MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

California Politicians Propose Government Boycotts of Companies that Do Business With the NRA

Corporations are being asked to take sides in a gun control debate that has very little to do with them.

Monticelllo/Dreamstime.comMonticelllo/Dreamstime.comCalifornia politicians are in a bit of a pickle. They want to impose yet more gun controls in the wake of the Parkland shooting, but they're stuck in a state where firearms are already tightly regulated.

Los Angeles City Councilman Mitch O'Farrell thinks he's found a way around this problem: an official blacklist of corporations that do business with the National Rifle Association (NRA). Yesterday he introduced a proposal that would instruct city staff to compile a list of companies with "formal ties" to the NRA and to draw up the city's options for boycotting them.

"It's time to speak with one voice and call attention to the assault weapon epidemic," O'Farrell tells the Los Angeles Times, adding that he had delayed a vote on renting out a city-owned property to FedEx because of the company's purported friendliness to the NRA. (Specifically: FedEx gives the group the same discount rates that it offers to all small businesses and associations.)

O'Farrell isn't the only California politician thinking along these lines. State treasurer and gubernatorial candidate John Chiang is leading an effort to divest the state's public pension system, CalPERS—the largest public pension system in the country—from the five sporting goods stores that sell firearms.

Unsurprisingly, Second Amendment advocates aren't happy about these policies.

"As if anything they do will impact gun violence," says Sam Paredes, executive director of Gunowners of California. "To me it indicates that these law makers are not interested in good, sound policy that effects their constituents, but more interested in making a political statement."

These policy proposals come on the cusp of an intense pressure campaign for corporate America to pick a side in a gun control debate that they have very little to do with.

In February, the liberal site ThinkProgress published a list of some 30 companies that dared to offer discount rates and special deals to NRA members. Teen activist David Hogg has likewise called for boycotting Amazon because it streams NRA videos on its website.

Companies that buckle to the pressure, meanwhile, then face a backlash from supporters of gun rights. When Delta scuttled a discount rate it had been offering to the NRA's national convention, the Georgia state legislature killed a tax break benefiting the Atlanta-based company. Breitbart has kept a running tally of corporations that have ended NRA-member deals. There is talk on social media of counterboycotts.

Coming from headline-hungry activists and pot-stirring websites, these pressure campaigns are just another depressing example of the politicization of ever more facets of American life. When such boycotts are converted into legislation, however, they become a free-speech concern.

Budget-bloating governments have a lot of leverage over the companies they do business with. (O'Farrell acknowledged this explicitly when introducing his legislation, telling the Los Angeles Times that he hoped to "send a message as a city with an annual budget approaching $9 billion.") Using that leverage to punish third parties for doing business with members of an advocacy group that these politicians don't like is both invasive and authoritarian.

Photo Credit: Monticelllo/Dreamstime.com

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • MikeP2||

    Isn't this essentially one step away from the textbook definition of fascism?

  • Curly4||

    California's solution would be for it to embrace fascism and outlaw firearms with a permit. To enforce this they would have make the penalty for having a unpermitted firearm steep enough that few would be willing to pay the penalty, maybe death penalty would be about right.

  • Entropy Drehmaschine Void||

    KKKalifornia uber Alles!

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Nothing wrong with California that a few tactical nukes on the coast wouldn't solve.

  • Earth Skeptic||

    Patience. Geology will take care of it soon enough.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    The only "California Split" I want to see at this point is the San Andreas fault opening up to swallow the I-5 corridor.

  • Reverend Draco||

    I know, right? I can't wait for everything east of the San Andreas to fall into the Atlantic.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    I can't wait for everything east of the San Andreas to fall into the Atlantic.

    Somebody appears to not understand how plate tectonics work.

  • timbo||

    That's the first thing I thought MikeP.

    Apparently fascism wears many cloaks. Some in the form of lefty politicians marauding as feminists and many others in the form of man-bun douchebag pussies.

  • Leo Kovalensky II||

    Many fascists even call themselves anti-fascist.

    Orwell was right, just a few years early.

  • timbo||

    He was so right its comical.

    War is peace has been our mantra since 2003. Americans are afraid to say anything bad about the war.

    I find it far more patriotic to not send children to die in middle east shitholes so the military industrial complex can make money. But I guess I'm just a hater.

  • Leo Kovalensky II||

    We've always been at war in Afghanistan.

    Actually, it's close to being accurate...

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    Ye gods, yes. Pretty soon a kid born when that war started will be old enough to join the Army.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Later this year, in fact, with parental consent.

  • timbo||

    If they are going to a public school where I live, they are being convinced of three best career choices:

    Working for the local government
    joining the military
    or becoming an air traffic control guy. That is the value of a government funded education - brainwashing more retarded leftists zombies.

