Arc’teryx Is Not Anti-Gun

Truth be told, Arc’teryx doesn’t have a corporate policy on guns. Why would they? They are a Canadian clothing company. Granted, they have a division dedicated to Law Enforcement and Armed Forces customers, but they remain an outdoor brand.

But that didn’t stop a viral narrative from forming today after an employee of Arc’teryx’s corporate sales team sent this email to a member of the US firearms industry who has done business with Arc’teryx in the past, purchasing clothing embroidered with their corporate logo.

This image went viral. It’s an email from an actual Arc’teryx employee, but it doesn’t reflect policy.

Several people reached out to me to see if it was true. I told them I’d find out, and I did.

The email looked legitimate, but I was skeptical of the story since I had just received an Arc’teryx fleece along with others from SIG Sauer during a Defense Media event a few weeks back. What’s more, SIG Academy’s pro shop is well stocked with LEAF product embroidered with the SIG logo.

Instead of what is asserted in the email, interaction with the tactical industry (to include firearms related businesses) has transitioned to the LEAF team from corporate sales since those businesses have more in common with LEAF.

What I gather happened was that the Service Coordinator misunderstood the situation and thought that since the Professional & Corporate Sales Team would no longer handle those clients, Arc’teryx writ large was no longer doing business with them. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Internally, this has been addressed.

I reached out to the receiver of the email who wishes to remain anonymous, but they didn’t answer my query which was very short suspense. Unfortunately, they went to others in the firearms industry to verify the purported policy shift rather than taking the issue up the chain at Arc’teryx.

Within 10 minutes of contacting Arc’teryx I was able to verify that the information in the email was incorrect and did not reflect corporate policy.

Arc’teryx provided me with this statement:

“The email screenshot expressing a restrictive policy on corporate sales to tactical industry business was sent out in error. It does not reflect our current policy. The customer has been notified, apologized to, and been put in touch with a representative from the Arc’teryx LEAF business unit”.

In the end, this is a horrible misunderstanding gone viral. Unfortunately, many are embracing the narrative to validate their own feelings rather than looking at the facts and understanding that this is a very big misunderstanding. Still others have used this incident for gain.

If you’ve ever been frustrated by so-called cancel culture, this is a classic example where narrative got out in front of fact. And the fact is, Arc’teryx LEAF remains committed to continue to conduct business with its industry partners, just like it has for over a decade.

215 Responses to “Arc’teryx Is Not Anti-Gun”

  1. JJ says:

    Thank you SSD!

  2. Shteve-Oh! says:

    Eric there you go again, verifying and checking facts! Logic and rational thought wtf. It’s more fun to spin up fury and be a chairborne keyboard commando why you gotta ruin the fun bro?

  3. Dan says:

    Great investigative work.

    However, I feel the author of the email is getting off pretty lightly on this one. What a tool this individual is, just the use of language in that reply is offensive, ‘align our brand’… sigh. It’s just disrespectful to a ‘different’ type of person to what this simpleton has in their own mind. So ironic given her signature is clearly attempting to ‘open-minded’ to peoples differences, yet in reality she is actually the opposite of what she purposes to be.

    “We appreciate your understanding(I don’t understand), cooperation(?) and thank your for your business (even though I don’t respect you).”

    Pretty much just saying ‘F U’… super professional, what an asset to Arc’teryx this individual is.

    • SSD says:

      Whatever happens to her is up to Arc’teryx. However, I’m sure plenty of folks have already sent her death threats.

      • Mark says:

        You’re sure? Based on what? Is Arc a sponsor here? You’re sure carrying that water.

        • SSD says:

          How many times are you going to make the same accusation?

        • Jon, OPT says:

          Advertising on this site is extremely inexpensive for a company like Arc’Teryx, or Amer, and losing their support will not affect SSD. Bringing up that relationship in a debate is irrelevant, SSD is going after the truth not lying, denying, and making counter accusations to keep a proportionally small amount of dollars in their pockets. That angle is really far off base.

        • SSD says:

          Yes, I’m sure. I’ve checked and been informed that people did send death threats. She’ll probably be safe though since the border with Canada remains closed.

      • Dan says:

        Well I hope not! Certainly not what I’m advocating, some stern performance management, and some retraining on ‘inclusivity’ and ‘respect’ would probably do.

        Again, great work SSD, leading the way in objective industry reporting!

      • Mark says:

        Why are you so sure? Thought we were here because we didn’t like people jumping to conclusions.

      • Paul says:

        Moving forward, I better not hear you heaux complaining about CaNcEl CuLtUrE.



    • Brian says:

      I still see an issue here. Why is arcteryx limiting firearms companies to LEAF products?
      I see 47 Arcteryx LEAF products on Optics Planet while I see 213 Arcteryx products on REI.
      It’s appears Arcteryx is trying to play both sides of the fence, throwing gun owners a bone while sanitizing their mainstream corporate identity from firearms. Like LEAF is the corporate dirty little secret.

      • SSD says:

        It’s a great narrative but that’s not what has been said.

        The tactical industry deals with LEAF. Nowhere does it say they can only have access to LEAF products although oftentimes it is LEAF product they are after for embroidery.

        The funny thing about this is that not many companies within the tactical and firearms industries use this service in the first place. The products are expensive as is the embroidery on Gore-Tex garments.

