Yeti cuts ties with NRA

[Bellero]

One has to be a bit insane to pay 400-$500 for a molded plastic cooler anyway. I never bought any of their products and now I definitely won't.

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by 270person

X2. You hit the nail right dead centre.

But hey. It was passed in 1791 so what's really changed in the world? I still shoot a flintlock. Don't we all?

A ridiculous argument. I could easily argue that its been toned down. Flintlocks, at the time, were a top of the line technology, same as what was utilized by the armed forces. Are we still allowed top of the line technology such as that utilized by the armed forces?

[Little red riding hood]

Originally Posted by Trochu

A ridiculous argument. I could easily argue that its been toned down. Flintlocks, at the time, were a top of the line technology, same as what was utilized by the armed forces. Are we still allowed top of the line technology such as that utilized by the armed forces?

Fortunately no, we are not allowed access to the same technology as that of the armed forces.
I would hate to think what the death toll would have been if that psycho in Vegas had access to a minigun, or frag grenades!

99.9% of the population would do nothing more dangerous than making YouTube videos about cutting down trees with a minigun.
But history has shown us that there are some people who should not have access to anything more dangerous than a plastic butter knife!
Trouble is, they don't wear signs to tell us who they are and announce their intentions toward their fellow man.

In a perfect world, there would be no need to restrict any kind of weapons, but in this world... I'm glad that private citizens don't have access to cruise missiles.
I personally have no use for a full auto rifle, I prefer to make each shot count, but if spraying a whole paycheck worth of ammo downrange in a few seconds gets you going?
As long as your smart enough to ensure there are no people downrange... knock yourself out!
I'll watch your video when you post it on YouTube.

[muledriver]

Originally Posted by East Toaster

NRA member here, that little puke David Hogg sold me on a membership. If people like him are against the NRA and gun owners I wanna be friends with the people he hates.

Certainly glad that you didn't have to go through the trauma of losing friends and hearing those gun shots that "that little puke" had to endure.

The real "little puke" is the one who killed all those students at Parkwood. The real "big pukes" are those that castigate David Hogg and his fellow survivors. You apparently have chosen to be one of the later.

[Jerry D]

When the high school generation runs the country in 20 years we will start to see a very strong shift in the US imo if it hasn't already started....

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

“Truth is, we did not cut ties with the NRA or the Friends of the NRA. We changed the structure of our discount program to better align it with the business. I’m not happy that the NRA would choose to mischaracterize and sensationalize this. Know that we do support the Second Amendment, gun owners and their pursuits. Please stick to these talking points publically and feel free to point out your own experience with our brand and people. See below:

As you know, YETI was built on a passion for the outdoors and, as we always have, YETI continues to actively support hunters, anglers, and the broader outdoor community. We believe in the Second Amendment and the Constitution of the United States.

Recently, we made a number of business, pricing and dealer decisions to simplify and clarify our product distribution. Based upon these, we ended a wide range of legacy vendor programs, which affected a number of different organizations. The conclusion of these programs in no way impacts our ongoing support of our consumers’ passions, as YETI continues to work with many organizations that promote the conservation and management of wildlife and habitat restoration.”

If NRA memberships are selling like hot cakes why not put a NRA sticker on a cooler and grab a piece of that pie too? Business 101.
Need marketing advice I am cheap.... not easy but cheap

[muledriver]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

“Truth is, we did not cut ties with the NRA or the Friends of the NRA. We changed the structure of our discount program to better align it with the business. I’m not happy that the NRA would choose to mischaracterize and sensationalize this. Know that we do support the Second Amendment, gun owners and their pursuits. Please stick to these talking points publically and feel free to point out your own experience with our brand and people. See below:

As you know, YETI was built on a passion for the outdoors and, as we always have, YETI continues to actively support hunters, anglers, and the broader outdoor community. We believe in the Second Amendment and the Constitution of the United States.

Recently, we made a number of business, pricing and dealer decisions to simplify and clarify our product distribution. Based upon these, we ended a wide range of legacy vendor programs, which affected a number of different organizations. The conclusion of these programs in no way impacts our ongoing support of our consumers’ passions, as YETI continues to work with many organizations that promote the conservation and management of wildlife and habitat restoration.”

Where was this posted originally? I can't find any place doing the Google thing where it was, and it is not on their website.

Thanks.