  • Ekke Ekke Ptang Zoo Boing||

    #1 and 2 covered under veterans preference of course.

  • Leo Kovalensky II||

    Not to mention that we supporters them in the 1980s. So they're kind of our Eurasia.

  • Teddy Pump||

    Me is confused...I thought Obummy absolutely promised he was gonna end the Bad War In Afghanistan?...I guess he was too busy starting new wars in Syria, Libya & Yemen!

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    Just as evil never sees itself as evil, fascisti never see themselves as fascisti. They do what they do because it (purportedly) serves some greater good, and that's all they need to know. It's an odd combination of pretending to an overarching world view while wearing tight-fitting blinkers. Add to that the self-justifying notion that "the ends justify the means" (of course, as Trotsky once noted the ends obviously must justify the means; if the ends do not, then nothing does. But I digress).

    And sad to say, it looks like we'll be pounded with the name "David Hogg" for the next decade or two. It only proves that you don't need to have anything to say, just a media machine to help you pretend to say it.

  • FlameCCT||

    IMHO we will only be pounded with the name Hogg until early November then they'll dump him or possibly blame him if GOP gains seats just like Cindy what's her name during Bush43.

  • BambiB||

    It is (sadly) only somewhat surprising that the press would trot out a punk kid whose grasp of facts, is, at best, feeble - to be the poster boy for gun control. Hogg should have been a 10-second interview along the lines of,

    Reporter: "What did you do when you heard the shooting?"
    Hogg: "At first I didn't know what it was. When I figured it out, I hid under my desk and cried. I also peed my panties."
    Reporter: "You're gay, right?"
    Hogg: "So gay..."

  • operagost||

    Are you kidding? Every gay man I've met has more guts and honesty that this douche.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Unsurprisingly, Second Amendment advocates aren't happy about the

    This is some master trolling, Britches. I know you did this on purpose to see if anyone is actually reading the article (cause otherwise, just hang up your britches). Scanning the comments below, and knowing all the commenters are grammar nazis, looks like no one did.

    Well played, Britches.

  • Teddy Pump||

    America, on the state & federal level has been Fascist for decades now!

  • Heraclitus||

    I know. I can't believe that in Georgia in order to get tax breaks you have to support the NRA. Good grief. You go Mike!

  • FiftycalTX2||

    No, it IS FASCIST. As is the whole Kalipornistan regime. Please put a "ban" on doing business with companies that have gun makers. We can use the money. Try looking up "commerce clause" and "bill of attainder" in the Constitution. Now the kalipornians may THINK they have seceded from the U.S. but I imagine the courts have a different opinion and PRESIDENT TRUMP just needs one more excuse to NATIONALIZE the Cal "National Guard". That would take care of the "sanctuary city" nonsense and lots of other things.

  • Elston G||

    Nope.
    Boycotts are widely accepted Market principle.
    You think private corporations and companies are entitled to California economic largesse?

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    If TX did the same for companies supporting Planned Parenthood, how minutes would it be before legal papers were filed?

  • Curly4||

    Before the ink dried on the order!

  • ||

    You wouldn't have to limit it in such a fashion either as, in addition to being anti-2A, this is anti-accommodation, anti-1A, and anti-due process.

    Alabama could push for boycotts of the HRC, Lambda Legal, and GLAD and deny them standing in court because, fuck the Constitution, why not?

  • commentguy||

    Interestingly Scalia argued that state and city governments were free to award contracts to their political friends and punish their enemies, because that's how things were in the olden days. Can't remember if he was in the majority though - the case was about who got a city's waste management contract...

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    The thing is, lefties are far less reticent about using government power to coerce social choices than is the right. But that's OK ... they mean well. Obama and Hillary tell us so

  • Elston G||

    Boycotts are is American as apple pie and guns

  • Elston G||

    Another corporate fascist that thinks corporations are entitled to California economic largesse

  • sarcasmic||

    It's pretty telling when people in government seek to punish those who support the Constitution.

  • Curly4||

    That is the next step as per Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens!

  • timbo||

    The constitution is and has always been the bane of the politician.

    Pols exist simply to attempt to thwart it for their friends and donors.

  • Elston G||

    Which one of the companies under the boycott support part of the Constitution that says well regulated?

  • Cloudbuster||

    The well-regulated clause has been hashed over so thoroughly that at this point anyone who uses it to support gun control is either deeply ignorant or deeply dishonest

  • SIV||

    "Advocacy group"? I think "the nation's oldest civil rights organization" is the preferred descriptive term for the NRA.

  • Brandybuck||

    it is not the oldest civil rights group. it didn't even care about the Second Amendement until the late sixties. Until then it was a national gun club, set up for the purpose of training marksmanship. The NRA just happened to be a convenient vehicle for 2nd Amendment Civil Righters to take over and convert into a lobbying organization. I have nothing against those people, but they did destroy an apoltiical non-partisan organization, for which there is still no replacement today. These guys should have just created their own lobby instead of taking over the NRA.

