Guns, Coffee and Veterans: Black Rifle Coffee Company | USCCA Blog

Agree. I’ve bought their coffee several years but their lame defense of Kyle caused me to put my orders on hold. Watching to see how they respond to what looks like significant customer push back to their certain-to-fail effort to please the woke as well as what I assume is a much larger patriot customer base.

2 Likes
  1. BRCC did what they felt they had to do at the time of the Kyle issue because of all the bad media they were getting simply because Kyle was wearing their shirt. They may have picked a better way to word their statement, but then again, ANYTHING they said would have been reported wrong anyway, and everyone making bad comments should know that.
  2. Many companies make blanket donations to politicians and political groups. They are only told the good things that it supports and not EVERYTHING that it supports. Being that they are a Veterans Group, and just plain good ole veterans, they probably had no clue who everyone on the list were. Also the fact that it was only $500 donation to Gabbard did not change the outcome of anything.
    Could BRCC done things different? Yes they could. But, they make coffee and support veterans and they are not professional politicians, or media hacks, so I will not nor cannot agree to chastise them over one thing that they did in order to protect the business and fellow veterans in a society and political war that they were no way involved in. If Kyle was wearing a USCCA shirt, what could be done there? It doesn’t matter the specific group, they were going to attack anything related to Kyle no matter what. I support Veterans, and I like coffee, so it is a no brainer to me. BRCC helps my fellow veterans, they believe in guns, end of story for me.
6 Likes

“BRCC helps my fellow veterans, they believe in guns, end of story for me.”

The fact is that they don’t believe in guns, and they proved it with their response to Kenosha. They believe in guns in the same way that Hollywood does, they’re useful to get publicity and make them money, but they won’t stand up for the Constitutional right. If they’re willing to throw the Second Amendment under the bus to avoid ‘bad media’, then they never supported it at all, and that’s not even a good excuse when others that don’t even have anything to do with guns, like MyPillow, stood up because it was the right thing to do. Even from a cynical perspective, standing up for the right to self-defense and the Second Amendment is something that can make you more popular among conservatives/libertarians/constitutionalists/gun people that make up much of their customer base, but instead they stuck us the finger to play nice with the people who hate our rights.

Even if they did not support him they could have just let it go, but they not only disavowed him, their CEO went off on Twitter liking tweets calling Kyle a “larp warrior dweeb” and “wannabe do*chebag” and celebrated “denouncing his [Kyle’s} punk a**”. He also did not even have the honesty to defend his donations to Democrats like you are, saying they were ‘photoshopped’, a complete lie that he actually thought people would buy.

It’s completely clear that BRCC is playing a bit thinking that people are rubes that they can sucker in, and if they make some YouTube videos with guns and explosions and slap a picture of a rifle on their coffee that people will believe that they actually stand for the Second Amendment and our rights. They don’t. Getting scammed is one thing, coming out and defending the scammer after they get caught is something else. There are far better organizations that actually honestly support the Second Amendment, veterans, and our rights that are more deserving of your money, BRCC is not one of them.

4 Likes

Where are you getting this information? I have heard this before, but it was not from BRCC. I am just curious as to who or how you did your research and by whom are you making these general statements? What are you using for facts? Is this from VOX? or CNN? MSNBC? Not anything that I have found in my research.

2 Likes

Apparently new users can only post two links, so I split the links of the first few, just remove the spaces.

Here’s the first on their statement, which includes the official BRCC released video where they said they would not profit from a ‘national tragedy’ of Rittenhouse defending himself:

https ://americanmilitarynews . com/2020/11/video-vet-owned-black-rifle-coffee-denies-kyle-rittenhouse-sponsorship-after-picture-of-rittenhouse-wearing-their-shirt-goes-viral/

That includes the claim that they do not take legal/political positions, but they have, however, defended a person actually legally tried and convicted of murder in the past, debunking that notion: screencapture of one of their Instagram posts here:

https:// www.ar15 . com/media/mediaFiles/505435/4E2A1867-7A31-4255-89C7-BAD674D4F73E_jpe-1697933.JPG

Here is the official FEC website showing him donating to Barack Obama and Tulsi Gabbard, donations that he claimed were “photoshopped”.

Here is the CEO liking tweets calling Rittenhouse a “larp warrior dweeb” and “wannabe do*chebag” and celebrating BRCC “denouncing his punk a**”


It’s all pretty well-documented. BRCC threw Kyle under the bus, falsely claiming they don’t get involved in such issues after previously doing so on their official social media, and their CEO subsequently provably lied about donations to Democrats that can be confirmed by official government data, and then liked people denouncing and insulting Rittenhouse for legally defending himself against attackers.