[East Toaster]

Originally Posted by muledriver

Certainly glad that you didn't have to go through the trauma of losing friends and hearing those gun shots that "that little puke" had to endure.

The real "little puke" is the one who killed all those students at Parkwood. The real "big pukes" are those that castigate David Hogg and his fellow survivors. You apparently have chosen to be one of the later.

Spoken like a true.... Fudd/anti-gun soyboy.

Let me guess, you have no need for an AR15 so no one should have one?

"I need this here 3006 and rem 870, no one needs anymore than these 2 guns here I tell ya whut"

David Hogg, do some research on him. Dad was FBI, mom works for CNN, hence why he gets to much screen time and attention, oh except as of late because people are past that now and have moved on.

What about his little "peace armband" movement? You know who else had to wear armbands? The Jews.

Kids who can't vote want to tear up the constitution and I can guarantee you that it'll be one cold day in hell in America before that happens. David Hogg's generation is the reason tide pods have a "do not eat" warning.

Signed, NRA Member.

[muledriver]

Originally Posted by muledriver

Certainly glad that you didn't have to go through the trauma of losing friends and hearing those gun shots that "that little puke" had to endure.

The real "little puke" is the one who killed all those students at Parkwood. The real "big pukes" are those that castigate David Hogg and his fellow survivors. You apparently have chosen to be one of the later.

Originally Posted by East Toaster

Spoken like a true.... Fudd/anti-gun soyboy.

Let me guess, you have no need for an AR15 so no one should have one?

"I need this here 3006 and rem 870, no one needs anymore than these 2 guns here I tell ya whut"

David Hogg, do some research on him. Dad was FBI, mom works for CNN, hence why he gets to much screen time and attention, oh except as of late because people are past that now and have moved on.

What about his little "peace armband" movement? You know who else had to wear armbands? The Jews.

Kids who can't vote want to tear up the constitution and I can guarantee you that it'll be one cold day in hell in America before that happens. David Hogg's generation is the reason tide pods have a "do not eat" warning.

Signed, NRA Member.

I probably have more guns than most on this forum, but I am against unfettered access to guns that the NRA promotes. They even opposed restrictions on mentally ill buying guns THIS YEAR. They've gone off the deep end.

What's wrong with safe storage? What's wrong with vetting WHO buys a gun? I really don't care what you buy if you are vetted.

Just as a driver's license doesn't restrict what car you buy or drive, a license to buy a gun doesn't restrict you either. Of course, just like we don't want anyone without extra vetting/training to drive a semi, what is wrong with the same logic being applied to certain types of guns (handguns as example).

And unlike a car, registration of guns does nothing.

Now, back to who is the puke. It's the shooter. Any discussion and denigration of those students who survived that tragedy is way off base, uncalled for, and frankly, a sad indication of how skewed the whole debate has become.

[ETOWNCANUCK]

Last i checked as a consumer, I could take what money the government left me with and buy whatever the hell I want.

I could care less what company supports what cause so long as I get the products I want.

I worry about what "I" do
Haven't got the ducks to care about anything else.

More companies in bed with nefarious types than we will ever know.

[Sundancefisher]

I would be boycotting more BC products and services far before dropping Yeti.

There is no better cooler than a Yeti. 33 degree day in Cuba. Ice and drinks into the cooler first thing in the morning...lots of ice left at the end of the day.

Strong enough to sit or stand on. They are/were the beast of the cooler world.

Or try this?

https://ca-pelicancoolers.glopalstor...-color-coolers

Pelican's look pretty durable.

[chris762]

If Yeti is dropping the NRA, is the elusive Sasquatch far behind? I had no idea they managed to find one to interview.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by East Toaster

David Hogg, do some research on him. Dad was FBI, mom works for CNN, :

Funny how research is so easy.

David Hoggs Dad is a retired FBI agent-information which is how conspiracy mongers get clicks...use a small bit of truth to hook your fish.

His mom however is a teacher.

http://www.newsweek.com/david-hogg-e...plained-872609

Conspiracy theorists are a funny lot. Highly gullible to the point that the more far fetched the theory is the more it has to be true.

[BlackHeart]

Originally Posted by ETOWNCANUCK

Last i checked as a consumer, I could take what money the government left me with and buy whatever the hell I want.

I could care less what company supports what cause so long as I get the products I want.

