it's an every day occurrence and still, as a affluent, educated and compassionate society, you continue to make the same mistakes and refuse to listen to reason and experience.
  • 1 1
 @awm1: I get where you're' coming from. It's not that we refuse to listen though, it's that we believe it's necessary to maintain freedom. Americans will never give up their guns - it's not on the table.

If I made a tool, that was really good at killing people, but had another practical purpose, would that be ok?? Razz

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" -B. Franklin

Note - the 2000 era bombings in Israel were an international issue, Israel built a wall. The 2016 Nice France truck attack killed 86 people - France did ?? The London bridge truck attack killed 11 people - The UK did ??
  • 1 0
 Sorry, but your facts are incorrect. Martin Bryant was not a law abiding citizen, he was a known person to the police for his erratic behavior and also a frequent visitor to the local mental hospital thanks to him being a paranoid schizophrenic, hence not allowed to own firearms. He murdered his carer (and fully registered owner of firearms) and gained access to the firearms in the home he shared with her and went on his rampage. Step back 5 years and you have the Strathfield massacre which killed 5 and go back further, you have the Hoddle St Massacre in Melbourne which was carried out by a for Military College drop out who knew EXACTLY how to handle a firearm.
  • 6 1
 I’m a US Marine Veteran, Infantry and React, and here’s what I think about this topic...if anyone wants hear it.
It’s a tough topic, because I own firearms, but I don’t own what civilians call “assault weapons”, why? I don’t need one, I was issued plenty of them, and shot the hell out of them.
But, the second amendment was established with single shot muskets in mind, not an “assault rifle”. Frankly, I think the law should require those who want to purchase a firearm in general that are under 21, to join the military, so they can fire those weapons regularly, and if you’re too much of a pussy to serve your country, wait until you’re 21 to buy anything except an “assault rifle”. Furthermore, as a civilian there is absolutely no reason to own an AR or anything alike, so if your job does not require you to carry an assault weapon such as active military or law enforcement, sorry you’ll just have to measure the size of your dick with a ruler instead of a shiny new assault rifle. Lastly, companies that no longer support the NRA probably should have withdrew support in a different mannor, and maybe just strategized a little, before the massive exodus. I don’t necessarily like the NRA, however, I’m not against firearms and owning them, I just feel that civilians shouldn’t be able to own “assault weapons” period. There’s plenty of handguns, rifles and shotguns out there for people to purchase and own, but the “AR” types of rifles should be only available to law enforcement and military jobs, and not some punk 17 or 18 year old with a black ops video game addiction and an assault rifle. Personally, I was never against onwning them, but people always have to screw things up for everyone else I.e. drinking and driving, seat belt laws, helmet laws, pissing in public, now owning assault weapons... history just repeats itself... blame the stupid a*sholes that made poor decisions and accept the change. You can’t get mad at people trying to make things safer for the greater good of society, again, it’s the a*shole with a gun that did the damage, and we have to pay for it, so suck it up, because they f*cked it up.
  • 3 1
 Yes I bloody well can get mad as hell at the intentional and continued erosion of our natural civil rights, fellow veteran.

FYI, graduate historian speaking:
The framers specifically and with intent wrote the word "arms" not muskets.

Our government is reason enough to own ARs and much worse, and don't bother trying the "you can't fight the government with an AR" nonsense, the Afghans have been doing it for decades to us, Russia, everybody.
If you're one of those types that would have "followed orders" to attack and strip your fellow citizens of their property (in this theoretical future), then I pity you more than anything.
  • 7 1
 I hear if you train your gun to be good it will make you dinner every night instead of killing people. Raise your guns right and maybe they won't walk out of your house and start shooting people!
  • 23 18
 1) Gun control increases gun ownership in criminals
2) Gun control decreases gun ownership in law-abiding/good citizens
3) Good people with guns stop bad people with guns (either it be police or citizens)
4) Stripping the "rights" of hundreds of millions of people is tyrannical
5) Training and arming less than a million teachers makes more sense economically as well as ethically
6) Most of the people that want gun control are people who think Donald Trump is going to be the "next Hitler"
7) More lives are saved by legal/defensive use of guns than lives are taken
Cool Guns provide independent safety for women, children and the elderly because it is an equalizer of aggression
9) Drunk driving kills more children than guns do.. we could get rid of drunk driving by federally banning alcohol (lol)

Just use your brain people. Stop reacting emotionally and demanding tyrannical actions.

You're not against guns if you want gun control. You just want to disarm the population and concentrate gun ownership to the government. And if you are pro-gun control, you probably think cops are largely abusive and immoral...... What the hell are you even trying to say?
  • 6 7
 Hell yeah brother
  • 14 5
 So much wrong here and not enough hours in the day to rip it to shreds yet again.
  • 19 11
 Spoken like a true gun fanatic. You’ve got the tired NRA diatribe down pat. I am a gun owner, and I support common sense gun control.

1.) No civilian needs an assault rifle. Ever. Period. Whatever your Rambo day dreams are about standing up against a modern military are hilarious. So the argument that we need guns (in all shapes, sizes, and lethalities) is utter nonsense.
2.) No one is talking about taking your guns there buddy... just making it harder for the people who shouldn’t have them to get their hands on them.
3.) Gun control ALWAYS results in people buying more guns, look it up.
4.) Good people with guns shoot way more members of their families and themselves than they do bad guys. Also factual, look that up to.
5.) If a police officer with over 25 years of experience is too scared to rush into a school with an active shooter, what makes you think a teacher is going to be able to do anything in that situation?
6.) The ENTIRE reason I bought a gun is because Trump was elected. Because I don’t trust people like you to keep your head on straight if things keep going the way they are.
7.) Check your facts before you try making an argument. Far more people are killed accidentally with guns than are “saved” each year.

I own a shotgun, I’m prepared to use that gun if the need should ever arise. No civilian needs an assault rifle, no child needs anything other than a shotgun to go hunting, or a 22 for target shooting. No civilian needs extended magazines. Common sense reforms is all that people want. If you lack common sense, then perhaps you shouldn’t have access to guns either?
  • 6 6
 What in tarnation is an "assault" rifle?

re: #5 you need courage to put your life in danger to save others.

You don't need "courage" if your own life is ALREADY in danger. Are you typing this from a mental facility??


TURN YOUR GUN IN YOU HYPOCRITE. YOU DONT NEED A GUN.
  • 2 2
 @DrPete:

How’d I do?!

Wink
  • 1 2
 Truth
  • 7 6
 @theminsta: Don't waste your time on the Snowflakes here. New generation grew up without understanding what our freedoms mean. And what kind of governments impose gun prohibition.
  • 5 4
 I'm 23. The only reason why I have the same conclusions as you, Axxe, is because I think instead of listening. What a fucking shitshow I've inherited.
  • 1 0
 not exactly but close
  • 2 0
 @MasterSlater: well i think that’s a little more than commen sense
  • 6 5
 @theminsta:

“Tarnation”, that’s cute!

See if you can keep up with my “liberal, elitist, snowflakey” language.

Courage is required to live in a world where you can’t shoot things you don’t like. Cowardice is avoiding doing what is right for EVERYONE around you. Which do you have more of?

The problem with the gun debate is that the majority of gun owners are like you... ANY sensible move towards saving lives is viewed as an attack on your “liberties”.

One more time... no one is trying to take your guns away. Just trying to make it harder for those who shouldn’t have them to get their hands on them.

So calm down, and try to realize that things can be had both ways. You’ll find you have less anger in your life.
  • 3 3
 @theminsta:

You’re only 23... ok. Then you can’t possibly understand what any of this actually means yet.

I’m sorry but your brain literally isn’t even finished developing. Which means there’s still hope for you.

Whatever you think you and @Axxe are “thinking”, you’re doing it wrong.
  • 2 2
 I am 100% for "make it harder for those who shouldn’t have them to get their hands on them"
  • 2 2
 @MasterSlater: Not an argument.

You know what else is not an argument? Axxe and I have at least triple the IQ points that you do.
  • 5 2
 @MasterSlater: You are a typical smug imbecile. Good thing, this society is still set up so that normal people are protected from the like of you.
  • 2 0
 100% Real talk ^^^^
  • 1 2
 @Anthonyfonzi:

Wonderful contribution Tony!

What do you have to add that’s “real?”

Please, I can’t wait to hear it.
  • 1 2
 @theminsta: You are the shitshow a*shole
  • 1 2
 @oneplanka:

You are so full of hate. So intolerant of other beliefs.

I will #LoveNotHate
  • 1 1
 @Axxe: by smug I think you mean making sense I have no real response to what you said.

You always resort to "smug elitist" when run out of things to copy paste from the nra website.
  • 1 1
 @reverend27: No, by smug moron I mean exactly that: a specimen at the peak of Dunning-Kruger curve.

A typical brainwashed liberal.
  • 1 0
 @Axxe: yes because I think something other then putting more guns in our schools makes me a liberal that right there is the first sign you are brainwashed.
I have many views that would be considered conservative.
But you have been programmed to think in the absolute. all or nothing.

Why is it that all the NRA solutions involve selling more guns and ammunition? Gee wiz I wonder who benefits there. I don't watch CNBC CNN or fox they are all 10percent news 90 percent opinion.

All they do is repeat what the viewers what to hear and the message their rich corporate backers want driven into your brain.
  • 1 0
 @Axxe: the Constitution is a living document written by our forefathers to adapt to the times.
  • 1 0
 @reverend27: Nonsense. Bill of Rights is the foundation of this country and it was specifically designed to be very difficult to amend. As much as the left wants to break down the constitution and instate a tyrannical socialist government, it will not happen.

Do yourself a favor, read through Supreme Court decisions in Heller in particular (as it applies here). You will see what level of analysis is used to actually interpret this.
  • 8 3
 I enjoy target shooting, but I also support sensible gun legislation: limiting clip capacity, required background checks for all purchases including private seller transactions, and limits for ammo purchases.


The NRA's lobbying actions undermine the safety of our society in order to benefit a single niche industry, and it's completely despicable. I unfortunately just bought a Giro helmet, but I will support the boycott for future purchases, as I don't want any of my money going to a parent corporation that is funding the NRA.
  • 1 0
 I think that the nra is wobling like a drunk on a straight path, some of their policies i agree with, others not so much prevention is the best weapon
  • 6 1
 Lets get rid of guns in every country. We can just agree to all get along and sing classic Beatles songs together as we hold hands around the big fire of burning guns. Then we can all hang out making flower garlands, while never concerning ourselves about Mongols or those bears eating our babies. The first move of tyrannical rule, is to disarm the general population. This is why we have a 2nd Amendment, we also have one that lets us change the constitution with the general consensus of the people. When we live in a world where guns are pointless we have the ability to make the changes we want. Peaceful people have no power to protect other peaceful people from the evils of the world. Brave men and women that are hardened to the core and armed to the teeth do have that power. There is no simple answer to stopping mass violence, but I do think a great place to start is to stop showing names and faces of these people in the media. Dont let them be the twisted hero they wish to be, just let them be nothing.
  • 11 3
 I HATE guns but you can't blame a child if their parent is a fuckup. Same goes for the bike brands.
  • 3 5
 So what do you say to the 20 parents who lost their children at Sandy Hook mass shooting? Or should i say, what do you tell parents who loose their kids on a monthly basis due to mass shootings?
  • 3 0
 @Batipapo: I'm just saying that it seems like misguided anger to boycott a bike related brand because the parent company owns another company that makes AR15's.
  • 7 2
 I'm a gun owner and a very active cyclist. Vote with your dollars. Vista brands are a heavy supporter of the NRA and other gun lobbyists. I know bell, giro, and others are tied up in the mess but they choose who they work for.
  • 1 0
 Wow so you can own a gun and understand that the nra works for gun makers and gives zero shits about anything but money. You sir are rarer then hens teeth. The nra gives two shits about the 2nd amendment and cares more about money then human life. Gun owners should wake up because the nra lack of any compromise will be their undoing. Take that shit to the bank people aren't buying it and are fed the phuck up.
  • 10 4
 ... yes again blame the thing, not the people and then take away the things...well eventually there will be no things left to take...
  • 5 1
 And people still hurting each other... Most likely with bombs and stabbing tools.
  • 13 9
 The gun/ammo manufacturers make product that actually serve to protect law abiding citizens, which is the majority of the US. The employees of the action sports side of Vista should not be punished in any way as I'm sure there are people that have different point of view on this matter. Yes, there are mountain bikers that have guns too and some actually like to carry while riding in remote wilderness.
  • 14 6
 Don't you understand? Someone misused a gun so it's only logical that we strip them away from law-abiding citizens.
  • 3 7
flag Matt115lamb (Feb 28, 2018 at 15:23) (Below Threshold)
 Bike ride prep ; oil chain , fill water bottle and load magnum !
  • 3 3
 @Matt115lamb: when you live in grizzly country, yes a magnum
  • 2 2
 @Beez177: Yeah, because the solution to every threat you see when you're in someone/something else's territory is to blow a hole in them.

Respect the environment you're in and use a bear spray.
  • 3 1
 @dubod22: respect the environment? Lol.. is that what the world's biggest polluter and human rights violator does ( China ) ? Nice try.
  • 1 0
 @Beez177: You are right, The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region is one of the world's biggest polluters. Incredible, really, for 7 million people.

But, nice try.
  • 2 1
 @dubod22: sorry all those red flags look the same to me.
  • 1 0
 @Beez177: Sorry to interrupt, but I don't think any nation in this world is whiter/cleaner than others.
  • 2 0
 @dubod22: I'll buy you a bear spray and see how that works out for you in a cage. Aren't the Chinese responsible for bears getting killed for their gall bladders and then the entire being left to die?
Btw. There are other animals like mountain lions here...
  • 1 0
 @dubod22: enjoying your Shark fin soup? How about all the other animals massacred for their horns, or other parts?? Nice try, really..
  • 1 0
 @Beez177: Is that supposed to be a racial slur implying that I eat shark fin soup? Yes, animals were meant to be eaten and if they don't, they over populate and actually hurt the environment.
  • 8 0
 Guns don't kill people. People with Camelbaks do.
  • 13 6
 Now I know what brands I will buy from. Thanks Vista, liking Giro even more now.
  • 4 0
 I love how the initial imagine to click shows the most :"military-esque" color options for Camelbak and Giro products as to directly associate those brands with guns before you can read its just parent companies...nice pinkbike...click baiting it...smh
  • 2 0
 pb incresed the clickbaity titles and thumbnails a lot in the last year. pretty sad
  • 5 1
 Pinkbike is almost as silly as Erik Tonkin for posting this drama, I mean article. Should have titled it "people do stupid reactive shit to feel better about themselves." I think this guy ordered too much inventory...last I heard carbon bikes hurt the environment, are you gonna stop selling those too? It's 5 o'clock, time to head to Sellout Cycles hah
  • 6 0
 Better boycott Intense Cycles while your at it. I mean they do have an assault bicycle called the M16, and an UZZI for the Reagan years crowd. Forks made fat.
  • 1 0
 Don't forget the new Sniper! lol!
  • 8 4
 I am confused, I thought that I was on a Website specifically bike related. What does GUN Control BS have to do with me riding my bicycle???? PINKBIKE, with all do respect please stay out of POLITICS and Focus on what you do best BICYCLES. If you keep pushing this crap you will loose not only me but a lot of people. If we had to be concerned from who we buy then we wouldn't buy from anyone. Happy Trails, let's RIDE!
  • 1 0
 That argument is so damn wrong and I think you know this yourself. You can literally do a lot of good with paying for the right products and services. Of course sometimes our options are limited but in that case we should at least try to make the least amount of damage when buying products.
  • 9 2
 Don't bring politics into mountain biking.
  • 7 2
 I get the relevance......buuuut, there are outlets for these debates......I love mountain biking, it's my escape from politics...or was...
  • 3 1
 Mods, this one's the best post here. Yeah, kill this thread please. I already said my piece here, with no regrets even though I'm in the minority, but this website is my escape as well (and Pornhub).

Maybe you should have some articles where you block any comments just for the sake of civility.
  • 3 1
 Thank you! PB is supposed to an escape from all this. Please dump this one......PLEASE! Concerned biker.
  • 2 1
 huh yeah Big Grin
  • 1 0
 Just curious why you don't scroll past this and move on. You made a decision to read this post, you made a decision to read the comments, you made a decision to complain about it. Why not take some personal responsibility and just tune out the stuff on pinkbike you don't want to read about? Why should your sensibilities determine the media someone else consumes. Your allowed to walk away and only read and comment on the article's you choose to.
  • 4 1
 I vist pinkbike to get away from the news like this very frustrating to read about this non-sense on a website that caters to my favorite sport. Although I guess politics and sport go hand and hand these days.... Personally I really hope MEC doesn't succumb to the pressure of these ignorant people, I will stop shopping at MEC if they drop these products over political issues.
  • 3 0
 Say what you will about gun control and whatnot, but there is no reason that companies that sell mtb equipment and promote values that help build communities around cycling and other outdoor activities have to take the heat from the stupid decisions of some kid that wants nothing but the worst for his community. These mtb companies under vista outdoor have absolutely NO affiliation with the school shooter. Savage Arms probably didn't even make the gun he used! It is totally absurd to degrade the reputation and values of these brands that had absolutely no connection to the shootings!
  • 1 0
 *Alarm* Klaxons blaring, etc. Attention THIS COMMENT CONTAINS COMMON SENSE AND LOGICAL THINKING Attention Mods, remove this comment. This is clearly not allowed on PB Wink Do not come within 1.5 scrolls for fear of contamination.
  • 7 0
 More people need to just go ride their fucking bikes!
  • 3 0
 Plenty of comments on worsening mental health issues in a number of countries. What seems to be lost in the debate is you can't beat statistics. No matter how hard you try, there will always be a certain percentage of people with mental health problems that are dangerous to society, in every society. The likelihood of those people causing harm goes up significantly when you have a society with a high per capita penetration of weapons able to do mass harm. It's just that more likely they will be able to access a weapon, regardless of background checks. Again, cold, hard statistics. Until the ratio of guns to citizens changes in any substantial form, I doubt there will be even a hint of a change in the outcomes.
  • 3 0
 Ill admit even though Im all for the 2nd amendment guns do take a lot of innocent lives and they are easy for an extremist or someone who is unstable or even mad at the world to obtain. Something should be done about it. However I don't agree with punishing companies and responsible tax paying firearm owners. I've used savage guns for hunting to put food on the table(which are excellent btw despite what some may say), camelbak for cycling, motocross and all day outdoor activities and Giro helmets, gloves for protection. All of these products have been reliable and helped me in some way. Boycotting these products won't change anything.... Don't be a half assed activist, its easy to blame. Guns,helmets,survival packs all useful items for the outdoor enthusiast.
  • 3 0
 why punish the men and women working for brands like Giro, Bell, or Camelbak? They're probably passionate people making good products, like in most sporting industries and I bet it wasn't their choice to sell the company they work for to Vista Outdoor. That's like saying a kid should stop riding a bike because his dad was in the army.
  • 2 0
 Thank you!!! Exactly what the sentiment should be, rather than being a BIGOT and treating people differently because of what they believe.
  • 3 0
 Do you stupid f*cks realize y’all just created the longest thread in Pink Bike history. This is where we come to get away and browse shit not related to the rest of the political world. Then Pink Bike has to go and do a political article. Now do we need to dig in and see who Pink Bike founder support or represent? Damn you people need to shut the f*ck up and f*ck you Pink Bike for doing this article.
  • 3 0
 Here in Australia, there has not been a mass shooting since strict gun controls were introduced in 1996. I hold a firearms licence and have zero desire to own a military style weapon - which by definition are for the MILITARY. If you have not seen John Oliver's take on the debate, you should watch this: www.comedycentral.com.au/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart/videos/john-oliver-on-gun-control-in-the-us-vs-australia#gun-control-whoopdedoo.
  • 3 1
 You fall right in with all the other sheep. Mass shootings count for a tiny percentage of all murders.
You own buyback in 1996 didn't work too well, but you won't point that out will you?
So much for honest discussion.
  • 1 0
 @TheOriginalTwoTone: Mate, its not just mass shootings, its all shootings. In Australia there are 22 guns per 100 residents, vs America with 101 guns per 100 residents. The firearm-related death rate per 100,000 is 0.93 vs 10.5 in America. its a pretty clear correlation, less guns means less firearm-related deaths. Simple as that.
  • 3 0
 If you guys looked into any of the products you use. you would find in a round about way that, they are all tied to something you don’t believe in. Next time you want to go and have fun, camping,biking,hiking,driving to the top of a mtn to go mtn biking. You should stay at home and not go. It is not about guns, this is a mental health thing. Much like this website.
  • 3 0
 I went to the movies the other night.
Every single preview showed the most cool, most beautiful people spraying bullets from machine guns. With cool being defined by that, getting rid of the weapons will have no effect. Semi automatic rifles have been available since WWII. What is changing now is that they've become extremely glamorized. It's so cool to be big and bad and have a pointy black rifle.
They sanitize the shooting so much that it's not even cringe worthy. Ever shot an animal? They bleed a lot. If you don't make a clean kill, they suffer a lot. Movies gloss over all that to make sure it shows slow motion of people getting blown throw windows with lots of broken glass and excitement. So cool, those guys are so awesome!
If you showed a cow getting shot up and blown through a window people would go ape shit. Even just show a real animal getting slaughtered for food. But blast a person? Naw, thats just fine

How about we ban movies that show this stuff?
How about we ban video games that lets you practice this stuff?
Remember the second amendment sits right next to the first.

Maybe we pressure Hollywood to show that guys with mountain bikes are more cool than idiots who shoot machine guns?
And by the way, the weapon in your photo is an acutal assault rifle with a select fire switch. Not legal to own.
  • 3 0
 This is absolute stupid social justice warrior speak. I'd wager 99% of of the anti-gunners here will continue to go out after their EndurBro rides and support their favorite beer/alcohol manufacturers of which, by the same logic, are causes of tens upon tens of thousands of deaths of teens, adults, and children either directly or indirectly every YEAR. Then they'll go get in their Tacomas and Subarus and drive. Where is the outrage. Hypocrisy is STAGGERING.
  • 3 0
 They are implements of war, used for the purpose of killing. Why the general public feels the need to have these things is beyond me. To me it is more just the culture of the USA, and how their politicians are bought with the lobbying of groups like the NRA, that will never see a common sense approach to this issue.
  • 22 19
 Don't say much on here but I will say this because of this senseless article. The CDC notes an estimated 88,000 deaths per year by over consumption of alcohol and admits there are 500,000 potential years of life lost per year due to alcohol. Yet there are commercials every other minute during sporting events trying to sell you alcohol. There is no limit to how much alcohol one can purchase nor retain in their household or on person. YET there is no outcry over this. In 2017 there were a total of 15,500 deaths by gun related incidents ... that is gang-banger, murder, suicide, death by cop, civil dispute, accidents, etc. etc. I agree with the NRA on this one. Being a member of a responsible, lawful, organization is now somehow a bad thing? Only in "America".
  • 21 8
 So 15500 deaths by gun is acceptable to you? Shouldn't ZERO be the goal?
  • 8 2
 @handynzl: With a population as huge as the USA's, 0 would be impossible. There's always going to be a few f*ckwits shooting each other.
  • 16 2
 The typical line rolled out by the gun lobby. "Let me compare guns to something that shows worse statistics to prove that there are worse things in the world". Unfortunately alcohol has nothing to do with guns or this article. When was the last time someone drank a beer and a classroom full of school children died? The NRA is responsible? Dont make me laugh. They are possibly the most irresponsible organisation in your country. They block every attempt to make even the smallest changes to gun control. How do they do it? By lobbying government. It is said that they are doing it on your behalf as a member but really they are doing it on behalf of a multi billion dollar industry who make money from selling weapons.
  • 6 3
 @handynzl: Nearly 6 times that death amount with alcohol is a okay? Does that amount not cause an outcry and ban on alcohol or the companies that profit from it's sale/consumption? 15,500 in comparison is pretty damn good considering 2500 of them were accidental deaths, 1800 were suicide, and the vast majority of the other deaths were by irresponsible owners performing "gang" related tragedies against other gangs. Taking my gun that is registered and saying my license to carry/shoot is in jeopardy because of those degenerates is asinine. To think my relationship with the NRA makes me a "bad" person because they are 100% for responsible gun ownership is a kick in the teeth. I give the alcohol reference because why is it widely accepted to have alcohol or cigarettes kill thousands a year but there's no uproar. Put it this way ... would you be pissed if your bike manufacturer caved into public pressure and scrutiny because a rider was killed while not wearing a helmet, hence they take your bike or restrict your availability to own/ride even though YOU are a responsible rider?
  • 6 6
 @handynzl: Australia had phenomenally low proliferation and zero points of entry. The USA has a gun for every 2 people and land borders with Mexico. Stop telling us how to run our country.
  • 3 1
 Well said mate.
Alcohol abuse is so rampant and no one cares. I’ve had three loved ones who’ve either been killed due to alcohol involved incidents (not their own fault) or drunk driver... I know most people know a handful as well. What’s being done?
‘0’ alcohol abuse is insane!
That being said, people kill people! Wether it’s a using a knife, a gun or any other weapon... why disarm the law abiding citizens who abide by the laws. People in an F’d state of mind and psychologically whacked or the criminal don’t give a flying F about firearm laws! They need help! What’s being done to help them? Pushing a pill that has as bad or worse side effects than the diagnosis. Nothing is being done to get to the root cause and treat that.

Can we please look at the bigger picture?
What happened to the golden rule?
What happened to love your neighbor as yourself?
Our values have gotten so skewed.
Ride your bike and care about people. Keep it real.
  • 9 1
 Maybe your point would be valid if overconsumption of alcohol killed other people. No one is forcing children to drink their livers into a pulp just for showing up to school.
  • 4 2
 *excessive alcohol use, is reported for the 88k deaths per year. Saying by over consumption is referring to alcohol poisoning resulting in immediate death. These 88k could be due to long term alcohol use. Roughly 3k die a year from alcohol poisoning.

Anyways, alcohol and tobacco use is a choice. Heart disease is the number one leading cause of death at ~640k in 2016. ~80k died because of diabetes. Are you telling me we should ban sugar? Your argument is probably as senseless as this article if you view it that way.

