Match Exact Phrase    




"The Best Mix Of Hard-Hitting REAL News & Cutting-Edge Alternative News On The Web"


Share This

  



March 24, 2018

Mass Exodus From CitiGroup After They Go Full Anti-Second Amendment - Gun Control By Proxy Backfires Again

gungrabbers345.jpg


By Susan Duclos - All News PipeLine

After Dick's Sporting Good's arbitrarily decided to jump into the anti-second amendment battle by refusing sell sporting rifles and banning sales of those weapons to anyone under 21, they announced they had seen "deeper than expected sales decline, as their stocks sunk.

CEO of Dick's Edward Stack said in an earnings call, "Thereís going to be some pushback and we expected that. There are going to be the people who donít shop us anymore for anything." Stack also predicted the decision is "not going to be positive from a traffic standpoint and a sales standpoint."

Since then, the company's shares have fallen 7.3 percent after going up 13 percent in 2018. The company also failed to hit projected sales of $2.74 billion for this quarter coming in at just $2.66 billion. The sporting goods company is set to open 19 new stores this year and has hopes that doing so will bolster their waning image.

While they were praised by anti-second amendment activists pushing for new gun control laws, that praise did not bring them new customers, but it did cost them the the business of second amendment supporters, which was the predicted outcome when a business decides to step into the political fray.

Dick's, along with Walmart, are now being sued for age discrimination, with one suit claiming Dick's is violating the†Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act, which "prohibits discriminatory practices, policies and customs on the basis of religion, age, race, national origin, sex, height, weight and other factors," according to multiple reports.

CITIBANK (CITIGROUP) GOES FULL ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT

Ignoring the lesson of the whole Dick's Sporting Goods fiasco, on March 22, 2018, CitiBank announced new "Firearms policy," in where they decided to tell companies that do business with them what the "best practices" are regarding firearms. In other words, Citi Group is attempting to force companies to comply with their political ideology.

Via Citi Groups' press release:

But we want to do our part as a company to prevent firearms from getting into the wrong hands. So our new policy centers around current firearms sales best practices that will guide those we do business with as a firm.

Under this new policy, we will require new retail sector clients or partners to adhere to these best practices: (1) they donít sell firearms to someone who hasnít passed a background check, (2) they restrict the sale of firearms for individuals under 21 years of age, and (3) they donít sell bump stocks or high-capacity magazines. This policy will apply across the firm, including to small business, commercial and institutional clients, as well as credit card partners, whether co-brand or private label. It doesn't impact the ability of consumers to use their Citi cards at merchants of their choice.

We know our clients also care about these issues and we have begun to engage with them in the hope that they will adopt these best practices over the coming months. If they opt not to, we will respect their decision and work with them to transition their business away from Citi.

The social media reaction to @citi's announcement was an immediate mass exodus, with users closing accounts, tearing up cards, closing accounts at Home Depot, Sears, and other companies that use CitiBank credit cards, as can be seen in their Twitter announcement thread, as users took them at their word and decided to "transition their business away from Citi."

Another immediate reaction could be seen in the fall of their stock prices, which coincidentally started right after they announced they were going full anti-second amendment.

Citistocks5.jpg

CONTACT CITIBANK

CitiBank phone:†1 (800) 374-9700
Online Contact Page:†https://online.citi.com/US/ag/contactus
List of Citi Affiliates:†https://www.citi.com/CRD/html/Citi_Affiliates.html

GUN-RELATED VIDEO CREATORS JUMP TO PORNHUB AHEAD OF YOUTUBE BAN

YouTube, already known for their censorship practices against conservatives and Independent Media, announced they would also be cracking down on content creators that make videos related to the manufacturing or sale of weapons, which in turn has led many of those content creators to head on over to Pornhub where their content would not be censored.

Gun vloggers InRange made their announcement via Facebook (Archive is link here):

InRangeTV takes pride in its consistently forward looking approach to digital media in todayís world of partisan censorship, fake news, and corporate encroachment into publication of potentially controversial information. YouTubeís newly released released vague and one-sided firearms policy makes it abundantly clear that YouTube cannot be counted upon to be a safe harbor for a wide variety of views and subject matter.

In a search for solutions to lifeís challenges, an understanding of the past can provide valuable insight. With its foundation as a channel dedicated to understanding firearms through the lens of history, InRangeTV is ideally positioned to recognize trends likely to succeed. In particular, an understanding that vice and pornography have long been leading drivers of communications technology and infrastructure.

For this reason, InRangeTV is pleased to announce its expansion onto the PornHub network.