I worry about what "I" do
Haven't got the ducks to care about anything else.

WRONG!!!!
Once C-71 is law go buy a CZ858 or Swiss Arms Classic Green or etc etc etc. Here is the long list of what are prohibited guns. http://www.firearms-safety-course.co...bited-firearms
And there is a long list of other things that are prohibited....like throwing stars or other ninja weapons.

And once the RCMP and the Firearms Advisory Committee (aka loaded with liberal political hacks that are anti gun ) gets going....a lot more will be added to the list.

SOOOOO......while you can right now have what YOU want...given enough time you won't.......Australia's rules are what the liberals view as the next goal......and that means no lever guns or semi-auto shotguns.

The argument is not about reasonable rules and ownership......that could be accomplished very easily if the Antis would be happy and leave it there once agreed to by both sides......but they can't and won't....until there is ZERO personal gun ownership..........and then because they love their meddlesome jobs...they will go after knives.....like we see with the CBSA or the Mayor of London.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by BlackHeart

WRONG!!!!
Once C-71 is law go buy a CZ858 or Swiss Arms Classic Green or etc etc etc. Here is the long list of what are prohibited guns. http://www.firearms-safety-course.co...bited-firearms
And there is a long list of other things that are prohibited....like throwing stars or other ninja weapons.

And once the RCMP and the Firearms Advisory Committee (aka loaded with liberal political hacks that are anti gun ) gets going....a lot more will be added to the list.

SOOOOO......while you can right now have what YOU want...given enough time you won't.......Australia's rules are what the liberals view as the next goal......and that means no lever guns or semi-auto shotguns.

The argument is not about reasonable rules and ownership......that could be accomplished very easily if the Antis would be happy and leave it there once agreed to by both sides......but they can't and won't....until there is ZERO personal gun ownership..........and then because they love their meddlesome jobs...they will go after knives.....like we see with the CBSA or the Mayor of London.

So should switch blades, tasers, throwing stars and other ninja weapons be legal in Canada?

Be careful calling anyone who disagrees with you an anti. It doesn't continue the conversation on a positive and constructive direction.

I see lots of people including hunters that see no need for personal machine gun ownership in Canada.

Are they antis?

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by muledriver

I probably have more guns than most on this forum, but I am against unfettered access to guns that the NRA promotes. They even opposed restrictions on mentally ill buying guns THIS YEAR. They've gone off the deep end.

What's wrong with safe storage? What's wrong with vetting WHO buys a gun? I really don't care what you buy if you are vetted.

Just as a driver's license doesn't restrict what car you buy or drive, a license to buy a gun doesn't restrict you either. Of course, just like we don't want anyone without extra vetting/training to drive a semi, what is wrong with the same logic being applied to certain types of guns (handguns as example).

And unlike a car, registration of guns does nothing.

Now, back to who is the puke. It's the shooter. Any discussion and denigration of those students who survived that tragedy is way off base, uncalled for, and frankly, a sad indication of how skewed the whole debate has become.

If you get your news from CNN/CBC you are very likely misinformed.
The NRA does not promote "unfettered access" to guns, and they opposed poor legislation as is their purpose in being.
You might want to read some real facts concerning their policies if you want to rail on about how "bad" they are. Here is a good start: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...gun-rights-too

If you think others are off the mark when condemning uneducated, arrogant and ignorant anti's then you might at least spend some time looking at real facts.

[Mulehahn]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

So should switch blades, tasers, throwing stars and other ninja weapons be legal in Canada?

Be careful calling anyone who disagrees with you an anti. It doesn't continue the conversation on a positive and constructive direction.

I see lots of people including hunters that see no need for personal machine gun ownership in Canada.

Are they antis?

I support licensing and SOME restrictions on firearm purchases (age, background checks, etc) but beyond that I fail to see how a bullet Browning Bar is deadlier than a bullet from an Ar-15 but I can only take one into the bush. Why are switch blades, throwing stars, taser guns, and other similar weapons not be allowed into Canada?

I go walk into any a number of stores and purchase a fixed blade knife which can be is just as deadly as any switch blade and doesn't have the ability to mechanically fail. Maybe it is about concealment... there are countless daggers that are just as easily hid as any folding knife but are legal. Same goes for the huge variety of boot knives used in Scuba diving. As for shurikens (throwing stars), I can go buy as many throwing knives as I want and face no repercussions. Tasers are a bit different as there really is not alternative but I think having more non-lethal options for self-defence would be a good thing.