Gun deaths are inflicted upon its victims(in this situation we are talking about, not discussing suicide). And when someone goes on a shooting spree its mass casualties
  • 1 1
 @handynzl: we are just saying that more people die by alcohol than by guns, both are very sick, and why we have alcohol and murder in our mind is something i well....
  • 8 0
 @siderealwall2: Whats Aussie got to do with anything? Other than they had rampant loss of gun control, then had a massacre and then, wait for it, passed into law sensible gun restrictions and they have since never had another massacre. But that is those blokes over the ditch from me. Maybe you'd like to learn some geography and flag recognition???
  • 1 0
 Your numbers are wrong, there are over 30k gun deaths per year. Guns should be legal, but highly regulated, just like alcohol, and I support the same approach to drugs.
  • 5 2
 Key difference is that alcohol is self inflicted.
  • 3 1
 @swartzie: The argument is not about alcohol vs guns. BOTH should have a ZERO goal. If you don't have a goal, i.e. my goal is to clear that 6m gap jump, you will never aim to do anything about it. But US lawmakers would rather shrug their shoulders and sweep it all under the mat, time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time immemorial, again, whilst the rest of the world face palms and goes WTF? (again)
  • 2 0
 @YouHadMeAtDrugs: For sure, always outliers to the rule, but you need the goal(s). To say "oh well, can't do much" without even TRYING, which is pretty much what always happens (Columbine, Sandy Hook, this last shooting etc etc) is just being a big fat hairy pussy.
  • 3 2
 @swartzie: There are at least road laws that require helmets. If you die not wearing a helmet its your fault. And again these are "choices". You don't get to choose whether someone goes off and kills you.

All anyone is really asking is for sensible gun laws, however the NRA has squashed every single proposed gun law no matter what it is. I don't care if people have guns, people just shouldn't have certain guns. Someone with enough experience can defend themselves with a simple handgun. Else all these movies I watch are BS.
  • 2 5
 @handynzl: your an idiot. You and everyone else knows that's not possible so why say it
  • 2 0
 @willbe19: hey man, he will make that 6m gap. Just believe.
  • 1 1
 @willbe19: First off, the word you are looking for is "you're" not "your". Perhaps you should have paid more attention in school? Also you should have capitalised (or spell with that with a "z" since you're American) the "y" as well. And you should have finished with a "?" as well. But that would just me being a grammar Nazi.

And I find it sad just how unwilling America seems to be in even TRYING to reduce gun fatalities. "Oh it won't happen, so don't bother trying!" Did Sir Edmund Hillary say that before "knocking the buggar off"? Did Neil Armstrong say "we'll never get this rocket into space!"?

Perhaps I am an idiot for trying to jump that 6m (20' to you) gap jump. I'll get hurt, perhaps. I may break my neck. But at least I will have tried. But that only hurts me. Not 17 high school children, nor TWENTY six and seven year old CHILDREN at Sandy Hook.

When is it enough for you lot?

How nothing happened after Sandy Hook is atrocious, and only proved how unintelligent USA is on this matter. It is beyond belief.
  • 1 0
 @bentown: Cheers for believing in me Ben! I can do it!
  • 1 1
 @handynzl: the moon landing was fake get over it
  • 1 1
 @handynzl: Sorry for the grammar. Typing on a phone is hard. For the record, it is also not acceptable to start a sentence with the word but. I guess I shouldn't be so hard on you. It's not like YOU ARE an arrogant Australian or anything. This is fun, have a wonder evening
  • 1 0
 @handynzl: A "zero gun deaths" goal is bullshit, quite frankly, because in America we have guns for self defense, law enforcement, and hunting on the virtue of our founding document, the constitution. The PA massacre reform didn't stop mass killings and gun deaths by any means, and perpetrators of illegal activities couldn't care less about the new law. The rise of advanced 3D printing and cost-effective milling makes this more apparent by the hour. If there is sufficient demand, the free market will always supply.

As for the flag, I know the difference, promise! Phone screen is greyscale to save power.
  • 1 0
 @handynzl: You'd better research your buy back bud. It took over 6 years for homicides to maintain a downward thread.
4 of the 6 years after the buy back you had MORE homicides even without the guns.
  • 6 3
 A few double-morals from you here Pinkbike?

www.pinkbike.com/u/camm02/album/GUN
www.pinkbike.com/news/Suns-Out-Guns-Out-James-Doerfling-video-2014.html
www.pinkbike.com/forum/listcomments/?threadid=97319
www.pinkbike.com/forum/listcomments/?threadid=176070&pagenum=2

as well as lots of videos depicting riders shooting semi-automatic guns...

If this is a mountain bike site, take a permanent position about it and be coherent about it all the time!
  • 4 0
 I don't think Pinkbike are taking a position here, the way I read the article it is pretty neutral on the issue.
  • 1 1
 @delusional: Well, that was exactly my point. They should take a position! This is a mountain bike site, right? Yet a lot of gun-related stuff (as above) is allowed and it should not IMHO. Especially because a lot of teenagers visit this place just for the biking, but find some gun shit here too. That is, why posting about this Florida massacre hot topic now while posting videos of Aggy & friends (or whoever) shooting AR15s. There is a double message, double moral in that. Let's just be honest in a world that it's increasingly not.
  • 1 0
 @webermtb: I tend to agree, but I'm not surprised to see PB not taking a stance here - remember that they probably earn a good amount of income from Giro, Camelbak, etc, and aren't exactly known for having a strong separation of content and sales. In that light you could read a fairly neutral article like this as actually taking a fairly strong stance.
  • 1 1
 I DEMAND THAT A BIKING WEBSITE BE POLITICIZED! AND IF IT DOESNT TAKE MY STANCE, PINKBIKE IS EVIL AND I WILL NEVER USE IT ARRRRGHHHHHHH IM THE MORAL COMPASS!!!
  • 1 0
 @theminsta: Yes! Let's politicize everything! US politics are hilarious these days, dude. I laugh my ass off every morning watching the best of Trevor Noah's and John Oliver as the satire on US politics and shred the sh@t out of Trump every day. Man is the most fun I have ever had watching other country's politics.
  • 1 1
 Late night shows HAHAHAHA you're kinda stupid aren't ya?

www.pinkbike.com/photo/15655082

Do you also get your facts from Buzzfeed? Hahhahahaha
  • 1 0
 @theminsta: Hahaha!...I just watch them because they are fun as hell. In this case, I couldn't care less about "the facts". It is just the fun factor, dude. From "The leader of the free world", the US has become "The clown of the whole world" these days. And it is fun as hell and a privilege to be able to watch the transition.

We live in a world where facts are less important than ever. Just look at the current US administration for a prime example.

Anyway, you probably get your "facts" from Fox News, right?. That is very intelligent of you buddy, brilliant indeed...
  • 5 0
 Relevent peice of news for our industry, thanks for covering it! I support my views with my dollars so this is quite interesting.
  • 16 10
 Pinkbike - Thank you for alerting me to this. I will now be big supporter of Vista Outdoor and ALL of their products.
  • 4 1
 Couple of questions from the outside looking in. I hunt and so I understand owning hunting rifles ect. However in Canada if you own a hand gun and such that is another issue. There are major restrictions on use etc.

My first question is why shouldn't there be major restrictions on something that is specifically designed to efficiently kill people? This idea that "guns don't kill people" is so silly to me. I guess if you really wanted to you could use a marshmallow to kill someone. The difference being a marshmallow wasn't created for that specific purpose and likely couldn't be used to mow down a room full of people.

Secondly, this idea of loss of rights. What about the right not to be shot by your classmate? If this is truly a rights issue why are so many other things that in my mind are basic human needs not a right (right to health care, affordable or free education)?
  • 3 4
 Hunting as sport should be banned too. Inflicting a brutal death on another living being for sport is sociopathic, narcissistic, unintelligent and shows a serious lack of empathy for all animals (including human).
  • 1 0
 @abros: I do it to eat. I do it because it's a healthier option than processed meat. Is your issue eating meat in general? If so tell me why an animals life is worth more than a plants or an insect.
  • 7 0
 Why learn facts, when i can use my emotions as facts?
  • 5 0
 Mass proliferation of guns is necesssary for our safety and freedom. Just ignore all those countries that are safer and fewer than we are but have strong regulations on guns.
  • 3 0
 Eh, doesn't affect or change my purchasing decisions. And Camelback as well as others are strong supporters of the US military, and make products specifically for serviceman, so it's not surprising to see a firearms company in their ownership.
  • 3 0
 Blaming gun related deaths solely on "mental health issues" is an oversimplification that does very little to help the stigma around mental health. When we say that those who kill have mental health issues, do we say that after the fact?; does having generalized anxiety (like your grandma), a psychiatric diagnosis, make you a dangerous gun owner?.

According to the World Health Report, "One in four people in the world will be affected by mental or neurological disorders at some point in their lives". Perhaps we should stop using easy answers for complex issues, and start genuinely looking at other risk factors such us socioeconomic and educational variables...
  • 4 1
 A boycott of Vista cycling products could never be on a scale large enough to hurt them and I can guarantee nobody is boycotting their guns and ammunition brands because they own cycling gear brands and the reality it that the cycling gear profits are most likely a drop in the bucket compared to the weaponry. People need to get off their high horse and quit buying into the flavor of the month. Remember when everybody boycotted Apple because Chinese workers were throwing themselves out of factory windows? Yeah, better reach for your iPhone and ask Siri to look it up for you while you sit there wearing your nice clothes that an 6 year old Malaysian was shot over after taking too long to stich the seam.

And of course it's a bike shop in Portland sending all their Bell and Giro gear back, everybody knows hipsters don't even wear helmets. If Vista owned a man bun elastic manufacturing company they wouldn't be sending shit back!
  • 7 2
 Hello 'Murica. Europe here. We'll leave this discussion to you, because frankly, we don't care. We have almost no gun related problems. In fact, we have almost no guns.
  • 1 0
 This is completely false. Criminals most certainly own weapons here, ak47's, sub machine guns, hell, even rocket launchers. People get shot all the time. There are a lot of states in the U.S with high gun ownership that are a lot safer than most european countries. It is just that a couple states/big cities drive the average up massively.

The law abiding citizen is unarmed in the eu, that's true. But by far the most violence comes from criminals in which we are no different to the us.
  • 5 2
 In a traffic accident we blame the driver, in a bombing we blame the bomber but in a shooting we blame the gun?
Guns (and gun manufacturers) are not the real issue IMO. Neither are the vast majority of gun owners. There are thought to be 300 MILLION fire arms in the US, yet fewer than 400,000 gun-related crimes. That's still a staggering number, I'll grant you but the percentage is very small, little more than 0.1% of guns in the US are used in crime. And many of the 400000 gun-related incidents likely involve the same (illegally-owned) guns, so that percentage is in all probability much lower, possibly 0.01%. Simply put, the chances a legally bought gun is in the wrong hands are infinitesimal. The legislation works for the overwhelming majority. Failures of the system are rare (when viewed in terms of the raw numbers). Unfortunately, the consequences when failures occur are nothing short of disasterous and heartbreaking.
Better gun control will always be welcome. Notice I said better, not-more restrictive. When dealing with such an small percentage of owners, outliers in statistical terms, it is not surprising that the legislation does not cover every scenario concievable. Those scenarios need to be considered.
Disturbed people hell-bent on killing others will always find a way. Look at the number of incidents in the UK where the perpetrators used knives to wound and kill multiple victims. Legal loopholes will not stop a suitably motivated perpetrator. Our history is rife with grotesqueries, regardless of race, religion or creed; It's a part of human nature whether you like it or not. If we make guns less available to those who want to commit unspeakable crimes then they will build bombs, use knives or employ any manner of atrocious methods you can't concieve of.
It's worth pointing out that law enforcement (federal and local) utterly failed to prevent the Florida shooting from happening; The warning signs were there and they failed in their responsibilities. They were incompetent in their handling of the incident too (inaccurate "real-time" information, ineffective personnel) which arguably led to a higher loss of life than would otherwise would have occured. Their handling of the shooter and the incident should be scrutinized in far more depth than the issue of gun control. The bulk of the "blame" for the death toll lies with them.
This is not an end-of declaration; it's just to add some nuance to the discussion. We should do our utmost to ensure individuals with nefarious intentions are unable to access the kinds of weapons that facilitate a killing spree. But the rush to control guns is a knee-jerk reaction which does not hold up when subjected to reasonable investigation. Call me a cynic but it's mostly political posturing; a healthy dose of unjustly targeting your opponents core supporters and vilifying them in your own supporters eyes. There are better ways to prevent these tragedies from happening. Piling in on the gun control merry-go-round ultimately means the other avenues at our disposal, reasonable methods for prevention are ignored. Since the gun-control argument can be defeated on reason alone, that means nothing changes. The gun-control merry-go-round is so blatently counter-productive it's borderline idiotic.
  • 3 0
 wow....I didn't know there are that many socialist loving, communist, gun hating, freedom hating, narrow minded, uneducated, ignorant mountain bikers out there. if you are not a LEGAL US of A citizen, you cannot comment on another country.....so sad that 90% of you on here don't have a clue. instead of spending time on here ranting and raving about how bad guns are, go educate yourself and go for a ride and while on said ride, think about how wrong you were and probably still are since you mind is so closed. I for one, am going to the range this weekend to get some exercise, 2nd amendment style with my pistol and "rifle".
  • 4 0
 TLBig Grin R but I'm with the majority of the comments I assume in demanding that we won't stand for another bike standard from the biking companies.
  • 4 2
 To each their own. I however don't tend to take social/political advice from knee jerk reaction based folks. For every person that won't buy these brands, there is at least one that maybe hasn't in past, but will now seek them out. Zero sum game, kind of like gun control politics....... Nothing has moved the needle in over 25 yrs.
  • 6 4
 Cool, the parent company owns a gun maker, I'm not going to boycott Giro or Camelback because of it. I'm not big on guns but why hate on a company that is only with the gun maker because they were bought out. I'm probably getting some hate but I don't care, sue me
  • 6 1
 i will wear my camo camelback and giro helmet to the store to purchase my savage firearms !!
  • 2 0
 The real issue isn't that they brands are owned by a company that produces guns...but that the profits from those companies ultimatly ends up supporting the NRA in their rabid defence of the right to bear arm and go out and shoot little kiddies. The companies in question make fantastic riding gear. It's just a shame that the parent company makes guns and ammo and supports the gun lobby. In the end it's' up to you. do you support the brand and the people who design, make and sell excellent riding gear stuck in the bad situation. Or do you say no I don't support part of my money going to support the NRA in allowing anyone the ability to carry firearms. Here in aus it took one mass shooting and the gov cracked down. you can still own guns etc they are just more tightly governed so the people who really need them get them. ie farmers for pest control. You just can't walk around the streets carrying one, just because like in the states.
  • 1 1
 Australia doesn't have cartels on the southern border. They're more concerned with the white sharks, jellies, spiders, snakes, etc.
  • 2 0
 Solid background and mental health checks before purchasing a weapon in the US is, and has been for a while, the best possible course of action reign in mass shootings, or the best place to start at least. The NRA lobby/lawyers always block the legislative branch from making this happen. A petition that impacts the parent company of an arms manufacturer is a measured and fair response to an industry that doesn't give a shit about people, only money. Maybe when Vista looses enough money, they'll help engender the NRA support needed to pass some very rational legislation. After all, one can only vote with their dollars. It's better than doing nothing.
  • 5 0
 A gun-for-bike exchange program here in the U.S. would fix a lot of our problems.
  • 3 0
 what guns are you willing to trade for one of my extra bikes?
  • 6 1
 I have both and won't trade my freedom for nonsense.
  • 2 0
 These mass murders are a problem as a society and culture. They are sick. Many of us watch too many superheroes shooting others (black panther) and play to much gun games (i.e. Fortnite). They get into our heads, and some of us think shooting solve the problemo. I assume ya’ll are here cause you’d rather go MTBiking than play/watch a gun game. That, I thinks is the best choice.

When these shootings happen, our brains clench up and we make illogical and somewhat illogical choices. We, as a world, need to calm the hell down and asses the situation. Then we can make logical choices. We need a reform, not in our objects, but in what we think, say and do. Thinking leads to saying and doing.

After all that, GO MTBIKING, for there is a sport we can get a good high on, and not watching/playing gun games.
As a matter of fact even those who hate sports should get pleanty of exercise.
  • 1 1
 There's plenty of other countries where violent video games and movies are popular, but they don't have the same problems with gun violence as the US: Germany, UK, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Nordic countries for example.

What do these countries have in common? Lower gun ownership rates than the US. In fact, gun deaths are linearly proportional to gun ownership both in respect to countries and US states.
  • 1 0
 @dthomp325: Well the other thing is that nowadays we get so heated up when someone disagrees with us, that some just go haywire. We need keep it cool. We see it all the time, but never think about it. I.E. Some guy murders his ex-girlfriends boyfriend, because he want his ex-g-friend back. We need to be calm and collected, like, (in my opinion), the U.S.A.’s founding fathers.

Idk maybe the U.S. has the idiots.
  • 2 0
 People like to say mental illness is the cause of these mass shootings and it's not the weapons fault. They forget to mention all the other thousands of shootings that happen daily. Also they forget to mention all these apparently mentally ill toddlers www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/09/29/american-toddlers-are-still-shooting-people-on-a-weekly-basis-this-year/?utm_term=.f6b1baa9bce3

I grew up with guns and most of everyone I know has guns, and most of them shouldn't. People will argue and that's their right but I can get my gear from other manufacturers.
  • 2 0
 I recently watched a feature on comedy Central called Jordan klepper solves guns. While I realize he is a comedian and it isn't a super serious show, it is worth watching. He talks to the atf, some lawful gun owners, a miltia, and learns about gun safety. At the end he concludes that most gun owners have no intention of killing people, and that even the objectively radical militia is open to some gun control.
  • 7 1
 Pinkbike has really turned into quite the shit rag
  • 7 3
 I will avoid doing business with companies who cut ties with the NRA. Time to buy a new Camelbak and Giro helmet.

Also, can I get a woo woo from NRA members?!
  • 4 1
 woo woo!
  • 6 3
 Sweet now i have an excuse to seek out these brands and support them. If people want to think with emotion and be told by the MSM what to be outraged by this week, so be it, they can go buy a surly.
  • 3 1
 Stay out of politics PB. So they sell guns. My 401 is probably loaded with companies that I would probably not support but I just want it to make money. This is not a gun sales issue, It is a lazy attack that skirts the real issue. Parent your children. Say no to them once in awhile. Stop non-confrontational ignorance. Force the issue of mental illness. Be involved with there day. Ask them questions about what there doing and where. GO RIDE BIKES WITH THEM! And for the sake of our future get back to “In God we trust”!
  • 2 0
 The biggest bummer in this thread so far is realize how far we, as a country, are from being able to legitimately discuss these difficult issues. We've gotten to a point where we are so set on choosing sides and creating a dichotomy that we are completely unable to discuss where a middle ground might be in this argument. There are never only two options. The gun control debate is not 'ban all guns' vs. 'protect the second amendment'. What it needs to be is a recognition that what is happening in the US (specifically our rates of gun violence) is not something that we as a society can tolerate. So how do we fix this? There have been posts that offer larger solutions but for the most part it seems to be people yelling at each other over the empty middle ground. What can we change without eliminating a basic right of our citizens? I have my general opinions but I do not have enough knowledge of the intimacies of gun legislation or crime to truly speak on the subject. Lets try to get past the 'us' vs. 'them' narrative and have a civil conversation. A compromise.
  • 5 1
 I think the problem is that the right/conservatives have been compromising for the last 50 years on liberties. Progressives are slowly eating away at the liberties of US citizens and they're is sick of it. I'm all for a logical discussion about how to solve the problem, but banning hardware is what the left seems to want, not a solution that will actually solve the problem or address statistical data. We're not a logic-based society. Spock would be very disappointed.
  • 2 2
 If you want a logical discussion, then have the left become educated on the subject matter. Otherwise how do you have a rational conversation with someone spewing nonsense?

This is the same with just about everything on the left. Do some minor research on the 'wage gap' with has been proven to be utter BS.

Can't start a honest discussion on anything if you start yours with a lie.
  • 2 0
 @TheOriginalTwoTone: alright so these first two attempts at looking at the issue without belittling the intelligence or opinions of others didn't go too well. There is a marine who posted below who believes that 'assault' style weapons are unnecessary for the public to own. He also believes that there needs to be better gun safety and handling training. What are your thoughts? Is this a legitimate response to the problem or just a bandaid. Once again we should not examine this as liberal vs conservative. We are all humans and, yes, if we try hard we can probably lump the opinions of others into two very broad categories but that doesn't serve to get at the root of these issues. It only serves to divide. We are not arguing ban all guns vs allow all guns
  • 1 0
 Spock would be upset they we have passed legislation to prevent the government from studying the gun problem and looking for a statistical, logic based solutions. We can't because after intense lobbying from the NRA, an amendment was slipped into a larger bill essentially making it impossible for this to be done with any governmental funding. Overturning the Dickey Amendment would be a logical first step to find an evidence based solution to the gun problem. I believe that is a step that everyone should be able to support, it essentially says we should study this issue and look for solutions in the data we uncover. Spock would want data so the conclusion would be logical.
  • 1 0
 @DaysToCome: First my background I own weapons and I'm NOT an NRA member because I don't believe in everything they oppose. However- all the rhetoric has me reconsidering that.

You are talking banning all guns. Right now they aren't but all this crap about it being military or not means nothing. Look at the silly bs about it's range and it's design to pierce a helmet at 500 yards- none of that comes into play when you're shooting kids stuck in a school. They aren't wearing armor they aren't 300 yards away.

Let ask you, if you're dead does your family care if it was a pistol or a rifle that fired the bullet?
So when you get your ban and the next mass shooting is done with pistols are all those people going to now say all good we don't need to do anything about pistols- please.
So where does it stop- that's why the NRA is the way it is, they are well versed in history and once the ball gets rolling it doesn't stop.
  • 1 0
 @CousinGunner: I could agree with that. There's no harm in a study and there are a number of ways to reduce fatalities without limiting the rights if citizens. In regards to the 2A, logical conclusions must conform to the amendment. We can't limit the liberties that the 2A protects because a study indicated fatalities will be decreased. the amendment is in place exactly for this reason.

This is simply the nature of the USA. Other options are open for discussion such as limiting access, removing access, and checking further into who should or should not have weapons. I'm all about a logical discussion, studying statistics, and forming logical conclusions to address the issues. Problem is, most of the solutions proposed will not address the issues.
  • 2 0
 @jason342: The US court system has consistently ruled that no rights are absolute. That's why you can't scream fire in a theater, the police can enter your home without a warrant if they have reasonable grounds you are actively committing a crime and you can't own a fully automatic machine gun. The Heller Supreme Court case concluded that the second amendment right to "bear arms" can be regulated and specifically that it is lawful to impose restrictions on commercial gun sales.
I agree that the second amendment should be respected, but the constitution was meant to be a living document that evolved with the times.That is why we have the amendment process. Not everything in the Constitution is honorable and should be protected at all costs (the 3/5's clause for example).
I'm in no way saying guns should be banned, or no one should have guns. But it is logical to look at ways we can legally regulate commercial firearm sales to reduce violence and do not infringe on your rights as defined by the courts over time. Even Ronald Reagan supported a ban on assault weopons so this is not some crazy left wing libtard idea.
  • 1 0
 @CousinGunner: Excellent post! I agree with you 100% on "no rights are absolute". Only a Sith deals in absolutes...

I believe there are plenty of steps that can be takes that don't infringe on the liberties of law abiding citizens (not including would-be murderers or those who are mentally ill or have violent history). These should be looked into.

One thing to note - there will never be 0 gun deaths in the US. What is a "acceptable" margin a which point regulation of firearms will cease???
  • 4 2
 What a garbage article and ridiculous viewpoint. Because an outdoor product group owns savage arms and federal ammunition, BOTH brands that produce guns and ammo for primarily SPORT SHOOTERS and HUNTERS we’re going to have blood on our hands if we buy Giro, Camelback, or Blackburn? Hunters and target shooters are responsible law-abiding members of the outdoor community too. I ride bikes, shoot guns, am in support of the NRA’s commitment to keep my 2nd amendment rights, and will do everything in my power to keep them. Oh and my Giro helmet works great and my Camelback fits perfectly! Wink
  • 3 0
 I've noticed that most people have forgotten that 9/11 was the biggest tragedy in American history. That happened because of radical hate towards fellow man and was accomplished with box cutters.
  • 4 2
 Guns are un-cool, they are a placebo for weak people scared of the world. Come on man-up don't be a pussy! you are riding a MTB, it's a great start. We need more respectful and confident people and not scared little bitches hiding behind their guns. If you are really honest with yourself, there's no reason to own a gun except maybe hunting. Do you really think you are going to defend yourself against a corrupt government with your guns. It's childish! You won't last a second against the Marines, the cops or any trained professional. It's like thinking anybody could escape from Sam Hill because they have an Huffy in their garage.
  • 3 3
 @max2max "Come on man-up don't be a pussy!" - Tell that to a woman who is about to be raped...

"there's no reason to own a gun except maybe hunting"... Self defense? No? Because the founding fathers of the US thought it was necessary to maintain a free state? No?

Ever had your house broken into by 3 people? You going to take them all on (and get whooped) or run out of your house while your wife & daughters are raped?

Really?? Be honest with yourself?? Dude Man Bro...

Also, Marines can't operate on US soil. There are 360M Americans in the US. 200k of them are marines. You're assuming the marines, army, navy, guard, etc. will be ok will killing civilians. Civilians could easily assemble a force of 20M+ overnight... Not to mention that civis maintain military systems, infrastructure, etc.
  • 3 0
 @jason342: First I appreciate the debate and that you come with arguments that make some sense.
First there are other ways (alarm, video surveillance) to protect yourself and being attacked in your house in a context where you have the opportunity to reach a gun sounds way less frequent than to get a cancer or a cardiovascular diseases (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_causes_of_death_by_rate)
The corrupt government taking over is a pure fantasy, like you said i don't think the military will go blindly after the civilians.
You said "civils maintain military systems, infrastructure, etc", we are not in 1800 anymore, civilians don't defend themselves with handguns, There are also more subtle ways to oppress a population than by physical violence. Look around you: in Syria, Lybia or in Serbia/Croatia and study how conflicts evolve. I don't see any recent conflicts (even less in developed and sophisticated countries) where democracy has been saved by armed civilians. I see much more problems by having so many guns in circulation. I don't have anything against people having the freedom to own a gun, the same has if they want to own a snake or a bear but it's a huge responsible and they should be overly controlled. We have to stop with the gun fascination, they are dangerous items that rarely do any good and they are as cool as smoking.
In my book owning a gun don't you make you a man, it make you look weak and uneducated or unrealistic about the world around you.
  • 1 1
 @max2max: Thanks for the reasonable debate. I'd wager that if civilians under Mao or Stalin or Hitler were armed, these things wouldn't have happened. WW2 was only 70ish year ago and people have already forgotten that 6M Jewish and 23M Russian civilians were slaughtered. It's not impractical to think these things can happen.