  • ||

    for which there is still no replacement today

    This is a bit melodramatic and/or tautological. The only way their's no replacement is if you consider it as a whole organization, plenty of who's functions you're actively deriding. The military and CMP quite probably exceed the NRA in every dimension but I don't think that's the answer you're looking for. Stuff like Project Appleseed and private/corporate gun training sessions fill the niche that the NRA, the Military, and the CMP don't fill by design and/or intent.

  • silver.||

    I was under the impression that the NRA was still mostly a training organization, and honestly their campaign contributions reflect this. I don't see how anyone can argue that $3-6mil per year for ALL political races is remotely substantial. Everytown dumped $750,000 into one of my state's legislature elections a few years back. I'm sure they're outspending the NRA, and they hide that fact with lots of organizational obfuscation, and I think that's super shady.

    Which makes this angry scapegoating of the NRA by gun control advocates even scarier and sadder..

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    The NRA is really pretty low-key as an "advocacy organization". They testify before legislative bodies when asked to, they publish opinion pieces, they send speakers when invited, they endorse candidates. Wow. My guess is that whatever comes out of this Parkland push will have a yearly advocacy budget well in excess of what the NRA has.

  • Ben of Houston||

    Brandybuck, you are ignoring the reason that the NRA was created. Founding member Ulysses S Grant organized the NRA explicitly to arm and train southerners against the Ku Klux Klan.

    While not the oldest civil rights group (that would be the underground railroad and all the other such informal institutions), it is quite old.

  • Mark22||

    Brandybuck, you are ignoring the reason that the NRA was created. Founding member Ulysses S Grant organized the NRA explicitly to arm and train southerners against the Ku Klux Klan.

    Citation? Evidence?

  • FlameCCT||

    Does it hurt being that ignorant?
    Or just normal for a Progressive serf?

    Set up for the purpose of training marksmanship? You mean training POC especially Black people to protect themselves from the KKK. I would note that the KKK was set up and run by Progressive Democrats.

  • Mark22||

    Set up for the purpose of training marksmanship? You mean training POC especially Black people to protect themselves from the KKK. I would note that the KKK was set up and run by Progressive Democrats.

    I'd like to be able to make that point to progressive friends, but where is the evidence?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    I have nothing against those people, but they did destroy an apoltiical non-partisan organization, for which there is still no replacement today. These guys should have just created their own lobby instead of taking over the NRA.

    Their transformation into a more prominent advocacy group happened at the same time that gun control hysteria reached one of its peaks in the wake of RFK and MLK being shot, and Handgun Control, Inc. becoming a prominent lobbyist to ban firearms.

    The NRA taking on that role was inevitable because it was the largest organized group of gun owners at the time.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    The NRA was, at that time, confronted with the choice of either becoming an advocacy organization, or an historical society. Gun controllers will never forgive us for not going with the latter, but I think we made the right choice.

  • BambiB||

    The NRA trained blacks in the South beginning in the late 1950s.

    I don't consider the NRA "destroyed". It still hews to its original intent (to improve marksmanship) but took on defense of the Second Amendment itself in response to the clamourings of useful idiots to disarm Americans. The most regrettable aspects of the NRA are its early support of gun control acts (NFA 1934, GCA 1968) and its reticence to engage in legal battles. The latter was largely cured when Alan Gura took on the Heller case. Up to that point, the NRA had been so terrified of a judgment weakening the Second Amendment, that it had run from legal conflict. When Heller was filed, it then rushed to try to take over the case - fearful that Gura would fail. Gura thwarted the NRA and won the case... although the decision was actually rather mealy-mouthed in its conclusions.

    Later, Gura filed the MacDonald case in Chicago to force incorporation. This time, the NRA jumped in early and managed to force themselves into the case. MacDonald was a win - but sadly, it was not decided on the grounds that Gura had originally pled. Gura's strategy was aimed not only at Second Amendment incorporation, but at revival of the Privileges and Immunities Clause through overturning the Slaughterhouse cases. The NRA added the "due process" argument, which allowed the Supremes to weasel out of dealing with privileges and immunities (which would have been a much greater win for freedom).

  • operagost||

    When your hobby or very livelihood is threatened, you're forced to become political.

    You're also wrong. They became politically aware in 1934, for said reason.

  • KevinP||

    for which there is still no replacement today

    The NRA is still the premier training, education and safety organization for the country.