The Canadian laws make no sense. For almost every illegal item there is a perfectly legal, and often much more dangerous one available.

[midgetwaiter]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

“Truth is, we did not cut ties with the NRA or the Friends of the NRA. We changed the structure of our discount program to better align it with the business. I’m not happy that the NRA would choose to mischaracterize and sensationalize this. Know that we do support the Second Amendment, gun owners and their pursuits. Please stick to these talking points publically and feel free to point out your own experience with our brand and people. See below:

The NRA taking the above situation and trying to spin it as an Anti NRA move to whip up their membership is a perfect example of why I don't and will not support the NRA. Does anyone else remember when they got a ll wound up about new ITAR regulations restricting reloading information a while back? Did anyone else notice that ABSOLUTELY NOTHING actually happened?

They are a bunch of panic junkies.

[270person]

Originally Posted by East Toaster

Spoken like a true.... Fudd/anti-gun soyboy.

Let me guess, you have no need for an AR15 so no one should have one?


What about his little "peace armband" movement? You know who else had to wear armbands? The Jews.

Does anyone have need of an AR15? Soldier boy complex or what?

Just because you think YOU should be able to own one doesn't mean I should have to stand up for your right to own one. Does that make me an anti? Nope. If I was an anti I wouldn't own more guns than you. I'm all for guns. Just not ALL of them.

By some of your comments you're probably not of the right mindspace to own one anyways.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Trochu

A ridiculous argument. I could easily argue that its been toned down. Flintlocks, at the time, were a top of the line technology, same as what was utilized by the armed forces. Are we still allowed top of the line technology such as that utilized by the armed forces?

Thankfully we are not.

Ridiculous analogy on your part. Times have changed. Firearms have changed. No matter how hard I try I just can't envision a mass shooting by someone with a flintlock. Dude would be ****booted before he could load his second shot.

I think the U.S. was a little more concerned about threats from foreign interests at the time than they are now. As if a bunch of wanna be soldiers would be much help anyway.

This gun owner isn't going to so much as bat an eye if the wannabe's aren't allowed to purchase whatever they "feel" they have a right to own. I can't drive an F1 car down the Whitemud either unfortunately. Dang, someone call me a Waaambulance. I should be able to! It wouldn't be the cars fault if I vaporized a few pedestrians.

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by midgetwaiter

The NRA taking the above situation and trying to spin it as an Anti NRA move to whip up their membership is a perfect example of why I don't and will not support the NRA. Does anyone else remember when they got a ll wound up about new ITAR regulations restricting reloading information a while back? Did anyone else notice that ABSOLUTELY NOTHING actually happened?

They are a bunch of panic junkies.

It's hard to say whether the NRA was in the wrong on this one, or Yeti is doing damage control. It is not, however true that this is all panic junkie stuff. If true Yeti would be joining a rather large number of virtue signalling companies in cutting ties with the NRA:
http://fortune.com/2018/04/23/yeti-c...complete-list/

So at least in this instance, there appears to be SOMETHING happening.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by 270person

Thankfully we are not.

Ridiculous analogy on your part. Times have changed. Firearms have changed. No matter how hard I try I just can't envision a mass shooting by someone with a flintlock. Dude would be ****booted before he could load his second shot.

I think the U.S. was a little more concerned about threats from foreign interests at the time than they are now. As if a bunch of wanna be soldiers would be much help anyway.

This gun owner isn't going to so much as bat an eye if the wannabe's aren't allowed to purchase whatever they "feel" they have a right to own. I can't drive an F1 car down the Whitemud either unfortunately. Dang, someone call me a Waaambulance. I should be able to! It wouldn't be the cars fault if I vaporized a few pedestrians.

Cause only we can stop the communist horde from blasting down through Canada!



Now if you read the alternative news such as the Conspiracy Times... they need the guns in the US to fight off the evil democratic scum government types trying to destroy what makes America great.

[270person]

Originally Posted by East Toaster

NRA member here, that little puke David Hogg sold me on a membership. If people like him are against the NRA and gun owners I wanna be friends with the people he hates.

And if the NRA is full of guys like you, and they are, count me on the kids side. He isn't trying to take MY guns away or ban hunting.