        That’s what set this whole thing off remember? Getting a logo embroidered on some clothing.

  4. Scott says:

    Any misunderstanding was on the part of the sender. This post insinuates the receiver misunderstood the message. “The decision was made to not do business with weapons manufacturers anymore” is pretty clear. You don’t need to be an English major to understand. Any reasonable person reading that would infer the same which is why this went viral. Either this employee sent this without authorization or their manager should have been more clear in their direction. They flat out said they would not fill the order. Nothing was mentioned about how LEAF would be handling these accounts going forward. It was a basic “sorry about your bad luck” email. Just my unsolicited two cents

    • SSD says:

      So you always take “no” for an answer? When you’ve been doing business with someone for quite awhile? This guy did and sounds like you do it too. I don’t, that’s why I asked the question and now we know the truth.

      • Lee says:

        You are simplifying a statement made in efforts to control damage as “truth”. So you take what they say, regurgitate it, and we should accept it as truth? If you were so informed and had access, why couldn’t they provide you with the actual company memo/policy that they said was taken out of context/mistakenly communicated? Until I see proof, it’s all just words. I’ll take the words of an employee acting on behalf of company directive before I take the words of a company AFTER they were caught in a pinch.

        • SSD says:

          I have a feeling you are one of those folks who will never be satisfied. It’s amazing how many people are angry because someone bothered to actually ask
          Arc’teryx about this instead of just sharing it unchecked and being outraged with the mob.

          This is their statement and if you are in business in the tactical industry feel free to contact LEAF about purchasing branded clothing. If they tell you they won’t do business with you because you are in the firearms industry, share that with us. We will look into it, just like we did this.

      • Scott says:

        No. I certainly would have escalated the issue with them. I would however, have had to calm down a bit before doing so. Especially if I had done business with them in the past. Now if this had been my first interaction with them, they would have most likely lost a customer. No one wants to feel like they need to beg someone to take their money. In reality if that order was substantial, it would have warranted a phone call not just a condescending email.

      • Rusty says:

        Why wouldn’t you take no for an answer? Why would you think someone in corporate sales was lying to you about a new corporate policy? The author of the original email said corporate policy changed and they weren’t doing business with the firearms industry. They don’t leave any wiggle room in that statement.

        And why would you want to spend money with a company who’s hostile to your business? Why try to dig deeper?? It’s not like they are the only manufacturer of outdoor apparel.

        And what’s wrong with outing a company that’s hostile to your industry? It can obviously be effective.

        • SSD says:

          There are two kinds of people in the world. The first take no for an answer and walk away mad. The second group of people question the answer and try to make things better.

          That first group got this wrong.

          Thanks for letting us know which group you’re in.

    • Robert Blake says:

      Agreed, it sounds like corporate damage control after the fact.
      Remember when Daniel Defense shot themselves in the foot a few years, and then regretted it? I do.

  5. R.L. Fullerton says:

    Ok, now that we have that addressed let’s move on to not buying from them for being too woke for their own good. Pronouns in the email, pride flags everywhere… they’re not our people.

    • SSD says:

      The most honest thing I’ve seen all day. Thank you.

    • Amer-Rican says:

      You two nailed it.

    • T says:

      You sound triggered bud

      • Jester says:

        Apparently you don’t understand the use of the word “triggered”, chief

        • T says:

          You’re the ones getting big mad about pronouns in the signatures. Sounds pretty triggered to me, snowflake

          • lol says:

            Says the one that would throw a child like tantrum for “misused” pronouns. You sad little snowflake.

            • T says:

              I literally don’t know what you’re talking about, I’m not the one flipping out in the comments sport, I’m just here for the laughs.

      • Philip says:

        It’s not “being triggered”…it’s making a conscious decision to stop giving money to companies who make it abundantly clear they hate anyone who doesn’t toe their preferred ideological line. Why line the pockets of people who hate you?

        Pronouns in a signature block tells you what you need to know about their corporate culture. Like R.L. said, these folks aren’t on our side.

        • Mookie says:

          This right here. Battered wife syndrome is gross and certain sectors of our “community” are ate up with it.

        • T says:

          All it takes for someone to “clearly hate you” is for them to put pronouns in their signature? A move that they do exclusively because its profitable?

          What a victim complex.

          • Philip says:

            No, it’s more the fact that those virtue signalling, pronoun-obsessed organizations and their employees make it clear (repeatedly) where they stand when they openly co-opt activist rhetoric linked to hatred and violence, or align themselves as “allies” of groups doing same.

            Groups who wish –and sometimes actually do– very awful things to people and families because of job titles, community affiliations, differences of opinion, or even just a refusal to bend the knee to whatever cause du jour currently has them motivated to make threats and destroy things. I think any decent person would want to distance themselves from that.

            Profitability is a moot point… by even passively aligning yourself with such hateful groups, you’ve stated your stance. Consumers taking their money elsewhere is an effective, nonviolent method of telling a company to stick it. It isn’t a victim complex, it’s called sticking to your principles. Perhaps you have none, so maybe you wouldn’t comprehend such a concept?

            I thought a literate adult would be able to understand broader social context and nuances, but apparently not. Your arrogantly worded commentary is a poor cover for your cluelessness.

