So the man does not share your political views.
I'm sure we all buy plenty of things from companies who do not share all our own political beliefs. He is supporting a legitimate candidate in a democratic system, not funding a guerrilla faction bent on violent overthrow of the state.
I thought you chaps were keen on freedom of speech, freedom of political expression and freedom of the individual to do what he wants with his own money.
Seems to me Mr Copper was just doing that.
No one is denying Cooper, or anyone, has the right to donate money to whatever candidate they wish or to exercise freedom of speech. However, like anything else, actions can have consequences. Given the charged political nature of firearms ownership and the past history of customer backlash (like the public reaction to Smith & Wesson cozying up to the Clinton Administration as someone has already mentioned) against firearms companies that support pro-gun control candidates or gun control laws, it's no surprise that the BOD asked Cooper to resign. It was in the interest of protecting the company. When it comes to politically charged issues, those involved in the struggle put their money where their mouth is.
If Sarah Brady gave money to Ron Paul, it would not surprise anyone here to see her removed from her position, and the reasons would be obvious to us all.