PornHub has a history of being a proactive voice in the online community, as well as operating a resilient and robust video streaming platform.

InRangeTV is excited to be joining a group of content creators who are truly open and non-judgmental when it comes to potentially controversial content.

Other Gun Rights groups have issued their own statements regarding Google's video platform YouTube's politically motivated censorship with Chris Cox, head of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action, issuing a statement saying "YouTube is now in the business of political posturing and censorship.†Millions of Americans watch YouTube videos every day to learn more about the safe and responsible use of firearms, and those videos show law-abiding gun owners participating in lawful behavior. By banning this content, YouTube is engaging in politically motivated censorship and alienating the millions of people who turn to the website for education and training. Currently, anyone can go to YouTube and watch a video to learn how to make a bomb, yet the company wants to ban videos depicting lawful gun use? It's absurd."

The National Shooting Sports Foundation sent out a message to its membership stating "YouTube's announcement this week of a new firearms content policy is troubling.†We suspect it will be interpreted to block much more content than the stated goal of firearms and certain accessory sales. Especially worrisome is the potential for blocking educational content that serves an instructional and skill-building purpose. YouTube's policy announcement has also served to invite political activists to flood their review staff with complaints about any video to which they may proffer manufactured outrage.

Much like Facebook, YouTube now acts as a virtual public square.†The exercise of what amounts to censorship, then, can legitimately be viewed as the stifling of commercial free speech, which has constitutional protection. Such actions also impinge on the Second Amendment."

Carefully note the wording of that last statement as in an unrelated case, Packingham vs North Carolina, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that social media is now a "modern public square," meaning that YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and others could help accountable legally by violating First Amendment Rights because while those companies may be privately owned, if they are "public squares," they must adhere to the constitutional right of free speech.

The fact that the National Shooting Sports Foundation specifically used the "public square" terminology could be indicative that they may be looking into legal action and their statement may be laying the foundation for such action.

That "public square" argument is already being used in a free speech lawsuit against Twitter for violating the First Amendment with their censorship.

Speaking of YouTube it seems that they are once against attempting to protect liberals' favorite gun-control poster boy David Hogg from himself, as they keep deleting his new profanity-laced interview, where he drops the F-bomb over and over again and he insults American gun-owners. This video has been uploaded to d.tube.



It also appears that little foul-mouthed Mr. Hogg, while promoting gun control, isn't very happy about any other type of "control" that†Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school, the location of the shooting last month that killed 17, has put in place in the name of school safety. Hogg has bitterly complained about the schools new policy of requiring clear backpacks.

Robert W. Runcie, the superintendent of Broward County Public Schools, sent a letter to the families of Stoneman Douglas High students imposing the new backpack rule, reminiscent of security measures at airports and professional sports venues. He said any student without a clear backpack would be provided one at no cost after spring break, which takes place next week.

Students also will be issued identification badges, which they will be required to wear at all times while in school.

Hogg's reaction was "After we come back from Spring Break, theyíre requiring us all to have clear backpacks...itís unnecessary. Itís embarrassing for a lot of the students."

Seems the new poster boy for gun control doesn't care about school safety, just trying to get lawmakers to violate the second amendment rights of Americans.


BOTTOM LINE

It appears that gun-grabbing proponents are now attempting to force gun control by proxy, with companies deciding the "best practices" for other companies, then threatening them if they do not abide by arbitrary rules they are setting for anything gun-related, whether it is Citibank, Dick's, or social media, but it appears to backfiring on them.

What these companies do not seem to "get" is that gun grabbers may hail and praise them for their actions but they aren't rushing towards them, becoming members, shopping at their stores, using their credits any more than they previously did, but second amendment supporters are refusing to use their services in large numbers and announcing it publicly.

The bottom line here is that every single time another company, or platform, attempts to help gun-grabbers erode our first and second amendment constitutionally guaranteed rights, it is up to readers, people who use their services and constitutional supporters to speak up, contact them, refuse to use their services and to tell them why.

Tell them, tell any of their affiliates, and any company using their services, exactly why their services will never be considered for use again.


NOTE TO READERS:†With the active suppression of Independent Media by social media, Google/YouTube, big tech etc... donations help to keep websites that do not conform to the official narrative alive. Any extra readers may be able to spare for donations is greatly appreciated. Thanks to all our readers and donors who are helping to keep Independent Media alive.

DONATEANP1.jpg











Website design by Innovative Solutions Group - Helena, MT
comments powered by Disqus

Custom Web Design By Innovative Solutions Group