    Over 125,000 certified instructors now train about 1,000,000 gun owners a year. Courses are available in basic rifle, pistol, shotgun, muzzleloading firearms, personal protection, even ammunition reloading. Additionally, nearly 7,000 certified coaches are specially trained to work with young competitive shooters. Since the establishment of the lifesaving Eddie Eagle GunSafe Program in 1988, more than 28 million pre-kindergarten to fourth grade children have learned that if they see a firearm in an unsupervised situation, they should "STOP. DON'T TOUCH. RUN AWAY. TELL A GROWNUP." Over the past seven years, Refuse To Be A Victim seminars have helped more than 100,000 men and women develop their own personal safety plan using common sense strategies.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    "To me it indicates that these law makers are not interested in good, sound policy that effects their constituents, but more interested in making a political statement."

    Looks like Mr. Paredes just realized what politicians are.

  • Curly4||

    Good, sound policy is policies and laws that is that which enshrined your interests in law.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    I think I know what you mean. Next time try it in English, please

  • Jerryskids||

    You mean those humble public serpents aren't really altruistic solons bestowing the blessings of their superior intellects on the besotted masses?

  • John||

    Government using corporations to punish dissidents and further the goals of the state. That used to be known as fascism.

  • Elston G||

    Representatives of we the people of California making choices about who they do business with ? Boycotting parking players is an economic principal and a fundamental of free market capitalism.
    Corporations are entitled for the fruits of California's economic largesse? You sound like a silly corporate fascist.

  • Sometimes a Great Notion||

    So CA wants businesses to discriminate? And by force of law. If they do this, Trump should send the national guard to protect NRA members attempting to access public buildings.; the optics would be good for a chuckle.

  • Sevo||

    CA's already bashed the retirement funds by opting out of 'impure' investments; you know, the ones that make money.

  • albo||

    If I was a member of CALPERS I'd sue them for fiduciary malpractice. The goal of a pension fund is to provide financial benefits for its members, not perform social work.

  • Brandybuck||

    If you were a member of CALPERS then you should already be a brainwashed Democrat who worships Moonbeam as their lord and savior. If you're not then they will kindly show you to the reeducation camp.

    Moonbeam could gut CALPERS to pay for his train, and the CALPERS members would masturbate in glee.

  • ||

    Well, Jerry's always been fond of the saying, "if you build it, they will come".

  • hardcorps||

    You win the internet with this comment.

  • Get lit||

    If a right is enshrined in the Constitution then I don't see how any govt could get away with singling out people who exercise that civil right.

  • Longtobefree||

    Welcome to Hotel California

    Why should CA stop at the second amendment? Now they are after the first.

  • NoVaNick||

    California Uber Alles is more like it

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    Hogg salutes you!

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Dude, put your hogg back into your pants.

  • silver.||

    Has anyone else ever thought that names are (unfortunately) important for politicians?

    Trump is a great political name. Imagining my clunky foreign name in headlines isn't exactly inspiring.

  • FlameCCT||

    Who knew the Eagles song would become reality!

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    Penalizing businesses who deal with the NRA doesn't violate the 2nd. I'm sure it would seem to violate other laws, but probably not. No different than prohibiting travel to NC for specious reasons a few years ago.

  • bevis the lumberjack||

    It violates the 1A, specifically freedom of association, which the SC has found to be covered by the First Amendment. Including association for economic reasons.

  • Ben of Houston||

    It would be official punishment of political speech. Passage of such a law is a clear violation of the first amendment.

    Quite frankly, anyone who would think about such a bill should be barred from office.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    Well, the right IS enshrined in the Constitution and the government DOES get away with singling out people who exercise that right, so ... you do the math

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    Stop making movies where people shoot people!

  • Curly4||

    That would hit the progressive actors in the pockbood and California in the tax collections. Not good policy!

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    Make movies where guns shoot other guns

  • Earth Skeptic||

    And then feel sad.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    2020 is looking better and better for a Trump re-up.

  • OpenBordersLiberal-tarian||

    Russia will have to hack the 2020 election a thousand times harder than they hacked 2016's for Drumpf to get a second term. That is, if his first term even outlasts Mueller's investigation and the upcoming #BlueWave.

  • NoVaNick||

    #BlueWave will almost guarantee that Trump gets re-elected.

  • Brandybuck||

    "I dunno. I don't want to vote for Trump. He's pretty bad. Let me look at who the Democrats are running... HOLY SHYTESTICK! Where's my MAGA hat!!!"

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    I dunno, those Hillary voters are pretty easily swayed by a GIF of Bernie Sanders and Jesus...

  • John||

    I am sure they will. Trump will be re-elected and you will claim it was the Russians

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    The Dems had a chance to move slightly to the right and recreate something along the lines of Bill Clinton's old Democratic Leadership Council. If they could have identified and promoted somebody at least moderately sane (a big order, I know) they could well be in the position to reclaim the House and the White House by 2020. However, being self-righteous liberals (or at least in thrall to them) they cannot help themselves, and so keep pushing more and more left, in an all-out war with Trump to see who can alienate more people most, a weird contest in which the loser wins.

