I fell for nothing. BRCC could have easily said that while they don't sponsor Kyle, they believe in the 2nd Amendment and one's right to self-defense. Yet they didn't. Words have meaning.
You can believe in the 2A and not inject your company into an extremely controversial subject and PR battle. These positions are not mutually exclusive.
Kyle is innocent until proven guilty, and the evidence shown thus far indicates self-defense. Are those things controversial? Why could another company state that and not BRCC? It reeks of political correctness and caving to the mob.
You fell for their much smaller competitor's PR stunt lol
I fell for nothing. BRCC could have easily said that while they don't sponsor Kyle, they believe in the 2nd Amendment and one's right to self-defense. Yet they didn't. Words have meaning.
You can believe in the 2A and not inject your company into an extremely controversial subject and PR battle. These positions are not mutually exclusive.
Kyle is innocent until proven guilty, and the evidence shown thus far indicates self-defense. Are those things controversial? Why could another company state that and not BRCC? It reeks of political correctness and caving to the mob.
To deny that the Rittenhouse case is controversial is borderline insanity.
What other companies choose to do has absolutely nothing to do with BRCC.
BRCC is simply taking a neutral position and being attacked by both sides for it. Which proves exactly why they are correct to take that position.