BRCC and their CEO talk a good game, make signals about how they support Constitutional rights and the Second Amendment when it is useful to them, but as soon as the tire meets the rubber and it is time to stand up and be counted, they disassociate, evade, and outright lie. There are plenty of great pro-veteran and pro-2A organizations out there, and USCCA would be better off partnering with them than the grift of Black Rifle Coffee.

1 Like

BRCC was dragged into a political shitshow by a third party. I feel they handled the situation the best they could. Evan had to look out for his company and employees. I watched the entire fiasco play out the day it happened and there was a massive disinfo campaign set into action by the twitter cancel culture brigade as well as other coffee companies seeking to steer BRCC customers to themselves. Tulsi was the only Dem candidate to dare oppose the “conventional wisdom” of the establishment. This is evident in how MSM and DNC worked to destroy her. A good businessman does not spurn half of his customer base. A good businessman does not allow himself to be forced into such a scenario either. I’m due to place another order.

Dumping Kyle and liking tweets calling him a "larp warrior dweeb”, “wannabe do*chebag”, and “punk a**” is absolutely spurning half your customer base, and it’s spurning a lot more than half, the majority of BRCC’s customers are obviously conservative. The gun-grabbers they were mollifying (and Hafer has donated to) are not their core base.

If BRCC was just a normal coffee company, Evan’s Coffee or something, then no-one would care one way or the other what they did about Kenosha but they’re not. They call themselves Black Rifle Coffee for goodness’ sake, they market themselves as actively pro-2A, but as soon as someone exercises their Second Amendment right using an actual black rifle, under the bus he goes. Hypocrisy at its finest.

No-one forced them to advertise themselves as pro-gun and pro-self-defense, they did, but their actions when things got real show it for what it was: grift.

1 Like

You’re irrational.

I’m irrational for expecting a company that markets itself as pro-Second Amendment to act…pro-Second Amendment?

3 Likes

Stick a fork in it! It’s done. there are arguments on both sides of this incident. BRCC will sink or swim whether I buy their coffee or not. The legal system will eventually sort the tangled web that was created when a 17 year-old either crossed a state line with a weapon or obtained a weapon in a state in which he is a non resident. The trial will be ugly!

Off-topic platform update:

This has been increased to 5 links for new users. Also increased for new users - you can make 5 posts in the same thread within the day. You can make additional posts in that thread IF someone replies to your posts. (Please let me know if you have any issues with that update.)

1 Like

Okay, in the first link, it is stated that they do not want to profit from a tragedy. They is no mention of throwing Kyle under the bus. There is not mention at off about Kyle himself, just about being associated with a tragic event where life was lost. I agree with that statement. I also noted it started going off into what THEY believe BRCC meant about the statement, not what was said directly. That is not reporting, that is voicing an opinion.
2nd link is an opinion piece and not anything based on true facts.
I see that the fund he donated to says Tulsi Aloha, which I believe is a ploy to make people think that it is for getting rid of Gabbard. Have not received and answer on that specific donation yet.
As far as the social media post, don’t see the issue. As a business you cannot answer everything said in all of the social media’s because it would leave no time to get any work done. There is also the dark web that only shows up when someone says something bad about a company they don’t like. I do not believe social media is a good source of hardly any facts. You have people in the basement, in their car, or at the library saying they are someone they are not and make comments stated as facts without any chance of repercussions. I always like to go to the source, check out ALL of the major news organizations, and then make an informed decision on what I am reading.
I would also like to state that I have a lot of respect for you Roberts77. I like someone who will state sources instead of just yelling at me with an opinion and running off.

1 Like

The issue is that their calling it a ‘tragedy’ is taking a position that contradicts both their earlier statements and their excuses about the situation. Calling a lawfully armed person defending themselves against three criminals, including a convicted pedophile, a ‘tragedy’ is the same kind of rhetoric as the anti-gun anti-self-defense crowd is using. One could make an excuse and say that it is something along the lines of ‘any loss of life is a tragedy’, which would be fair and reasonable, except that BRCC disproves that themselves, as they’ve defended an actual convicted murder on their official account without calling it a ‘tragedy’, but chose to disavow Kyle.

The second link is actually from Black Rifle Coffee directly, so if it is not based on true facts then that is actually an argument against BRCC.