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by 270person

Thankfully we are not.

Ridiculous analogy on your part. Times have changed. Firearms have changed. No matter how hard I try I just can't envision a mass shooting by someone with a flintlock. Dude would be ****booted before he could load his second shot.

I think the U.S. was a little more concerned about threats from foreign interests at the time than they are now. As if a bunch of wanna be soldiers would be much help anyway.

This gun owner isn't going to so much as bat an eye if the wannabe's aren't allowed to purchase whatever they "feel" they have a right to own. I can't drive an F1 car down the Whitemud either unfortunately. Dang, someone call me a Waaambulance. I should be able to! It wouldn't be the cars fault if I vaporized a few pedestrians.

Too true. Freedom of speech used to be just that too. Someone used his voice and spoke to a small number of people. Now, someone can self publish on the internet, or send messages to millions. Something need to be done about it.

It's apparent that you really have not spent any amount of time actually thinking about your feelings, but seriously, you really are coming off as an anti.
There were rapid firing guns in existence when the second amendment was written, and citizens owned artillery too. Furthermore a typical way of fighting back then was to carry a number of guns, and large knives or bayonets. If you want to make nonsensical arguments about how the concept of privately owned firearms is old fashioned, or that mass murder was impossible with the technology in the 18th century, at least take the time to educate yourself.
Also, whose guns do you think Hogg would have been after if this had happened at his school: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Univer...tower_shooting

It's pretty shallow of you to assume that only AR15's will ever be a target. You may feel all superior and just, attacking those who own AR15's now, but you can rest assured that when they are gone, the "powerful sniper rifles" will be next. And you are not doing anything to garner support to protect your property from arbitrary confiscation.

[Rockman]

Originally Posted by 270person

Thankfully we are not.

Ridiculous analogy on your part. Times have changed. Firearms have changed. No matter how hard I try I just can't envision a mass shooting by someone with a flintlock. Dude would be ****booted before he could load his second shot.

I think the U.S. was a little more concerned about threats from foreign interests at the time than they are now. As if a bunch of wanna be soldiers would be much help anyway.

This gun owner isn't going to so much as bat an eye if the wannabe's aren't allowed to purchase whatever they "feel" they have a right to own. I can't drive an F1 car down the Whitemud either unfortunately. Dang, someone call me a Waaambulance. I should be able to! It wouldn't be the cars fault if I vaporized a few pedestrians.

Weak!

I won't defend everything the NRA does because I disagree with it in a few ways, but this whole ongoing active shooter fiasco could be greatly curbed in a few ways that no one is willing to consider, such as securing school entrances and having armed guards (like Israel does), and actually making sure existing background checks do have access to all criminal or mental information and aren't blocked by civil liberties lobbying. There are other approaches to mental health consistently ignored in the US and that have mattered in many shooting instances.

I don't think every 18yo should have any gun that exists, but neither do I agree with letting gov creep in their own regulations without a strong freedom lobby standing behind law-abiding gun-owners. As we see in every other country and instance, laws would creep in, banning every item ever blamed for a crime until we were as hemmed in and prohibited as London.

Also, US crime has consistently gone down for decades, and despite the showy nature of mass shootings, you're as safe in most places in the US as in any other developed country. If you're not in a gang and not in the habit of walking alone like a fool in certain areas of certain cities at night in the US, you're perfectly safe.

Anyways, as usual, none of the extreme positions are entirely right, as usual, and reason probably lies somewhere in the middle.

[ETOWNCANUCK]

Originally Posted by BlackHeart

WRONG!!!!
Once C-71 is law go buy a CZ858 or Swiss Arms Classic Green or etc etc etc. Here is the long list of what are prohibited guns. http://www.firearms-safety-course.co...bited-firearms
And there is a long list of other things that are prohibited....like throwing stars or other ninja weapons.

And once the RCMP and the Firearms Advisory Committee (aka loaded with liberal political hacks that are anti gun ) gets going....a lot more will be added to the list.

SOOOOO......while you can right now have what YOU want...given enough time you won't.......Australia's rules are what the liberals view as the next goal......and that means no lever guns or semi-auto shotguns.