            • T says:

              Really in your feelings with these long paragraphs huh

              • Philip says:

                About the response I would’ve expected from a troglodyte like you.

                Pound sand.

              • Philip says:

                And still nothing of substance, just more hot air. What an interesting and productive life you must lead, being so edgy and all.

  6. Matt Peters says:

    Great job SSD!

  7. Travis says:

    Yea that’s all great. However they did send the email. So they will reap the results..

    • SSD says:

      “They”. I realize this is what you want, but reality is something entirely else. An employee sent an email that was incorrect. It’s that simple.

      • Mark says:

        A simple misunderstanding…right?

        • SSD says:

          I’m more than happy to allow you to continue to show off. Eventually, those begging for attention want everyone to know who they are and then we can all laugh at you.

      • Brian says:

        The employee felt comfortable with the culture within Arc’teryx to hit the send button on a response like that.

        • Steve Burris says:

          While I appreciate you pushing back for clarification, an internet search shows that you are the only venue they cared to respond to. Their website has nothing of the sort. For a company that stepped in it to have one apology on a sight many don’t read… it’s a bit disingenuous.

          • SSD says:

            They posted the same statement on Reddit.

            • txJM says:

              LOL, how is that acceptable?

            • Mark says:

              Yeah and they linked to here…think about that for a second. You’re calling anyone criticizing your defense of them cowards, not men, etc. yet just about the only work a major corporation did to dispel a very nasty “viral rumor” was to link to your “article”, with your comment section where you’re white knighting them aggressively.

              Step back and be honest with yourself…if you were on the outside looking in, would you not question what’s going on here?

              I know you feel attacked, and I’m sorry if you felt like things got personal, that wasn’t the intention. But the credibility of a site such as this lives and dies on its ability to be impartial and NOT carry water for companies. When a company’s only real defense is to link to you…it just doesn’t look right. I know you can’t control what they do, but it is what it is.

              That’s the last I’ll say on this as apparently I’m now a faceless coward who works for a rival company for having an opinion on this matter and using basic measures that everyone uses to not have their life stolen or be doxxed by the first person who doesn’t agree with them…

              Take it easy

              • SSD says:

                That upsets you? You’re a complete clown. And yeah, you’re also a coward. Keep hiding. That’s what cowards do.

  8. Stickman says:

    If a company goes out of their way to show how “woke” they are, and they make no indication that they have disciplined (or terminated) and employee who altered corporate policy to fit their own narrative, what are the ground pounders supposed to believe? With Arcteryx actively promoting gay culture, the email really doesn’t seem out of sorts.

    Personally, I appreciate Eric using his personal and professional contacts to get info and save Arcteryx from fallout, but as a grunt, I believe what I see.

  9. Arnanderson says:

    This damage control is embarrassing. LMAO!

    • txJM says:

      You can always count on SSD to not hold a defense industry member accountable.

      Meanwhile, the customer has nor received the so-called “apology”.

      • SSD says:

        You believe SOLGW is the company in question? It’s not. You have no idea what you’re talking about.

      • Joe_momma says:

        Was SOLGW the recipient of the original email or shared a screenshot from someone who shared from someone who shared it from someone….

        • SSD says:

          They were not. I knew who it was and it’s not them and SOLGW never said that it was.

  10. QM says:

    That original email was oddly specific. Doesn’t read like a rogue employee going off the reservation.

    I’m not buying it. They’re backtracking now they’ve seen the backlash.

  11. Josh says:

    This appears to be PR firefighting it’s finest. The email was crystal clear, if there is any misunderstanding its that this employee who wrote the email doesn’t understand the difference between her personal views and that of her employer,or the employer didnt make the corporate stance clear to the employee.

  12. Jeff Bader says:

    The post came from a straight legit gun manufacturer that has serious cred for making absolute top of the line products. Dead Bird had better get with the program and fire the she/her/hers who sent it. These are contentious times for firearms owners/makers/sellers. There is no time to deal with bullshit from idiots.

    • SSD says:

      A company that won’t discuss what happened with me.

      • GBL says:

        Why do they have to discuss it with you? Who voted you referee status here?

        • SSD says:

          I’m the guy who decided to ask what happened instead of running with a narrative, so I’m going to piece together what transpired based on the evidence I’ve gathered.

          I’m not a referee and yet don’t have to discuss it with me. I know who it was and I’ve kept their name and the name of their company out of it but it might have helped had they agreed to speak.

          You keep coming back here to make accusations and question why I’d take a look at this. I can see that this really upsets you. Did I spoil your fun? Disrupt a viral promotion of a business? Why are you so worked up?

          • Confused says:

            How is it a “narrative” when an employee sent an email that clearly states they were not going to sell to the gun company? As a purchasing manager I would not have pushed the company to sell to the company I work for to take my money. I would find another company that has the same quality of product and start buying from them. I would then explain to our customers that the original company no longer viewed us as a valued customer because of the nature of the items we sold. I guarantee our customers would understand and gladly switch to the new merchandise.

            • SSD says:

              It’s a narrative because no one bothered to check on the veracity of the information and once it hit the Internet mob it became Arc’teryx is anti-gun, which turns out, isn’t true.