As far as Syria goes, look what happened to the Yazidis, who disagreed with ISIS. Murdered sold into slavery, or both. Evil will always exist in this world, if good people lay down their defenses, evil will triumph. This is the exact reason the US has nearly 500 ICBMs standing ready to be launched. Not to murder, but to deter would-be attackers. There are many ways to fight in modern warfare, but we, in the US would prefer to maintain the right to defend ourselves is need be.

I do agree that weapons are serious, deadly, and need to be controlled properly, but I prefer the liberty to maintain the right to defend myself with deadly force if need be. Alarms don't work, police are slow, I'm not going to run if someone breaks into my place. Also, I'd prefer to not end up in a gas chamber or work camp at some point if at all possible... Why did Germany make it illegal for Jews own guns?? Have you ever read about krystallnacht (the night of broken glass)?
  • 2 0
 are the people getting upset about this unaware that camalback sells more to military and civi shooters than it does bike riders? plenty of brands we buy for bike use also directly sell to the shooting world- so targeting(no pun intended) companies just because they are owned by a company that also owns shooting companies strikes me as silly.
  • 3 1
 People forget how large the US population is. Roughly 327million people... it might as well be ten+ European countries. If there's a shooting in Scotland are the folks in Spain blamed? Likely not. Yet there's a shooting in Florida and people in California, almost 3,000 miles away, get to stamp their opinion on it. NYC alone has more people in it than all of Norway. It's only logical that more bad $hit happens in the "US."

I, for one, support states' rights.
  • 2 0
 I wish the yanks could try our system for a year. We still get to play with guns it's just very tightly controlled which is great because it's not that big of a hassle to get a FAC provided you meet the requirements. Plus it's reassuring to know that the local turd with the all matching tracksuit and fashionable anklet wouldn't have a chance a getting one. Something that annoy's me about the states is that terrorists are seen to be a big threat where you are more likely to be shot by your own child that's picked up your gun. Also along those lines.. from the statistics available online the US doesn't actually have a crime or mental health problem it's just that those things become a lot more lethal when everyone has easy access to guns. Guns usually rule out the option for a second chance.
  • 2 0
 Personally I think this is absolutely ridiculous. There is no way I will stop using products from these companies because these companies make good products that make this sport more enjoyable. They have nothing to do with gun violence. Boycotting these products is not going to do anything to stop the gun violence, because if this company stops selling firearms people are just going to find another way to get a gun or another way to inflict damage to people such as the Boston Marathon and the pressure cookers or how terrorists used trucks in London to murder people. I don't know the answer to stop this violence and frankly no one does but I believe we have to stop jumping to the easy conclusion that violence happens because guns are legal. Nothing is ever going to change if we just point fingers and expect someone to solve the problem like I see many people do. There are those that are legitimately working on finding solutions and that is absolutely great but I'd say the vast majority of people would rather just go on social media and rant about gun violence rather that thinking through it logically and not doing anything about it. But really I don't know anything, I'm just a guy who likes to ride my bike.
  • 2 0
 It's kind of bizarre, but I actually own all 4 of the items shown above. Only the gun is the same color. Savage is getting beat up pretty hard on this forum, but what is funny is that they have only been making ARs for a few years. They are know for precision hunting rifles and quality barrels. My guess is that someone is kicking themselves right around now.
  • 13 7
 Time to buy products from Bell, Giro, Blackburn and CoPilot
  • 8 4
 My thoughts exactly!
  • 6 2
 Damn right you are my dear sir. And don't forget to put some Camelbak stuff in your cart. Those brands always deliver. Unlike the AR-15 platform lmao Big Grin
  • 4 3
 @Euskafreez: that's the truth buddy!!! Kalashnikovs are where it's at! Shot an AK-47(semi-auto with bump-fire stock) and AR in -25F weather in eastern Montana. AK had 0 issues AR was to tight and wouldn't cycle through properly and kept jamming.
  • 4 1
 @scotttherider: hell yes! and gwin just went to bell too.
  • 16 14
 I’ve had my Camelbak M.U.L.E. for 6 years of hard abuse, and it shows no sign of giving up, and I don’t like Giro’s stuff, so I’m good with the boycott. I was gonna buy a Bell Super DH, but now, maybe not.

Savage Arms doesn’t sell to law enforcement, the military, or any other group that legitimately needs assault rifles. So f*ck ‘em.

So the company that owns Savage needs to understand that if they’re gonna put profit before common sense, then let their other brands and bottom line suffer. If some people lose their jobs that would be unfortunate, but they’ll back down before that happens I’m sure.

But even if people do get laid off, you can’t make an omelet without breaking some eggs and if these boycotts actually accomplish some meaningful reforms then so be it.

Oh, and I own a big ‘ol mean ass shotgun so can your B.S. responses about why people need assault rifles and large magazines. This isn’t about guns, it’s about keeping guns out of the wrong hands. If some 18 yr old kid is so hot to get military grade weapons, let him enlist. Otherwise, the less lethal the weapons are the kids (and sick adults) can get their hands on, the better.
  • 7 0
 Savage Arms sells to many law enforcement agencies across the nation. Idk where you got your facts from. I would be interested to hear where you got your info?
  • 1 0
 exactly, it matters who’s hands it’s in, I go hunting, family owns a gun, will keep that gun. idk what other people say
  • 3 4
 @MatthewYoung4: I can’t find any definitive proof that they don’t, but I also can’t find any proof that they do.

I do know they don’t have anywhere near the contracts that Remington, Glock, SIG, etc have...

My point was, as a maker of only long guns, their choice make and sell assault rifles to civilians is the bed they’ve made and now they should have to sleep in it.
  • 1 0
 U da man!!
  • 7 2
 Who cares. If for some reason you do. Don't buy the products. End of debate
  • 5 1
 Oakley supplies sunglasses and eye protection to the military so you think they should be boycotted for supporting the largest single entity that buys and sells firearms?
  • 4 1
 Uhmmm... no. Soldiers don’t get to decide where they go and whether or not they’re fighting for a cause they believe in. And so they deserve to have the best of the best. Which is why THEY should have assault weapons. Not some 19yr old kid.

This is what we’re talking about. Companies that sell military grade weapons to kids.
  • 2 0
 Wasnt aware any companies sold military grade weapons to kids... I had to be 18 when I bought my first AR over 14 years ago....
  • 1 0
 @scotttherider: my first was an AK47, although I really do prefer the AR to the AK.
  • 1 0
 @jason342: I think the AR's sport a much better platform for sport shooting. I'd prefer my AR over an AK any day of the week for a 3-gun comp. but if I was given one platform I might just choose the AK because it's never going to fail to go pew when I pull the trigger.
  • 1 0
 @scotttherider: LOL. Agree. I've seen AKs fire while literally on fire. The laxed tolerances do make them pretty bullet-proof (haha). I do prefer the precision of the AR platform though.
  • 1 0
 @MasterSlater: So you're ok with kids dying for you, but letting them buy a gun or a beer.
  • 2 0
 Related article that has some thoughts on the various ethical implications of these cycling brands being associated with the NRA.

www.outsideonline.com/2282941/should-our-morals-determine-our-gear-purchases

Although if you're going to boycott Giro, Bell, and Camelbak you should probably also boycott all commercial aviation given that Vista Outdoors is itself a recently separated subsidiary of Orbital ATK which is a company that supplies all kinds of parts to both Boeing and Airbus. Good luck flying on a plane built by someone other than them!
  • 3 1
 When do we ban selling weapons and bombs to regimes that then use those armaments to kill innocent civilians or bomb critical infrastructure, resulting in disease and further death.
When do we call a boycott on the companies that supply these items directly or indirectly? Do you stop flying airlines that use Boeing? Are you ditching your Siemens or Samsung communication tech? Still using that Microsoft equipment?
If we boycott every company that has ties to weapons manufacture or the facilitation of death and destruction, the only people your going to trade with will be your local farm produce store. And even they bought their seeds from Monsanto and the fertilizer from Dow.
  • 2 1
 Well that's the question isn't it - what are we willing to do as individuals to make a difference? Bitch about the state of everything & remain indifferent because it doesn't directly impact me or decide to make a difference in any way we can. For someone who has been to the Ho Chi Minh trail and seen UXO teams clearing 'bombies' that are still maiming children who think they are toys to play with - I'll do what I can. No one is saying to withdraw from the 21 Century but at the same time I won't be rolling over and whingeing that it's all too hard.

Maybe if you close your eyes really tight, stay at home everything will be better tomorrow.
  • 11 8
 I thought mountain bikers were smarter than this, but apparently there are still lots of mountain bikers who value their Rambo/Red Dawn fantasies over the right of my kids to survive a day at school.
  • 3 7
flag jason342 (Feb 28, 2018 at 20:22) (Below Threshold)
 I'll forgive you for calling me dumb if you'll acknowledge that school shootings will still happen if guns are banned.

How have people come so far from the values of the founding of this nation???
  • 4 2
 @jason342: yes, they would probably still happen, but likely with less lethal weapons and with better monitoring for red flags the frequency and lethality would be reduced. The bigger problem, though, is the sick gun fetish this country has. I say that having served in the military and shooting competitively. The love affair with guns in this country is pathological, and there are a lot of countries proving us wrong every day because they are just as free and safe as we are and yet don’t kill off 30,000 people a year with guns.
  • 3 4
 @DrPete: It's not a sick gun fetish, it's called liberty. Quit using poorly analyzed statistics to support your claim. A huge percentage of those are suicides, followed by gang violence - neither of which any legislation will address. a truck attack at a school would be WAY deadlier than 17 kids being killed. It was 500+ in Nice France using only a truck. Pressure cookers and nitrate explosives are also a dime a dozen and widely available.
  • 4 2
 @jason342: then why is it that when people want to shoot up a school, they go for an AR-15? Because it’s the most lethal thing you can get your hands on quickly and cheaply with nothing but a quick NICS check, and it’s ready to go.

Yes, people have used trucks and if used improperly can be extremely lethal. That’s why we have education, licensing, registration, insurance, and criminal penalties for dangerous driving, and why you can’t just walk in off the street and buy a semi because there’s a special license for that.

As soon as people start blowing up schools with pressure cookers you’d better believe you’ll need to show an ID to buy one, and that would be smart. Fertilizer bombs? Thanks to Tim McVeigh you can count on being on a watch list if you buy fertilizer in significant quantities.

And yes, 20k are suicides, and if you take it down to 10k we still lead the developed world in all types of gun deaths.

Liberty? Bullshit. There are countries just as free as ours that don’t have more guns than people. Tell the grieving parents of a child who just got ripped in half by a .223 round that they had to die for liberty.
  • 3 1
 @jason342: I also take issue with the claim that you can’t legislate your way out of gun violence. There are specific measures that can be taken to reduce the poverty, lack of education, and hopelessness that make gang membership an attractive option. Oddly enough the same people who don’t want to do anything about guns don’t want to do anythIng about that either. It’s like we have legislators who don’t represent us or something.
  • 2 2
 @DrPete: The truck used in the attack in France was stolen. No law could have prevented that.

Fertilizer - WAY easier to get than you think. All you need is a couple pounds to cause massive damage, not a truckload. You don't need significant quantities. 20 pounds or so can destroy a building depending on the structure.

The AR15 is not the weapon of choice in school shootings. Many (if not most) school shootings shave been done with weapons other than assault-style weapons and have been more deadly than cases with AR15s. Handguns are a better CQB weapon and are more lethal up close as well as easier to conceal. AR15 turns up in a few shootings (because it's likely the most common gun in the US - so YES, it will be used proportionally so), but HANDGUNS are the leading cause of gun deaths in the US by a long shot - NOT AR15/assault style weapons.

Countries just as free as ours? I'd say ask the German Jews how they're doing with their freedom, but you can't, because they're all dead. What about teh Chinese under Mao? Nope - same thing, dead. Name a country that is 1) as ethnically diverse as the US and 2) has cartels on it's borders which are loosely controlled and has a separation between religion and state (there goes the entire middle east and northern Africa, excluding Israel). Not much left out there... ALSO - the fact that we're having this debate SHOWS that we have more liberty that other countries, but YOU want to get rid of our liberty to own an AR15, making us marginal, like others.

You're using emotion & dead children to rationalize your argument. I can guarantee you that ANY law made out of emotion is likely a crap law (the patriot act).
  • 1 0
 @jason342: well wow you won the award of coherence, calling out @DrPete for using poorly analyzed statistics when you're clearly the king of saying bs figures to try to prove your point. 11,208 of the 33,636 (33%) gun related deaths were homicides and in the Nice attack 86 people died, not 500+. Educate yourself before making a fool of yourself and go enjoy your lovely and innocent gun since it's your fetish
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: That was intended to be 500+ killed & injured. Can't correct it Frown

I'm not sure how my other statistics are inaccurate - referencing that suicides by gun are #1, followed by gang violence at #2 is not inaccurate. Looks like you're quoting Wikipedia on the 33k deaths.. which is 2013 data? Why are we looking at 2013 data? Well here's more - as I said, Suicides are #1 (63.0%), followed by gang violence. Funny that Wikipedia says there were 33,636 deaths in both 2013 AND 2015!! Wow, what a dependable source of info!

From another source: gang violence accounts for roughly 8,900 of 11,100 gun murders in both 2010 and 2011 which was my other comment about gangs being #2... Funny thing is that these occur in cities wit the strictest gun laws in the US. Curious! Did the "Gun Free Zone" and laws signs not work??

The figure this entire debate is about is the roughly 2200 gun deaths in the US each year, of which, roughly 15% are from AR15 rifles. I'm not really sure what you're getting at - all guns are bad? AR15s are bad? I don't have a gun fetish, but I certainly do have a fetish with liberty. And FYI - my guns have never killed anyone, but have likely saved a life or 2.
  • 1 0
 @jason342: so what percentage of school children being shot would justify a ban in your eyes?
  • 1 0
 @jason342: I'm pretty sure teenagers have a fetish with breathing.
  • 1 0
 @reverend27: I wouldn't ever put a number on that. I wouldn't ban guns, I'd beef up security. There's more than 1 way to solve a problem. Adversity is part of human life - liberties don't need to be taken away each time a person dies...
  • 4 1
 As an European, I see no reason whatever not to buy a Giro-helmet. If a democratic country has a problem with his own laws it only means that the people there never voted for the right person. Your problem, not mine.
  • 7 2
 Giro must not have paid their Pinkbike bill. Looks like I found some new brands to support.
  • 2 0
 If Vista Sports is smart they should spin off or sell their profitable recreation companies: Giro, Bell, Blackburn and Calmback. No need to tarnish brand when you can sell it and make a hefty profit.

Vista Sports overall only hope to become profitable again is if there is a big gun scare that new regulations will restrict ammunition sales and related items - this could drive a buying freenzy similar to Obama presidency. Trump might of done that tonight in his talk with democrats about gun controls.

Not really sure why I am talking about bikes accessories, guns and politics on Pinkbike. I’d rather just be shredding a sick trail.
  • 2 0
 Where do we draw the line here? In Canada, these brands are distributed by another company. Should we boycott all the brands the company distributes? I personally find the US president repulsive and contrary to much of my moral beliefs. Should I boycott everything from the USA?

I'll be watching to see how this develops. We tend to have a very short memory these days. Anyone care that Russia invaded the Ukraine? I do identify with the idea of not wanting to support or fund the NRA. I just feel like this is a bit of a stretch.
  • 2 0
 I seem to remember a story a short time ago where some guys hijacked a few planes with box cutters. Those guys decided to crash those planes into some buildings resulting in the the deaths of thousands of innocent people. THOUSANDS! Or did we forget. Box cutters people box cutters!
  • 2 0
 we should boycott smug liberals who like to ram there opinions down peoples throats 24/7.

maybe spare a thought for people with mortgages that work for the companies, and there families.

there are other countries with high gun ownership but no mass shooting problem..........
  • 2 0
 Perhaps since Canada is being raised as the standard for "Enlightenment" it needs to be pointed out that you can buy a toy up there in the Great White North called the Norinco M14/M305. And they are cheap. Like, maybe $600CAD.

This little gem would make a great deer rifle, since it uses the 7.62×51mm NATO and it might be able to fire the commercial .308 Winchester. That is a much better round for deer than the 5.56 NATO that the AR-15 fires. And lethal at much greater distances.

And it is on the "non-restricted" list, meaning that if a legal resident of Canada has satisfied the firearms ownership permit requirement, they can go buy one.

So a Canadian bound and determined to create mayhem with a firearm could go buy a dozen magazines for one, load them up, and do a lot of real damage. But it hasn't happened very often.

This is why I say that it is not merely access to a suitable weapon which causes this kind of attack. Making them illegal didn't stop the IRA from having a whole host of firearms in the UK. And using them to cause mayhem.

It hasn't stopped people from using petrol bombs to create mayhem. It didn't stop Aum Shinrikyo. It hasn't stopped "Man with a Van" attacks, or a whole host of other evil acts. It is just a way for a bunch of sanctimonious expletive deleteds> to make themselves feel good.
  • 6 2
 US, Guns, and Violence? Remind me of some Cowboy Films I watched long long time ago.
  • 2 1
 I live is a supposedly violent area yet it seems pretty peaceful.
  • 16 15
 The issue is not gun control. It’s not the guns fault that a psycho had purchased the gun. I fact it is considered the FBI’s fault for this incident since they were tipped off. All we need to do is do a test to see if someone is sain of not, and if not, they don’t get gun rights. Guns are a tool for recreation and self defense. Why should guns be revoked all due to some psycho shooting up a school? If there were security guards at the school, then nothing would have happened in the first place.
  • 4 5
 you just said it isn't an issue of gun control and then we shpuld have background checks. So are you saying it is an issue of gun control thenWink
  • 4 3
 Cool story bro.
  • 5 4
 Do you live somewhere that you need a gun for self defense? Be honest. I have spent a lot of time in your country and have never ever felt that I needed a gun
  • 5 1
 @pwadjo: you've clearly never made a wrong turn in Compton, Stockton, or Chattanooga. I've had a couple reasons to draw my judge do to road rage recently in my travels as well. Also have used my handgun to put wildlife down after being hit as well. I have a concealed carry permit and responsibly carry. For me it's a resreational activity first self defense secondarily.
  • 4 2
 @gnar-shredderz You put truth in comments. Be ready for downvotes!
  • 2 1
 prevention
  • 2 0
 @pwadjo: but you are telling me that you can’t shoot a gun at a target for recreation all due to some psycho who shoots up a school? Yea that makes sense
  • 2 0
 @XCMark: yea right? Lol
  • 2 0
 lol I literally repeated back what @gnar-shredderz said. Aka "the issue is not gun control" . "all we need to do is check to see if someone is a saint or not, and if they are not they don't get gun rights" which is freaken gun control you numpties, aaand I get down voted...
Think about it a bit it lol
  • 1 0
 Maybe if we started calling schools uteruses Republican senators would care about the children dying inside of them.
  • 1 0
 Funny how it all depends on where shootings happen for there to be such uproar. What about all the gun related deaths in Chicago last year?
  • 8 3
 I visit Pinkbike to get away from politics...
  • 2 1
 politics gets everywhere, though we need to be involved with the government, politics is going downhill fast because often when someone diagrees, they call the other one names. I wish we could go back to the type of politics that the founding fathers had
  • 4 1
 Well..air Canada and Westjet use boeing airphanes and boeing builds minuteman icbm and some of the most deadly military aircraft for war
  • 3 1
 Thats a stupid response
  • 2 1
 @abros: No it's not. He's saying that Westjet and AC are pouring literally billions towards Boeing, which makes military equipment that either (wrongly or rightly) kills people. Westjet's money assists in Boeings' economic development. He's drawing a conclusion that it's immature and hypocritical to play the shame game, as it's being done on Giro, Camlebak etc. This shame game can be laid on even the most honorable of companies like, Tesla - saving the world, one e-car at a time. Right. E-cars are brutal environmental nightmares, using 3-6 times as much copper, and cobalt from war torn Africa. What if we eat at Mcdonalds, or Subway or most chain restaurants ...we're bound to be gobbling up some GMO, and there is a HUGE suicide crisis in India right now from farmers killing themselves due to financial debt - the gmo seeds are dying from white flies. So, who we gonna shame today? It's just not worth it, and it's also childish. The media and politicians are going nuts with this (although I am equally horrified and saddened by florida). But, way more died last night alone from hand guns through the east coast of the USA, DC...Detroilt etc. And, as i said in India, thousands have already engaged in suicide and we don't hear one bleep from CNN or Pinkbike, give me abreak. This is mass hysteria, group think...and if we're not careful mob rule. Yes, we need better laws, but we also need the facts, truth...and then mature (non- projectionist) minds - easy to point your finger at your neighbor and accuse them of something. Anyhow, back to biking....or at least Pinkbiking.
  • 1 0
 @ryanm189: good luck flying on commercial airliner made by a company that doesn't make military hardware.
  • 7 3
 Makes me want to go out and buy a new giro helmet. Had no idea the support NRA.
  • 3 1
 sorta was my thought too.
  • 4 4
 I might just have to purchase a new Giro lid after this. Black Rifles Matter.
  • 5 4
 Thank you so much for sharing this Pinkbike!!!!! The the lack of rational thinking on the gun issue has been making me quite sad lately and I've felt pretty useless, as a Canadian, not being able to offer much help to our friends to the south with policy change. What better way to hit these greedy-ass corporations where it hurts than in their pocket-book!!! I for one am never buying products any more from the companies cited here Smile

And to anyone who doesn't think that the ridiculous ease of access that one has to guns in the States is not at the heart of the bloodshed, please do some research: there is no other country that fetishizes guns the way that America does and there is no other country with such an astronomical number of innocents slaughtered yearly by guns. Supporters of gun culture (albeit sometimes unintentionally, because they are ill-informed or brainwashed), republican politicians, NRA and associated companies--all of these people are as responsible for the deaths of innocent children as the person who pulls the trigger (perhaps even more responsible).
  • 3 2
 "Many of the employees of the cycling-related companies worked for the brands before they were owned by a parent company with ties to the NRA."

I'm all for the boycott of NRA-related products and services, but this one gets tricky because of the above quote. I think the best way to proceed (if you are from the boycotting side that is), is to boycott the products and services at the heart of the issue (i.e. the guns, not the helmets). I don't know if this will matter in the bigger picture, but we can at least be more precise in the message we are trying to send.

Btw, no one's taking ALL the guns Just SOME. Some does not equal all. Stop crying. Jesus F. Christ.
  • 1 0
 Your comment was awesome up until the btw
  • 1 0
 @mtbikeaddict: Then you will absolutely hate me if you ever see my other posts on FB
  • 2 1
 Thanks for the heads up Pink Bike. With so many choices for products, its nice to be able to support a company that supports my political stance. I have always supported Bell because of the Trail Grants. I sent them an email about gun control concerns.
  • 1 0
 The irony is that there's no "transparency" in objects like bicycle helmets, water hydration packs and tire pumps!
You can't simply buy a helmet to protect your head or hydration pack to not get thirsty or a pump to fix a flat to get back home safely. Now these things carry bad joojoo. The evil lies in the corporatio
  • 8 2
 AR-15 > EBIKES
  • 3 1
 Good info. I will now put Vista products at the top of my to buy list and those shops refusing to sell their products I will be sure not to spend money with. Boycotts work both ways!!
  • 4 3
 Change.com can go f*ck themselves. Gun control work when the united states has 50% of the worlds guns. Many states have banned drugs across america, and tell me how that is working. These criminals that shoot up schools got these guns illegally and would still get them illegally if guns weren’t allowed. By the way, handguns kill more people per year in the US. than rifles.

Guess what else. Assault rifles have been illegal in America since the 1900s. The AR15 is just a hunting rifle that just so happens to be used in many shootings. There are a ton of different guns that can do the same damage as an Ar15, but since they don’t look “scary” to liberals, they don’t give one shit.
#protectthatsecondamendment
  • 4 3
 The latest mob mentality towards guns and companies directly and indirectly associated with guns makes me want to buy more guns and products from companies that have some association with them. Guns aren't the problem, society is. If you go to bed at night feeling better now that you're not buying Camelbak products anymore because they are owned by an investment group that also owns a gun company then so be it, but just remember you did nothing to fix the actual problem lol.
  • 1 0
 You are absolutely true. This whole reaction to Florida is nothing more than group think, mob rule and "consensus = correct." Florida was bad, absolutely, and we need better laws. But all the scapegoating is for lazy, or shall I say people of low consciousness. Shame, group think...are only steps away from mob rule, and then totalitarianism. All the chimpanzees are yelling, dancing around and throwing rocks at the nearest 'bad guy.' Once they've completed all their own shadow projection, and scapegoating, they'll feel better about themselves and go back to sleep. Their hearts and intent might be in the right place, but their actions are that of complete hypocrites!
  • 1 0
 heh I love a good arguement as much as the next guy but like foxxyman I like it cool, shouting and screaming, not listening to the other side then claiming your view is the only view is totally uncool. Sit down, have a beer and a good discussion or well thought out arguement is so much more fun. 99 percent of the mentioned brands staff probably had no say in the sale of the company to Vista, probably the board and maybe stock holders at a AGM would have made that choice. The rest are like you and me. People try to work to earn a living designing, testing and trying to sell their products to us the end user, I would hazard that a few of them aren't happy about being linked like this but that is the moral question, do you support the people and the brand, or boycott them to protest against vista and the NRA. luckily for us we are in a situation where we as individuals can make that choice. I would support Camelback as they make kick ass backpacks, but I can also decry Vista for supporting the NRA a group that comes across as rabidily pro weapon and won't listen to anyone and have way to much political pull. At the end of the day and arguements of pro's and cons, that what it really boils down to. What do you as an individual chose to do. PB brough this up to push this exact arguement. Making us aware that some companies are linked to the NRA through seperation and that we as consumers have the choice to decide what we do with that information.
  • 1 0
 there is no rationale with nra supporters, i bet none of them will ever fire a shot in self defense either, and willl never have to because nobody gives a crap about them or their inbred kids! take the nra supporters to antarctica and drop them off with all the guns and ammo so they feel "safe". seriously, you need a gun to feel secure? grow a pair sissies.
  • 4 3
 If you want to see gun control results, see the security of Brazil, is under gun control since year 2004 ... Now Brazil Has more 60,000 Murders, Brazil is the deadliest place in the world outside Syria. in Brazil our bikes have insurance and things got bad after gun control. You need boycott those who support gun control!
  • 2 3
 Why didn’t you use Australia in your examples?
  • 4 3
 98.4% of all mass shootings happen on gun free zones that the left has said will protect people (according to the FBI AND Crime Prevention Research). So while all you guys are boycotting Bell, Camelback, etc. I’ll boyott the left. They are the ones that haven’t done anything usefull about the problem. We gaurd banks with security gaurds. Why shouldn’t we gaurd children the same way? Does the left not care about kids. An armed teacher could have put a stop to this.