    Feh.

  • Ben of Houston||

    I don't get it. With the current climate, a reasonable centrist could easily sweep everything out from under Trump. Motivate both the left who hate the man and the right who are embarrassed by his continued nonsense, mediocre success at reducing regulatory burden, and complete failure to keep the budget in control. However, they seem to be doubling down on the hate and division, pushing away their potential supporters.

  • NoVaNick||

    The funny thing is that Trump could easily have run as a Democrat with the same platform up until the early 2000s. His positions are very similar to Blue Dog/DLC/Bill Clinton positions (tough on crime, protect US jobs), the only real difference is that Trump is now "pro-life" a hat he wears awkwardly along with his "pro-2A" hat that is close to falling off.

    In the meantime, the dems have been taken over by SJWs and identity politics. Obama won because he seemed reasonable and likeable to most people, but that is not their current mood.

  • OpenBordersLiberal-tarian||

    "It's time to speak with one voice and call attention to the assault weapon epidemic," O'Farrell tells the Los Angeles Times

    Why can't the entire country be like California? Dianne Feinstein tweets, Today we have 15 million assault weapons in the U.S. These are guns modeled after military weapons and then sold to civilians. For what? You can't use it for hunting. You don't need it for defense. What do you really need it for?

    Assault weapons have no uses other than the mass slaughter of innocent people.

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    Allow Diane Feinstein to vagsplain it to you.

  • Leo Kovalensky II||

    Something is awfully fishy about this vagsplanation

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Smells like 7 layers...

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    That taco turned brown a looooong time ago

  • Leo Kovalensky II||

    She has a child. Somebody, somewhere hit that.

  • mpercy||

    Turkey baster.

  • timbo||

    I find it to be outrageously fun to shoot AR's and AKs. Turns out there is another use for them. .

  • Leo Kovalensky II||

    I hear they can also water the tree of liberty, whatever that means.

  • timbo||

    Where is that tree?

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    I tried that, but they leak.

  • Longtobefree||

    "It's time to speak with one voice and call attention to the assault weapon epidemic," O'Farrell tells the Los Angeles Times

    I am not aware of the research showing assault weapons are contagious.
    I am not aware of anything clearly and accurately defined as an assault weapon.
    I am aware that guns "modeled after military weapons" (WTF?!) can in fact be used for hunting.
    I am aware that any weapon of military grade can in fact be used for defense. Or else what's an army for?
    I am aware that Dianne Feinstein does not speak the truth.

  • BigChiefWahoo||

    "Assault weapons have no uses other than the mass slaughter of innocent people."

    If that's true, then the civil authorities at all levels don't need them either. Any "assault weapons" ban should also prohibit their possession and use by local, state and federal police forces, since slaughtering masses of innocent people is not the function of civil law enforcement.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    since slaughtering masses of innocent people is not the function of civil law enforcement

    At the risk of seeming overly cynical, I would say that it is the primary function of civil law enforcement in a Socialist Worker's Utopia. There are a lot of kulaks, hoarders, and wreckers to be dealt with!

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    There are a lot of kulaks, hoarders, and wreckers to be dealt with!

    Yes, but by definition none of them are innocent.

  • silver.||

    Good point. How often does a cop have to kill more than one citizen? At medium range-preferably not inside because of wall penetration? A pistol would've killed the unarmed man begging for his life in the Arizona hotel just as effectively, and it would've been less risk to other occupants.

  • FlameCCT||

    Factually, a pistol round is more likely to penetrate the wall than a AR-15 round.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    15 million implies they are in common use by civilians.

  • Brandybuck||

    They aren't assault weapons. Sheesh.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    An assault weapon is a weapon that can be used to assault people. Come on over sometime and I'll gladly show you my assault rock garden, my assault kitchen knives, my assault pickup truck, and so on.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    Whatever. Does it matter to you that California as well as the federal government already has banned assault weapons?

    Guess not.

  • FlameCCT||

    I hunt with my AR in .300AAC; it replaced my Winchester Model 64 in 30-30.

  • mpercy||

    The I've been using mine wrong for years and thousands of rounds of ammunition. All this time I've only shot at paper targets on a shooting range. How stupid of me to not consider the proper use of these weapons.

  • KevinP||

    Assault weapons have no uses other than the mass slaughter of innocent people.

    Like here?

    WXYZ Detroit: Mom Fires Assault Rifle to protect family during home invasion
    http://youtu.be/hGBEDCxmyzs

  • NoVaNick||

    Would this mean the LAPD would be forced to disarm?

  • Ron||

    I don't see how a government can discriminate based on freedom of association.