        • SSD says:

          You done fucked up G_A_L

  13. Rob says:

    Yeah I bet she definitely “misunderstood” the situation and it was completely “by mistake”. As if putting your Twitter pronouns in your professional email signature wasn’t enough to tip us off on her political views, she excitedly gets to cancel business with what she calls WEAPON manufacturers. This may not be part of your official company stance, but it’s clearly apart of the company culture.

  14. Ken says:

    Bullshit. This pronoun stating shitlib was gleeful to mistake company policy. Fuck arcteryx for hiring this person. Grow a spine and take sides in the culture war.

    • SSD says:

      Businesses shouldn’t have to take sides. This attitude is a big part of the problem.

      • Adam says:

        +1 SSD

      • Papa6 Actual says:

        I agree 100% that companies shouldn’t have to take sides. The problem is; most of the big companies in the USA have taken sides to pander to a very small and very vocal minority.

  15. Sasquatch says:

    So she/her/hers just fucked up the interpretation of company policy. Damn. She sounded so sure of herself.

  16. GBL says:

    So one employee said they have a policy of not dealing with weapons manufacturers and yet another employee replied to the author of this post saying no such policy exists…

    Who should we believe? Any financial relationship between SSD and Arc’teryx?

    • SSD says:

      So you’re saying that the company is lying because they are an advertiser on my website?

      Perhaps, since you think it’s a great idea to accuse me of malfeasance, as well as Arc’teryx, that you could be a man and use your name.

    • Will Sommers says:

      Eric has an excellent reputation in industry for being truthful. What’s your reputation? About zero for making false accusations.

  17. Bill says:

    When I get an unexpected no I will ask to speak [email protected] supervisor. When I get an unexpected f you I walk away, they obviously don’t want my business

  18. Jack says:

    >Pronouns: She/ her/ hers

  19. Hydguy says:

    Lol!! Of course when something like this goes out, the company will engage in damage control! It’s very clear from the email that this woman is speaking in an official capacity, snd its clear that the company regrets their little secret getting out.
    No skin off my nose, as their overpriced gear is not something I’ve ever had an interest in, but I find it humorous that so many are rushing to their defense. Sounds a lot like the morons who defended Troy Industries a few years back, after they gave a big fuck you to gun owners.
    Yes, idiots with more pocket change than their IQ will still spend money with them, just like the same people did with Troy.

    But I won’t be one of them, as my IQ far exceeds what I have in my change jar..

  20. Mark says:

    Delete comments calling you out for shilling all day long. Doesn’t change you shilling. I prefer my journalism without breathless defense of advertisers.

    • SSD says:

      Shilling? So the truth is not the truth because they are advertisers?

      If you’re going to accuse me of malfeasance, at least do it as a man and tell us all your full name.

      • Mark says:

        LOL that’s what you’ve got? This is embarrassing. Used to think you had some integrity.

      • Clay says:

        Remember when you took private information from the mod forum at Lightfighter and took to the Grant at G&R? Pepperidge Farms remembers…

        Anyone who gives you private info is just asking for it to go public and be doxxed.

        • SSD says:

          Yep, I let Larry Vickers and Grant, two people who had loyalty to me know what people who smiled to their face said behind their backs. It’s amazing that you felt that weasels who talked shit about me too, deserved to be protected.

        • Wowza says:

          Seriously? You’re still pissed that Eric wasn’t loyal to the Whistle Talker? That was before he even started SSD. That guy fucked Eric over every chance he got. He’s lucky Eric never went public with the Det-One stories or the stolen valor claims and only let people know who he was between gentlemen.

          • Will Sommers says:

            I remember hearing about this. Pat Rogers was talking shit about everybody including the owner of M4C and Eric told Grant about it resulting in Rogers being PNG’d by M4C. Rogers hated Eric anyway because he knew he was lying about being a retired Marine so he got Lightfighter to ban Eric. Is that the stolen valor stuff you’re talking about? or is there more?

    • I’d like to buy a “Y” says:

      He didn’t delete yours even though you’re a well known liar.

    • Jester says:

      Mark you seem to have an unnatural interest in this story. Why don’t you just tell is what competitor you work for instead of being such a coward?

      • Mark says:

        Yawn…so should I just do what you did and claim you work for arc since you have an unnatural interest based on replying to a few threads in one article? For someone calling people out for it knowing what triggered is you sure don’t seem to understand the definition of cowardice.
        I came here to see what the deal was as I am often an individual customer of this brand. I stayed because holy crap SD is REALLY working to defend something that the company itself doesn’t even seem to want to put any effort into.

        • SSD says:

          I’m really defending accusation by anonymous person that I am engaged in malfeasance.

          Cowardice is hiding behind a fake name fake email address and proxy when lying about another person. You, are the very definition of cowardice.

          • Mark says:

            I’m sure Jester is a birth name…I’ll make sure to include my social security number and a valid credit card lest I measure up to your definition of internet bravery.

  21. Thulsa Doom says:

    One employee has created a shitstorm of legendary proportions for her employer. However, much like the Nike shoe burnings, it’s a tempest in a teapot.

    Half-facts got around the world before the truth and Arcteryx got its pants on to deal with it. The fact that this happened over a sudden holiday weekend in the US was the pure oxygen to get this internet fire raging.

  22. dude says:

    pronouns: stupid

  23. Chris says:

    I’m not buying it. They were radio silent on social media for almost a whole day but were replying to ppl who were saying they like rock climbing and even did a post about some gay dude that wears dead bird when he’s not sucking cock outdoors. This is a backpedal from a woke company that forgot cancel culture works both ways. Anybody with pronouns in their bio is a liar

    • SSD says:

      Maybe you could explain to us how your multi-million dollar a year company puts together a corporate statement on a Saturday within minutes.

      • Gg says:

        I work for a multi billion dollar global corporation and maintain a key role in 1 of our emergency response plans. Corp comm has a team on social media 24/7 and c suite personnel can be personally contacted to put out viral fires in minutes.

        • SSD says:

          Well Arc doesn’t. Which company do you work for? And what is their stance on guns?

          • Gg says:

            Well their corp comms ppl obviously know how to conduct shill based warfare. The corp I work for has zero ties to tactical or outdoor recreational industries. And has no formal stance on industries it’s not tied to.

            • Will Sommers says:

              Then it sounds like your company is anti-2A amigo. You’d better quit before you get canxed.

      • Mark says:

        They didn’t mobilize a corporate statement but they have a hysterical “journalist” writing their copy for them.

        • SSD says:

          I didn’t write that statement. They did. But like I said, you want to make accusations without being responsible for them.

          What did Arc’teryx tell you when you inquired about that email again?

          • Mark says:

            “Make accusations without being responsible for them”? Nothing I’m saying is untrue. We have a “journalist” in the comments section doing more damage control for the company he was “investigating” than the company themselves. You’ve put more work into defending them than they have themselves. And the fact remains that the original email wasn’t just misread by the OP…but yeah you’re right, we were always at war with Eurasia…

            • Will Sommers says:

              Well aren’t you a special kind of POS. Only a liberal commie fag could be as fucked up as you.

  24. Random_Pickle says:

    That email was very explicitly anti-gun. I don’t know why you’re trying to imply that people did something wrong when they made it go viral. Is it too much to ask that companies behave responsibly with their statements?

    • SSD says:

      Why? They didn’t bother to ask if it was true. They just ran with it.

      • Gg says:

        I mean their original inquiry was asking.

        U sure tho?

        • SSD says:

          And when they were told no, they didn’t question it, didn’t ask to talk to a supervisor, just set it out into the world, despite doing business with Arc’teryx in the past. This could have all been avoided.

  25. botts says:

    Can you clarify that though this client will be able to deal with Arc’teryx LEAF, is Arc’teryx “proper” refusing to do business with the firearms industry?

    I almost wonder if they’re trying to have arc’teryx appear anti-gun for their woke “techwear bros” and limiting “damage” to the arc’teryx LEAF brand.

    • SSD says:

      No, Arc’teryx LEAF will handle the relationship. It is a misunderstanding that many are taking advantage of for their own agendas.

      • Adam says:

        “industries in which we align our brand”

        Kind of interesting verbiage, wouldn’t you agree?

        • Haji says:

          There’s nothing unusual about that; the verbiage is pretty much boilerplate language. Every company that’s big enough to have partners does that. The way it was stated is just more current marketing-speak, that’s all.

  26. Nelson says:

    Seems to me Corporate is doing damage control and that their “anti-gun” stance wasn’t public policy but, appeared to be understood as unwritten. No reasonable sales associate cancels repeat business on a whim without some kind of backing. Whether it came from from that person’s immediate boss or higher up, who knows.

    • This is interesting says:

      It seems the corporation didn’t know it had an anti-gun stance until today.

  27. Frier Duck says:

    This would have been a very surprising move especially when considering Amer Sports as a whole. I would think fallout from this policy would effect not only Arc sales but also Salomon and Suunto sales as well.

    Is there any indication that this is truly just a miscommunication with their civilian sales department and their LEAF sales is their goto representatives for firearm related orders or does their civilian department really have this stance?

    • dude says:

      North American, corporate HR-types are a special breed of Karen. I wouldn’t read too much into it as of now.

    • SSD says:

      99% of the people outraged over this don’t know that they are part of the same business group.

      It was a corporate decision to have LEAF handle the relationships with the “tactical industry” as they are more closely aligned.

      • Frier Duck says:

        I get that LEAF should generally handle industry related orders but what if a customer wants something not from the LEAF line? If their civilian line is truly not antigun, does that mean I can order purple Atom LTs embroidered with a hi-point?

        • SSD says:

          One more time…they can do that if you meet the minimums and you are a business. If you just want a one-off, they’ve never done that. Just buy the shirt and have it embroidered yourself.

          • Frier Duck says:

            OK. That’s what I was really looking for. Within your original post/article the main thing I got was if you want to buy custom arc gear for you company, go through the LEAF sales team, but I didn’t see any indication whether or not they were willing to allow purchase of both lines of apparel. Though my example was in jest, I was really just looking for clarification.

  28. Doorkicker says:

    “They are a Canadian clothing company.”
    Ah, no. Just another Chinese conglomerate appendage.

    • SSD says:

      They are owned by a Chinese conglomerate, some Finns and two Canadian interests.

      I understand your desire to avoid doing business with Chinese owned companies, but could you tell us what device you used to post that comment?

      • Steve says:

        “I understand your desire to avoid doing business with Chinese owned companies, but could you tell us what device you used to post that comment?”

        Why are you equating clothing to computers?

