TexasCHLforum.com

Staples would not let a gun store enter their contest...because they sold guns. time to boycott, never again will I enter their store. Done. Fini.

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/to ... ntest.html

I'm really not trying to pick a fight or anything but if it were a strip club, another perfectly legal business, would you feel the same way?

Right or wrong, many view gun stores in the same light.

So you would boycott and go somewhere else? Like, say, Office Max?

Office Max runs their contests the same way.

Contests are PR events for these kind of companies, and if they award something to "controversial" businesses (gun stores, strip clubs, puppy killing mills, etc.) it neutralizes or negates their PR value. We don't have to like it, but in their defense, they did call it out in their rules. I don't agree with their rules, but it's their business.

Staples is a program partner with the NSSF. This is really weird. Why would Staples partner with the NSSF, only to not allow the same industry to enter into their contest? Inquiring minds want to know!

TBM

OldCannon wrote:So you would boycott and go somewhere else? Like, say, Office Max?

Office Max runs their contests the same way.

Contests are PR events for these kind of companies, and if they award something to "controversial" businesses (gun stores, strip clubs, puppy killing mills, etc.) it neutralizes or negates their PR value. We don't have to like it, but in their defense, they did call it out in their rules. I don't agree with their rules, but it's their business.

They could have just kept their mouth shut and not let them win. "That was easy".

Shinesintx wrote: They could have just kept their mouth shut and not let them win. "That was easy".

i c wut u did thar

Agreed, but large companies like that often contract out the operational details of the contests (lawsuit insulation, you would be amazed at how difficult it is to actually run public contests like that when you're a large company).

OldCannon wrote:

Shinesintx wrote: They could have just kept their mouth shut and not let them win. "That was easy".

i c wut u did thar

Agreed, but large companies like that often contract out the operational details of the contests (lawsuit insulation, you would be amazed at how difficult it is to actually run public contests like that when you're a large company).

Can't argue with that, kinda...but I can sorta hijack my thread.

Years ago, I had a buddy whose GF worked for the cowboys...she did their PR stuff and walked the halftime singers on the field. He needed LASIK surgery. During a cowboy game, they ran a promo for a large dallas based eye surgery center...and I'll be danged if the guy who sat right next to my buddy didn't win the free surgery. Since his eyesight was fine, he gave the certificate for free surgery to my buddy. Guess it did not hurt that my buddy gave him the 50 yard line ticket.

My point? Companies are familiar with loopholes.

olafpfj wrote:I'm really not trying to pick a fight or anything but if it were a strip club, another perfectly legal business, would you feel the same way?

Right or wrong, many view gun stores in the same light.

It does not matter what the business is. Staples invites businesses and people in to shop for office products and participate in their games. Because a business that sells firearms is not allowed to participate, it's discrimination.

I can understand they want to and thanks to this still being America can run their business and contests as they see fit...BUT, what I have a bit of an issue with is the group that they were lumped into...

“We’re sorry, but your small business entry into the Staples PUSH It Forward Contest has been rejected for the following reason(s): Entry contains content that promotes alcohol, illegal drugs, tobacco, firearms/weapons (or the use of any of the foregoing); promotes any activities that may appear unsafe or dangerous; promotes any particular political agenda or message; is obscene or offensive; or endorses any form of hate or hate group.”

Medic624 wrote:I can understand they want to and thanks to this still being America can run their business and contests as they see fit...BUT, what I have a bit of an issue with is the group that they were lumped into...

“We’re sorry, but your small business entry into the Staples PUSH It Forward Contest has been rejected for the following reason(s): Entry contains content that promotes alcohol, illegal drugs, tobacco, firearms/weapons (or the use of any of the foregoing); promotes any activities that may appear unsafe or dangerous; promotes any particular political agenda or message; is obscene or offensive; or endorses any form of hate or hate group.”

Funny and hypocritical, since banning a gun business is loudly promoting a particular political agenda.

olafpfj wrote:I'm really not trying to pick a fight or anything but if it were a strip club, another perfectly legal business, would you feel the same way?

Right or wrong, many view gun stores in the same light.

One, a strip club is a legal business, but the right to bare breasts isn't protected by the Constitution. Seems like a little respect for the highest law of the land might be in order for a company that benefits from the American style of government. Two, as Medic points out, banning a gun business violates their own rules by promoting a particular political agenda.

VMI77 wrote: . . . but the right to bare breasts isn't protected by the Constitution.

In NY it is.

I contacted our NSSF representative and was advised that the NSSF was unaware of this policy and that they have reached out to their Staples contact. And in the meantime, NSSF will be contacting other office supply centers for their members. We will see if the NSSF get anywhere with it. Not holding my breath.

jimlongley wrote:

VMI77 wrote: . . . but the right to bare breasts isn't protected by the Constitution.

In NY it is.

As it is in Texas, http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/h ... 090481.pdf
Regulate it, Yes. Tax it, Yes. Ban it, No. The "communicative components" of exotic/erotic dance(whatever they are)are protected expression.

Dadtodabone wrote:

jimlongley wrote:

VMI77 wrote: . . . but the right to bare breasts isn't protected by the Constitution.

In NY it is.

As it is in Texas, http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/h ... 090481.pdf
Regulate it, Yes. Tax it, Yes. Ban it, No. The "communicative components" of exotic/erotic dance(whatever they are)are protected expression.

This is the point I was trying to make. Us gun rights people need to be careful about being hipocritcal. Not that anyone was in this thread, just raising the point.