  • Longtobefree||

    The same way a government can 'forfeit' your asset without due process.
    The same way a government can require a permit to exercise the bill of rights, and refuse to issue the permit in a whim.
    The same way a government can compel you to speak what you do not believe.
    And so forth

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    In a perfect world, rational voters would take and feather those clowns. But PETA.

  • Exocetmd||

    How about tar and bullshit? Appropriate AND Animal-friendly.

  • Longtobefree||

    Now is the time for ALL corporations to stand up against fascism, and boycott California.
    Refuse to business with any governmental entity in California until such time as they fully recognize the bill of rights.

    For a shining example, refer to Barratt. When California banned all commercial sales of their fifty caliber rifles, Barratt immediately cancelled all existing orders from the state police and all other agencies, and returned all service work in whatever condition it was in. Barratt will not accept any orders from the state of California.

    Same thing should happen with car manufacturers, and all corporations CA attempts to pressure. The companies should refuse all state/local purchase orders, and if they are in a fierce mood, refuse to sell to anyone in the state. Announce that they will resume normal operations as soon as the populace elects politicians interested in following the US Constitution. I suspect any short term profit loss would be recouped once a free market was in place.

    And Hillary should accept the results of the last presidential election, as long as I am dreaming - - - - - - - - - -

  • Sigivald||

    1) Barrett, maybe?

    2) Car manufacturers don't care about it at all, and want all that delicious money [especially since most of them aren't even American companies at heart]; there's no strong tie between "cars" and "civil rights" the way there is with firearms and firearm people.

  • ||

    there's no strong tie between "cars" and "civil rights" the way there is with firearms and firearm people.

    Not that Accuracy International, FNH, HK, Steyr, CZUB, IWI, Glock, Norinco, etc. have any special fondness or shared heritage with the 2A.

    If they really wanted to stick it to CA, they'd low-ball bulk offers and generally provide shitty, overpriced service to anyone with an official position in the State and pass the savings on in the form of a fat pro-2A virtue signalling rebate. The mix up about sending LEOs in CA, CA-legal rifle stocks and magazines should happen every day, in perpetuity or until the law is repealed.

  • NoVaNick||

    Hey Trump-forget about the Mexicans. Please deport all progs to California ASAP and build a wall around it high enough to keep them from ever coming back.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    build a wall around it high enough to keep them from ever coming back.

    And then fill it with milk since it's breakfast cereal state: full of fruits, flakes, and nuts.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    "To me it indicates that these law makers are not interested in good, sound policy that effects their constituents, but more interested in making a political statement."

    But isn't that their job? To make pointless political statements and virtue signal to their base? It must be. That's all they ever do, and yet incumbents are re-elected in droves, which means the voters must be pretty satisfied with their job performance, right? /sarc

  • timbo||

    The biggest problem with democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter - Winston Churchill.

  • contraryjim||

    SO TRUE

    I realized that we would make no real progress unless we changed the underlying ideas of the people. Manuel "Muso" Ayau

    "To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea" James Madison 1788

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    The principal objective of the incumbent is to be re-elected.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    (Specifically: FedEx gives the group the same discount rates that it offers to all small businesses and associations.)

    Does this mean that the boycott will not only be applied to companies that offer discounts to the NRA, but also to any which fail to specifically discriminate against the NRA?

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    It's turtles all the way down

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    LOL, I know this isn't what you meant, but I immediately had the image of a teenage Leftist yelling at a turtle "You've got blood on your...your...feet!"

  • MatthewSlyfield||

    I wonder what California officials would do if the gun industry decided to boycott The California state government, California local governments, and any gun dealers who do business with CA state/local government. No new guns for CA Law enforcement.

  • Sigivald||

    "The gun industry" is not a monolith, is one problem.

    Hell, even if such a boycott could be arranged, CA gov could pay someone in to get an FFL in CA, do a one-time bulk buy, and then dump the FFL - there's no way to stop such a thing short of "refusing to sell inside California at all", which would be death to what remaining gun culture California has, a definite own-goal for 2A supporters.

    (Or CA could just let cops buy their own and reimburse them. Impossible to really enforce a "no government sales ban" through that.)

  • contraryjim||

    All these comments point to the fact that no ban or boycott works...except to create a black market and a criminal class.

  • FlameCCT||

    Kinda hard for the cops to buy their own when CA does not allow such a purpose.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Sort of like this?

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/Media.....d=10691844

    Los Angeles: "Arizona's immigration laws are horrible and racist, so we're going to boycott them!"

    Arizona: "Okay, we'll stop selling you our evil racist electricity. Enjoy having no A/C this summer."

    Southern CA: "REEEEE!!"

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    "I feel like if you're going to boycott the candy store, you've got to leave all the candy alone," said Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce. Arizona provides 25 percent of Los Angeles' power.