And by the way I am a proud owner of a Bell Super 2, a Camelbak, and a Savage Arms .22. (Though I prefer other gun company’s over Savage Arms.) And I will not stop buying high quality products from them.
  • 1 0
 right
  • 3 2
 Oh my god. This has gone too far. I can't even.. This is such a joke. I hope this makes you weaklings feel powerful. It wont though, and you piss ants will just be on to the next big movement hoping to convince yourself you had a hand in something big. And why is Canada so concerned?
  • 4 0
 Thanks Pink Bike. The one place I could find solitude from the great debate is now infected by the rhetoric.
  • 4 1
 Guns ? Politics ? Bullshit ? I thought this website is about bikes by bikers for bikers...PB we saw what you did there, and its wrong.
  • 2 1
 Honestly not really sure what the point is of this article. A company that manufactures weapons also sells biking equipment. Some people will not buy from them now due to their political beliefs, others will based on their beliefs and others don't care. Article seems like a waste of space and to fuel fire. Pinkbike, please stick to your core - we don't come here for politics.
  • 1 0
 I’m not opposed to tougher gun laws and I don’t mean to detract from the current debate, but it raises another question in my mind. I recall a CDC or NIH statistic that nearly 10,000 people (including many innocent victims and children) die each year in alcohol related traffic accidents. I desperately want to see gun violence decline, but would it be fair to consider additional and concurrent emphasis placed on alcohol abuse which seems to take far more innocent lives each year?
  • 1 0
 There’s a long way to go, but there is actually a lot of work being done with laws/education/medical professionals to reduce alcohol-related traffic fatalities. The difference is that the CDC is actually allowed to research that, whereas the NRA has lobbied hard to keep gun safety research from being funded. You don’t work to defund public health research if you think your side is going to be proven to make people safer.
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: the gun safety research they're referring to is BIO safety, which gun owners DO NOT WANT. The NRA is representing Americans. You may as well use the NRA and AMERICANS synonymously.
  • 1 0
 @jason342: not true. They oppose all of it thanks to the Dickey Amendement and other efforts. www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-is-there-so-little-research-on-guns-in-the-us-5-questions-answered
  • 1 0
 @jason342: I will not use an organization that even with its inflated rolls represents less than 1/60th of the country interchangeably with “Americans.”
  • 3 2
 This is great, I've had great luck shooting savage rifles! looking forward to supporting vista in the future.

The sad thing about all of this is that the liberal/ gun control advocates show their true colors when they immediately skip over mourning for the victims and the horror their families are faced with and go straight for the advancement of their agenda. its sickening.

Also i've heard Dicks sporting goods is no longer selling "assault style rifles" they are so blind to the reality of the issue. I've never been impressed with that store anyway so it doesn't hurt my feelings to stop supporting them in any way.
  • 2 1
 Let's add a little perspective to this debate. In 2013, there were over 33,000 intentional and accidental gun deaths in the US. That same year, 2 people died from extremist Islamist terrorism (Boston Marathon). If we take an objective approach and consider that a human life is valued the same regardless of the cause of death, are we really spending our money and resources wisely?
  • 1 1
 We are if we can keep ISIS, Hamas, Hezbolah, etc. from obtaining a nuclear weapon. That would change statistics real quick. You're kinda comparing external threats to internal threats.
  • 6 3
 This comment section is like the olympics of flawed logic, bad reasoning, and mental gymnastics. Looks like Team America is sweeping the podium!
  • 1 0
 Trinidad Colorado is the where all the gun toting PB'ers need to hold a convention and get their macho swerve on - scores of places to shoot your cache of assault rifles and the very best secret MTB trails........

For the record, I'm not giving up my new Bell 3r - that lid is the shit. Now get the f#*@ off my lawn !
  • 4 2
 Noticing a huge bias from the people with U.S. flags against their names and the rest of the world... Still amazes me that Americans believe more guns will solve the problems of more guns.
  • 4 3
 @clarky78 More guns can solve the problem. Arm the teachers, shooting is stopped sooner. Look at the attack in Norway at that camp. If anyone else had been armed, maybe some of the 70ish people who were murdered would be alive. Mentally ill people don't want adversity. They shy away form it. Like sharks, they want an easy kill and typically kill themselves when someone shoots back and they lose hope.

Problem is vetting people, securing ones own guns, and removing guns from people who are unstable.
  • 2 0
 +++ 1st problem is a "guns free zone" it's looney park for phsyclo with a gun
  • 2 1
 @neeed: EXACTLY agree. If I'm mentally unstable and want to hurt a lot of people - that's where I'd go!! A place where I can cause the most damage.
  • 2 0
 @jason342: attack in Norway, hahaha. These were leftist snowflakes, even if they were allowed to, they wouldn’t carry any. Can I please get banned now?
  • 4 2
 @jason342: Your response sums up my point exactly. American stupidity. Get more of the thing that causes the problem.. think about it. In what situation does more of something that is causing the problem ever solve a problem??? Hmmmmm?

Let's assume schools had guns. You gonna give them assault rifles?? Maybe just plain old handguns.. then either way, some nutter want to shoot the place up, but can't get a gun, then all he has to do is go into the school and take one. Stupid idea. What about teachers, you assume they are going to be trained to shoot and risk their lives? I assume all teachers in USA will get a huge payrise then for that and that will really sort your economy problems...

Kinda funny you refer to something that happened in Norway years ago to compare with the recent US shooting. That's because it's been years since something like that happened elsewhere and it happens every month is USa. I recently read that this is the 20 something school shooting this year! Need I remind you it is March, barely! This epedemic is almost entirely restricted to America with the ridiculous gun laws. Take a country that doesn't allow every maniac who wants to to buy a gun and these situations barely ever occur. So yeah, more guns will really solve this.. Fool.
  • 1 0
 @clarky78: Switerland requires citizens to own a gun, and have the lowest homicide rate in the entire world.
  • 2 2
 @FlysDown: Yeah but the Swiss aren't homicidal maniacs, invading everywhere and killing everything like the US. Also not sure this I true as I have known people live there and never heard anything about this. Link to proof?
  • 2 2
 @clarky78: Yeah... I don't think you understand the US. I don't claim to know about your country, but I'd assume it's nothing like the US in terms of ethnic diversity, culture, wealth, or with border issues. Ever been to Israel? They live with people who regularly going on knifing attacks and manage it very well by having armed citizens, soldiers at the ready. I'm not sure why you consider this stupidity - I'd consider not having any option to defend yourself stupidity, like sticking your head in the ground and pretending there's no evil in this world.

Have you looked up statistics on mass shootings when stopped by a civilian vs the police? there are way more deaths while waiting for police. If teachers want to take responsibility for being the first line of defense and protecting their student, why would you stop them? I'd do it if I were a teacher. In fact, a couple teachers died protecting student in this past shooting. What if they were armed? are you saying the outcome would not have changed??

I brought up the Norway shooting as en example to show hat i's not just the US where these things occur. 17 kids are NOT killed in schools by mass shootings each month in the US. This is NOT the 20th school shooting. Look at the data. It's people accidentally discharging, committing suicide, etc. stop using that fake metric. Your model only works is you take 100% of the guns away, which will NEVER happen in the US so your model for gun control is impractical and irrelevant. Disarm law abiding citizens and leave criminals with guns. That sounds foolish to me. I don't think you have a realistic view on the world Americans live in or why we choose to do so...
  • 1 0
 @clarky78: www.snopes.com/politics/guns/hondswitz.asp
Wish someone from Switzerland can prove if true. Internet/Mainstream media can be bias, hard to find the facts without opinions.
  • 1 2
 Person who wants to use an example of Switzerland when discussing gun ownership in US, should seriously consider sterilization or euthanasia for the sake of the human race
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: "You're banned".
  • 1 0
 @clarky78: The Swiss are ethnically homogeneous. You can't compare the Swiss populous to the US because the US has a lot higher number of people from 3rd world countries and gangs who don't respect life. The Swiss are not a diverse people like the US.

And yes, the Swiss are armed, although I don't believe they're required.
www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/switzerland-high-rates-gun-ownership-why-doesnt-no-mass-shootings-a8230606.html
  • 1 0
 @clarky78: thanks for categorizing our entire country as homicidal maniacs.... I appreciate when idiots who claim to know so much about a country other than their own make themselves known. Good job identifying yourself.
  • 1 1
 @Timroo1: technically didn't categorize everyone as such. But let's face it, this post has garnered more response than any other post ever on pinkbike I believe, more so than Sam Pilgrim on an Ebike and Steve Smith's death, which is sad and also kinda implies a high percentage of people are pro-gun therefore pro-death. It's simple statistics that more people in the US believe in the right to bare arms than don't. Therefore I generalise that the US are homicidal maniacs. Sorry for the offence. By the way, I'm English not Finnish!
  • 1 0
 @clarky78: Most people in our country who are pro-gun, respect life and are pro-life not pro-death. They believe in God which gives them a high morals and wisdom.
  • 2 1
 @FlysDown: I find great wisdom in your first sentence. Just because you own a gun doesn’t mean you are itching to use it to kill someone. The second one, not so much... without God, there would be no ISIS. It is extremely hard to make people conduct torture or various forms of atrocities. If you want to compell someone to cut someone’s head off with a blunt knife you need to drug him, or you need to convince him that he is doing a great thing. You need a higher idea for that. You need a poet. What he writes about is irrelevant, but stories of God’s will are just working best. Here again, religion is like a gun, it is a tool. You can use it to enrich your life but the other end is, you can use it to motivate violence and deeper your religion the more terrible violence it is capable of causing. Christianity is a rather loose religion with what can be considered as low morals (especially true for Protestants) as opposed to Wahhabism where morality is rather black and white. But well, if you truly believe religion is the source of morals and wisdom then I guess I wrote it as if I spilled water into the sand. Morality like religion is to a great degree an evolutionally driven social construct. Certain actions simply pay off more than other, at a particular time/ with a particular set of circumstances. You’d be terrified to find what Christians in 1000AD considered as highly moral and in tune with Gods will. I bet 1800 would be scary enough. Carpet bombings in 1940s or Obamas speech after killing Bin Laden where he ended rather distinctively One Nation under God. God is on lips of all leaders regardless of the side of the conflict like innovation is on lips of those making new standards. God can easily exist without religion. That’s the God to find in yourself and in all other people as well as all the things around. Communion with the universe is achievable but it is not a permanent state. It is those who seek the promised land, transcendence to higher state of peace and order, who are the worst of monsters. As such state cannot be achieved without tremendous violence
  • 1 0
 @FlysDown: isn't that the irony, the pro gun control are usually pro abortion.
  • 1 1
 @FlysDown: sorry but you just f*cked it all up in your last sentence. They believe in God which makes them idiots
  • 1 0
 @TheOriginalTwoTone: Haha so true!
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: You lost credibility on violence with your comment above about of how I should be killed.
  • 2 1
 @clarky78: easy there bigot. You're an a*shole, we understand.
  • 1 1
 absolutely true haha

comment by @Timroo1 saying I'm a hateful ignorant little POS in 3..2..1..
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: You only get those after you make a comment laughing at Americans being shot or categorizing my country as a shithole... cause and effect.
  • 1 0
 @FlysDown: well if you don’t understand how hugely different these both countries are, what sort of preconditions are at play then well, you have some work to do if you want to participate in making world a better place. The pattern recognition system in your brain is malfunctioning big time. Makes me think what else is wrong with you. I’m not condemning you, you may improve it. In fact please do.
  • 1 1
 @Timroo1: 1) I didn't post any comment where I'm laughing at Americans getting shot, I also said I am actually sorry when it happens (but you assumed I was being sarcastic)

2) the shithole comment; I was just bullshitting in response to the comment before (also in reference to Trump) sorry for any offence. I don't believe there are any shithole countries, each country has positives and negatives
  • 4 0
 Pinkbike you just made it a debate.... political statement aye. Anti 2nd amendment pinkbike?
  • 3 1
 That's kind of what I got from this article.
  • 1 2
 not really, it's only exposing that some of the biggest brands in our sport are owned by a company that supports the NRA in light of the recent (and unluckily frequent) events. It's informing us readers, then it's up to us to decide what to do with this information, just like with the Alu vs Carbon debate
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: Why not expose brands that support abortion, homosexuality, do business in sweatshops, etc. It seems to be intentional targeting of these companies if you ask me.
  • 1 0
 @jason342: they chose to expose this information in the light of the recent mass shooting, and since it's not the first and won't be the last, they felt it was correct to inform the customers about this link. Whether or not they're anti 2nd amendment we can't know, it's not like they said "don't buy these products because we're anti 2nd amendment"
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: -_- really?? Someone chose to publish this information. It was a political move. There are plenty of political publications PB could be making, but they choose not to, only the ones they want to expose...
  • 1 0
 @jason342: I think they chose to expose this argument to increase traffic on the website. They knew it would dramatically increase the response since it's a highly controversial topic. Not for the political side of the story

However, I agree with you on the fact that also other similar information should be published, so that we as customers can then try to make the most ethical (following our own morals) purchases
  • 1 0
 So if the government is corrupt who is corrupting them? The money is coming from somewhere, and it seems very likely that professional lobbyists working for big corporations and where the big bucks are coming from. Average folks are going to be f*cked by corporate greed, government acts like a condom. It may still be uncomfortable, but at least you have some form of protection. Vote at the poles, vote with your wallets, educate yourselves, and make decisions that make your world the kind of place where you don't have to ride your bike or sit in your home with a handgun to feel safe. Maybe most importantly, Charleton Heston is amongst the worst actors in American movie history, so stop quoting him!
  • 1 0
 @uberlounge not necessarily money, could be an ideology ie - Nazism, Islam, etc. any other ideology that doesn't value life.
  • 1 0
 @jason342: I commented in error. I have to remove myself from the conversation, this is not the correct venue for this topic.
  • 1 0
 this is one of the better insights and arguments I've seen. Highly recommend folks take a read. Helps you see the impact of firepower form the person who is trying to save your life.

www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/what-i-saw-treating-the-victims-from-parkland-should-change-the-debate-on-guns/553937
  • 1 0
 Has anybody mooted the concept of an e-gun yet? It would have the core gun enthusiasts 'up in arms', debating that they are not really guns, and should be called motor guns. Each e-gun review on gun enthusiast websites would have a sh1t storm in the comments.

Also, another 'sure fire' winner in gun development, and the solution to all these problems, is the mandatory introduction of backwards firing guns. The gunthusiasts would love them, as they are just as lethal, and gunthusiasts generally accept that self inflicted gun deaths are not the fault of the gun, but the user. And school shootings would be over pretty quickly, with not loss of innocent lives.
  • 3 1
 No firearm in the history of the world ever killed someone by its self, much like no automobile in the history of the world ever got drunk and killed someone. It's the operator plain and simple.
  • 2 1
 How about addressing the facts? Gun control will effectively ban guns from the people the LEGALLY OWN THEM. The thugs and criminals will not comply and most likely are not complying at this very moment. When government does not know how to handle a situation they just try to make it illegal. Never taking into account who will be affected the most. Short sighted.
  • 1 0
 I am only going to say, licencing restrictions, ownership processes and education. I am pro ownership (hell, I have been a registered shooter here in Oz for nearly 3 decades being granted my target licence at the age of 10, and grew up around them and received proper education about firearms from a young age that I have since parted onto my own kids. I have built rifles, competed at a national level and have since turned my love of firearms into a profession, but the amount of red tape to acquire a firearm here is a necessary evil. Here in Oz it is like "oh, you want to acquire a firearms licence, here is a list of paperwork you need to compile, then we will place it in a pile and go over it with a fine tooth comb, then we will make an assessment if you are permitted to have a licence to own a firearm. After that, when you want to purchase one, here is another pile of paper work to sign and hand in for approval. Thank you"

I agree that the US should look outside its borders for a solution. disarming is NOT the answer (hell, I have seen the amount of animals in the US that will eat you, and while yes, we have lots of deadlies in Oz, especially those bastard drop bears, not everything will EAT you) but looking to countries that have a high gun ownership population and look at amending the second amendment to restrict who can own a firearm.
  • 1 0
 Good to know who supports the freedom to protect you're self. Unfortunately I'm german but as an american I would do everything I could to protect my rights. I'm praying for the people but I'm not blaming the gun for shootigs like this. I blame evil people for that. With more gun control you'll only punish all the law abiding people. I would feel safer if I would know that the people around me are perhabs armed and abel to protect them selfes and the people around them. For example here in germany I didn't hear a singel word about the evil shooter but only how bad all these guns are. I would be more interested about the people and a task for everyone could be to be nice and friendly to the people around you so that every one tries to creat a positiv environment around them selfes. The goal should be to create love and not to create a bunch of softtargets for some evil people.
  • 1 0
 I don't care what side you fall on but its laughable that a bike shop it taking a stand. They have no power in the current online world. Good luck to them just trying to keep their doors open. Now to order a new Giro helmet off Amazon...
  • 1 0
 @FRguild College has become a waste. I didn't used to be. And because of the path that colleges are heading in we are creeping towards a society in which we are no longer truly free.

This world will never be perfect. There will be hate and tragedy no matter what utopia people think we are capable of. And to think that by solving "Assault Rifle" gun deaths will put us on a path to a safer world in nonsense. Where is the uproar about the gun related deaths/murders in Chicago? The only reason people get fired up about school shootings is because it is closer to the reality they live in. The rest of gun violence is in inner city shootings so who cares right? The AR-15 which only accounts for around 300 murders a year is the most evil weapon of them all, inst it?... There are about a million other reasons people die on this planet and the reason the news hangs onto these stories is because it scares us the most.

www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used
  • 1 0
 How about a challenge to PinkBike since they decided to post this article. Go do the research and find the parent companies and all their subsidiary and post it up. I bet most would be amazed that more than just the mentioned above are owned by a parent company that supports something the reader does not agree with.

Does that mean we all go out and boycott every company simply for that fact? How many companies do we have that source their materials via Fair-Trade? How many companies do we support that source their products in environmentally friendly ways? This is really no different, so in my mind (and this is my opinion and much like the adage says "Opinions are like a$$hole$. Everyone has one, but that doesn't makes yours more right or prettier than the others.") we might as well go about our normal business day.

Ride your bikes because you love the bike and to ride, because if you truly believe and follow this inane political and bureaucratic BS then you might as well sell your car, house, close your bank accounts, and truly go native where you only eat what you kill, gather your own food and materials, and make your own living and livelihood.
  • 3 0
 This is honestly the most pointless article I have ever read on this website. It even beats that article comparing skiing and biking.
  • 2 0
 Americans just straight up hate each other. If we didn't have guns, we would use knives, if they outlawed those, we would use rocks or something. Guns aren't the cause, but they do make all this killing a lot easier.
  • 1 0
 While something needs to be done. And i think that even the most staunch gun enthusiast would support this. This action is throwing the baby out with the bath water. This is not going to affect the gun company in any way in comparison the the cycling employees, users, athletes, and media employees down the line at Vista. At a time while the cycling industry is at a record low with layoffs and low shipments and exports. This is going to be akin to shooting ourselves in the foot while trying to hike our way to better market health.
  • 1 0
 I guess I must be old as I just miss the days when I could come and read about bikes, people that bike and places to bike instead of what marketing crap, political crap and just shitty comment crap. Biking is my oasis so is it too much to ask that we just put this stuff where it belongs as we can read or see this everywhere else. The world used to be a playground but now it is just a bunch of angry people trying to angrily get you to take their side from which smarties do you eat last to whether or not having a penis makes you a boy. Im sure I will get some hate for this comment.
  • 2 1
 I am an avid Canadian hunter and I shoot a Savage arms rifle and at times use Federal ammo. The nonsense of punishing a company because they lawfully sell rifles in the US is ludicrous. They also sell their rifles and ammo in Canada and adhere to all Canadian laws and regulations. They also own multiple companies with vastly different product lines and aside from ownership have no vested interest in the products. The issue is with American gun laws and not Vista Outdoors, If the US was to finally come to their senses and introduce gun laws similar to the ones in Canada and most common wealth countries, Vista Outdoors would adjust their product line accordingly. To be clear I do not support assault rifles or hand guns and the BS about the US constitution blah blah blah, I am openly supportive of US gun control measures and the statistics about the gun problem in the states is overwhelming. I do support Savage arms as their hunting rifles are top notch and I am not against gun ownership when properly licensed and controlled. That all being said this is a issue with US gun laws and not the NRA or Vista outdoors and MEC's decision is led by an army of social media minions and a blatant disgrace IMHO.
  • 1 0
 Its a shame to see so many individuals in favor of infringing on our constitutional rights. Continue your boycotts while gun sales, and NRA memberships soar to astronomical levels. You all can defend your family how you see fit. But you have no right to tell me how I can protect me, or mine. I for one choose to boycott the companies that wish to infringe on our constitutional rights, and disarm the population... I'm no historian, but I'm sure the majority of us attended primary school, therefore we should all realize the consequences of such actions.
  • 1 0
 well, I don't know what primary school you went to but it sure didn't teach you the consequences of arming the population, you know those random 30,000+ gun related deaths in your wonderful country
  • 2 1
 Being italian I love to live in a country where there's no free gun market and we literally think that the situation in North America is closer to medieval age than XXI century, but It's not just a matter of values and lifestyle, just look at the statistics: everywhere in the world the countries where there's the lowest amount of gun shootings are the ones where the guns are not legal except for soldiers, police men and hunting. It's really that simple. Do you want to put an end to mass shooting? Remove free gun market. Austrialia already did it in 1997, so please don't talk me that it's in your veins to be "protected" because the first thing that will protect you is the welfare state. Give jobs and security to the majority of the population and you'll see a drop in the crimes' numbers. It's not a "left wing/right wing" issue, it's common sense and we are afraid that your common sense is to let people buy guns, there are better hobbies like... mountain biking.
  • 6 1
 I wish the bike industry was this concerned about car violence.
  • 1 0
 @CustardCountry:
UK and AUS have not banned all types of guns only fully auto and hand guns.
AUS banned semi auto too i think
hand guns are allowed in the uk provided they are fitted with an extension that makes them non concealable
I have had a shotgun license from a young age and also now have a firearms license I can own a 50.cal rifle if i so choose but I have to give a good reason to the police for such an item. as it is I have a much lower calibre rifle which is for vermin control on the farm. the only other way to get a rifle is for hunting stalking purposes and you have to prove that you go on such trips. shot guns are easier to get but only for sporting use and you certainly cant just walk in to a shop and buy one.
medical history is considered and 2 independent references must be given as to your character. and this needs renewing every 5 years.
regular inspections to the guns storage are undertaken by the police.
ammunition storage limits are in place.

so no MURICA people are not trying to take away your guns, just change the way you use them and the type that can be reasonably considered necessary.

slavery was also a part of the bill of rights but that go "AMENDED"

I have met plenty of townies who are unaware that people in the uk is allowed to own guns, but to quote the film hot fuzz in regards to country folk "every one and their mum's is packin' round 'ere"

peace
  • 1 0
 With how ridiculous these protests are, I will go out of my way to purchase from companies that did not back down and kept their business models the same and did not make a knee-jerk reaction to change their business model based on an emotional response from a deluded portion of the public. There are exponentially more incidents where violent crime has been thwarted with the use of a fire arm than committed with a firearm.
  • 1 0
 I will gladly keep using and purchasing Bell and Camelbak, I like the products I own. I do not particularly like Savage firearms but my brain box has been saved by the Bell at least twice and my Camelbak's keep me hydrated while carrying samiches and in many cases a firearm or two...

Not sure why people are loosing their mind over NRA and politicizing this horrible event. A company who manufactures firearms will obviously support the NRA and for good cause. A mad man with the desire to create his own version of homegrown terrorism and be remembered for it goes for the easy target. Our media in the US feeds these psychopaths and encourages these crazys to do it and go out with a literal bang. This moron skated past local and federal law enforcement despite many tips, here lies our biggest problem.

CAN WE GET BACK TO BANNING EBIKES? Leave us yanks alone with our love for bikes, guns, god and country.
  • 2 0
 Sounds like an order to damage competition, plain and simple. Small brain reaction: " I will not buy these brands anymore". Big brain reaction: "who will benefit from the smear campaign"?
  • 1 0
 Banning guns will guaranty to the bad guys that their victims will be unarmed. If somehow we could get all guns, the mentally challenged will take an even more deadly weapon, a car or truck and drive it into a crowd. You can not legislate against mental instability. But we should look after these folks and let them keep some respect. For them selves and others. In reality the cat is out of the bag. We will never get all the guns.
  • 1 0
 As a second amendment support and gun owner, I agree there needs to be honest and thoughtful dialogue minus the political rhetoric. I am curious to know which of our political leaders coming up for midterm re-election are banging their drums about this debat for political gain? And those are the same individuals who have armed security agents assigned to them-interesting. I also find it interesting that Sellwood Cycle Repair- who I’ve never heard of- garnered internet fame by coming out and boycotting a company due to their ownership of certain companies. f*cking hipicritical if you ask me while they use the image of a bike helmet akin to a military style helmet similar to the movie full metal jacket- well played dip shits. #bansellwoodcyclerepair
  • 1 0
 gun control is freedom control. In the U.S. Constitution #1, freedom of speech, freedom of religion. #2 guns. the right to keep them and bear them. one two and three. the three most important things that protect your freedom. The events we see in todays media in which a armed person has taken lives with or without cause or reason or at random is a tragic event in which no good comes of it. It is even more tragic that the media never does report on how many times a gun has saved somebodys life or haulted a harmful situtation. the guy who makes Klein bikes, he packs a gun while riding, or so im told.
  • 1 0
 none of these company's had anything to do with the shooting in Florida, so why should they be punished? if you want to vote with your money don't fly on airlines that use Boeing aircraft. Boeing made 29 billion dollars on military contracts in one year. oh and don't drive GM vehicals... again lots of money made from the military.
  • 1 0
 Japan and Australia seemed to have figured it out. Japan has gun laws that protect it's society. guns won't protect you, laws do. if you are lawless, you don't need laws, hence why the japanese mafia and yakusa clans ran the country rampant prior to the japanese government imposing extremely strict gun policies [including swords for that matter]. this was critical to their country's major lessening of gun related deaths since. it's a fact.

www.businessinsider.com/gun-control-how-japan-has-almost-completely-eliminated-gun-deaths-2017-10

if you believe that it's all about the right to hunt for sport, try bowhunting as i grew up doing, where one must be close enough to make a killing shot. look directly in their eye, be in their direct environment, hear them, even smell them. this is how to experience a hunt from an entirely different perspective at 30 yards with one arrow's chance [maybe two if you're lucky enough to have a less entitled prey's desire for life on a first errant shot], versus that through a scope at 300 yards with a clip full of ammunition. anyways, i realize this premise has a snowflake's chance in hell with any gun owner's position, but give it a shot, no pun intended as change is invariably always for the good.

firing off bullets from an assault rifle are like firing off tweets. no one really knows where they are going or whom they are going to affect. does anyone truly think that america's president would state most any of his tweets directly to the receivers face, looking that person in the eye, in person? i think not. cowardice.
  • 1 0
 if youve never witnessed the damage a gun can do, SHUT UP. THESE ARE NOT TOYS AMERICA, AND YOU'VE TREATED THEM THAT WAY FOR FAR TOO LONG. WHEN A CHILD IS BAD YOU TAKE AWAY THEIR TOYS , AND THIS POPULATION IS A BAD CHILD. TIME FOR TOUGH PARENTING AMERICA, WAKE THE HELL UP.
  • 1 0
 Bell helmets have been fantastic since they got picked up by Giro. I use one for MX and my streetbike, looks like I might need one for the pedal bike now. Savage arms makes some of the best out of the box long range rifles you can buy. Camelbak is a well known industry leader. I haven't heard of Blackburn but thanks for the tip. Ill gladly support Vista Outdoors!
  • 1 0
 I'd be stoked if my over-priced, non-gun company owned Sram Rockshok Reverb were a tenth as reliable as my Savage bolt action 308 tossing Federal Gold Metal Match down the it's 24" bull barrel...And for people mentioning mental illness and guns...that basically new, crappy-ass, need a bleed before every ride p.o.s. seat post makes me crazay......also, if anyone's paying attention, Black Diamond also owns Sierra Bullets (which kick ass, by the way, and are the bullet used in Federal's Gold Metal Match rounds). If you have no idea what you just read, you might want to rethink whether or not your opinion is even valid or not...not saying it's not...you just may want to think about it. Apologies, but further, Federal is the leading supplier of ammunition to the US military..I'm not a military guy by any stretch, actually pretty liberal, but these guys aren't exactly the ones supporting criminals...they're just companies, with hard-working people with families employed by them.
  • 6 1
 What are the current UCI firearm regulations for mountain bike racing?
  • 3 0
 people can only shoot on 29ers
  • 5 1
 We should just give the gov all of our guns. Problem solved, no more crime... :Lol:
  • 10 9
 You idiots do realise if a criminal wants a gun it doesn't matter how many laws there are they will still get one lmao so lets just unarm all the people who could save us from a crazed gunman so its that much easier to slaughter us lol you people are fucken retarded!!!!
  • 6 1
 Congrats! You obviously missed the part about name calling. Hush now, the grown ups are talking!
  • 1 1
 exactly if they want to murder, they will do it
  • 3 0
 @foxxyman:
agree with this, even though aus has tight gun laws we still have gun related crime. Just not with military grade weaponry.
  • 8 3
 A year from now no one will remember anything about any boycotts.
  • 7 2
 Or at least til your next shooting
  • 9 0
 @onemind123: Which history states should be just around the corner in 3.... 2.... 1....
  • 4 0
 @handynzl: actually, sorta has happened again

www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43217142

Nope, no issues there at all.
  • 1 0
 If you really want to make an impact on the gun control debate be it for or against stricter gun laws, contact your local congress representative or organize a group of fellow constituents to make a louder noise to your congressman. Maybe just maybe you can outweigh the power of the corporate lobby. I think that’s more productive than boycotting Giro and Camelbak who has hardworking employees ehonare most likely bikers as well. It’s not their failt their company was bought by another one who owns a company that also sells guns.
  • 3 1
 Why should I care if this company carries firearms sanctioned by the US government and accepted by a large percentage of the American people? Guns don't kill people, people who don't give a shit do.
  • 2 1
 I don't think I would boycott the individual companies - large corporations have their fingers in many aspects of manufacture, and a lot of the traits of global mass manufacture are extremely shady - at what point do we boycott all companies as we disagree with aspects of their business practise? I think the positive effect of any boycott would be extremely limited - and the negative effect on individuals working for Giro/ Camelback etc has to be considered,

However I fundamentally cannot understand how anyone can defend the plentiful and ready supply of military grade weaponry to the general public. How can people love weapons and their perceived "liberties" more than their countries children/ citizens? Every innocent victim has a family, loved ones. The students could have gone on to great things. For a moment put yourselves in the shoes of a parent, identifying their child at the morgue, organising the funeral, picking the hymns, laying the flowers. Picture the years going forward, and the painful reminders of what was lost.

If giving up your guns could even contribute to saving both the victim and the family that - surely it's worth giving up?
  • 3 0
 Sadly, as you see in this discussion, there are plenty of Americans who think the pile of bodies isn’t large enough to give them up yet.
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: It's not about a pile of bodies doc, It's about the means to secure a free state.

If you want to talk about bodies piling up, let's look at Mao (50M+ murdered) or Stalin (23M+ murdered) or Hitler.... Note - these are CIVILIAN deaths. I'm not sure, but I think 50M deaths is a bit of a larger issue than what the US sees each year in non-suicide, non-gang related deaths.

Is it impractical to think that another Mao, Stalin, Hitler could occur again in our lifetime?
  • 4 2
 Why is the gun industry at fault for shootings? Are beer companies at fault for drunk driving? This shit is so old. Make it harder to buy a gun sure but don’t demonize a inanimate object.
  • 6 1
 ban the guns already bring back the cannonballs!
  • 3 0
 If I can have a cannon, I'll give up one gun.
  • 2 0
 That would be way more entertaining.
  • 5 0
 Every person should have the right to bare a mountain bike.
  • 5 1
 Please just dump this. PB is already stressful enough with wheel size.
We don't need this debate here Frown
  • 2 1
 Honestly there was a massive study released by Northwestern University that pretty much shows that this gun nonsense in not based in actual fact. We have constitutional liberties because of our second amendment. There are examples of firearms being used to end government overreach such as in the Bundy Ranch incident. It's media an political driven nonsense. I will never give up my rights for any reason.
  • 1 0
 Reminds me of the late 90's when Bill Clinton was telling the world to get rid of antipersonnel mines while awarding contracts to numerous American companies such as Motorola and Dyno Nobel who were producing components to produce another 4million mines to replace the outdated stockpiles. It wasn't until Human Rights watch got involved and shamed them that they withdrew that arm of manufacture from their organisations.
Can consumers make a difference? -certainly.
  • 2 1
 Savage's biggest market are their hunting rifles and .22 plinkers. So tired of this virtue signaling - neg prop me to hell, I'll stand by my principles. Thanks for the info, I'll give as much business as possible to Vista Outdoors, to try and offset the ignorant masses hell bent on paving the way to their own enslavement.
  • 2 1
 If you don't want to buy guns don't. If you want to buy guns do. If you want to buy a camelback to ride your bike with definitely do that. If you don't want to sell camelback anymore, your customer can just buy it on amazon. I'm pretty sure our store will still be carrying camelback and blackburn because, you know, were not petty and stupid. (lol my phone just auto corrected gun to fun) Gun control may be a helpful tool to reduce gun violence, but all this boycotting stuff seems pointless and irrational to me.
  • 2 1
 Thank you for this reporting, and please go farther. I don't want to boycott only bike companies that are owned by a company that owns another company that sells guns. I want to boycott bike companies that have shareholders that own shares of another company that sell guns. Please investigate those for me!
  • 1 0
 Once upon a time I owned a Chinese made Norinco AK47 copy. Was fun to shoot but in the end I decided I didn't need in any way a military weapon so I gave it up. Plus there had been some mass shootings (yes even in little ol' New Zealand), and the conservative government at the time was seriously tightening gun laws.

However since the internet came into been, there was so many loopholes that pretty much anyone could import gun parts legally and build their own assualt rifle of choice. Yet the irony was while you couldn't legally purchase said assualt rifles you could (at the time), legally purchase the parts to build that AR-15 if you so wished.

Now we just have the problem of criminals breaking into legal gun owners houses and the police shooting dead more people than they care to...
  • 4 1
 We should boycott Oakley as well. They make glasses for target shooting and hunting! How dare they support such horrendous things!
  • 1 0
 What about rocket launchers, Handgrenades & Sharks with freaking laser beams attached to their heads?!? Why is it illegal to have those as citizens but yet we all truly know that Dr. evil and other crazy/evil bad guys Still have those kinds of weapons? Yet we never hear anything in the news about those kinds of deaths especially at schools!
  • 2 1
 Well, I ride bell helmets, use camelbak packs, and my trusty 30.06 is from savage, so I guess I'm a fan of vista. They make great products! This is a dumb story about nothing. If you actually looked into the ownership of vista, you'd find that their majority stock holder is Fidelity. Fidelity is one of the largest brokers and uses Vista in their actively managed funds (i.e. the 401k investments of millions of Americans). This is a dumb story about nothing.
  • 4 1
 Liberals play his lovest game, no thinked about problem — only ban, ban all. Giro entered — ban, camelbak is military — ban, why?
  • 4 2
 Thank you for being objective and using your brain!! You're exactly correct. BAN BAN BAN - remove liberty!!
  • 4 1
 I didn't know that. But now that I know it I WILL NEVER BUY THOSE BRANDS AGAIN. I don't want to finance wars and human suffering. Any others connected with weapons?
  • 1 0
 I think it's great, that the US finally start a debate instead of ignoring the problems. For sure there is no simple solution for you, but not supporting gun manufacturers, if you don't want to, is a good way for taking responsibility.
  • 1 0
 I'm frustrated that no matter where I go I have to look at the gun debate. We get it people hate guns and people love guns. I have still not seen a real solution offered but instead a constant endless debate with the same reiterated "facts" spewed over and over by "Internet Experts".

Ok back to bikes now.
  • 3 2
 Shame on Pinkbike for throwing fuel on the fire - how about boycotting pinkbike for being douchebags in our culture and bringing up political shit that is beyond our control and beyond any form of blaming small companies that only have an umbrella of a connection to larger investment firms. You know the Waltons aka Walmart boys love biking - they do a lot for it - Am I a fan of Walmart? No - Do I hate them more cause they're helping Mountain Bike and Road Biking Communities - No - so why hate on companies that have been making awesome safety products for years? Kinda f*ckin ignorant and stupid if you ask me - Pinkbike mods - with all the great content and stuff you put out you're lining yourself up for full on failure with one more bullshit post like this. I thought for a moment you all would stay above this - It's been out for a while now - You had to stoke the fire and just in the name sake of creating content people will get upset about - ONE MORE POST LIKE THIS AND VITAL MTB IS GETTING ALL MY ATTENTION -
  • 1 0
 get your guns now while you still can....by the time they are needed....registration will be irrelevant.......and please if you could lift the import restrictions on Kalashnikov....I really want one on the new AK-12 or an AK-72.....very cool
  • 3 0
 I am amazed at how many people get offended. We can all have a civil conversation. You don’t have choose to be offended at something you disagree with.
  • 1 0
 @MTBingSpartan Amen to that! No more civil discourse, just name calling and belittling.

You running Boise, Eden, or Breck Spartans this year?
  • 1 0
 "Vista is a relatively new owner of Bell, Giro, and Blackburn – they purchased the companies in 2016 from BRG Sports for $400 million, while Camelbak was purchased in 2015 for $412.5 million from Compass Diversified Holdings."

These are the reasons cycling has become astronomically expensive. Cycling is not about profits! Fa Q corpo cok sukers.
  • 1 0
 As socially liberal, I find it kind of funny how fellow leftists make a stink about boycotting helmets produced by Bell, Giro, etc. I mean whats the big deal? 99% of consumer products are tied to unfair business practices such as pollution, bigotry, and over-charging. Is the NRA shady? Sure. Are current gun laws working? Not really. But i’m sure those helmets have saved more people than have been killed by the few gun companies Vista Outdoor owns.
  • 1 0
 FYI

investors.vistaoutdoor.com/Cache/1001225176.PDF?O=PDF&T=&Y=&D=&FID=1001225176&iid=4564156

The company makes 54% business with what the call Shooting Brands 46% with outdoor brands as stated on Page 6.

Also: on page 2 Vista fell short in its 2017 business results blaming this on lower sales of Shooting Brands.
  • 2 1
 Is it just me or does every statement from the NRA come across as creepy guy (person)! Something is wrong with a country that believes the right to bare arms, as written on their constitution, which was drafted and signed just after the country ended it's bloody American Revolutionary War, has any merit in the 20th century. Those were very different times in N.America and it's about time that paper was updated so people stop referring to something that was applicable over 300 years ago. As for the brands I think it's unfair to punish the bike brands and their employees, just because they got bought out by a sporting goods conglomerate that happens to also have an interest in a company that produces guns. This is a legislative issue more than anything else. Unlikely to see any positive change on this while Trump reigns in the Whitehouse.
  • 2 1
 I love guns I am my NRA supporter and I believe we do need to find a good way of keeping our sport in our Hobby safe. Safe from hurting others and safe from being taken away. Saying that you’re going to regulate who you sell guns to buy having some sort of mental check is just plain ridiculous because at the end of the day most people have some sort of mental disorder. Lots of us like to huck our bikes 20-30 feet in the air which to others sounds “crazy” so does that mean we have some sort of mental issue? I think the point needs to be taken is if you’re wanting to do bodily harm to somebody or not which there’s no way to ever tell if somebody truly wants to do that or not. The other thing I think the media is definitely failing to report is all the people that tried to reach out and express that this guy had a mental issue and wanted to cause bodily harm and that it was just ignored over and over and over again. Which is one of the biggest reasons the NRA is getting the blame. The sheriff trying to deflect his responsibilities and place them on somebody else. The NRA doesn’t even sell guns and doesn’t make laws. They are just an association that gun owners can join. Nothing more then automobile association is.I see a lot of people talking about they would love to see numbers were here are some numbers why don’t you look up the amount of deaths a year related to automobile accidents and compare that to gun violence. Are we going to start taking vehicles away. We can’t even regulate in our country who gets a drivers license.
  • 1 0
 @jclnv: flawed binary logic ~ this is far more complex than a simple yes or no. When weapons outnumber people over 2 to 1 (and that's a swag... I'm betting the number is higher with gun registration laws being new relatively speaking). What would you rather have a means to level the playing field in a bad situation where your family, your children are in harms way as you wait for the police to arrive or a system where the risk is on the other guy... do they "take the chance" that you're not armed and not able to protect yourself and your family... I'm a father and a grandfather and I'd give my very last breath to save my kids ... keeping that question alive helps ensure I don't have to.... and to answer your other question, yes I'm armed and a retired vet so I know how to use them.
  • 1 0
 Official Giro Response - Dear Authorized Dealer:
As you may know, in the wake of the recent tragic shooting at a Florida school, there have been calls on social media for a boycott of Giro, Bell, Blackburn, Copilot, Raskullz, and Krash products because of their association with Vista Outdoor, a company that also owns separate businesses in the shooting sports industry. A major concern for the boycott centers around the incorrect assumption that the purchase of any of our products may support a cause that does not fit the mission/values of our brands. That is not the case. Our brands fall within the Outdoor Products segment of our company, which operates separately from Vista Outdoor's Shooting Sports segment. Since their inception (Bell - 1954, Giro - 1985, Blackburn - 1974, Copilot - 2000, Raskullz/Krash - 2010) these brands have each maintained their focus and reputations for innovation and high quality in support of users of our products.
We recognize, support and respect the right of every individual to decide for themselves what brands they will purchase based on whatever criteria they believe are important. Throughout their history, our brands have contributed to enjoyment and personal safety in powersports, cycling and snow sports and our focus remains on innovating and developing high quality product in support of these user communities.
This is a complex scenario and we expect you have many questions. We continue to encourage you to reach out directly to us to schedule a time to speak, via your local rep, so that we may provide additional information specific to you and your market.
Thank you for your support!


Can we all go back to just being a Mountain Bike Community? Realizing that these issues are beyond our realm of actual truth? Giro has nothing to do with the other company, that is an entirely different group separate of the Outdoor segment. So one has to wonder why Pinkbike would try to hurt a brand without talking with them and actually getting the facts first. So Pinkbike thanks for spreading FAKE NEWS - FALSE RUMORS and BULLSHIT only a child who is getting money from competitors would try to harm the LEADING GLOBAL BRANDS IN BIKE SAFETY. Too bad Giro & Bell Win this Round of fake news and I'll be sure to have Snopes.com update their findings....
  • 1 0
 It seems that people want something to be done, but with the NRA holding the reigns of power, what can people do?
Maybe this will be ineffective, but its arguably better than sitting back and doing nothing. At least they tried. At least their point was raised.
  • 1 0
 Where are the reviews and advertising for holsters and rifle scabbards for convenient on-bike carry? I know people who carry pepper spray when riding in grizzly country, I have to assume that an automatic (or even semi-auto) tactical rifle strapped to my fork stanchion or a pistol in my "fanny pack" would be more effective and make me feel more liberty at the same time.
Smile
  • 4 4
 This isn't even the fault of the employees of giro, bell, or CamelBak it's kinda bullshit just for this to happen even if all of these companies make quality items like what's the fucking point is my question. People need to bitch less ride more like who really gives a fuck about a gun company that has literally nothing to do with your riding or anything to do with this site or bikes in general. Jesus Christ just fucking ride.
  • 6 3
 Pinkbike, you're better than this, bringing politics to a site that so many people love
  • 4 1
 the people that work at these companies are not NRA donators. they make bike stuff
  • 18 17
 Australia took away everyone's guns. Everyone turned them in too. Except criminals. Crime with guns then increased. Except normal people couldn't defend themselves anymore. Not good.
  • 13 5
 Huh. Makes sense, doesn't it?

Criminals don't follow the law.
Normal people do..

But muh emotions. Turn your guns in
  • 18 4
 Australia's homicide rate has dropped significantly since they passed strict gun control legislation:

www.factcheck.org/2017/10/gun-control-australia-updated
  • 8 3
 "The authors, however, noted that “no study has explained why gun deaths were falling, or why they might be expected to continue to fall.” That poses difficulty in trying to definitively determine the impact of the law, they write."

They were falling anyways. Trade your freedom for the illusion of safety. You'll have neither
  • 3 1
 Arhhhh.......think your wrong on your facts !
  • 5 0
 Did you happen to get this information from a meme on Facebook?
  • 2 1
 @dthomp325: Australia's homicide rate was dropping before the legislation, and actually increased slightly afterward, before resuming it's decrease.
  • 5 1
 @dthomp325: AUS is in the middle of nowhere lol. The US borders a 3rd world country and lower than that the next country is leading in murder rate (country with gun control btw)
  • 2 5
 @VNIMAL: Canada is the 3rd World Country in this metaphor, right? Which makes the next country lower than that the good ol' US of A with a lead in the murder rate... Yup, sounds about right. Other than you calling Canada third world. That wasn't very nice of you.
  • 8 1
 @dthomp325: And the US murder rate has fallen over the last 20 years despite huge increases in the number of guns. They're just not correlated.
  • 7 1
 Crime rates and gun deaths are all irrelevant of gun laws. Our founding fathers considered these things and decided that it was more important to secure a free state than to worry about a couple crazies running around with guns. There will always be free radicals. If not guns, then cars, bombs, poisons, knives.
  • 6 0
 @theminsta: LOL it's ALL emotions. That's how the left operates. Give up your freedoms for a "feeling" of security.
  • 1 0
 Mate you have no idea. Check the facts.
  • 1 0
 @handynzl: Are you slow? Mexico, then brazil....
  • 1 3
 @jason342: Your founding fathers were being attacked by Indians. Haven't seen too many stage coaches lately.
  • 2 0
 @dthomp325: Australia also doesn't border Mexico.
  • 2 1
 @RJM70: actually the founding fathers were offering rewards for native skins. The Potomac ran red w native blood And giving them cheap plastic trinkets and blankets infested with smallpox. Before you spout off about something you know nothing about. You should probably research the attempted genocide of the native inhabitants of the good ole USA
  • 2 0
 @RJM70: right o bear arms has nothing to do with threats from Indians... How are so many people unaware of WHY the founding fathers (of the US) created the second amendment? -_-
  • 2 2
 @jason342: Our "founding fathers" thought slavery was great, didn't think women should vote, probably could not conceive of mass produced semi-automatic weapons and ammo, and thought ridiculous wigs looked pretty fly. Who give's a shit what they thought? It's 2018, we need solutions that work for our current society and technologies, not 1789.
  • 2 1
 @JohanG: Guns death rates are highly correlated with gun ownership rates. Higher gun ownership is correlated with higher gun death rates both between US states, and between different countries:

s3.amazonaws.com/content.washingtonexaminer.biz/web-producers/100315-beltway-Image-One.jpg
cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/9371383/guns_country.jpg
  • 2 0
 @dthomp325: I've heard the same argument for the Torah / Bible, yet the principles are still valid thousands of years later. The term :well regulated militia" easily transfers to modern day times. The statement is time-irrelevant and accounts for advancements in armaments. I think you're really underestimating how brilliant the founding father were.

A number of the founding fathers opposed the slave trade (including Jefferson) and recognized a mans NATURAL RIGHTS, which is what the US is about - God-given rights that government neither regulate or take away. Apparently our founding father's did something right. Look at the success of the US today - being that the country is only barely 250 years old.

And wigs are wicked cool.
  • 1 0
 This is true, and people are down voting you because they know you are right! Nothing more than group think/mob rule! Criminals don't turn in their guns, that's the problem. This can be solved though. It's Reeeeeal simple! 5 years mandatory prison first offense. Second: 15 years, full confiscation of property and assets (to fund your prison time). People will scoff, people will laugh. Not for long. Soon as a few go away, everyone will think twice about roaming around the streets with an unregistered gun!
  • 2 1
 @Anthonyfonzi: But all of the school shooters are American citizens, nothing to do with these 3rd world countries you talk about.
  • 1 0
 @doe222: not talking about the shooters being 3rd world. Talking about guns coming into the country from there if you would have a ban.....
  • 3 1
 My 5yr old Giro lid, 5yr old Bell full face and 20yr old camelbak were all bought before the merger. Please refrain from throwing rocks at me when you see me on the trail.
  • 3 1
 Yes, but you are still supporting them (and advertising their products), and not conforming to mob rule and consensus, and therefore we shall 'Lord of The Flies' you to death, in the bush. Look for the group of us looking really proud. Our sticks (that we beat you with) will only be ones that have fallen off trees at their own will. The good news: they will be dry and snap upon hitting you. No pain, no pain. All easy, in utopia.
  • 3 2
 I'm going to buy their products just because of this. I won't let people trying to take our freedom take down businesses as well.
  • 6 5
 This is all any red blooded American, Pink Bike or it's subs need to know, A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
  • 6 1
 Yeah, because a 19-year-old sociopath so creepy he wasn’t allowed to bring a backpack to school is a well-regulated militia. And amendments can be replaced.
  • 1 4
 @DrPete: no we don’t mean that
  • 2 1
 @foxxyman: ok, then are you a member of the national guard? That’s the modern equivalent of the state militia. Or maybe you’re a member of the military?
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: nope you totaly morphed this into something else
  • 1 0
 @foxxyman: morphed? The text of the amendment begins with the well-regulated militia.
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: what did i ever say to make you think i was on the national guard, i am not

I support a well regulated militia, and every citizen havint the right to own a gun if they prove responsible.
With that, we need a responsibility test with the buying of guns, Idk how, I just know we need to.
  • 7 4
 Come on pink bike, you're a website for bikes not politics. Enough of this nonsense!
  • 6 3
 F#ck Pinkbike, I go on this site to get away from the madness. Here you go getting into the gun debate. FML.
  • 6 1
 Bell and Giro save lives
  • 2 1
 Don't like guns? Don't buy any. Heck, even lobby for more gun restrictions. But don't punish people in the bicycling industry because their company was purchased by a conglomerate that also owns firearm manufacturers.
  • 1 1
 Thie fact is giro and bell make a great product. It seems unfair to punish them because they, and the others, were bought by vista only two years ago. I will continue to wear my Giro helmet because I refuse to believe not wearing it will do anything for this topic. In fact wearing and using said products should spark up a conversation. Just like this article did in the comments section. Good work pinkbike.
  • 1 1
 Why are people trying to take away Americans' right to bear arms? The shooting could have been prevented (FBI and Sheriff's debt being idiotic). If these organizations can't protect us, there's no way you should be taking Americans' rights to self preservation.

This boycotting without a complete assessment of the millions of guns in the USA is retarded
  • 3 0
 I refuse to read any political content on pinkbike unless it's in the form of a Mike vs Mike video
  • 4 1
 Pinkbike, Stick with bikes and happy people that ride them. Please leave the political bs for all the other outlets
  • 2 1
 If not a gun a knife not a knife a car, it goes on regard less, if there is will, they will find a way.. protect the ones that cant protect them selves thats how we are all still here today. circle of ...
  • 3 2
 Try to kill 17 people with a knife before getting tackled.
  • 2 0
 @DrPete:https://www.cnn.com/2014/03/01/world/asia/china-railway-attack/index.html

Ironically enough its by CNN even.
  • 2 1
 @DrPete: well I'm pretty sure a dude in China did it on a train not to long ago. You should watch the news. And apparently word on the street is some guys hijacked planes with box cutters, crashed them into buildings killing thousands of our people. Box cutters man, box cutters
  • 1 0
 @willbe19: And how frequently do those events happen? One guy on a train in China vs tens of thousands of gun homicides in the US in the same period. As for the 9/11 box cutter thing, what are you now not allowed to bring along on a plane? Box cutters, man, box cutters.
  • 3 0
 Please ban game consoles = mass shooting simulators and time wasting devices as well. Less of that, more pedal time
  • 2 0
 guns dont kill people, people kill people. and people like the c.i.a. and the d.e.a. use all of these products when on covert missions.
  • 3 0
 @sellwood cycles is lame. This reassures me , they won't get another dime from me. Kook hipsters
  • 1 0
 Damn it, PinkBike, leave the frickin' politics out of mountain biking. It's bad enough I can't watch the Olympics, NFL, or anything else without someone telling me what to think and believe. Piss off!
  • 3 1
 I dunno Giro looks sick, plus those guns look cool. Don’t really give a shit about a bunch of hate train trendy hipster shit.
  • 1 0
 The Savage AR is said to pack in a lot of features at a bargain price. Don't think I need another AR, but my old Camelbak is getting a bit shabby. Maybe it's time to replace it.
  • 26 21
 Rip liberty
  • 13 13
 Whose liberty is being infringed upon?
  • 18 9
 Was one of those students called liberty?
  • 3 8
flag sino428 (Feb 28, 2018 at 15:09) (Below Threshold)
 I missed the part where any of you or anyone else's freedoms or liberties were taken away.
  • 6 3
 @sino428: gun control

i don’t want people control how i use guns or taking them away. I obey gun laws. Using guns, or anything else for that matter, to kill people is sick, very sick indeed. Unfortunately there are people who do it. There will all ways be an adversary.
  • 1 2
 @DrPete:
Maybe one of the murdered 17 in Florida were called liberty. Or maybe we all died a bit that day.
  • 7 5
 @foxxyman: at some point a sane adult would recognize that their “need” to own a gun is offset by measurable adverse effects to society. But we know that, and it’s why the NRA tries to suppress any research on guns as a public health and safety issue.
  • 4 3
 @whitebirdfeathers: they are the only ones whose rights were violated, that’s for damn sure.
  • 2 1
 @DrPete: The nra IS going off track, but i will still keep my gun
  • 2 1
 @foxxyman:
No issues with owning a gun. just change the laws so that certain types are illegal (bump stock semiautos) better licenses to control who can own them and laws on storage and carraige. ie keep at home in a safe. no conceal carry, or open carry. comp shooters or part time shooters keep firearms at a range in a safe location. certain types of ammunition. Surely there is a middle ground like this that people would agree would be sensible rather than.
I wanna carry my gun because I can carry a gun for no real reason (self protections is pretty weak, if the criminal has a gun out and you try and draw you would be dead meat anyway. Self protection against wild animals...hmm shoot a grizzly with anything less than a 155mm and you would prob just piss it off lol
  • 1 0
 @Hooch73: I agree with some of that others not so much, but thank you, good input.