The argument is not about reasonable rules and ownership......that could be accomplished very easily if the Antis would be happy and leave it there once agreed to by both sides......but they can't and won't....until there is ZERO personal gun ownership..........and then because they love their meddlesome jobs...they will go after knives.....like we see with the CBSA or the Mayor of London.

Umm....
I was talking about buying a $400 cooler from Yeti.
That ,if that is what I want, who or who they don’t support, has no bearing on me as a consumer.

WTF are you talking about?

[EZM]

Originally Posted by Newview01

Ok, I might agree with you here, but what do you mean by their ultra right absolutist agenda?

What is the NRA's agenda? Could it be that they don't have one? Could it be that they just don't want to give an inch, because they know that they will lose a mile?

It's my personal belief that most of the hard core NRA supporters are ult-right type people ....... and ..... you called me out ..... and, maybe you are right, that's probably not a completely fair statement in all cases. I will withdraw this statement for the sake of conversation. No point in what I said and no relation to the agenda (or lack thereof) of the NRA.

It's just very disappointing to me that it (the NRA's position) seems that any and all legislation or control of any sort is blocked, with absolute conviction and that same position is feverishly defended when, in fact, some of it makes sense for sensible people and sensible gun advocates.

One example - The one that comes to mind, is having a legislated mechanism for background checks for gun ownership with no loopholes. Crazy people, terrorists and others could simply buy a gun at a gun show in many states.

That simply makes no sense to me whatsoever.

The NRA's absolutist position on these matters just serves to alienate themselves from people like me who are responsible and sensible gun owners.

It also severs to solidify the MAJORITY of the people against their irrational positions like the one outlined above.

I can't support that.

PS - no speech required on the "give an inch take a mile" or "slippery slope" argument. This is fear mongering and paranoid thinking - and - I acknowledge as a pragmatic persona that legislation won't prevent all murders, but it could have saved some lives and prevented some lunatics from getting some guns.

Just because legislation isn't perfect - doesn't mean it worthless.

[270person]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Cause only we can stop the communist horde from blasting down through Canada!



Now if you read the alternative news such as the Conspiracy Times... they need the guns in the US to fight off the evil democratic scum government types trying to destroy what makes America great.

Uh huh. Simple paranoia from people who think federal laws don't apply to them and that they should be able to do anything they feel like anytime they feel like it.

[270person]

Originally Posted by JamesB

It's apparent that you really have not spent any amount of time actually thinking about your feelings, but seriously, you really are coming off as an anti.

There were rapid firing guns in existence when the second amendment was written, and citizens owned artillery too. Furthermore a typical way of fighting back then was to carry a number of guns, and large knives or bayonets. If you want to make nonsensical arguments about how the concept of privately owned firearms is old fashioned, or that mass murder was impossible with the technology in the 18th century, at least take the time to educate yourself.
Also, whose guns do you think Hogg would have been after if this had happened at his school:

It's pretty shallow of you to assume that only AR15's will ever be a target. You may feel all superior and just, attacking those who own AR15's now, but you can rest assured that when they are gone, the "powerful sniper rifles" will be next. And you are not doing anything to garner support to protect your property from arbitrary confiscation.

I know exactly how and what I feel and if I'm an anti why do I own 4 shotguns, 2 x .22 cal, 2 x .17 HMr, and 6 centre fire rifles up to .35 whelen. Just because I don't support people who want to play GI Joe doesn't mean I'm anti.

And I'm not attacking AR-15 owners at all. Just the paranoia thats exhibited
each time one of these black guns gets banned or threatened. Is that taking away someones right to hunt or ability to own hunting firearms? Not from my perspective it isn't. When that gets threatened I'll react. Until then I could care less.

[propliner]

Originally Posted by 270person

And I'm not attacking AR-15 owners at all. Just the paranoia thats exhibited
each time one of these black guns gets banned or threatened. Is that taking away someones right to hunt or ability to own hunting firearms? Not from my perspective it isn't. When that gets threatened I'll react. Until then I could care less.

This statement perfectly illustrates the Fudd mentality.

"I don't care about your guns as long as mine are safe". "I don't care about handguns, semi-autos or lever rifles as long as my bolt-action is safe". "Take the target rifles but not the hunting rifles. I only care about hunting anyways".

Talk about throwing others under the bus with only self-serving interests in mind. The gun grabbers don't just want black guns. They want them all, including your "hunting firearms", whatever that term means.

Show some solidarity or we all lose.