    "I feel like Arizona is the candy store," he added.

    I hope this clarification was not really necessary for almost any reader.

  • Rich||

    "It's time to speak with one voice"

    "Sieg heil!"

  • Sigivald||

    As Reynolds says, "The gleichschaltung cares about you!"

  • Real American||

    What Mitch O'Fucktard is explicitly proposing is to punish the NRA because of its views on guns and advocacy of the 2nd Amendment. If it became law, it would be a blatant violation of the 1st Amendment. The City can't explicitly punish the NRA because it does not like its viewpoints and advocacy, so it is seeking to do so indirectly by punishing entities that do business with the NRA because of its views and advocacy. The government cannot punish the any one for its views directly or indirectly! Both would be gross violations of the Constitution and little Mitchey's oath of office.

  • DJK||

    "Something something rational basis something something" - Courts justifying this.

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    Well it is the 9th circuit and SCOTUS doesn't do 2A any more. I'm gonna call this settled law.

  • Sigivald||

    "Yes, we realize the City of Los Angeles hates civil rights organizations, thank you."

  • chemjeff||

    This idea seems rather... chilling.

  • Rich||

  • silver.||

    That would be endearing if he wasn't a level 9 authoritarian turd.

  • JSinAZ||


    Zen fascists will control you
    100% natural
    You will jog for the master race
    And always wear the happy face
  • Rich||

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Good news for Holy Thursday I suppose.

  • John||

    I guess is the Pope Catholic isn't such a rhetorical question anymore.

  • ||

    "The Holy Father Francis recently received the founder of the newspaper La Repubblica in a private meeting on the occasion of Easter, without however giving him any interviews. What is reported by the author in today's article [in La Repubblica] is the result of his reconstruction, in which the textual words pronounced by the Pope are not quoted. No quotation of the aforementioned article must therefore be considered as a faithful transcription of the words of the Holy Father."

    Are we sure Russian hackers didn't help Pope Donald Francis get elected?

  • Rich||

    Beautiful.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    You win the thread

  • Ben of Houston||

    It's called Annihilationism. It's not exactly new, and it's the official view of the Anglican church.

  • FlameCCT||

    Pope Francis is a Liberation Theologist.

  • ||

    Ha, you idiots think the constitution does not allow for this kind of wackadoo policy? Haven't you heard of the commerce clause?

  • flyfishnevada||

    California can do whatever it wants as long as they don't violate people's constitutional rights or step on the enumerated powers of the Federal government...which they have with their sanctuary policies. But people are free to vote with their feet, not to mention at the voting booth. At some point they will run out of other people's money and piss off too many of their citizens. I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    It has happened to a noticeable degree and the trend is growing. This is a major reason why Brown is demanding that the state be allowed to make drastic cuts in publicly-funded pension plans and blaming the public employee unions (how do ya like dem apples?) for the fiscal crisis. It's one of those cases where you hate being able to say "I told you so"

  • contraryjim||

    The "commerce clause" was streache way beyond it's original intent...read the Federalist Papers...A rogue "Supreme" Court has allowed this clause to be used for the Federal government to grab powers it was never meant to have. A Constitutional Amendment is needed to make clear the restrictions on Federal power. Could it happen?? Doubtful'

    I realized that we would make no real progress unless we changed the underlying ideas of the people. Manuel "Muso" Ayau

    "To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea" James Madison 1788

  • DSK1134||

    I propose we boycott sanctuary cities and the state of CA

  • DSK1134||

    Hmm, that would leave all the California Public Safety people without a place to purchase weapons and protective gear. Not a very bright idea

  • FiftycalTX2||

    And where are these geniuses going to get THEIR GUNS FROM? Ford? Apple? EVERY gun maker "does business" with NRA.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    I'm sure there will be a law enforcement exception to their ban.

  • contraryjim||

    NRA members do business with gun makers....the NRA buys a few for prizes....not much leverage when the gun makers are supported by individual's purchases.

  • Rev. Arthur Ꮮ. Kirkland||

    Remember when Smith & Wesson made a deal with the Clinton Administration? The NRA put out a denunciation, and there was a massive boycott of S&W guns by gun buyers, both by civilians and red-county police departments. The British owners of S&W wound up selling it off soon afterward for a pittance to a startup.

    No gunmaker wants to be the next Smith & Wesson.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    You apparently lost track of which account you were using, Bigoted Authoritarian Mini-Me.

  • Daily Beatings||

    I like the account with the extended "L" since it's actually reasonable and informative.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    It has to be embarrassing that your sockpuppet has a broader vocabulary than you do.

  • Raoul Duke||

    I'm just glad California is doing so well that they can focus their energies on this monumental problem! It sure will benefit the residents, like by...uh...

