Saw this a little earlier.

Your thoughts?

http://dailycaller.com/2013/03...o-if-gun-bills-pass/


While Colorado state senators argue their way through a marathon debate over a slate of gun-control bills, another company has vowed not to do business in Colorado if the legislation passes.

A producer for the Outdoor Channel, a California company that produces television shows about guns and hunting in Colorado, emailed Republican Sen. Steve King on Tuesday warning him that not only will he film the shows in a more gun-friendly state, but also that he would warn hunters to stay away.

“The message we will take to our viewers and listeners is that these proposed laws are so dangerous to hunters and any other person, be she a fisherman or a skier who brings a handgun into the state for self-defense, that we cannot recommend hunting, fishing or visiting Colorado,” wrote executive producer Michael Bane. “We reach millions of people, and, quite frankly, we have a credibility that Colorado government officials can no longer match.”

Outdoor Channel’s most popular show is “Gun Stories,” hosted by “Criminal Minds” actor Joe Mantegna. Although Bane said the network is “relatively small potatoes” by TV standards — he estimated it would contribute just under $1 million to the Colorado economy in 2013 — he says his industry connections have already cost Colorado plenty.

He cited a “major network producer” who, after having lunch with Bane, chose to set a reality TV show in Arizona rather than Colorado because of the pending legislation.

“That lunch cost Colorado over a million in economic impact,” Bane wrote.

He also warned of dire impacts to Colorado’s hunting industry if the bills should pass, noting that next month he will attend a meeting of outdoor and hunting programing producers in Texas.

“The Number One agenda item will be Colorado,” he wrote. “Already, hunting organizations and statewide hunting clubs around the country are pulling out of Colorado, and we expect this trend to accelerate rapidly.”

Bane was preaching to the choir, as King is one of the most vocal opponents of Democrats’ gun control bills. By midday Friday the Senate had given the OK to just one of seven bills expected to be heard, a bill that would prevent ownership of firearms by people who have committed domestic violence.

It’s far from the most controversial to be heard. Still to be debated are bills that would impose liability for damage caused by assault-style weapons on owners, sellers and manufacturers; a bill that would ban high capacity magazines; and a bill requiring universal background checks, among others.

Bane’s email didn’t specify whether Outdoor Channel would leave the state if some but not all of the bills pass and which, if any, are less palatable than others.

Other companies have made similar threats to leave the state, most notably Magpul Industries, which manufactures the sort of high capacity magazines that one of the bills would make illegal.

Lawmakers are prepared to continue the debate well into the evening and perhaps into Saturday.

Best

GWB

Just my opinion Geedubya, but it really does not matter what a company like this thinks or does. People will still watch their programs and no one will care if hunts in Colorado are not being filmed.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Just my opinion Geedubya, but it really does not matter what a company like this thinks or does. People will still watch their programs and no one will care if hunts in Colorado are not being filmed.

That's the whole point of them boycotting Colorado! It will be Colorado that suffers, not the company! DUH!!!

On my list of places to not hunt or go on vacation.

Boycotting has largely been a tool liberals use to threaten people who don't think like they do, the list is long, which usually makes their boycott relatively ineffective because they always seem to be boycotting something. Tough to get all the crazies behind every boycott.

You don't see too many instances where conservatives do it, but when they do, it's usually quite substantial and effective. The Harrisburg show comes to mind first. AR manufacturers banning sales to military and law enforcement in states who pass ridiculous gun control measures is another that has seemed to be quite effective, every mfgr. seems to be on board with this idea.

But this one, well, I don't see the logic behind it. For the most part, It will only hurt the guys who are on the side of the 2nd amendment. It will hurt the people the liberals would like to see hurt, outfitters and hunters.

While I'm 100% behind supporting the 2nd amendment and all for boycotting those who seek to weaken it, I can't see any good in this particular boycott.

They had the right line of thinking, but failed in their execution of it. What good is a boycott that hurts those you want to support, even if it also hurts Colorado's economy and tax revenue.