        • SSD says:

          Because we all buy and use Chinese products. To pretend otherwise is ridiculous. Unfortunately, there’s a lot more economic damage being done by electronics than a jacket.

          If your goal is Made in USA, I salute you, but Arc’teryx has never been an American product, except for a short period of time when some stuff was made here for US military customers.

          There just aren’t very many US clothing brands outside of the military supply chain. Now, whether those companies are pro-2A is an altogether different argument and I’m not sure how to settle it since so few take a corporate stance on guns.

  29. tw says:

    Funny how the delicate flowers crawl out of the garden to express their hurt feelings.

  30. DavidH says:

    Why is SSD making excuses for Arc’teryx? I am familiar with the company that made the initial request. They got what appeared to be a legitimate response from an official Arc’teryx representative. It’s not the requester’s responsibility to fight the way up the corporate chain. The response was unambiguous and not embellished. They posted the response verbatim. At that point, the requester did the best service possible to the firearms community and spread the word on their bigotry. Arc’teryx just got caught and are trying to walk the policy back.

    • SSD says:

      Excuses? No, I am the only person who bothered to ask. No one else did. They ran with it without bothering to check.

      Sorry that reality gets in the way of your narrative.

      • El Terryble says:

        Word on the street is SSD got bought by a an investment portfolio manager with strong backing by the defense industry, which is why they their articles are leaning more soy-boy than they used to.

      • QM says:

        “Ran with it without bothering to check”?

        It’s interesting how you are so keen to put the blame on the email recipient. If I receive the corporate equivalent of “go eff yourself” I am not particularly “inclined to check”.

        I suspect an awful lot of business owners would feel the same way, especially in the current leftist cancel-culture environment.

        • SSD says:

          Considering he had done business with them in the past, it seems very odd that he wouldn’t ask to discuss it with a supervisor. Since I was able to find out it wasn’t policy in minutes, I stand by my position that this entire thing could have been easily avoided.

          • Sasquatch says:

            Could it also not have been avoided by the employee actually knowing her own company’s policies?

            • SSD says:

              Yep, but that happened. If you believe her position was infantile, then what is the position that posts it on the Internet without checking first?

              • QM says:

                I don’t see any mention of “infantile”.

                I, for one, am glad the email was posted. At the very least it lets us know the kind of activist assholes Arc is hiring these days. There’s a chance they’ll be more careful hiring in future, and, if not, forewarned is forearmed.

                • SSD says:

                  They’re a Canadian outdoor company. They’re going to hire who they want. Don’t freak out, but it’s happening here in the US as well.

  31. John says:

    Well Robynn Shannon needs to be fired if it’s truly isn’t the company policy. If they don’t then it’s certainly is the company policy and they are doing damage control.

    • Brian says:


    • SSD says:

      It’s up to them whether they fire her or not. Regardless, the company policy is that companies in the tactical industry contact LEAF and they will work with you to get your logo placed on Arc’teryx products. That’s what this was all about; a company wanting their logo on some clothing and someone mistakenly told them it couldn’t happen.

    • Jon, OPT says:

      At this point, she’ll probably get promoted and put in charge of marketing. I’m betting she, along with thousands of gun owners, quadrupled their sales this quarter through media gravity alone.

  32. SSD says:

    I gotta admit, even after all these years of doing this, it’s amazing how angry people get when you question something and the answer wrecks their narrative. I am still impressed with the energy they expend to keep ahold of the blind lie because they want to believe it so badly.

    They’ll attack you personally. They’ll deny what you show them. Anything to retain that falsehood. I’ve watched it happen over and over. And not just here. I see it all too often with liberal narratives. This is just sobering because it reminds me how susceptible conservatives are to the human condition.

    • iggy says:

      With you on that one.

      Good work doing some investigative work and fielding the inevitable shit storm for doing so. Not least, having spent a decade dealing with Arcteryx myself including working directly for them, they are not always the easiest group to deal with in the best of times. Personally I’ve always been amazed at the cultish love affair many have with them, especially when owned by a bunch of socialists.

      But you become what you confront, and libs and cons are just Pepsi and Coke now. That said, having had a look about, the noise is all on the con side for this, the pretty posing lib skiers and hipster dog walkers seem to have not got the memo…

    • Tim Ellwood says:

      Having lived at ground zero, thru the worst shitstorm of pre social media “canceling” in the industry, I can agree with your statement fully.
      At that time, it was only email, and forums to deal with, and the “reach” was no where near as far as it is today.
      The NRA did a lot of lying and pushing of thier narrative of what was going on, and when one gun magazine tried to tell some of the truth of the matter, they were blasted as shills and added to the “Boycott”.
      I spent a year, going in 6 shops a day, and getting my bizz cards torn up, was spit on more then once, screamed at and called every name in the book.
      Death threats were very prevalent ( over a policy, made way above my pay grade, made in England, and people want to kill me for it)
      I had spent the bulk of my life in and around the gun industry, it sickened me to see how easy people were led down a path, and would not even try and find out if what they were told, was true.
      Over 350 gun owning, great people lost thier jobs, because someone, that could get massive donations from amplifying a lie, ran with it. lie

      • Bob says:

        Hey Tim;

        I take it you are talking about the Smith and Wesson Debacle? in the 90’s I believe? Reason I ask because not everyone remembers that firestorm.