  • flyfishnevada||

    Damn, The People's Republic is going full Kim Jong-un. You never go full Kim Jong-un!

    Seriously, when does the pendulum swing the other way? It wasn't that long ago The People's Republic was conservative. There are still many moderate and conservative's in the state. At some point you'd have to think they'd be motivated to go out and vote these clowns out of office.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    The California Democrats sealed their power with the gerrymandering after the last census. They only just in the last election lost their supermajority in the Legislature. All of which points to the possibility of moving the needle at least somewhat to the center, but the GOP has no real credible statewide presence. After all, the last governor from the Stupid Party was Schwarzenegger, so draw your own conclusions.

  • contraryjim||

    FREEDOM of Association went out the window when the 1964 Civil rights Act was applied to the private sector...God bye Constitution.

    The NRA is supported by it's members, not businesses...businesses don't need the NRA. Boycotting is seldom effective on it's own...only the lunatic fringe supports boycotts. The NRA isn't the 2nd Amendment ant the Amendment isn't the NRA...taking a casual relationship and trying to make it causual...is a sign of a weak mind?

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    I see subliteracy -- childish misuse of apostrophes, for example, or random capitalization -- as a sign of a weak mind.

  • Leslie the Bard||

    This sort of trick can backfire. All it would take is the NRA publishing two lists: one of its loyal supporting companies, one of its enemies -- and then ask its membership to patronize the one list and boycott the other. Since the NRA has 5.5 million members and at least twice as many supporters, this will hit its opponents seriously in the wallet. I imagine that GOA, or 2ndAF or JPFO will launch some seriously retaliatory lawsuits too. More people than just Democrats know how to play Economic Warfare.

  • Earth Skeptic||

    Meh. California boycott Fedex? How about Fedex boycott California.

  • Elston G||

    Yeah I wonder what FedEx shareholders would say about Frederick W Smith the siding that FedEx was going to cease operations in the sixth largest economy in the world.
    Do any of you ever even pretend to attempt to reason?

  • Alan@.4||

    And what, I wonder, might taxpaying residents of California have to say about the above described, assuming that people like the proposer ever bothered to ask?

  • Earth Skeptic||

    What percent are tax "payers"?

  • John C. Randolph||

    What? A candidate is a posturing douche? Say it ain't so!

    -jcr

  • TxJack 112||

    California has gone completely off the reservation. If the state actually did something stupid like boycotting Fed Ex, it would hurt them, not Fed Ex. Boycotts are economic terrorism and a weapon used by leftists unable to gather support or to silence opponents. What would the state of California do is suddenly companies started to refuse to do business with them? I am sure they would pass a law making it illegal to refuse to do business with the state which would only further demonstrate modern progressives are nothing more than fascists.

  • Elston G||

    You mean the ones that socialize their externalities and dump waste costs.

  • Elston G||

    You mean the ones that socialize their externalities and dump waste costs.

  • Elston G||

    Says the corporate fascist that thinks corporations like FedEx are entitled to California's economic largesse.
    Boycotts are a tried-and-true Market fundamental since capitalism's Inception.
    I thought Libertarians knew about Market fundamentals?

  • Earth Skeptic||

    Says the Marxist who thinks that Cal state government is entitled to the peoples' largesse (or at least fucking with it in order to promote a political agenda).

  • PBinLostAngeles||

    Other than pursuing the vote of the gullible, John Chiang would have no reason for taking this stance. Mr. O'Farrell on the other hand, obviously didn't see the memo:
    Since 2009, there have been more than 1,500 publicly reported "Disinvestment Events" - across all industries - in California, although estimates the actual tally of companies leaving California is approaching 10,000. Beginning in 2014 Google, Facebook, Apple, Dropbox, Oracle and nearly four dozen other Bay Area tech companies, all built or expanded facilities in Texas; LiveOps Cloud also, has since moved from Silicon Valley to a suburb of Austin, driven by what their CEO articulated were "Government Created Reasons" Among them: "Egregiously high taxes. Over-burdensome regulations, unaffordable housing for potential new hires, excessive development fees, and suffocating land-use policies." California's highly-educated workforce is not so unique anymore, and its quality of life has been tarnished by massive illegal immigration, regulatory and affordability issues, and the afore mentioned horrific taxation.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Are the half-educated goobers who fault California in this context the same half-educated goobers who demand that government refuse to transact with Planned Parenthood (and strive to arrange government micromanagement of certain medical facilities), or is this a different group of half-educated goobers?

    Thank you.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Arthur L. Hicklib projecting his subliterate background again.

  • dchang0||

    What happens when a taxpayer in California tries to boycott the government of California by repeatedly refusing to pay taxes?

    Oh, that's right--California will send people armed with GUNS to force this taxpayer to comply.

    What utter hypocrisy.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online