Yes middle ground, right now it is one side or the other.
  • 2 5
 @PrPete you a busy bee spreading your fake sympathy and fake numbers. You seem to neglect to mention the fact that in the last 20 years all but 2 of the "mass shootings" were done in gun free zones. Seems that being armed is a good idea and a prudent action for responsible citizens.
  • 3 2
 @sbrdude1: DrPete and the media love to forget about all the people that protect themselves with guns.
But those stories go untold because it goes against their agenda.
  • 2 1
 @foxxyman: Exactly, because those committing these events don't follow laws in the first place..
  • 2 2
 @DrPete: True americans, thats whos liberty is being infringed upon.
  • 2 1
 @Chingus-Dude: true americans? You need to think a 19-year-old sociopath should have easy access to AR-15s to be a true American? You’re saying I’m not one?
  • 1 0
 @NickyDiNapoli: well yeah they never plan to obey gun laws
  • 2 1
 @DrPete: the 19 year old ain’t a true american, he had the thought to use a gun irresponsibly
  • 3 1
 @foxxyman: why don’t mass shooters use full auto SBRs?
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: Idk, what are you getting at?
Idk what the gunmen think, I don’t want to know what the gunmen think.
  • 2 0
 @DrPete: Constitutionally law abiding citizens. For a doctor you don't seem too bright.
  • 1 0
 @whitebirdfeathers: Did you die a bit last night, while double the amount of Florida kids, just died in Africa from starvation? Or, in the Congo - right now - where the violence is out of control? Hundreds die every month is slave mining camps (Cobalt - number one producer in the world), to make Elon's trendy Tesla. Did we die a bit when all those kids died? Florida was tragic, very bad indeed! But, the media (and it's followers) go nuts with this, and act like zealots. Tossing Giro or Camelbak under the bus is not fair, and dare I say ignorant. Frankly, we should protest everything in life - because everything, at the end of the day functions because of oil. Everything. Even it we think we're 'honest' and use an e-battery, oil is still behind that - how did you mine the copper, cobalt, lithium and nickel - with big trucks and machinery = diesel, gas and oil. Everything, including Florida, requires discernment and mature discussion.
  • 7 3
 Thanks for the info! Gives me a further list of companies to support!
  • 4 0
 Somebody better take my bike away because killing it lately!
  • 5 2
 The gun debate continues while alcohol kills more Americans and people. When will it all stop??
  • 4 4
 Guns kill over 30,000 people a year. Alcohol is definitely involved in a lot of injuries, but we have more guns than provide any value to society. It’s just a fact. You’ll also recall that there actually was a constitutional amendment that brought prohibition along with a multitude of unintended consequences. It was later repealed by another amendment. Just an example of an amendment being repealed when we realize it was a bad idea. Hopefully the second will be along soon.
  • 3 1
 @DrPete: Alcohol kills 88,000 per year which is more then twice of gun violence. And thanks for making my point for me. What happened when the prohibition happened?? Nothing, corrupt people gained more power and alcohol was still free flowing. What makes gun control any different with 3D printers and all the technology we have now?? I’m all for more gun control efforts but to think it will make a difference is laughable. And please tell me what value alcohol plays in society?? None.
  • 1 1
 @DrPete: No, actually they don't I'm at a loss as to where you have obtained your numbers but rest assured they are false.
  • 2 0
 Last I checked, I can't sit up in a hotel room and inflict severe alcohol poisoning onto over 500 innocent concert-goers. But hey, that's just me.
  • 3 0
 Yet you can easily kill a family of 4-5 or drive into a mass amount of people. Either way both are terrible but the bigger problem is alcohol which is why I find it funny everyone turns a blind eye to it. Drunk driver kills a family of six blame the driver not the booze. Guy shoots people at school blame the guns not the guy. Logic doesn’t make sense there does it? @JacobKmtb:
  • 2 0
 @andrew8404: if you think anyone is turning a blind eye to alcohol you don’t know much of what’s been happening in the world of public health for about 100 years.
  • 1 0
 I work in public health so I’m very aware of issues affecting our society. @DrPete:
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: who cares about gangs and suicides? that's over 90% of the gun violence
  • 1 0
 @titoholt: was there any point where I said that arming gangs and suicidal people was ok?
  • 4 2
 Any type of firearm is banned in Honduras, yet they have one of the highest murder rate in the world, guess what they are using to murder... firearms.
  • 3 1
 It is a very poor 3rd world country. Are those the standards that America should itself to? I mean Liberia is pretty terrible, why not set the bar even lower?
  • 1 0
 @rebel12: Are you saying those are shithole countries? I thought there were none.
  • 1 0
 Hell, one of the highest gun control cities is Detroit and yet they are one of the highest in murder rates?! I think logic has truly escaped our society, or at least it was pushed out with all this "acceptance of everyone and everything" crap. Hate to say that my generation is a major influence of that.
  • 1 0
 @pipomax I wouldn't use the term shithole. Especially if I was the President of a country when in an official role. One of the roles a President plays is representing their country to the world. I would say 3rd world countries have major issues that go far beyond gun control. By the way if you research you will find the US played a major role in creating the chaos in Honduras and the rest of Latin America.

@gregnash Detroit is not isolated from the rest of the US. but good for them for trying to progress. For gun control to work it would have to be country wide. Seems fairly straightforward. I should be clear. I understand why someone would use a gun for hunting. But I don't understand why private citizens are allowed to own weapons that are specifically designed to kill people. It clearly isn't working.
  • 1 2
 @pipomax: you thought wrong of there being no shithole countries, there's yours
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: I am from Guatemala as a matter of fact, so... thank you I guess. And yours (Italy) is not a shithole thanks to the United States of America in WW2 Italy was a Nazy ally.
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: real classy dude. Sorry your country used to side with Nazis.
  • 2 1
 @Timroo1: sorry your country has to deal with shootings every now and then
  • 1 1
 @PierfrancescoTron: Oh yeah you're pretty sincere. Every comment from you is hateful BS. You should stop embarrassing yourself, although your ignorant hatred is good for a laugh. Stay classy.
  • 2 0
 @Timroo1: btw I was actually sincere, I might not share ideologies with your country but it doesn't mean that I want you guys to die, sad you saw it that way Frown

and glad I made you laugh a bit
  • 1 0
 @rebel12: I guess I am a little confused by your statement of "I understand why someone would use a gun for hunting. But I don't understand why private citizens are allowed to own weapons that are specifically designed to kill people. It clearly isn't working."

A hunting rifle is really not all that dissimilar than an AR, remember now AR DOES NOT stand for Assault Rifle it is an acronym for ArmaLite Rifle which was the first company to patent the design. This is the exact same thing as calling any Facial Tissue, KLEENEX. This rifle was not specifically designed to kill people, rather it was designed for a self-repeating firing mechanism (however you are correct that war is usually the instigator for many many inventions and forward movement within technology.

For the most part the firing mechanism is the exact same between a hunting rifle and an AR, the only difference being a Bolt Action hunting rifle that requires a manual actuation of the bolt to load the next round. The maniac could have just as easily walked into a local WalMart that sells guns and purchased a Hunting Rifle and did the same amount of devastation. He could have easily done the same with a Glock 19 (handgun) or a 38 Special (small revolver), the maniac could have simply picked ANY firearm and done the damage.

But the case really is that there were indicators in his past that were not adequately addressed by a multitude of people (including the local police, fbi, school, etc.) but you dont see people attacking those individuals. REI/MECs choice to halt all business with Vista Outdoors specifically because they are associated and own a firearms company (and ammo manufacturer as well) was best put on MTBR, "it is like hating the children simply because the parents aren't nice people." Really Savage Arms (firearms manufacturer) and Federal Ammunition (ammo manufacturer) has ZERO to do with the incident (that we know of at this point), yet we are chastising them simply because they are "guilty by association".

Would we be in an uproar just the same as we are now had the maniac gone and purchased a ton of knives from Cutco and used them to kill the same amount of people by throwing the knives at them (yes very gross generalization)? The answer is NO, gun control and mental health are the current hot cakes for activism (just like pitbulls) now days. I think more what we have is a lack of teaching our children Right from Wrong, that all lives matter, the sense of compassion amongst other things these days. I can't tell you how many "millenials" I have interviewed for positions that have self-entitlement problems that stem back to those types of items and the lack of mom/dad teaching them that everything comes with hard work. There is a difference between the statements of
- You can be anything you want! You are Special and you deserve it!
and
- You can be anything you want if you work hard! You are Special and you deserve it!

Again, as I have said in the past, this is just my opinion and we all know how that old adage goes..... Opinions are like @$$holes, everyone has one. That doesn't make yours more pretty or right than any others.
  • 2 0
 @gregnash: Thanks for your clearly informed response. I can elaborate to eliminate some of the confusion. I am speaking about fire arms that are designed for killing people. For example hand guns, infantry guns, shotguns with shortened stocks and or barrels etc. The mechenism may be similar in an AR15 but from my understanding what sets it apart from regular hunting rifles is the size (designed to be better used in close quarters) and that it is a semi automatic. There are very distinct differences in design for hunting rifles and guns that are made to kill. Even if it something as seemingly simple as ergonomics.

Canada has strict rules when it comes to guns. For example a shot gun may only have the capacity for 3 shells. Hand guns are very restricted. You have to declare a location you will be using it (an authorized firing range) and the rout you will be taking from the location the gun is store to where it will be used. With serious reprocutions if you stray. There may be a little more to it but that's the gist of it when it comes to hand guns. In my mind all good things to minimize the negative impacts.

It's not just a mental health issue. From the outside looking in it seems your country is in a crisis. A lot of anger and distrust.

As a kid I lived in the States. We have some close friends that we visit regularly. It still feels like a second home. But you can feel the tension these days.
  • 2 0
 @rebel12: Ok I see where you are coming from... The US does have quite a few different laws, many based on state or county you live/reside in, that take lots of what you talk about into account. For instance, a shotgun is meant for bird hunting mainly, in most states it is completely illegal to modify a shotgun with a shorter barrel or to put a "pistol grip" on it. There are certain variants that can be purchased with those items but they are like your countries shotguns and normally have a much smaller capacity.

With regards to your statement about "I am speaking about fire arms that are designed for killing people. For example hand guns, infantry guns, shotguns with shortened stocks and or barrels etc." This is somewhat of a gross (meaning broad) categorization and statement as primarily ALL firearms were designed to kill, not just humans but to kill in general. Simply stating that one particular type of firearm is designed specifically to kill only humans is incorrect. Are they USED to kill humans, yes absolutely, but specifically designed too, no not really. The ergonomics of a handgun are design for shorter range effectiveness vs. a rifle (of any sort) that is designed for mid-to-long range effectiveness.

The maniac could have easily purchased a .357 Magnum or a 9mm Glock and still did the same amount of devastation. Instead the AR has had an image portrayed by the media that it is an evil firearm specifically because of its "LOOK" and aesthetic vs. anything else. As many movies and actors have portrayed, the AR is a "badass" looking gun that gives off an image of the holder being "unstoppable" and "intimidating" when the truth of the matter is that it is no more or less effective at killing another person than a pistol/handgun. Just like Pitbulls have been portrayed by the media as these evil, ruthless, blood thirsty killer dogs they are the complete opposite (I have owned four, currently have three and would trust them with any child in my family over my sister-in-laws terrier that has already bitten her 3yr old and 1yr old).

But you are correct, I do agree that we (the US) could use some gun reform laws AND that this is not just a mental health issue. However, what I personally am seeing (again my OPINION) is that the left wants to completely do away with the public's right to own a firearm and the right wants a slackening of the controls that are already in place. What we need is a conversation between both parties to find a middle ground. The right answer is out there, it is NOT what we currently have but it is also NOT completely taking guns away. By doing that you will be doing nothing more than enabling those that do not abide by laws to take advantage of those that do, simply put Criminals do not care, they will find every target a "soft target" at that point.

The best "generalization" I found recently was a post of discussions like these from TheCHIVE where the conversation was something similar to:

anit-gun person: This shooting was horrible. Yet another needless massacre of lives, we need to get rid of guns and have more gun control laws. Why wont the government do this!!

pro-gun person: Getting rid of guns and more gun control laws is not the answer. Yes this was horrible and senseless but there is more to it than just getting rid of guns.

anti-gun person: Your WRONG!!! All guns need to be gotten rid of! If this doesn't happen I am going to start carrying a rocket launcher around with me. No one will f$&* with me then!

pro-gun person: Really? A rocket launcher? You know that no person can own/buy a rocket launcher as they are completely illegal, right?

anti-gun person: Not on the black market they aren't.

pro-gun person: So you're saying that gun control doesn't work.


I do truly appreciate the civilized response from you! I was hoping for something like this to actually happen as I have been wanting to discuss with someone that has opposing beliefs in a calm and composed manner... Much appreciated!
  • 1 0
 @gregnash: I really do appreciate your thoughtful responses. It goes a long way. I totally agree with finding some sort of common ground on this issue. Not living in the US I can only speculate that having a 2 party system leads to extreme opposing views on a lot of things. When in reality the middle ground is more realistic and often more effective. It also seems that people are more prone to live and die with the party they affiliate themselves with. Over the years I have voted for parties that are left and also for parties are conservative (right wing). I try to base my vote on which party has the best solutions for the problems at hand.

I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with guns. I don't think it's a matter of taking away all guns. Fear of guns is due to lack of knowledge. In the hands of a responsible owner they very safe. But I do stand by the idea that some guns should not be available to the public.

Thanks again for the great dialogue. If you are ever in this part of BC I would be happy to show you around some of our amazing trails!
  • 2 0
 @rebel12: Thanks dude, much appreciated and refreshing to not get a sudden attack of verbal diarrhea by someone with opposing views simply because of that fact (which if you look at most of the comments on here and other forums that is what you see). You are correct, having only a two party system does have its pros and cons, and the wife and I are like you, we base our vote on research and what the person is proposing that will best suit us. But many are stanch Democrats or stanch Republicans and will live and die that way regardless of whether or not their party is actually doing good for the country and them.

If someone from the "anti-gun" side came and proposed some new regulations that would only restrict certain things, that were not ridiculous then the "pro-gun" side might actually listen. The biggest thing the "pro gun" side has against the other side is that the proposals they put forward are the removal and restriction of all guns. For many, that is like being a pack a day smoker for 30+ years and then being forced to go cold turkey (with the added effect that if you touch a pack of cigs you are going to jail).

It's amazing what a calm, open minded, collaborative discussion can be like if both sides are able to do that. But alas, we are a society built on "my needs are greater than yours!" and "that's mine!!" and self-gratification and commercialism/capitalism so that will more than likely never happen.

Funniest (and Scariest) things I have watched lately is the "Real Conversations with Steven Crowder" on YouTube where he has (or tries to have in some cases) conversations with people that have an opposing view to his allowing them to give arguments to change his mind. Some of the arguments are very well put together and thought felt with good points, but not enough to change his (or in some cases my) mind. Others just purely resort to name calling, violence, etc. to intimidate.

Anyways, Trumps presidency and everything that has gone on during it has made for an interesting ride, that is for sure. Would Obama or Hillary been able to stop these shootings from happening (Vegas and Florida), I highly doubt it but we will never know (once again my opinion).

And if you ever happen to be in the Tahoe area, same to you and then we will go out for some good food and beers afterwards!
  • 1 0
 @gregnash: Thanks, it was a pleasure!
  • 6 2
 I love vista outdoors, good stuff all around.
  • 2 2
 So the unfortunate and deadly actions of a few stupid/crazy people makes it acceptable to give up the right to bear arms somehow? Gun Control of the responsible and law abiding citizens in no way keeps guns out of the hands of criminals.
  • 3 3
 Anyone claiming a ban is needed better go get some real facts. After Australia's buy back homicides still increased, took over 6 years for them to trend down. 1996 354 year of buy back 1997 364 1998 334 1999 385 2000 362 2001 347 2002 366 2004 341 and continues downward with a few spikes. Pretty much proves eliminating guns isn't the solution, people will find a way to kill if they want to.
  • 4 0
 There was a drop in gun deaths, www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/22/what-happened-when-australia-actually-did-something-to-stop-gun-violence/?utm_term=.338b0a3389a9. And they haven't had a single "mass" shooting since.

It's easy to say "homicide" and hide behind that. The talk is about gun deaths. Humans will always find ways of killing each other but it happens at a greater rate with a high capacity magazine.
  • 1 0
 @idigm: point went way over your head apparently. If guns are the problem and a ban is going to work then homicides should go down- they didn't hence if people want to kill they will guns or not.
Mass shooting are bread and butter for the media money makers but make very tiny percentage of gun deaths.
Why aren't they covering Chicago? No money in it. Feb alone 141 shot 31 killed but hey it's only black people not 17 white kids shot by one person.
  • 2 0
 @TheOriginalTwoTone: a gun ban reduces gun related deaths, which it did but apparently facts (like climate change) aren't accepted in your country. America has 101.5 guns per 100 inhabitants and it casually also has the highest ratio of gun related deaths per 100k inhabitants out of the first world countries (coincindence? I don't think so)
In comparison Australia 21.7guns per 100 inhabitants and 0.93 gun related deaths per 100k inhabitants
(also since you like the homicide part of things, the USA has a 3.43/100k ratio while Australia has 0.16/100k)

also you saying "pretty much proves eliminating guns isn't a solution" is in complete contradiction with the line before where you said "and continues downwards", since the whole point of the ban is to reduce the deaths
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: So if gun deaths were reduce and homicide still increased you're ok with that since they weren't gun deaths. bravo
  • 1 0
 @TheOriginalTwoTone: I'm not saying that, simply a gun ban has as an objective to reduce gun deaths and it worked. Then the fact that the homicides went up a bit and then took 6 years to go down and are still going down is showing (even though not immediately) that the absence of guns is lowering the number of homicides
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: clearly you've never heard of an American city called Chicago.... looks like you don't know much about our country after all... shock.
  • 1 0
 @Timroo1: erm ok, don't really see the connection having to know about Chicago and analyzing the statistics of two countries but oh well

and you can even save the time to answer cuz I'm tired of arguing about this topic. I'll just go enjoy a ride like most of us over here should do
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: Chicago banned guns. Chicago has a massive gun crime problem. It's not working for them. Chicago has a greater population than some European countries.

But yes, go enjoy a ride. Stay out of politics in countries other than your own, it makes you look hateful and ignorant.
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: Then why are all our murder centers the cities with the strictest gun laws?
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron since your not from the USA I'll just inform you, you can't argue with people like @TheOriginalTwoTone and that's why I just stated my opinion and left it be. Their "God given" right to have a firearm is more important than kids shooting each other at school and they will always find a way to try and make your argument seem like the crazy one. These kids get legal guns to kill each other and they use illegal gun stats to say, "well we just shouldn't do anything to try and stop this because people are going to find a way to shoot each other". It's the same with climate change. I know so many people who think, "just let the next generation deal with it because it's not gonna kill me". The problem is they are the ones having a dozen kids and their kids think the same thing. We just have hope and wait for the youth of today, well the ones who aren't getting shot at school, to get to the age that they can start voting to push their beliefs and if all goes well we can get some of the guns out of peoples hands.
  • 1 0
 @idigm: why don't you concentrate on solutions instead of scapegoating guns.

All those kids that marched on the capital, how many of those stood up and did something when they saw someone being bullied? How many went out of their way to make a loner feel welcome? Why aren't you talking about all the huge failures by the agencies you want everyone to depend on to protect you instead of relying on yourself?

Why don't you point all the times someone has protected themselves using a legal weapon.

Thought it was supposed to be a discussion, not an argument? Start using facts not emotions- works better with people like me.
  • 4 1
 Pinkbike: stop the political submissions.
Also Pinkbike: more comments than 98% of submissions.
  • 2 0
 Pinkbike is loving all this chitter chatter and 'hits on page' from this posting. Their ad revs are going up, big time! So then, PB is now making money....courtesy of guns. Guess I gotta boycott now.
  • 5 4
 I didn't know CNN was on pinkbike. Let's give everyone free healthcare, take away guns, and I attack people's religious freedoms. Oooh wait that's been done, I forgot how did that worked out.
  • 1 0
 Thing is
This list could be endless if you really looked into it, like what companies are supported by big Corp investors and/or share holders
Pretty sure Oakley and Camelback are military suppliers...?
  • 2 4
 The military should have guns. Not civilians.
  • 1 0
 @lev3000: should gangs have guns? you non American people don't have the gang culture we have. I own guns because it is a real threat in the ghetto area I live. blood members are a real threat to rob or burglarize my home. who are you to tell me I cant protect it?
  • 1 0
 @titoholt: where did the gangs get the guns from???
Yes we do have gang problems here in the UK, as does every country........
Our gangs have guns just not as many because....
Dun dun duuuuuuun
The country doesn't have guns
It's REALLY that simple.
Facepalm.
Thing is the US is too far gone for anything to be done about it
Also
How many "good guys with a gun" have ever solved any thing? Honestly, I'd genuinely like to know because all we hear about over here is about "good guys with guns" that didn't do shit
  • 1 0
 @nojzilla: stolen or black market. also I like gangs killing each other, and suicide is going to happen some how. I could care less. I am not giving up my guns because of the nerds out there that cant handle their shit. have fun getting alah akbared in your shitty country.
  • 1 0
 @titoholt: MASSIVE LOL, that reply just sums you an every reason the world is laughing at muracaaaa.
don't believe the hype you racist piece of shit.
  • 1 0
 @nojzilla: don't care. I prefer it that way.
  • 3 2
 0 guns = 0 mass shootings (or any other gun related crime), correct me if I'm wrong.

Anyway, I miss the day when the most controversial thing on PB was the number 28.99...simpler times.
  • 3 2
 @aribr are shootings the only problem or is it murder in general? Do truck attacks, bombings, knifings not matter?

If cases of rape increases by 200% is it still reasonable to ban guns?

I guess the notable thing is that 0 guns is absolutely impossible.
  • 3 1
 @jason342: You know, i really like the States! Just came back from a Ski Trip in UTAH, it was great! What I can't understand though, are these constant evasions when the right to carry guns is being discussed.
Yes, there are terrorist attacks in a lot of countires around the world. Those attack equal death by explosives or trucks driven into grps of people and so on ... But that's not the issue! You're deluding the actual problem: Simply look at the HUGE number of school shootings in the US in 2018! Look at all the pple getting shot in a year in the US! Those are facts, not emotional statements, but facts! You can't possibly try to evade this discussion with other wrongs like terrorist attacks. A crazy person can also get a gun over here, but it is much more difficult! As i said before, every country has crazy people, but only the US arm them ...
  • 2 0
 @yggi: you do have a point on the mass shootings that make world wide news but if you look at the stats that the news rarely share stats about our communist states like California, Illinois, and New York with the strictest gun laws yet still have the highest rates of gun violence from people that can't legally procure guns. If you take weapons from the innocent that violence in those areas will only get worse. The crazies that are commuting these violent acts are trying to get their 15 minutes of fame. If we stop making these crazies a household name and glorify what they're doing I'd be willing to bet you would see far less of them. When the UCC shooting happened our sheriff handled the situation perfectly. He wasn't going to release the name of the shooter as that's what they want in the end. Some low life nameless piece of shit that feels out of place in this world just wants his name to be famous.
  • 2 0
 @yggi: DEFINE "school shooting". The fact that you're saying there has been a huge number of school shootings in the US tells me you're listening to rubbish news. A school shooting (as defined by me) is when a person goes to a school and fires a weapon indiscriminately (or possibly targeting specific) at students. This has happened ONCE - maybe twice this year. ALL of the other cases were either a person committing suicide in a school parking lot, an accidental discharge of a firearm, a stray bullet hitting a school, a quarrel between 2 people at or near a school parking lot, etc.

If you analyze shooting statistics, you'll find that the majority of shootings are suicides. After that, it's gang violence. Outlaw guns in the US - sure, I bet all the gangs will come in to turn in their weapons... You're also comparing the US to countries that are ethnically homogenous, unlike the US who also don't have cartels at their southern borders...

Additionally, the US does not arm crazy people. THAT is the real issue. Keeping guns out of the hands of people who should NOT have them. Taking guns from law abiding citizens is not the answer.
  • 2 0
 @jason34: well, even 1 or 2 is too much @ 03/01/2018! "An accidental discharge of a firearm, a stray bullet hitting a school". I claim: No arms, no accidental discharge! No arms, no stray bullets hitting a school! This may be an oversimplification, but i really think more guns does mean more violence. I get your urge to feel safe, but you're more likely to be killed by guns in a gun environment... But i think i've had enough, i find this discussion very depressing ...
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer @mikelevy You guys need to stop the political sh!t on here. Big fan of this website, and have been for over 10 years. People use this site to get bike news, not the f*cking political garbage.
  • 2 0
 Stick to bikes. People come here to get away from this divisive garbage. To find it here is infuriating. Extremely disappointed.
  • 2 0
 A Pinkbike article related to gun control with more than 1,200 comments? This time minds will be changed, lives will be saved!
  • 1 0
 hopefully
  • 1 0
 But no bottle cage.
  • 1 1
 I might be way off base here, but it seems to be a lot of these problems came after "No Child Left Behind" (most of you will no what I'm talking about). Breed a stupid population, and stupid SH!T happens.

I know this debate and the reasons for it have been around longer than my 37 years, but it seems to be happening more frequently. Just an observation.