I agree with you Wendell. Somehow, I can't see the liberals who are pushing gun control in Colorado being upset that hunts will not be filmed in their state. Seems like we would be doing exactly what they want as most who are pro gun control are also anti hunters.

No one seems to boycott Zimbabwe and look who is in charge there? What's the difference?

MAGPul is making is easier for Colorado residents to get their products in spite of the bullshit...I like MagPul's way better...

If we take this argument to it's logical extensions, why film in the US at all? It the the entire SYSTEM in the US that allows things like Colorado to potentially happen...why not punish the ENTIRE system.

Personally I think we need to recognize that it's these pyscho shooter cases with kids being targeted that are killing us.

It wasn't until Aurora that gun bans started up again and it wasn't until Newtown that the floodgates really burst. All it's going to take is about one more big one and the country will start to like the idea recently announced by that individual in the WH - total abolition of privately owned firearms.

Therefore, if I had the NRA's ear, I'd tell them to start there in analyzing what can be done.

If I had anything to do with it, I'd start by re-directing the debate and remedies away from gun owners into two other directions - the mentally ill and better security especially for schools. That's needed anyway, for reasons that go beyond guns (like keeping sexual predators away from kids etc).

And I think it needs to be gun owners leading the charge on that.

The other thing that absolutely has to be done is, unite under one organization every last gun owner in these libdem "swing states" like CO.

I agree with Wendell that in this case boycotting won't work (it's way to late anyhow). And I agree that in some cases targeted boycotting does work.

But we've got to have a more national based and much better plan and organizied response. Or else.

A producer for the Outdoor Channel, a California company that produces television shows about guns and hunting in Colorado, emailed Republican Sen. Steve King on Tuesday warning him that not only will he film the shows in a more gun-friendly state, but also that he would warn hunters to stay away.

Really?

A California company? Is going to boycott doing business in Colorado?

Just spit-wadding this, but maybe the California company ought to tend to politics in their own state.

figuring out how to stop and help people with problems would be a big part of the answer. However, Dem's do not want that. Does anyone really think they want pain and suffering to vanish? Of course not! How could they stand on the graves of the dead to push their agenda. I bet every one of those gun grabbers was cheering after Sandy Hook.

quote:

figuring out how to stop and help people with problems would be a big part of the answer. However, Dem's do not want that.

Mile High, you're right. This is why I said just above here that gun owners must be the ones pushing for the solutions that will provide some immediate relief to potential victims. And it's not being done. And there we are.

And at the risk of being repetitive, we don't have a lot of time here before another one happens.

Our opposition to inch by inch killing of gun owner rights should ask the question, "how is eliminating (fill in whatever gun feature they want to eliminate next) going to prevent another mass shooting TOMORROW, instead of theoretically at some distant time in the future?" And then you say, "there're better ways of dealing with it".

Michael Bane lives in, and is from Colorado, not in California. The Outdoor Channel has offices in California, New York and Chicago. But making it sound that this “ban” is coming from California makes better headlines and sells more stories.

As far has hunting in Colorado goes, nothing that Michael Bane or The Outdoor Channel has to say, will change my mind. Every show I’ve seen Michael Bane in is about CCWs and self defense. I don’t even think the guy hunts.

quote:

Originally posted by just-a-hunter:
A boycotting Colorado will hurt the wrong people.

I dare say most/all hunters and outfitters are the ones in the "We want Colorado back, pro gun" pool...

I see this as a furthur division of people on the same side while like as said earlier, the city dwellers and vote majority will see it as a double sided victory.

Todd

Read this:

http://forums.accuratereloadin...3411043/m/8881030781

quote:

producer for the Outdoor Channel, a California company that produces television shows about guns and hunting in Colorado, emailed Republican Sen. Steve King on Tuesday warning him that not only will he film the shows in a more gun-friendly state, but also that he would warn hunters to stay away.

Shouldn't they move out of California before they start screaming gun rights?

Wendell, I see your point - you book hunts in Colorado.