http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/washington-secrets/2012/04/coke-caves-face-democratic-boycott-threat/444346

Which one do you trust?

But the article says

"PepsiCo Inc ended its relationship with the group - the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) - in January."

Seems you need to avoid both families.

The article said Pepsi caved a couple months ago even before Coke did. So what's left? Actually, I don't object too much to a beverage company caving to a boycott threat over gun laws. I don't necessarily think every business should take a stand on every controversial subject that isn't even related to their core business. Now if they decided to go out and donate to Brady or something, then yea, I'd cut them off.

Except that PepsiCo did the same thing months ago:

"PepsiCo Inc ended its relationship with the group - the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) - in January."

Coke's explanation is valid:

"Our involvement with ALEC was focused on efforts to oppose discriminatory food and beverage taxes, not on issues that have no direct bearing on our business. We have a long-standing policy of only taking positions on issues that impact our company and industry."

That's only reasonable. Starbucks did the same thing by refusing to take a stand one way or another on open carry in their coffeehouses, and everyone applauded them. Coke is focusing on selling soda... isn't that what they owe their shareholders?

I say the same thing about a company spending money on gun control.

What does this have to do with what they sell?

Just as supporting gun control has nothing to do with selling soda, so does supporting stand your ground.

What we should be checking is if Freedom Group is a member, that is inside their sphere.