Oh and the more extreme people have gotten from left to right, instead of somewhere close to the middle may have made it worse as well.
  • 1 0
 I don't think the issue is shot guns as much as it is semi-automatic rifles with huge clips.........like really, other than for mass killing, what is their purpose in society! I support any ban if it pushes back at the NRA
  • 1 0
 @pingntodd So what would be a good "clip" size for you? You do realize that these are easily gained just about ANYWHERE for any type of firearm, not just semi-automatic rifles and definitely not specific to ARs.

If that is true, why not go back to civilians only being able to own black powder rifles (where you literally have to load powder, tamping cloth, ball, etc.)?

The thing people seem to forget is that if the person truly has malicious intent then they will find a way. If it is not guns, then it will be fertilizer bombs.
  • 1 0
 @gregnash: hey yeah, black powder rifles is a good idea......at least he would possibly only hit 1 person before you could casually walk up and bash him to bits.......
  • 1 0
 And now for some facts that will displease some people already convinced Camelbak supports the NRA....

redkiteprayer.com/2018/03/camelbak-responds-to-the-vista-boycott
  • 3 0
 I carry a gun when I ride to protect myself from the mentally ill transients that inhabit the woods were I ride.
  • 1 0
 assumed you lived in Santa Cruz, so I had to check. I guess whacky hobos live in forests all over.
  • 1 1
 I know I'm late to this thread, but anyone interested in signing a petition to boycott MEC? Smile Come on a company that owns Savage, and Federal isn't the enemy of the people... EVERY firearms manufacturer makes a version of the AR because EVERY firearms buyer wants to buy one.

Consumers created the demand, firearms companies just filled the demand. And be honest 99.9999999% of us consumers who buy AR's are perfectly normal, legally abiding citizens who are not the problem.
  • 4 2
 or a pressure cooker,or a sprinter van the common denominator is a man who should be out riding his bike
  • 7 4
 Savage arms are dope rifles. Best out of the box rifle ive seen in years.
  • 3 3
 Yeah, they’re nice. No reason anyone should be able to walk out of a gun shop with one and 1000 rounds of ammo in 20 minutes with one form and a NICS check.
  • 4 1
 youtu.be/0rR9IaXH1M0
Jim Jeffrey's explains it all
  • 1 1
 Not one of his shining moments. He went full potato.
  • 3 3
 I so disgusted at what my country is turning into, and what other countries have done/might do, that my school report turn into this: docs.google.com/document/d/106OWvdiAoQGc1B-Q0C5z7SnK5G5yiM7FvNYhJBx_aZY
  • 2 2
 Some guys who think they’re going to fight off the government with what’s in their gun collection need to continue persisting in their fantasy, though, and that’s more important.
  • 1 0
 LOL.
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: that’s not necessarily what i was saying, thnx for the input
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: You seem to forget that many of the people that have returned to civi life are veterans who will never give up their rights. This is why the government is pushing this massive stupid PR camping because an armed conflict would essentially eliminate the current power structure.
  • 6 2
 Hippie talk.
  • 1 2
 there is nothing wrong with guns it is a tool just like a hammer as a example but the problem is in the states it is to easy to get a gun we do not have the same gun issues in canada and you would not believe the amount of guns that are here also we think that canada is gun free we are not it is just hidden better the issue is we just need to keep the tool away from the tools that use them for wrong
  • 4 1
 I'd much prefer a ban on Catlike helmets
  • 4 1
 Vista Outdoors (VSTO) stock looks like a BUYing opportunity.
  • 3 2
 Same. And some bitchy kid from the Florida school shooting is calling out Fedex. All these libtards are destroying our businesses, or at least trying to. Shows that all they care about is their feelings and not the well being of America or other people.
  • 1 0
 @Chingus-Dude: Very true!
  • 3 0
 This thread was hacked by russians.
  • 2 0
 Russians want us to give up our guns so they can invade. It's cold in Siberia and the biking is no good.
  • 2 0
 If I were Giro or CamelBak, I'd be pissed at Pinkbike for this article. How did this get by editors??
  • 1 0
 politics has now become a place for contentious arguers instead of the debates we used to have arguing and debating are different
  • 2 0
 Would be great to see these affiliated brands being picked up by a new non-NRA supportive parent company.
  • 1 0
 I disagree. It would show that group think, and mob rule have had their day. This whole chimpanzee 'hooting and hollering' is low level consciousness, and hypocrisy. I am saddened by Florida, and fully support tougher gun laws, but this is a joke what's taking place. By non-NRA who would we suggest, somebody 'honorable?' Maybe we get a bank, or somebody noble like Tesla Cars to pick up these brands? Banks are pirates, and Tesla (like any e-car) is a mining nightmare - just consider an e-car will need 3 times the amount of copper, and cobalt (from war torn Africa), then lithium and nickel to make those batteries. The point is, when we wish to look "out there" and shame somebody the game continues forever, all the way back to us! The NRA by and large has always consisted of law abiding citizens. They are not the ones blasting little kids. Yes, better laws are needed, and I fully support this. But, the left and right fights this thing like immature people, and shame never helps, nor does group think. We all want to toss out our Giro helmets now, and I think it's very immature and hypocritcal. We had better not bike again, or visit bike parks, or even shuttle! the bikes are made of steel, alloy, carbon etc and are mining nightmares. Bike parks = chair lifts = massive amounts of electrictity, all from nuclear, coal and mostly natty gas. And to shuttle means we need a truck = steel, aluminum...and then gas - all powered by Rio Tinto, Chevron and Shell - and millions have died in this process over the last century. So, who do we boycott today? To be pure would mean fasting on a tiny island, until you die. So then, we need maturity, balance, an open heart, and critical thinking. Right now, the politicians and media are spinning crazy with this for political motives and it's very sad! 17 kids died in Florida. More died that evening alone in Baltimore, DC and Detroit from handguns. And since Florida, probably 200 have died in handgun warfare in the U.S. Where was CNN and Pinkbike then? Facts and strategy rather than drama. Then, real solutions. For now, I'll continue to buy Giro and Camelbak and whomever else. Too easy to play mother teresa over here.
  • 2 0
 Thanks for posting, I will be sure to support Vista and their companies even more now that I have read this.
  • 4 0
 #dicksoutforharambe
  • 1 0
 amen
  • 2 0
 I work at MEC and just got a sweet deal on an AR15, can't wait for it to arrive!
  • 1 0
 These boycotts force consumers to buy online & support those companies being wrongfully targeted by the ridiculously hysterical uneducated libturds!
  • 2 0
 How a hell is it possible to blame and dispise biking brands for a mass shooting? are all those people even serious? :/
  • 1 0
 Relevant to me, will be on the lookout when I buy, I wouldn't want the profit made on my next purchase going towards any company making tied to the NRA.
  • 1 0
 I had enough of this news feed one comment and people want to jump down your throat.. pinkbike should take this article down..
  • 8 6
 People can just as easily kill masses by driving into a crowd.. just saying.
  • 6 7
 Not really, look at per-incident deaths of vehicle related incidents versus mass shootings. MUCH easier to shoot into crowds then driving into them.
  • 7 3
 @MrFogg: guns are banned in San Francisco but there are tons of shootings, it's called a black market for illegal guns. Change the laws all you want, but don't tell me that will end the violence.
  • 6 5
 @Beez177: First, you didn't directly address my statement. Matter of fact you are stating that I have certain opinions without any evidence or proof. I say it is easier to kill people with guns than with cars and you respond with saying that I said removing guns will remove all violence? Ha ha do you even read? Stay in school bro...

Second I agree, removing all guns will not remove all violence, but I believe removing military style (assault) rifles would decrease the ability of those motivated to harm others to do as much damage. Same thing with high capacity magazines. You don't need 30 rounds of .223 to take down a deer. Matter of fact using tumbler rounds on meat you intend to eat sounds pretty dumb to me.

Now bow hunting, that's badass!
  • 3 1
 killing with fists happens as well
  • 2 4
 @MrFogg: clearly ppl don't understand the Second Amendment! The 2A has nothing to do with hunting. Take your own advice stay in school & crack open a book!
  • 4 0
 @foxxyman: Yeah, kill 17 people with your fists before someone stops you.
  • 2 3
 @MrFogg: Please take a look at Nice terrorist act before opening your mouth.

Single truck killed and injured more people in less time than it took for Las Vegas shooter.
  • 2 2
 @foxxyman: Can you kill 17 people in a row inside ten minutes with your fists, Jackie Chan? If that is even your real name???? Razz
  • 6 1
 @Axxe: Yeah, we should have age requirements, education requirements, licensing, registration, insurance, and criminal penalties for people who misuse cars to mitigate that risk... Oh, wait.
  • 3 2
 @handynzl: Worst terrorist act in US was a car bomb made from fertilizer. I already mentioned Nice.

Giving up fundamental individual freedoms, thankfully enshrined in the Bill of Rights, is not worth the small and unproven increase in safety.

There had been armed guard in the Florida school. They did not went in. And you tell me I should trust government agents to protect us at all times?
  • 1 2
 @MrFogg: especially if you lookat the vehicle related incidentsin the USA only vs mass shooting in the USA only.

Not even close.

But vehicles are way more dangerous and more difficult to acquire.
  • 4 2
 @DrPete: There are plenty of restrictions on gun purchasing. More than enough. Felons can't own guns. There are backgrounds checks up the wazoo. And there are certainly criminal penalties.

Second amendment is a birth right of every man. Driving is a privilege.
  • 2 1
 @onemind123: More difficult to acquire? Are you being dense on purpose?
  • 4 0
 @Axxe: And after that fertilizer bomb went off we changed our laws to regulate fertilizer sales...
  • 5 1
 @dthomp325: In fact it did. And we already have plenty of restriction on arms sales. More than enough. But it is never enough for the socialists.
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: i was talking all types of murders, including single murders. i am just saying that taking away a device that murders doesn’t help, putting a band-aid on a big and deep wound doesn’t help much. What we need is the teaching of “committing a mass murder because you mad” doesn’t help at all, it makes things worse.
  • 1 0
 @handynzl: well see my comment to DrPete :p
  • 4 0
 @MrFogg:

Anyone trying to take down a deer with a .223 either has very small deer or doesn't want the meat to be usable, because its going to take more than one shot to do it, even at ridiculously close ranges. If you want to take down a deer you want something bigger than a .223. Its a caliber good for coyotes, wolves, and other small game.
  • 3 0
 @Axxe: try to buy a truckload of fertilizer without ending up on a watchlist. You’ll need to go out to Walmart and buy an AR and a few hundred rounds instead.
  • 3 0
 @Axxe: not a single right in our constitution is unlimited. 2A is no exception.
  • 3 0
 @foxxyman: there is zero reason for semiautomatic rifles to be as easily accessible as they are. None.
  • 2 0
 @Jim-Beau: I never brought up the second amendment, you did. The second amendment was written to address the need of states to defend themselves with a militia. We already have well trained state militias called the National Guard.

Hunting is a common excuse given for why people feel the need to own certain weapons. My point was that military style weapons are not made for anything other than killing people.
  • 1 1
 @DrPete: no shit. And what is “unlimited” about second amendment?
It is very clearly limited to individual arms, and there are more than enough accepted restrictions, particularly in California.

You have no point.
  • 2 0
 @Beez177: Only 8 people killed before vehicle disabled. Hardly large numbers compared to mass shootings.
  • 2 2
 @MrFogg: What second amendment was written for was clearly resolved by the Supreme Court in their Heller decision. Just so people stop speculating what it does or does not mean. Read the decision.
  • 3 0
 @Axxe: True, but how many high death toll vehicular homicides have we seen versus high count shootings? How often they occur? Plus, trucks serve a purpose besides killing. Guns exist for one reason, to kill.
  • 2 0
 @Axxe: Only equalling the density of people that believe there is not a gun problem in USA .
  • 1 0
 @deeeight: Exactly my point. Don't high velocity low-caliber rounds also break up when they hit soft tissue?
  • 4 2
 @MrFogg: 8 killed 11 injured including 3 children.

3000+ killed on 9/11. Trump tried to ban Muslims from entering the country. They used box cutters to take over the planes not guns. Liberals called this racist, hateful. Of course not all Muslims are bad people, just like gun owners. Also banning all guns will only lead to a thriving black market.

Believe what you want but you only see it one way
  • 2 1
 @MrFogg: I already told you to look up Nice numbers before talking.

Yes, guns exist to kill. It is their lawful purpose. One is allowed to lawfully kill in self defense. This is an important freedom.
  • 3 2
 @onemind123: There is no gun "problem". It is a made up issue designed to incite emotions and hoplophobia to get people elected.

Homicides are unfortunate, but freedom is more important. Governments that confiscated arms became dictatorships and killed millions. It is not an exaggeration and not a joke. It happened in my lifetime. Too bad younger generations forgot that and is so easily manipulated.
  • 2 0
 @Axxe: no, that’s my whole point. Certain weapons are very effectively restricted (NFA o 1934 and its updates), and adding semi auto rifles to that list would be easy and effective.
  • 2 1
 Yeah, that last one that killed 17 kids really made me very very concerned about car ownership.
  • 1 0
 @MrFogg: Do you need a V12 for transportation? No, you don’t and hey, they pollute more but should they be banned? Also no. Same with guns.
  • 3 0
 @Beez177:

All but one of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi citizens, yet no US administration has ever attempted to bar Saudi's from entering the USA.
  • 3 0
 @pipomax: uh, there is such a thing as a car that’s not street legal.
  • 2 2
 @DrPete: semiautomatic weapons are effective for lawful purposes and commonly used. While some states are chipping away at them feature by feature, wholesale ban of them is unlikely to pass constitutional master.
  • 2 1
 @Axxe: I don’t agree with a full ban but I do fully support adding semi auto centerfire rifles to the NFA.
  • 3 1
 @Axxe: no gun problem huh?

www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43217142

Carry on with your rose coloured glasses.
  • 3 2
 @onemind123: OMG. A BBC article as a retort.

No. There is no “gun” problem. The Bill of Rights is what made this country great and protected the likes of you from dictorships. Which did confiscate guns and trampled other freedoms.
  • 2 2
 @DrPete: fortunately that is unlikely to happen. Auto center fire rifle is a common weapon. Nothing unusual or dangerous about it, no matter what hoplophobes think.
  • 5 4
 @Axxe: So basically you are saying is that your government is corrupt. Lovely country, mate. You lot voted for it.

The actual amendment reads:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

A singular person, a militia does not make.

Shooting your fellow person does not a State set free.

Where in those 27 words does it say that you can keep and bear a weapon to act as a policeman, to shoot in self defence, to use it upon others because you had a bad day?

Also, where are the well REGULATED persons forming this non-existent militia? You sure as heck have a loose definition of regulated gun control, not to mention a President that just recently allowed mentally unwell people to purchase weapons.
  • 2 3
 @handynzl: what actual amendment means had been decided by people who know this better than you. Just read the Heller decision by the Supreme Court. All your blabbering had been debunked. Really, why people keep repeating this revisionist nonsense.
  • 2 2
 @foxxyman:
Here in Aus we are sadly dealing with cowerdly king hits. at least 3 ppl in the last year have been killed
because a coward ran up behind them and king hit them resulting in death. Gov has been running a campaign with sports ppl and boxers against such cowardly behaviour.
so yeah agree it does happen
  • 2 1
 @handynzl:

In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (200Cool , the Supreme Court undertook its first-ever "in-depth examination" of the second amendment's meaning Id. at 635. After a lengthy historical discussion, the Court ultimately concluded that the second amendment "guarantee[s] the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation" (id. at 592); that "central to" this right is "the inherent right of self-defense"(id. at 628
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: uh, there is such thing as banned firearms. ALL AUTOMATIC FIREARMS!
  • 1 0
 Nice France truck attack killed more people than the Vegas shooting...
  • 1 0
 @MrFogg: Compare Nice France truck attacj to the Vegas Shooting...
  • 1 0
 @handynzl: He could if those fists were on a steering wheel!
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: ever been to LA?
  • 2 0
 @Beez177: Disagree with Trump banning muslims... the list was created by obama admin because the countries had no port control. There was no way to vet who was coming or going. Muslim ban is #fakenews
  • 2 0
 @pipomax: automatic weapons aren’t banned, they’re tightly regulated and heavily taxed. That’s why you don’t see anyone using a machine gun in a mass shooting. It’s because those laws work.
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: nonsense. It is not the ban, it is just mass murderers use what’s they have. Could be trucks.

And it is does not matter what works for some narrow purpose. Right to bear arms is enshrined as inalienable right of humans, nobody may take it.
  • 1 2
 People killed in the USA (323,1 Million people) with guns 2017: 61449 (guns legal)
People killed through terrorism worldwide 2017: 35000
People killed in europe (741,4 million people) with guns 2017: 1000 (guns illegal)

its the guns not the cars
  • 1 0
 @Axxe: go try to buy a big truck to replicate Nice. You’ll find that you need a special license to own and operate a truck that large, and the license includes physical and mental health checks and a real background check. You might want to look for a different example.
  • 2 1
 @Axxe: the right to bear arms is enshrined on a piece of paper that is designed to be amended as the needs of our society change.
  • 2 0
 @DrPete: liberals in a nutshell. No respect to anything if it does not fit theirs whims.

No. It is not a piece of paper. It is the Bill of Rights. As far as amendingbit - try.
  • 1 0
 @rideIng: it’s called lying with statistics.
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: The founding fathers, writing the 2nd amendment to protect against tyrannical government, might argue that point.
  • 1 0
 @MrFogg: @Jim-Beau: I never brought up the second amendment, you did. The second amendment was written to address the need of states to defend themselves with a militia. We already have well trained state militias called the National Guard.

Hunting is a common excuse given for why people feel the need to own certain weapons. My point was that military style weapons are not made for anything other than killing people."
____

The National Guard's duties are certainly NOT a well armed militia. Their supposed purpose is to protect the interior of the country against foreign occupation. In practice, they end up in the Middle East or other areas of conflict for some reason. Militias are supposed to be private citizens armed with their own weapons, called up to assist the army if needed.
  • 1 0
 @pipomax: Do you need an 8 inch DH bike? They are dangerous after all.
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: Exactly my point. Thank you.
  • 1 0
 @handynzl: oh man, you know so much about our country. I'm impressed... you clearly watch a lot of news... so well educated.... thank you for understanding all our problems, since those of us who live here just can't figure it out....

Stay out of international political debates dude.
  • 1 0
 @Poulsbojohnny: Your points are irrelevant. Read Miller and Heller decisions by the Supreme Court. That what second amendment means.

Miller needs revisiting though. In 39 fully automatic weapons were not commonly used military arms, so banning them as unusual was tolerable.

You liberal keep this revisionist drivel about the second amendment and don’t bother to read well researched court opinions. And read dissenting opinions to to know what was disagreement about.
  • 2 0
 @Axxe: remember the goal of the socialist is to grab all the guns so they can control all the people! Fact: Germany did it the 30s before they became Nazi Germany, the Russians did it before they became the Soviets, etc. etc. The point is, Never Ever Trust a Socialist or the American DemocRAT party!
  • 1 0
 @Jim-Beau: And most gun laws here had been originally targeted at suppressing blacks. Like California bans on weapon carry in response to Black Panthers in Oakland.

Hoplophobia is racist and fascist st it’s core.
  • 4 1
 Great idea boycott goods with zero government impact
  • 6 6
 I'm calling for a boycott of PB!!! RC and ML seemed to have gone full retard the last few months with obviously political content intended to incite. I have no problem, just roll over to VitalMTB.
  • 4 1
 I haven't seen people this fired up since DUB was announced.
  • 4 1
 Great.... I usually come to pinkbike to escape contentious politics ????
  • 2 1
 Oh no, all you snowflakes that own a intense, hand it over cupcake, you can't have a M1,Uzzi,M9,M16 in your safe space sweetie.
  • 3 0
 Geezus, this is almost as contentious as the new DUB spindle by Sram
  • 3 1
 Yeah, let's ban Giro helmets, but allow violent video game sales... seriously people. ????
  • 1 1
 where did you get the ban of Giro helmets from man? and are you seriously blaming video games? video games don't do shit. Guns kill, joysticks don't
  • 1 1
 @gorgefreerider: yeah it's f*cking right, violent video games are found everywhere in the world and don't cause deaths except for in your country which is coincidentally the place where you can buy a gun in 5 minutes. Seems like the guns are the problem
  • 1 0
 I hate all of you. This is one of the reasons I love mountain biking. So I get go into the woods and get as far away from you people as possible.
  • 3 3
 It’s the USA’s problem and they think owning a gun is more important than protecting a school full of kids. I won’t buy anymore products, of any kind, that I know supports the NRA. It’s a simple decision for me.
  • 2 0
 Then, you should never go to a bike park again. They use electricity to power the lifts, and the 'E' came from nuclear, coal, and mostly natty gas. Animals died, people died. You should never eat at McDonald's again, or another brand of cereal, or at any chain restaurant really (even somewhat fancy ones) because they all buy GMO. GMO is killing (literally in the thousands of) farmers in India right now - the seeds are not working against white flies, and the farmers suicide after one bad crop. Google India Farmer suicide, it's a huge crisis right now! And, you shall never shuttle your bike again, because Toyota trucks are made of steel (have you seen an open pit mine for all the steel, copper and aluminum required), and then the gas to power that truck - kids in Africa, with limbs blown off, as people fight over oil or copper rights? If we want to play the shame game, it continues forever, and you must fast on an island, until you die of starvation. The NRA btw, are not the ones doing the killing! They are mostly law abiding citizens who support their second amendment. History is abound in nations that have turned rogue and overthrown their societies because of lunatic Govts that have become totalitarian - look at the States today, it's a mess. The 'Left' fights the NRA extremely hard, and plays this shame game, so the NRA fights back. What we need is more maturity, and YES strong, intelligent gun laws! Remember, hand guns do the most damage, and as bad as Florida was, 20 times that number have been blown away in DC, Detroit, New Orleans and Baltimore since - all by handguns. Where was our shame, CNN or Pinkbike then? My point is, that people are nothing more than chimpanzees and wildebeest, that go wild with group shame and mob rule...and use scapegoating as their tool. We must study the facts, and then introduce good (tough) legislation. In the meantime, I will continue to support Giro and whomever else! Life is paradox. It's up to us to fill in the gap with discernment and mature thinking. Dare I say, it's convenient and also lazy to label the left as stupid, or the NRA as evil. Trying to shame either one, with 100% capacity is incorrect. Our lives are too interwoven to shame, and somewhere in that mess, we stare at the man in the mirror.
  • 1 1
 same, it's sad to see how low american society fell
  • 2 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: woah butthurt
  • 1 0
 I own Camelback & own Savage Arms so either way.... oh well. I'd like to meet someone who actually knows what EVERY product they buy's parent company is up to.
  • 2 0
 Just an observation here, but NRA supporters seem to be very aggressive neg proppers.
  • 3 0
 I don't think so. From what I've ever heard or seen, NRA members by and large are mostly law abiding citizens. NRA members are compliant with the law, and are NOT the folks running around blasting people. The NRA are the convenient scapegoat here.
  • 2 0
 ..As long as an AR-15 has a water bottle mount and a threaded silencer.....Pinkbike porn!
  • 2 0
 Bottom line, stupid people will do stupid things regardless of if guns are banned or not
  • 1 0
 what's the problem?
it's only a little gun to play with
www.savagearms.com/firearms/msr
hahaha

there's so damn proud of their products - it's scary
  • 22 21
 I see you pb, slowly but surely pulling garbage politics on here. PLEASE DON'T DO IT!!
  • 7 6
 I love having guns. I'll further support a bike company if they are tired to the same firearms companies that I am into.
  • 3 3
 Criminals commit crimes. Banning guns will take away guns only from those who use them responsibly. Criminals will still get what they want done. Nuff said.
  • 6 5
 If guns dont kill people, people kill people, that implies toasters don't toast toast, toast toasts toast.
  • 3 0
 Um, what?
  • 6 6
 Sweet, thanks PB. I will move these brands to the TOP of my shopping list! The rest of you out there huffing and puffing about politics, go ride bikes.
  • 2 1
 WOW its funny how people think inanimate objects kill people they do not HUMANS DO!
  • 5 7
 Makes me sad to think that one day i have to try to explain to my daughter why people kill other people with guns. The world would be a better place without them you cant deny that. I can understand a rifle for hunting etc if thats what you like to do in your spare time and if you then consume the animal thats fair game but do you need semi automatic weapons they serve no purpose but to kill multiple targets, its completely unessecary. How long can you ignore the facts.
  • 3 0
 Then you can explain to your kids why terrorists are using bombs and cars in attacks in England.... and you can explain how the terrorists are often killed by good guys with guns. Good luck with all that.
  • 2 0
 how will you explain how radical muslims in the UK kill children in concert halls or sever their heads from their bodies or run people over with cars on London streets, etc, etc? London mayor stated you have to get used to it! good luck with that explanation!
  • 1 1
 @Timroo1: I only have one kid.
  • 1 0
 @gasworks: you didn't answer the ?
  • 1 0
 @Jim-Beau: Change is a good thing my mtb companion do not be frightened of it.
  • 5 3
 Ill continue to support vista and the NRA
  • 3 1
 I will continue to support these companies. Stupid post by pink bike.
  • 1 0
 Virtue signalling and political grandstanding at its finest.

*sigh* the good idea fairy strikes again
  • 2 0
 This is SOOO worth a watch!!
youtu.be/0rR9IaXH1M0
  • 1 0
 Mmm, sort of. His argument is valid, but also very simple. The murders are being done with illegal firearms (non-registered). If you put a 5 year sentence on carrying illegally, with 15 years as second offense, a lot of people would dummy up. Again, I get it - why need guns? Guns are killing machines, and so on. Fair enough. However! People laugh at Americans who say they 'may,' one day, need to defend themselves against their government. Hahaha. I did the same. Look today, at 2018 - that country is a fraud. The highest levels of Justice (law, including the judges), the fbi and cia are totally corrupt - not the agents on the ground, mind you - who work hard. The stiffs at the top. They (tried) to rig an election, and failed, and were caught. Now, they are fraudulently chasing their President, thus destroying democracy and the term itself - "rule of law." Tyranny, breeds slowly. Now, let's study Argentina. This country was once the #3 economy in the world, with their currency pegged directly to the USD- a wealthy nation, prosperous! Not any more. There was a time, where a corrupt government (of course backed with an army and police) that went door to door, violently kidnapping people - and murdering thousands! "Mothers of the disappeared" still exist today, and annually they hold a vigil for those taken and killed. Think for a second how insane the left wing and crazy 'elite' in America are trying to resist democracy and overthrow a rightly appointed President. Forget Russia collusion, this is garbage - and I could spend hours explaining the geopolitical complexities that led to this, and WHY there was none - another rant, another day. BUT! If you are an American, sitting at home, watching this gongshow unfold, and you are one who studies history, and you are one who doesn't take things for granted (and become one of the Mauldin Economics, 4th Cycle (Rome will fall) idiots), then you have room for concern. I'm not saying guns, a case of whiskey and some beef jerky will save the day, but I understand why people do it. History is repeat with examples, where society falls asleep, takes things for granted, and then simply lets tyranny overthrow them, or they sheepishly let it happen anyways. What is needed is balanced, legal discussion on how arms can be distributed in that country. So far, it's mostly political BS. What the hell was Obama doing the last 4 years in office, while HAND GUNS were killing thousands in Chicago? Nothing is the answer. More died in one night in Chicago that 2 highschool shootings! Nothing on CNN. Nothing on Pinkbike. Who cares? It's not dramatic! Florida was graphic, and tragic. Of course, in the time it took to write this - double those kids just died in Africa from starvation. Nobody cares. Nobody will make a donation to Unicef of equivalent. But, they will come on Pinkbike and swear to never buy Giro again. Irresponsible, immature. Not good.
  • 1 0
 And the second part:
youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4

You may even agree with some of it, or at least have a laugh!
  • 2 1
 Mike kazimer fuck your editors note and fuck you for putting a political article on Pink Bike.
  • 2 0
 Thanks for that info. I will now be buying Vista products now.
  • 1 0
 bought Stock in Vista products! Friday trade $15.91, I am gonna ride that wave!! Anytime libturds protest something, the exact opposite happens!!
  • 1 0
 Funny how guns are killing the bike community, and nobody even has to pull the trigger
  • 1 0
 GUYS GUYS GUY!!! Just one question for you all....

