lawandorder
Member
Will never buy anything with the name Levi again!
Levi's Donating $$$ Against the 2nd Amendment
- Thread starter Scott B.
- Start date
Watchdog
Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2013
- Messages
- 12,510
- Reaction score
- 32,351
As stated in the OP, this is ten-month-old news from last year. I haven't seen anything new written about Levi's corporate position on guns and/or the Second Amendment since September 6, 2018. And everything written in the media about it was basically just rehashing what someone else said on the same day or the day before. The subject was almost instantly hammered flat in the media and on every gun forum I looked at.
There's a sorta lengthy thread about the Levi's donations and corporate policies on our forum from September 5, 2018... posted more or less the same time Levi's made their announcement. Anyone who wants to go back over it can do so by clicking here.
No, they did not. Even though the majority of Levi's products are made overseas, there are still some of their denim products made right here in America. In my opinion, to say that the company has "gone commie" is insulting to the thousands of hard working American employees involved in the manufacturing, transporting, distributing, and selling of the product. A lot of collateral companies rely on Levi's for their fiscal survival. Far as I'm concerned, saying Levi's went commie is like saying the NRA has gone commie because they endorsed controls on bump stocks.
Levi Strauss set these policies last year. All the talk and threats of boycotts by gun owners and firearms manufacturers have not changed their mind one iota. And it won't. The company has the cash to run their company any way they choose.
Wrangler Rich
US Veteran
I wear Wranglers.
WR
WR
Watchdog
Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2013
- Messages
- 12,510
- Reaction score
- 32,351
They wouldn't care.
Remember when people burned Beatle records by the thousands (millions?) in 1966? Didn't stop those guys from making more records and making millions of dollars. Same difference. McCartney's still worth more than $1.2 billion. That's over 1,000 millions. Ringo's worth less...only about $350 million...but he isn't exactly knocking at the poorhouse door.
Stock up on eye bleach!
bill2000
Member
You might like to know that after Parkland, LL Bean very publicly capitulated to the Hoggs and Bloombergs of the world and stopped selling semiautos and raised the purchase age to 21. I'm done with them too. The next gun control battle we face will be with the "social justice warrior" companies. I predict they will be a formidable foe. Banks and credit card companies are already making trouble.
I used to buy Levis once in a while, but I'm done now.
It is important to write the company and let them know you are opposed to their political agenda. Don't even mention how you will "never buy blah, blah, blah".
It is important to write the company and let them know you are opposed to their political agenda. Don't even mention how you will "never buy blah, blah, blah".
LoadedRound
Member
Lets see:
High Price
Low / Inconsistent Quality
Inconsistent Sizing
I don't need other reasons to avoid Levi products. Their Dockers are just as bad.
High Price
Low / Inconsistent Quality
Inconsistent Sizing
I don't need other reasons to avoid Levi products. Their Dockers are just as bad.
Watchdog
Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2013
- Messages
- 12,510
- Reaction score
- 32,351
L. L. Bean says they have not stopped selling semi-autos, even though most of their gun sales seem to be bolt action rifles like the Remington 700 or Winchesters. They just don't sell AR-style rifles. I don't think they ever have. They don't sell handguns, either. Bean only sells guns at their flagship store anyway, and the long guns they sell are geared to target shooting and hunting. ARs are a dime a dozen at just about every LGS and online sales site on the planet, so it isn't as if Bean is denying anyone's rights just because they don't sell the things.
So they don't sell ARs and they don't sell long guns to people under 21? Bean also won't sell ammo to anyone under 21. So what? Their store, their rules.
If little Johnny wants a rifle or shotgun so bad but he isn't 21 yet, let him buy one somewhere else. Or get daddy to buy it for him.
You might like to know L. L. Bean has contributed millions of dollars to the National Park Foundation, helping to preserve the parks and maintain wildlife habitat. Bean also contributes its products to the Atlantic Salmon Federation, an international non-profit that promotes the conservation and management of the Atlantic Salmon and its natural habitat, which includes the New England states. Bean also offers classes on skeet and trap shooting throughout the year.
No long gun or ammo sales to under 21? No AR sales? Probably a store just down the road a piece where someone can buy both. A Bean salesperson would probably give someone directions on how to get there. L. L. Bean isn't the Second Amendment Bogeyman, and their corporate decisions are made by company execs, not outsiders like Mike Bloomberg and a crybaby high school kid. Much ado about nothing far as I'm concerned.
...or shooting a Ruger firearm. Google "the Ruger Letter".
I would buy Chinese fakes/knockoffs of Levis, if I was certain they were fakes. Rugers too.
jag312
Member
I believe that Dominos Pizza is also anti-gun and donates mega bucks to anti-gun organizations. I don't like their pizza either. Let me clarify that. I would rather eat cigarette butts from the gutter than eat a Dominos pizza.
I agree re: Levi's and Domino's - neither the products nor the politics appeal to me. Notification that I oppose their official corporate policy which I find pandering, uninformed, and illogical, via hand-written letter (supposed to carry the most influence), and steering my family away from their abuse of intellect and support of tyranny is likely the best I'll be able to do to protest.
As I understand it, Ruger's policy died with the old man. The sons operate it now and have embraced standard capacity magazines, modern sporting rifle designs, and the like. Some of their products were prizes at a recent Friends of the NRA banquet I attended. I understand some have issue with the agenda and practices of the NRA, fundamentally and recently, regarding funds use and treatment of staff. I am also concerned about some of those items, and give the vast majority of my budget for donations and political action to more local affairs - state institutions like the Virginia Citizens Defense League, and the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Ownership.
edited for spelling error
As I understand it, Ruger's policy died with the old man. The sons operate it now and have embraced standard capacity magazines, modern sporting rifle designs, and the like. Some of their products were prizes at a recent Friends of the NRA banquet I attended. I understand some have issue with the agenda and practices of the NRA, fundamentally and recently, regarding funds use and treatment of staff. I am also concerned about some of those items, and give the vast majority of my budget for donations and political action to more local affairs - state institutions like the Virginia Citizens Defense League, and the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Ownership.
edited for spelling error
Last edited:
Regarding the positive things that some entities do (supporting public lands but not supporting certain firearms issues), I think corporations are too big if they have the power to influence and choose and agendize things like federal lands, which is likely an incentive for additional profiteering and tax abatements, which can be used for malfeasance and less reasonable efforts - disarming individuals who ought not to be disarmed, restricting firearms to government use only, etc. I'm no socialist - I support making a profit - but I do my best to support those entities that profoundly and fundamentally support issues that I agree with, in way that I agree with.
When you need access to 1% type of money and influence to have a meaningful impact, 99% of individuals are already lost.
When you need access to 1% type of money and influence to have a meaningful impact, 99% of individuals are already lost.
joeintexas
US Veteran
While I would love to say I'm going to hurt their bottom line by never buying their products, I guess I can't cause I've never bought the Levis brand and somehow they managed to stay in business. I will say I won't help it in the future though. I've always preferred Wranglers.
My sentiments exactly. I haven't bought a pair of Levi's in the last 40 years either.
OK, that is news to me about his sons running the company now.
Of course the NRA supported Bill Ruger, because he donated a million dollars to them as I recall. A million dollars buys you some nice coverage. Disgusting.
Last edited:
