Enriching the drug companies for one thing.
7 Likes
124 grain NATO by any chance? Asking for a friend.
Ah, nevermind, still got 4 cases left, Winchester and ppu. I’ll check on that offer next year 
2 Likes
That’s fair. I wouldn’t expect it to be. I also give and withhold my patronage from businesses based upon values other than the dollar sign.
Just pointing out that choices have costs. I certainly agree that in the context of a global pandemic, a “dollars off” coupon is pretty small beans. I do appreciate the actions of the Hornady organization to follow the science, protect their workforce, and protect their community — whether voluntary or compelled.
I’ve paid more in the last year than I would wish anyone pay in a lifetime. Tell me, do you have children? Grandchildren? What if you were told for BS political reasons that you couldn’t hold then or be near them.
Let’s not discuss “costs” here. Because you have absolutely no idea. You’re quipping about Midway coupons.
The only “science” that they are following is “political science”. Otherwise they would recognize the human immune system. I suppose “science” means that Postal employees and Congress are somehow able to avoid Covid without the jab?
6 Likes
The Government cannot Mandate. Only Courts can mandate based on laws that are on the books. Even then it is still a thin line given Roe v. Wade. Yes it will get reversed, but companies will still give in.
The funny thing is the company does not want to lose any Government Contracts. It is hard fulfill a contract order with no employees, plus there are penalties for delay in delivery.
5 Likes
Because it’s not a vaccine.
If it was a vaccine then A) Recipients would need only 1 shot* and then be IMMUNE to whatever they were being vaccinated against and B) the CDC wouldn’t have had to change the definition of “vaccine” in order for what they’re trying to push. The MMR vaccine also went through way more testing then this shot.
This shot should never have been called a “vaccine”. Instead, The Powers the Be should have looked at it like flu shot and treated it the same way. Especially considering the fact that, for all intents an purposes, COVID-19 isn’t going away and looks like it’s going to be seasonal, just like the flu. (Which, if I’m not mistaken is a derivative of a coronavirus itself).
The other thing to think about is this: If it’s SO important that everyone have said shot, why is Congress, the Senate and the USPS exempt from said shot? (There might be more groups that are exempt but those are just the ones I remember).
Bottom line, people should be able to decide or themselves if they want/need this shot.
*I do believe the MMS shot (or maybe it’s Tetnus) needs a booster. But that’s after 10yrs. Not 3 months.
4 Likes
I have plenty of idea. I quip because humor is how I deal with adversity.
My father died this year. Nothing to do with Covid.
His family had been prohibited contact since day one of lockdown — while he was last healthy, and during his final decline. One family member was allowed 20min with him once he was in a terminal coma.
Because of early vaccination and simple but strict precautions, none of his family and no resident of his senior living community contracted this virus. That is public health, and that is a cost to individuals of public health on behalf of a community. We sacrifice because we are members of community, and sort of resent those who won’t but still want to claim membership. Sorry 'bout that.
Sorry for your loss and the circumstances that surrounded his last days. 
4 Likes
Not sure where you get that idea. Among affluent countries, the U.S. is one of the least vaccinated, trailing Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and others. Less vaccination means more death.
In the recent days, all of my coworkers who have been quarantined, are fully vaccinated. The unvaccinated, haven’t missed any work, and we aren’t sick. We are sick of self righteous individuals telling us “we’re causing a problem.” I’m a healthy 43 year old, with a very strong immune system. I had Covid last December. Why would I not trust my immune system? Why aren’t we studying natural immunity more?
The why, is found in political power, and pharmaceutical profit margins.
To the Hornady issue, they issued a new statement. They are not mandating shots.
9 Likes
Absolutely. Were you denied when you asked? That would be a provider problem, not a program problem.
- Pfizer package insert, 48pp.
- Moderna package insert, 35pp.
- Johnson & Johnson package insert, 31pp.
7 Likes
Agree. Let’s follow the science…
Some examples from the above 91…
“…the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects.”
"…the reinfection rate among individuals who had recovered from Covid-19, even if they had gone on to get the vaccine after recovering, was “almost zero.”
“Protection against SARS-CoV-2 after natural infection is comparable with the highest available estimates on vaccine efficacies.”
“…this study demonstrates individuals who received the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine have different kinetics of antibody levels compared to patients who had been infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus naturally, with higher initial levels but a much faster exponential decrease [of antibodies] in the first group [the vaccinated].”
And on and on and on for 91 studies.
5 Likes
Awesome. That was fast. I actually wrote them. I’m guessing others did too. Messing with the wrong customer base.
5 Likes
I haven’t seen the text of the “retraction”, but I think this video spins the original 11Oct notice pretty hard. There is no “Hornady Mandate” involved — it describes the company’s vaccination program, encourages employee participation, and anticipates an emergency rule from OSHA being released in early December which would apply to the company. Period. Does not describe any consequence to employees who do not choose to participate. It probably does foreshadow the possibility that the company might be inclined to follow OSHA standards, but says squat about exactly how the company would implement a currently non-existent rule.
I don’t know whether the “retraction” just points that out, or if it declares that Hornady Industries plans to go down in flames rather than comply. Maybe better save your boycott in case you need it for Christmas.
The first notice is floating all around the Google-verse, but if you haven’t looked the ConcealedCarry article contains the notice and is a bit less incendiary than most.
I for one don’t / didn’t plan for a boycott.
I read your link.
In the letter from Steve Hornady, he tells his employees that the anticipated deadline to get the entire workforce in compliance is December 8th. To meet that deadline, employees need to capitulate by receiving their second dose of the shot no later than November 10th.
Steve Hornady urges all his employees to “please, please, please get the v*x.”
The letter explains that onsite pokes will be available to any employee who wants to keep their job. Steve says:
This is a good place to work, and I value the contribution each of you makes for this company. We are on track to have an even better year than last. We do not want you or us to be faced with career devastating decisions in the final days before this mandate is in effect.
If you read the original letter there may be wiggle room for Hornady to have plausible deniability on the “mandate” consequences but is there! They published a deadline for their workers to comply.
5 Likes
Yup, that’s what I both read and heard as well. This thread is teaching me you can lead a horse to water…but he’ll still think it’s hay, and blame you for his thirst.
3 Likes
Unfortunately, covid19 death data is tainted and inflation of deaths has long been pointed out by various people. Also, US has a lot more morbidly obese people than any of other countries on the list, and we know this is a magnet for covid
2 Likes
Never heard of our world in data. Be careful what you believe. Wars have been waged all over the world as a result of propaganda. It’s fine if you disagree. We all do what we think is best.
2 Likes
Sorry, I didn’t mean you personally — just a general remark toward the rabble calling for heads to roll.
Like I said, there is foreshadowing that the company might comply with federal regulation — and it does provide the arithmetic of “rule might equal deadline, minus days, minus days, equals worst case start time”. I guess that might be seen as helpful or ominous depending on point of view. Perhaps the revised notice changes to reflect that the “worst case” rule might not actually require compliance to have occurred before the publishing of the rule — but I don’t know what that revision said.
I don’t know whether people believe that Vista, and Winchester, and RCBS, and Smith, and the Austrians, and everybody else in the industry is planning to blow up their companies on the thesis that the federal government has no regulatory powers. I won’t be surprised if somebody would rather spend the company down running this through the courts — I just don’t see a corporate insurrection or a win at law.
I’m sure we’ll find out.
1 Like