Thread: Gear shopping - Local vs Offshore - I know...

Originally Posted by tiroahunta

Doesn't change the fact they through NZ shooters under the bus..... Fuck em

Sent from my SM-T225 using Tapatalk

No they didn't. The Gov did. Their CEO said stuff that the majority of franchisee's didn't agree with or likely didn't like being said, and in any event the Gov had well made their mind up and the comments would have made no difference. Time to let it go and move on.

To not buy from H&F franchises because of "principle" makes no sense to me.

Originally Posted by Tahr

No they didn't. The Gov did. Their CEO said stuff that the majority of franchisee's didn't agree with or likely didn't like being said, and in any event the Gov had well made their mind up and the comments would have made no difference. Time to let it go and move on.

To not buy from H&F franchises because of "principle" makes no sense to me.

It may make no sense to you, but to many others protesting against matters that go against our principals is the only way to effect change. That protest can take the form of a boycott.
The question of greatest importance is ' Did H&F benefit from the buyback / confiscation with 'windfall profits' '

Originally Posted by Tahr

No they didn't. The Gov did. Their CEO said stuff that the majority of franchisee's didn't agree with or likely didn't like being said, and in any event the Gov had well made their mind up and the comments would have made no difference. Time to let it go and move on.

To not buy from H&F franchises because of "principle" makes no sense to me.

....well they certainly didn't go out of their way to su
support one party of the shooting demographic.

My point stands.

BTW bit hard to boycott a government. If you know of a way, let me know.


Sent from my SM-T225 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by tiroahunta

....well they certainly didn't go out of their way to su
support one party of the shooting demographic.

My point stands.

BTW bit hard to boycott a government. If you know of a way, let me know.


Sent from my SM-T225 using Tapatalk

I think the boycott available is not voting for them, rather than punishing the innocent franchisees. “Principles” should be values led, not emotion led. The

Originally Posted by Tahr

I think the boycott available is not voting for them, rather than punishing the innocent franchisees. “Principles” should be values led, not emotion led. The

Clarification: vote for someone else. Make sure you vote, even if it requires holding your nose while doing it. That's only wasted vote is the one not cast. That's the key. I don't care who for (that would be politics, which is verboten on here), just vote. Voting confers maximum moaning rights.

Identify your target beyond all doubt because you never miss (right?) and I'll be missed.

Originally Posted by Tahr

I think the boycott available is not voting for them, rather than punishing the innocent franchisees. “Principles” should be values led, not emotion led. The

Not voting for any party just gives those who do more power (albeit a very small amount) to their individual vote. A better "boycott" is to write to the parties you have issue with and let them know why you will be voting for someone else - if a tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it, will they care?

My "Principles" are values led, but that doesn't mean there is no emotional involvement with them.