    • txJM says:

      “They promised me it’s not true” is not the vindication that people who’ve spent thousands on their merchandise want to see, and it’s an insult that you think it should be otherwise.

    • James says:

      It is the Human Condition. No different than any High School, Church, or small town- anything and everything that can possibly be twisted or embellished is available to everyone without any of the context or familiarity that might temper the attack. People have simply been lied to and manipulated too much to break with any part of their core belief based initial read. Easy thing to take personally.

  33. El Terryble says:

    I hope the Arc’teryx employee who sent out the e-mail was fired. People are losing their jobs because they refuse to change the English language and refer to some wack job, neo-Bolshevik millennial by their preferred pronouns. It’s eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth time and the game is keeps.

  34. nate says:

    All aside, what a shit sewing job on the sig part…

  35. Bushman says:

    Well, it sounds like a fun thing to break down.

    Thanks to SSD, we know the position of the Arc’teryx that’s been approved for release to the public (that’s just how it works with any company of that size).

    We still have no idea of whether the company’s presentation of that story is anywhere close to the truth and we’ll never know. There are two main possible options: a) the company representative went way out of her scope and wrote all that on her own accord or b) she had something to actually misinterpret. Again, we’ll never know and everyone is still obviously free to make any more or less reasonable speculations.

    Is there any shilling involved on the SSD’s side? It doesn’t matter at all.
    Does the story add anything more to the image of the Arc’teryx? Not at all. Because this is just another typical corporate BS that happens all the time and it doesn’t really stand out against the existing background such as pandering to certain political movements, employing people who display their political views in the professional environment (see LinkedIn profiles), etc.

    Bottom line – nothing new, move on.

    P.S.: redacting the screenshot that’s been already published unredacted doesn’t make a lot of sense, but if you do that, it’s better to just use 100% opaque black, because it’s still possible to read the sender’s name.

  36. Brian says:

    Why is it that people have such a hard time accepting that people mess up sometimes? Everyone is in such a rush to kill a whole company over what one person wrote. It’s not like the person who wrote this was the CEO or COO. The company the same day said the employee made a mistake. Has no one else here ever made a mistake at work? I guess everyone around here is perfect and I’m just a screw up. These used to be called learning moments. I hope yall’s job’s hold you to the standard that you are holding both this company and employee too.

    • Bushman says:

      Well, everyone makes “mistakes”. And everyone had “learning moments”. But it seems like you are missing the idea of scale. Because it’s one thing when someone, for example, shipped ten pairs of pants instead of a hundred (that’s just a type in a single digit). But it’s a bit different thing when someone takes time to compose a meaningful email dismissing the whole industry and then clicked “Send” without having a second thought or double-checking with someone.
      I work in the manufacturing industry, and I train new guys, so I tell them: “Screwing up a number of parts is usually avoidable, but possible, don’t worry about it. Screwing up a whole order has no excuse because there are too many ways to notice it before it went too far.” Although, some of them ask me later, why it’s okay for a person in the office chair to cause a screw-up that costs ten times more. So the shop floor guys have to sacrifice their time to fix it. Apparently, you just described the reasoning why.

  37. Ian says:

    My opinion: pronouns and virtue-signaling are the agonal breathing of Arc’teryx, not early warning signs. They are not a 2A friendly company. The military/police market is big enough they choose to maintain their LEAF division so as not to drive that market to a competitor. It’s a conscious choice of theirs to cloth and equip the very people that, under threat of gun and prison, will crush your ability to exercise that god-given right.

    My Atom Hoody has served me well, but I will spend elsewhere in the future.

  38. T says:

    So many of you legit can’t seem to process how the whole LEAF thing works huh

  39. Jester says:

    Sure are a lot of you “big tough guys” whining about Chinese-made clothing. More proof that 99% of you are all hat and no cattle

  40. Karhu says:

    Never had anything from them, since everything they make is for tiny people and stupidly expensive.

    Varusteleka has me covered. And they don’t produce in China.

    • Luke says:

      Might want to double check that….a huge amount of varusteleka’s stuff is made in china.

  41. Joe_momma says:

    Since everyone is all interested in transparency and wants to delve into the depths of arc business models, agendas, personnel decisions, etc., can we at least know who the email was sent to? Who was engaged in this conversation with Arc? What weapons mfg are we talking about?

  42. txJM says:

    Funny how the companies in question always give a chummy answer to SSD but never publicize a correction themselves. It’s almost as if they get PR and deniability in the same venue, for the low cost of a shirt giveaway!

    • SSD says:

      I’m amazed that your price is so low. Now I’m curious what things you’ve done for a free shirt.

    • Will Sommers says:

      Hey, it’s Mr Stolen Valor hisself. How do you talk so much shit with all of that cock in your mouth “Jump Master”? More like Joe Mama.

  43. Wilson says:

    How to get the SSD community interested in talking about things or wanting to ask more questions, 101

    step 1: post something mildly controversial that has little real impact
    step 2: ???
    step 3: Watch comments section go up in flames

    • SSD says:

      The people who are posting about this just showed up. Very few have commented in the past.

      • Wilson says:

        I respect you and anyone else working on the site for managing all this, unfortunately it’s hard to moderate stupid, and those alternate accounts you mentioned are honestly hilarious, I mean who even does that anymore?

