Utah Guns Forum banner

Alternative to Babies R Us ??

10K views 28 replies 18 participants last post by  bagpiper 
#1 ·
I've looked around and tried to find some good alternatives to "Babies rus". However, not really found a lot, .. :dunno:

What do the experienced, gun-slinging mothers and fathers on this forum recommend? :grinningjester:

Any suggestions welcome, I need to organize a Baby-Shower and would love to make it a gun-friendly adventure instead of having the easy solution to send everybody to a anti-gun cooperate shop.

Thanks,
 
#27 ·
bagpiper said:
The second reason for a boycott is much easier to achieve and that is simply to avoid contributing to the bottom line of a company whose policies you oppose. I don't like to do business with companies who then use the profits I helped provide in order to work against my interests. If I could persuade them to change their policies that would be great. But even if all I do is take my business to a company whose policies I prefer, I've succeeded in this second reason.

Charles
I don't disagree, but all that approach really does is deny you access to a known source of certain items. For example with Toy's R Us, my three boys are Thomas the Train and Geo-Trax crazy (and just about anything train related), I can find many/most of the toys and track sets at other retailers, and have done so. But Toy's R Us usually has the most comprehensive selection of any Brick and Mortar store I've seen for both those product lines. And there are some sets or components that I haven't seen anywhere but Toy's R Us or it's online shop. That means my boys don't have those sets, but it also means I'm starting to have to hunt harder to find sets they boys don't have already. So calling it a boycott when it's just to not darken their cash register with your money is counter productive in that it only really "hurts" you. Not that it may really hurt you, but if we're gonna call it a boycott we should be trying to let them know they are being boycotted, thus my suggestion about going CC and showrooming your purchases from Amazon.
 
#28 ·
quychang said:
I think it's rather sad that as a group we probably aren't large enough to achieve the desired policy change, at least not in most cases.
Not to despair, however, realize that "we" do seem to be a large enough group to prevent most of the offensive government actions that would limit our RKBA. Thanks to the Democrats losing the House in '94 and Gore losing the presidency in 2000 both in at least some part due to voter backlash (and especially blue collar, blue dog, union voter backlash) over the scary looking gun ban and other anti-RKBA policies, only the most die-hard gun grabbers are openly advocating new limits on RKBA following the shooting in Aurora. (Not that many more don't still want to infringe or even deny RKBA, but they know it is a losing issue both nationally and in many of their individual districts.)

Of course, while the number of households with guns is probably around 50% nationwide (and a lot higher in many areas), the number of persons who routinely carry a handgun for self-defense is much lower. Many rural gun owners don't feel the need to carry on a regular basis. Utah has slightly over 100k permits valid, with about half of those issued to residents of other States. So 50k valid permits held by Utah residents. Figure 3 million total residents and 1.5 million residents of legal age to get a permit. That is about 1.7% of total Utah residents with a permit, and about 3.5% of residents who are eligible (ignoring the small number of adults who are not eligible). I'd be shocked if even half of those with permits actually carried on a regular basis.

So while those who carry and want to carry is a tiny minority, those who support RKBA generally are a definite majority, especially in Utah. Go look at campaign finance disclosure forms. The NRA and other pro-RKBA groups are not donating any significant money to candidates. So when the other side gets mad and talks (in shorthand) about the "NRA" or the "gun lobby", they are really talking about the majority of Utah voters.

quychang said:
But I absolutely think Charles is right concerning supporting those businesses that have policies more in line with your own beliefs and goals. We might not be able to seriously hurt a huge business chain, but we certainly can make a difference for those smaller local businesses that deserve our support because of their policies.

Mel
Helping to support businesses with good policies, especially small and/or locally owned businesses is probably as important as not supporting businesses with bad policies. If we lose the former, we will lose the choice of where to patronize.

Charles
 
#29 ·
DaKnife said:
I don't disagree, but all that approach really does is deny you access to a known source of certain items.

....

So calling it a boycott when it's just to not darken their cash register with your money is counter productive in that it only really "hurts" you. Not that it may really hurt you, but if we're gonna call it a boycott we should be trying to let them know they are being boycotted, thus my suggestion about going CC and showrooming your purchases from Amazon.
We could certainly call it, "An advisory that you may not want to support certain businesses because they have anti-RKBA policies". But "Boycott List" seems to convey the general meaning.

I certainly would not condemn anyone for doing the showrooming and letting the business know exactly how much business they have lost. I just don't hold out much hope that such effort is likely to change the policies of a large, national chain like Babies R Us. I think such strategies are much more likely to effect change on non-chain businesses, or on businesses without national policies.

But yes, denying myself access to a known source of certain items is the cost of avoiding doing business with certain establishments. And so I have to be selective about my choices. I don't know of any retail establishment that isn't RKBA at least as far as their employment policies go: no guns carried by most employees. Some establishments have been reported to be more likely than others to hassle those who OC. Others go so far as to post and actively enforce anti-RKBA policies against customers. I can't boycott every business with an anti-RKBA policy. It is like trying to boycott businesses that are open on the Sabbath.

I can BUYcott businesses with particularly good gun (or Sabbath) policies (such a Macys) to help those businesses succeed and continue to offer me some choices.

I avoid those places where the cost of avoiding is less than the benefit I'd gain by not avoiding. For me, that means avoiding events at Energy Solution Arena with their metal detectors and active efforts to disarm me. On the flip side, I'm not about to boycott LDS Church meetings including those to which I am invited held at the Conference Center with its metal detectors. Turns out, for me, church attendance and service is far more important than concerts and basketball games. Others in the pro-RKBA community doubtless arrive at different, even exactly opposite conclusions. In other venues, I tend to simply CC when shopping at Costco, while not worrying about OCing while shopping at Lowes or Home Depot.

But generally speaking, I find myself doing more and more shopping on line. I can do that on my schedule, without having to get dressed, fight crowds, etc, and in most cases, I get at least as good of service from the computer as I would from the typical employee at retail stores. And it is a lot easier and quicker to comparison shop for prices.

In other words, and to be brief, "Boycott" encompasses a wide range of activities relative to personal and group business decisions.

Charles
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top