How can I go treasure hunting if I don't have guns?!?!
  • 2 2
 No support for Vista Outdoor is how to make changes for the better! Thanks for exposing this company and sharing this with us all. Vote with your money and your feet.
  • 1 0
 Wow, this really blew up quick. I don't know if I have ever seen such a long post feed on PB.....
  • 2 0
 Well....that escalated quickly....
  • 1 0
 Where is Will Ferrel when we need him?
  • 15 14
 So all the Snowflakes want to rewrite Bill Of Rights on their way to socialist dictatorship. Fuck them.
  • 7 5
 Amen brother
  • 4 2
 Good to know, I’ll be buying everything I need from them. ????????
  • 2 0
 Well then.... now that we've got it all figured out...
  • 10 8
 Fuck PB and it's anti US BS
  • 3 0
 *its
  • 1 0
 @mi-bike: #shotsfired
  • 1 0
 I'm just wondering if this is the article that has the most comments in PB's history.
  • 1 0
 @milanboy1986 We've REACHED 1000 COMMENTS!!!
  • 1 0
 Si vis pacem, para bellum ... and if you turn it around it probably works as wall.
  • 3 1
 Well it's official, MEC has dropped all Vista brands moving forward.
  • 2 1
 Correct article title: "cycling brands not under scrutiny, but pinkbike wants to create massive drama".
  • 1 0
 obviously the OP is a left wing nut bag!!
  • 1 0
 Never seen soooo much shit talk on this site....go here everyday to escape the f@#ked up World...just saying.
  • 1 0
 Employees who design, promote, manufacture or distribute helmets and pumps are not hurting anybody. Why hurt them?
  • 9 8
 In USA Ebikes are dangerous things but guns are cool
  • 8 5
 In Wales... never mind Wales has never done anything relevant.
  • 7 1
 @pipomax: Didn't people from Wales help populate America
  • 5 3
 @Hoob93 Americans do not learn much about other countries in school. Have you ever watched Jeopardy? Answers for $200 stating "who was the secretary's assistant to the 3rd vice president"? But then Final Jeopardy answer, "what is that large country just north of USA"?
  • 5 3
 You’re right! I don’t think there has been any mass shootings in Wales. There probably hasn’t been anyone killed with a gun in Wales in the last twelve months. Why? No guns (hardly)@pipomax:
  • 3 2
 @Hoob93: No wonder USA is like it is then..
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: So you are saying your help was copulating, awesome!
  • 6 1
 @lev3000: It amazes me that whenever its convenient people compare countries to the USA but when its not they say that it does not apply.

Gun control does not work, look at Honduras. Reply: You can`t compare USA to Honduras it is a poor country.
Gun control does work look at Wales. In that case you do compare countries that can`t compare either. Wales is not surrounded in the South by poor and violent countries, illegal immigration, and not even close enough population.


Liberal hypocrisy
  • 4 0
 @pipomax: I think it is perfectly fair to use comparisons. But you have to be comparing apples to apples. Canada has gun control that works and has a violent country to the south.
  • 3 0
 @pipomax: Honduras has a lot of corruption and poor infrastructure. America and Wales have much more similar level of government control but still very different countries. There is such a thing as an unfair comparison and a fair comparison look it up.
  • 2 0
 @pipomax: look up what you're ancestors did to make your country it was a bit more than just f#cking lol
  • 3 0
 @pipomax: Tom Jones. Tom Jones will always be relevant to something or other.
  • 3 1
 @pipomax: Violent countries...? really? just look at how many wars the USA was involved in since 1776 on Wikipedia, it's bloody longer than this comment section
  • 2 1
 @pipomax: Better than being famous for all the wrong reasons IMO (in response to Wales not having done anything relevant)
  • 2 1
 @PierfrancescoTron: you're from Italy.... Italy was part of the axis of evil in World War 2.... and you want to talk trash about wars involving the United States? That's a joke dude, nice try.
  • 1 1
 @PierfrancescoTron: you're quoting wikipedia, we're all laughing at you!!
  • 2 1
 @rebel12: umm . . . what is Alberta for 4 million quebec dinars!
  • 1 0
 @Jim-Beau: You get a poutine for that!
  • 2 1
 @rebel12: i would rather have 2 hot dogs all dressed, plz & merci!
  • 2 1
 @Jim-Beau: I'll just let you gun retarded uneducated rednecks laugh as much as you want, anyways facts aren't accepted in your country (like climate change)
  • 2 1
 @Timroo1: do we have to talk about how many deaths your army caused? are you kidding? nuking civilians in Japan and bombing the shit out of the middle east just to quote a few of the great actions your army did
  • 1 2
 @PierfrancescoTron: nuking a country after being attacked? Yes we did that. Siding with NAZIS? Nope, that was your country you dolt. Go disappear dude, logic doesn't work on you.
  • 2 1
 @Timroo1: the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were completely useless, the Allies had all turned towards Japan since the war in Europe had already finished and would have eventually won the war without the use of nuclear weapons. Obviously though the US army had to try to show off their huge Richard and decided to nuke two towns full of civilians.

And yes, "italy" sided with Nazi Germany and when I use inverted commas for italy it's because we had an absolute madman as a dictator and he saw the alliance with Germany as the only way to recreate the empire, he did not have any nazist beliefs.(btw I'm not at all trying to defend what Mussolini, the dictator, did because it's undefendable but only exposing the situation)
  • 1 1
 @PierfrancescoTron: no, you're just making excuses. Your reason for siding with one of the most murderous maniacs in history is far worse than the US reason for nuking Japan. But hey, enjoy ignorance. Don't throw stones when your recent history looks that bad.
  • 2 1
 @Timroo1: learn how to read moron, I clearly said I'm not defending what Mussolini did, Mussolini was a madman just as Hitler was. The nuclear bombing was useless as Japan would've lost the war almost immediately since all the Allies were now concentrated on it, without the need of killing more than 129k people.

Oh it's ironical how you talk about recent history looking bad cuz in the 240 something your country existed it spent around more than 90% of it's time in war

www.informationclearinghouse.info/article41086.htm
  • 1 1
 @PierfrancescoTron: worry about your own country dude. You have too much time on your hands, posting a ton of anti American BS on a website. Glad I could point out what a dolt you are. It was a good time.
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: You mean u admire the corrupt lying "scientist" from East Anglia University! You're even a bigger idiot than u led us to believe! Congrats Frany!!
  • 2 1
 @Jim-Beau: shit I forgot you were Americans and facts don't work with your country if they go against your ideologies.

Go enjoy dodging bullets
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: you're a hateful ignorant little POS, we get it. No need to keep proving our point.
  • 2 1
 @Timroo1: haha coming from someone who's insulting everyone who doesn't share his ideology, bloody love it. Glad we made each others day Smile

peace man
  • 1 1
 @PierfrancescoTron: nice try dude. All I did was respond to every hateful post you made. I haven't even mentioned my "ideology". I called you out on your hatred, you spewed more hatred, I laughed at your stupidity. You're embarrassing yourself.
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: poor franny gets called out on his chronic libturd propaganda by many on here & Franny doubles down with it. If libturds like Franny didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all!! Franny when u ever in DC, look me up I'll buy u a coffee & properly educate u!
  • 1 0
 @Jim-Beau: proper education from a pro-gun sure haha, I might look you up for a ride though if I ever come to the states

jah bless (also please don't call me franny)
  • 1 0
 @PierfrancescoTron: Franny, c'mon! Anyway, Hey enjoy that muslim revolution in Italy!! Should b a blast!
  • 1 2
 @Jim-Beau: It's actually not really happening, or rather it's not happening at an extraordinary rate which could qualify it as a revolution, surprisingly because the government (even though it is officialy a laic state) is extremely linked to the church due to the presence of the Pope in the Vatican, meaning that in public areas we don't actually get this sensation of muslim revolution but rather of christian dominance (but even this christian dominance isn't actually that strong)
  • 2 1
 No, ebikes are just stupid.
  • 3 1
 I don’t care
  • 4 7
 @jclnv: Rubbish. Meth is illegal in the US, yet thousands of people die from it every year. Who would you blame the truck attack that occurred in Nice France on? People who didn't want to outlaw trucks? The attacker killed the truck driver and stole the truck if I remember correctly.

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Your logic is flawed. You need to take a look at the history of oppressive governments. Citizens being armed is the core of American doctrine/values. Have you ever looked at stats on how many times a year guns are used for self defense? What about how man people are killed in mass shootings when response comes from a citizen vs the police? What about a 5 foot woman who is about to be raped by a 6 foot man? You're going to take away her equalizer? Does this mean that you're at fault for all women who will be r aped in the future? I'd say yes.

Another note - look at the US ICBM system... We have nearly 500 nuclear missiles ready to launch. A previous system was named "peacekeeper" as it was a deterrent for anyone who would attack the US. They're purely defensive weapons, but are keeping the peace because countries know that if they strike us they will be absolutely crippled.
  • 6 3
 Wow, you’ve bought the whole NRA package hook, line, and sinker. How many European countries in 2018 are oppressive dictatorships? How many have strict gun laws?

The idea that citizens need to own guns to be free and safe is just flat-out false. Guns are neither necessary nor sufficient to guarantee freedom or safety. In 2018 a free press and the free flow of information are far more effective safeguards against oppression than whatever gun you own.
  • 4 5
 @DrPete: I am the NRA dood. You obviously don't understand why and how the US was created, and that to maintain freedom, it is imperative that citizens have the right to bear arms. Only 60ish years ago millions of people were murdered. The span of your life is not the spectrum of possibilities that can occur. Why are you so against citizens being armed? Is it because of fatality statistics alone? Is it based only on school shootings? I just don't get it.

What happens when the press becomes a state-run press? What if we take guns away from all citizens - who are of one political party? Or religion? Can't you see where this goes?? The 2A guarantees the 1A.
  • 1 1
 @jason342 the thing with your gun/truck logic is this, a guns main purpose is to kill while a trucks to to transport thing. These can’t be compared like for like.

Your logic of arming people to protect them selves is an interested one, should black people be armed to protect themselves against police brutality? Should tourist visiting America be armed as well, after all America is so dangerous that the rest of the population needs to be armed. Should North Korea be armed to protect themselves from larger countries?

I used a shotgun before for clay pigeons shooting, it was great fun, I really enjoyed it. But I don’t need to own gun, I don’t to need to have one at home on the off chance that something happens. If I did have a gun and in the process of protecting myself I killed a innocent bystander how would I feel?
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: Well, you got Russia, then you got Slovenia, you could say Ukraine. Bosnia was just a few decades ago. Seams like the war in Ireland was pretty brutal in the 90's, as well. That's off the top of my head. Switzerland's population is about as armed as we are, and they have low crime. In Mexico there is literally one gun store and you can't really own one, but they have more gun deaths than the USA. Guns or no guns, people hate each other and are going to shwack each other, regardless.
  • 1 0
 I made it to the bottom! Longest scroll ever!
  • 2 0
 You people are idiots
  • 1 0
 I want to criticize the editors note, but hate speech is not allowed.
  • 1 0
 Nooooooooooooh.... I really like some of those brands.. Way to ruin my day
  • 1 0
 Why do people need a gun?
  • 1 0
 Love my Spikes Tactical AR15.
  • 1 0
 Is this thread going to hit the 2000 posts Mark?
  • 7 7
 Is Troy Lee Designs related in any way to the NRA?
  • 11 4
 One can only hope...Death to clown suits!!! hahahahahaha
  • 2 1
 If I find CP Gang is owned by a gun mfg, I'm going to be bummed. Italian guns are probably pretty cool, though.
  • 37 37
 I just re-joined the NRA. No joking, I did.
  • 19 13
 Me too actually. Cant wait to get my NRA hat.
  • 7 10
 Canada is considering not allowing NREh membera into Canada. Keep em types in their own wallz that trumpet wants up.
  • 9 3
 @MaxFromMarshfield: I joined because of libturds hysteria
  • 7 8
 Paid for 5 more years here.
  • 3 10
flag Batipapo (Feb 28, 2018 at 16:13) (Below Threshold)
 @onemind123: VERY SMART move!
  • 4 4
 Yeah BUDDY!!
  • 4 2
 @onemind123: There's no NRA database... I do have NRA stickers on my truck though...
  • 1 0
 In California its almost more important to beba calgunner. Nra has lretty5 much given up on cali.
  • 13 16
 NRA is a great non-profit organization that protects our 2nd amendment. Only $40 for a membership for a year. It's well worth getting one.
For sure my next helmet will be from Giro!
  • 9 8
 They’re shills for the gun industry and care about your rights only to the extent that you keep buying guns. Amoral parasites of the worst kind. It wasn’t always that way.
  • 13 8
 I totally agree. I'm sitting on about 2000 rounds of Fed 9mm as well. Didn't know they were related.
Sounds like everyone wants to reopen mental health asylums which could be a common goal. I am a Reagan/Trump guy from day one but never understood closing down mental health asylums. Just look at the cities. Virtually every homeless vagrant is either full psycho or full drug addict take your pic. SOmething needs to be done to be able to place these people to evaluate and treat or just secure from law abiding citizens.
Taking any gun away is not the issue. My AR hasn't shot anyone, and probably won't unless you try and take it.
  • 6 11
flag DrPete (Feb 28, 2018 at 17:29) (Below Threshold)
 @chasejj: less than 5% of mass shooters have a diagnosable mental illness. That’s why the American Psychiatric Association also supports stronger gun control, as does every organization involved in injury prevention in this country. F1 drivers would probably never kill anyone driving F1 cars on city streets but they’re not allowed to do it, no matter how much faster their commute would be. Just because you’re a safe gun owner doesn’t mean you’re immune to an AD or a case of mistaken identity. Having as many guns as we do is a net harm to our society by any rational measure.
  • 3 4
 @DrPete: That is complete BS. But don't bother with facts or nuthin. Fact is APA has some culpability in ALL these mass shootings as virtually all the shooters have been on or were currently on phychotropic drugs prescribed to them by the medical profession. Something most of these fake news outlets intentionally omit from their reports. Read the toxicology report on any of them as well any celebrity suicide or "accidental" death/OD. All involve these family of drugs. This then implies that virtually all had mental health issues. Hmmmmmm. Inconvenient facts when you all just wait for the next crazy person and proclaim the gun is at fault.
  • 7 1
 @chasejj: The government just wants to pass the blame because they didn't bother to enforce existing legislation .I will never give up my rights for any reason because no reason will make subjugation appealing.
  • 2 2
 @sbrdude1: me either.........From my cold dead hands.......
  • 5 2
 @DrPete: you're a fool. They are market driven. Most Americans want their guns, for good reason. We have an inadequate, incompetent, bloated, corrupt and wasteful government we've ever had, as demonstrated during this past tragic shooting. We have cops killing tons of innocent people. Now, I'm supposed to surrender my right to defend myself to that same government, and expect they will do their jobs? No thanks.
  • 1 1
 @sbrdude1 warms my heart to get on here and feel like I'm not alone.... the "mountain sports" crowd is sometimes quite skewed in their views, since they often live in a bubble
  • 1 1
 politics has now gone to arguing from debating
  • 2 3
 I'm right, your'e all wrong (unless you agree with me), now let's go ride bikes!
  • 3 4
 Stupid Yanks, don't understand their own constitution... youtu.be/sRGp0S7qZLw
  • 2 0
 I like bear arms
  • 1 0
 Who gives a damn
  • 1 0
 wow..
  • 6 7
 I already own a couple Bell helmets, and now will make sure to purchase items made by the other companies.
  • 1 0
 Yes, but please make sure you quit mountain biking immediately. Your bike is made of aluminum, carbon or steel, right? Mining, big open pit mines - in Africa - killing kids. And you you have suspension - fox or rock shox? Where did the oil come from? You support Shell, Exxon and Chevron. Get it? Impossible to stand on the left and say "I'm beautiful, and shame those over there." Do you go to a bike park? How do you think those chairs go up the hill? Natty gas, coal and nuclear. And, the food and beer you consumed at days end, all arrived to your mountain village by truck, train or ship. Bananas from Ecuador = a big ship and lots of diesel. It never ends. So, if you're gonna righteously stop buying Giro, you better stop all else cause I can tell you, mining in Africa kills way more kids, than a school shooting. And, in the time it took to write this response, probably 100 just died in Africa from starvation - where are the protests at Harvard, Berkeley or Yale, from all the students? We need: rule of law, intelligent discussion, personal ownership and the embracement of paradox. Everything else is just CNN Group think and mob rule - chimpanzees in the trees hooting and hollering.
  • 1 1
 I'm just here for the comments.
  • 2 0
 You got enough of them.. enjoy.
  • 3 2
 Fake news
  • 10 2
 I identify with the guy in the NRA hat.
  • 2 5
 @Chingus-Dude:

Anything that requires reading is fake news for the right in the US Smile ))
I guess that's why more than half of Trump's supporters think college is a waste...
  • 3 0
 @Chingus-Dude:

You're 17 dude... what do you know about the Economist?
  • 7 6
 @FRguild: Anything that contains poorly or deceptively interpreted statistics is fake news to the right because they can think objectively. Have there really been 18 school shootings this year?!? I'll bet you'd say yes. The term "school shooting" implies (to most people) that a person is shooting indiscriminately at kids at school. To CNN, it means, suicide, accidental discharge of a firearm, a stray bullet that hits a school, gang related event at a school, etc. See how deceptive this is?? They're padding their argument with statistics and vaguely defining terms to support their case, ie - FAKE NEWS.

Besides, who needs college degrees in gender studies and lesbian dance theory?
  • 3 5
 You’re obviously a bigot. No point in trying to reason with you. @jason342:
  • 3 2
 @jason342: So just for clarification - you think a news agency that reports 18 schools shootings in the US is spreading fake news because their definition of "school shooting" doesn't jive with yours? And furthermore, you DON'T define a suicide, accidental discharge, stray bullet or gang related event as a school shooting even though a gun was shot on school property?

Just trying to get a little context here.
  • 2 2
 @lev3000: Define Bigot... You don't have enough evidence to determine if I'm a bigot or not, so I'm not sure you know what it means...

Maybe you mean I'm irrational so you can't reason with me?
  • 3 2
 @scrawnydog: I call #fakenews because they're intentionally deceiving people to push their agenda. In this case, their agenda likely aligns with yours, so you don't have an issue with it. If this is the case, you're likely not a person of principle and are ok with embellishing facts to push your agenda.
  • 1 0
 @jason342: You're the one pushing an agenda. You mentioned CNN, FAKE NEWS and the notion that a documented number -18- of incidents, at a school, involving guns was being skewed to fit some narrative you don't like. I simply asked you questions that you clearly didn't want to answer.

There was a "shooting" down the street from my house a few weeks back - no injuries but police called to the scene. It was a reported as a shooting by the police and media alike - because a gun was shot. So again, my question to you is, if there have been 18 shootings on school property then how is the media pushing #fakenews?
  • 1 2
 @jason342: Here you go buddy here's the definition:
1.
a person who holds blindly and intolerantly to a particular creed, opinion, etc.
2.
a narrow-minded, prejudiced person

You've said plenty to prove you're a bigot.
  • 2 1
 @Hoob93: not sure where you got that definition, but I use the following:

Bigot: "a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions"

So you're saying I don't take facts into consideration? Not sure what you're implying here... Narrow minded maybe?
  • 4 1
 @scrawnydog: I think I answered your question directly. No, I wouldn't define an accidental discharge of a firearm at school to be a school shooting. The argument is about AR15s, and indiscriminate school shootings and the media is bringing in nonsense like this "18 school shootings" data and likening it to what happened in Florida.

These are vastly different events and an AR15 was only used in Florida. How does a school security officer accidentally discharging his firearm have ANYTHING to do with taking AR15s away form American citizens? same question for a person committing suicide in a school parking lot - what does this have to do with limiting or taking firearms from citizens? Point is - these events are irrelevant and unrelated to what happened in Florida, but the media is using it to pad statistics in their favor, hence, #fakenews. Hope this clears it up for you.
  • 2 4
 @jason342: it's from Collins English dictionary I'm implying your a bigot generally there's no reasoning to be had
  • 1 0
 @Hoob93: Mmmm... I thought this was a debate?
  • 1 3
 @jason342: lol you were debating in a bigoted way
  • 1 3
 @Hoob93: Hoob, you are a boob.
  • 1 1
 @jason342: Still not clear. Everytime there has been a school shooting news outlets have reported how many there were prior. And I've yet to read a single news story that's perpetuated the idea that every shooting was a mass shooting, perpetuated by someone with an AR. The only reason the AR is in the spotlight is because of Florida. If the news outlets you read have led you to believe otherwise then perhaps its time to change sources.

And you can't view restrictions as a gun grab. I've heard that rally cry a million times before and have yet to see confiscations of any type. If you want to be pissed, be pissed at the irresponsible gun owners who go out and kill kids in school for threatening your gun rights. Be pissed at the irresponsible security officer for accidentally discharging their firearm on school property - how the hell does that even happen. Be pissed at all the people who created the number 18 - they are the ones threatening your rights.

And per the article above - Giro products have directly saved my life more time then any Savage firearm so they get my business for good.

All respect intended man. Your a mountain biker so the way I see it we're all part of the same tribe. No reason we can't learn from one another.
  • 1 0
 sooooo 29ers or 27.5?
  • 1 2
 #boycotyourlocalgunretailer
  • 5 6
 Awesome! I will buy tons of Camelbak podiums
  • 3 6
 Haters gonna hate. I bet Vista’s sales are dropping drastically as speak! It’s a shame the gun market is affecting the bike industryFrown
  • 14 2
 It's not a shame. It's stupidity. I think more people are coming around (though this discussion on PB today) to realize that it's totally immature to target Giro or anyone else. Why bike at all? You support mining and oil companies that are either killing a seal here in Canada, or an African kid in the congo. Bike parks = electricity = nuclear, natty gas and coal. Gone shuttling lately? Your Toyota Tacoma = steel = mining, and she goes up the hill with gas - Shell and Exxon. Oh, and that snack at subway and mcdonalds = gmo = farmers in India are engaging in mass suicide from farmer debt (as the gmo product is failing to white flies). Who we gonna hate today? Shame tomorrow? We can't play this game - it's shadow projection and fools paradise.
  • 14 15
 The second amendment is the constitution’s E-bike.
  • 11 7
 Costly, ugly, does unintended damage, and gives people a false sense of confidence that gets them into situations they can’t get out of.
  • 5 4
 @DrPete: For someone with poorly sourced ideas you sure have a lot to say.
  • 6 2
 @sbrdude1: poorly sourced? How about the words of a former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court: “"[The Second Amendment] has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word 'fraud,' on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime."
--- Former Chief Justice Warren Burger

That snowflake was appointed by ultra-liberal Richard Nixon.
  • 6 3
 @sbrdude1: I draw my poorly sourced ideas from 15 years as an army surgeon having seen trauma in cities in the US and in combat, and a couple decades as a gun owner and competitive shooter, and from the American College of Surgeons, an organization that has been working on injury prevention for 100-plus years and of which I’m a member, and the advice and opinions of people who kick in doors and kill bad guys for a living. So yeah, really no background at all to talk about gun violence.
  • 3 1
 @sbrdude1: one more for you to ignore about the original intent of the second amendment: www.law.upenn.edu/journals/conlaw/articles/volume10/issue3/Kozuskanich10U.Pa.J.Const.L.413(200Cool .pdf
  • 3 1
 @DrPete:
The fraud being that our natural human right to armed self defense can somehow legally be restricted.
With ya there.
  • 7 1
 @DrPete: I suppose there's no changing your mind then. So I ask you, even if taking all guns away would change the violence (it really wouldn't many studies show this... google "Harvard gun control study"), why do you insist on trying to force Americans to give up their guns? Move to another country - this is one of the last places on earth, that isn't just somewhere off the grid entirely, where people can come to enjoy certain freedoms, including the right to own a gun and defend themselves. No, the "freedom situation" ain't that great, even relatively speaking when looking at a place like Hong Kong or Switzerland, but this is the ONLY large, diverse place that has the kind of constitution we do. You can't possibly justify your intense hatred of the 2A by thinking it would save lives - even if full repeal would change the violence, i.e. the best case in your mind, there are much more worthy causes to pursue that would save thousands of times more lives, and don't involve stripping people's rights. Best case scenario, and I mean absolute best case - I'm totally wrong and you're entirely right - you are still making an argument effectively the same as wanting to lower all speed limits to 25mph, or adopt a drug policy like singapore's (death sentence) - massive encroachment on freedom to "save" a few lives (fractions of a percent), or change the way in which they are lost (i.e. gangsters start bombing each other instead of doing drive bys.) I just don't get it, dude.
  • 1 2
 Yes cant wait for the trickle down technology
  • 4 4
 Bikes, not guns.
  • 2 3
 I prefer both, thank you very much! You should try shooting a pistol at California liberal tourists while riding your bike down glorious Arizona singletrack...it's GLORIOUS FUN!
  • 1 2
 The thing Yanks hold most dear... Junk Food and Firearms. lol
  • 7 9
 Thanks for the education PinkBike this is how we start to win.
  • 6 3
 Or loose? I suppose it depends on your point of view, doesn't it?
Below threshold threads are hidden







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.192933
Mobile Version of Website