  44. JR says:

    After reading the comments here, I did a little poking around on the Arcteryx social media. I couldn’t find a single post of any tactical/LE wear, hunting or for that matter even a single post of a fisherman (fear of PETA maybe?). Seems like they want to be very discreet about the sugar daddy of any of these industries?

    • SSD says:

      LEAF is a tiny portion of Arc’teryx’ bottom line and any US government business consists of micro purchases.

      • JR says:

        I guess my point is, we’ll likely see no mention of any of this from them on their social media for fear of a backlash from the large portion of their bottom line who I would assume to be staunch anti gun. Seems the company is passively anti-gun. It’s clear as to who they pander to and any support of the gun culture is not something they are going to display anywhere. Some will but soon most will not care, I feel bad for the abuse you’re getting here and I sure as sh*t would hate to be the folks at the Arc’teryx’ booth at Shot next year. I wouldn’t be surprised if they canceled their booth because of all of this.

  45. Will Sommers says:

    There’s a whole lot of juveniles in here mad at Eric because he asked a question and you don’t like the answer. You ought to go harass Arc’teryx on their social media accounts about this. Bunch of punks.

    • SSD says:

      I’m starting to laugh. There are a couple of guys trying to create new accounts to back one another up. They’re so dumb they don’t realize I see it.

      • Chuck says:

        Hell, i bet more than half of these jokers will be out buying the next greatest thing Arcteryx comes out with, they just won’t admit it

  46. Todd says:

    I think this is the largest comment thread ever on SSD. What an absolute poop storm.

    Personally I don’t like Arcteryx’s response at this time but I’ll say this. I received a copy of the email in question before SSD posted on it. As with anything internet related I didn’t know if it was legit or not. At least SSD followed up on it and got a response from the company which is more than I did. I don’t know the background of what is being discussed on this thread above and understand SSD has a business relationship with Arcteryx. That said, it is the weekend and maybe we will see a more formal response from Arcteryx this coming week. I’m sure any in depth written/published response from the company other than SSD’s initial inquiry into this from someone they know possibly due to their business relationship, will probably have to be approved at a high level and I doubt those people will deal with it on the weekend.

    Arcteryx makes great stuff and I remember making multiple individual purchases through them directly through them in the LEAF program starting in about 2001. They had a great discount for members of the program back then but it changed and that discount was discontinued. I still purchased items for work wear through retailers that carried the LEAF line when it would go on sale because it was great quality gear with a well thought out design.

    Society/the world is changing. I’m sure there are quite a few people on SSD that are well traveled and can see it. Having been in LE from a local to federal level since the early 90’s, I can see it in my workplace and especially our applicants. I’m sure every employer has probably seen it.

    Just vote with your wallet. I personally don’t like Arcteryx is owned by a Chinese company according to Wikipedia. I didn’t know until recently Amer Sports also owns another company whose shoes I wear to work 90 percent of the time. That said I still continue to purchase these products because I haven’t found a better alternative. Someone who is pro shooting industry/LE/MIL comes up with a better designed jacket with the technical features that I like and backs it with the warranty response I’ve had from Arcteryx and I’ll buy it. Someone makes a better pair of shoes in a not normal/wide size for the same price and I’ll buy it.

    There’s going to be a lot more anti LE/MIL/firearms industry sentiment in the world. Look at press coverage on these topics as well as the constant messaging on the internet. If you are as passionate about your response to this on a weekend by the company, then I’m sure you will be as passionate about removing Arcteryx from your closet and future purchases. Get the word out on their response and let others know of better alternatives. I would like to know about it but I’m off social media because I don’t like how it’s run, who it’s owned by, and check places like SSD to find out industry information and trends. I’m not going to fault SSD for posting a response from a source inside the company on the weekend. I’ll wait and see how Arcteryx handles it, or doesn’t, and then make a decision based on that.

  47. JR says:

    I guess my point is, we’ll likely see no mention of any of this from them on their social media for fear of a backlash from the large portion of their bottom line who I would assume to be staunch anti gun. Seems the company is passively anti-gun. It’s clear as to who they pander to and any support of the gun culture is not something they are going to display anywhere. Some will but soon most will not care, I feel bad for the abuse you’re getting here and I sure as sh*t would hate to be the folks at the Arc’teryx’ booth at Shot next year. I wouldn’t be surprised if they canceled their booth because of all of this.

  48. UntilElysium says:


    As an aside of all of this, back in early March when Arc’ released their new kit they mentioned LEAF opening up more on social media.

    Is this still happening?

    Might be an opportunity for them to speak directly to their LEAF customers instead of through civilian channels.

    Regardless, I hope all concerned and with concern in regards to this “shit storm” can take a breath, a moment of pause, and realize what this actually is. A learning experience for Arc’. They are a civilian based company who began that way and will continue to be so with or without LEAF. That customer base makes up a small portion of the whole that is Arc’. Gender pronouns, pride colours, ReBird and the like just reflect the current trend in culture and what civilian customers want to see and support.

    So again, take a breath. R e l a x.

  49. Love it when calmer heads prevail, thanks for doing your part to inform the situation. Hopefully more people see this before just reacting.

  50. Yancey Bret Harrington says:

    Well done SSD… excellent write up and as usual, a great revelation of the facts.