For the donation, Tulsi Aloha is the exact name of Gabbard’s campaign/official website and was central to her campaign, so it was not any ploy.

https://www.tulsialoha.org

And finally for social media, I should clarify what that was in case it was not clear, those were not random comments, those were the ones that Evan Hafer, BRCC’s CEO, went out and liked. That was not a case of them not responding to insults against Kyle, I think you are correct that it is reasonable that they would not have time to answer all of that, but it was a case of their CEO actually taking the time to go out and approve of smears and invective against Rittenhouse.

I’d like to say that I also appreciate and respect what you’re doing here, too much of the internet just devolves into personal insults and emotion and I’m glad to be able to have a discussion on the topic that we disagree on but that we can disagree on respectfully and argue based on rational points.

^^^ Love this comment more than you know, @Robert677!!

Thank you all for being respectful in your conversation here! We’re never all going to agree on everything, but we can (and should) have a respect for our differences!

Carry on! :smiley:

The reason Evan called it a tragedy is because someone died. Doesn’t mean anything about Kyle. Yes, they were all scumbags, but BRCC and most Veterans are Christian and believe that any death is tragic. I totally agree that Kyle was justified to do what he did. He was in a very bad situation and handled it better than a lot of people would. Was acting very mature for being so young and in a life or death situation.

2 Likes

I think that I would agree with you on that if this sort of thing had not happened before, but that is why I put up the second link, where BRCC was advocating on behalf of someone convicted of murder, no mention of ‘not profiting from tragedy’ in that case, but they tried to put that out as a clearly false excuse.

Really I think that their response to the incident was less of a problem than their lying to their customers/the public to try to cover it up. If they just wanted to avoid the whole Kenosha incident, then they could have honestly said that, but they made up a line about not getting involved in these sorts of things when they are on the record doing so previously, lying to their customers. If Hafer wanted to donate to Gabbard in the primary because he thought it would make things better overall, I think that that is something that can be defended, but his openly lying by saying it was ‘photoshopped’ when the FEC website shows it clear of day is a much greater problem of dishonesty.

I can be all right with a company that honesty disagrees with me with an emphasis on the ‘honestly.’ But they’ll lose my business if they show that their goal is to try to fool their customers by portraying themselves as pro-Second Amendment and pro-“Black Rifle” then backtracking when push comes to shove, and then having the CEO lie multiple times to try to cover for it all rather than just telling it straight.

(Though even if they were honest about things, Hafer’s promoting attacks/insults on Rittenhouse was certainly out of bounds regardless)

Most of us can’t distinguish true vs false, right vs wrong, good vs evil anymore. So you may be preaching to the choir. $$$$$ = right and $ = wrong for most nowadays. BRCC and Ranger Up have always been about hustling the “combat vet” thing. By comparison, GS and 9L give a whole lot back. I have done more than my fair share of real, boots on the ground social welfare projects for disabled combat vets. I’ve always been “the guy” who solicits the help, and I’ve never gotten any help from the former, and the latter always seem to be in there doing what they can. I have longer list of the “good guys” if anyone is interested. Some of the very best for profit companies supporting disabled vets and troops might surprise a lot of people, and my opinions are based on my personal experience “in the trenches” and not on some PR campaign designed to deceive. A wise old boss lady of mine once told me that when the amount gets to $500 being in the same clubs/attending the same church won’t matter anymore, and when it gets to $1000 friendships don’t matter. But when the amount someone can cheat you out of or steal from you exceeds $5000, even blood doesn’t matter.

I am surprised in USCCA for running this story on Black Rifle Coffee.
In a promotional fashion.
The liberal left is in a full out attack on our 2A rights and it’s no secret that the owner of BRC has given money to the Democratic Party on several occasions over many years! I am a former customer of BRC and like the product! Also I thank him for his service.
At some point in your life you need to make a stand for the values that are most important. This is my standard! I am happy to say I will not knowingly pay for a product that donates to a group that is determined to take my god given right to keep and bear arms. Which is protected by the Second Amendment in the United States Constitution. Please do not let them steal this from us just for some instant gratification!

1 Like

I guess the best way to look at this is that you are seeing everything thru different glasses than I am. I would never say that you are wrong, just you are looking thru a different light. As a veteran, I can understand that Evan may have not said exactly the right things, but I can understand that what he meant, is not what has been interpreted. I also believe that the good from this company out ways what is thought of as bad. I also believe that if you hear something that can be construed as good or bad, 99% of the time they meant the good.
I think we had a great discussion about this whole subject Robert677, and I really enjoyed the discussion. Hope to run into you sometime and we can sit and have a coffee or a beer. Take Care.

1 Like

image

2 Likes