Posted on 07/03/2014 7:28:17 PM PDT by Kaslin
Well… I’m starting to run out of places to shop. Target Corporation (TGT) made the announcement on Wednesday that they have acquiesced to the Bloomberg fanatics who believe no-one should be armed while shopping. The company (politely) asked customers to keep their guns at home the next time they wander in for a DVD or Cuisinart.
Of course, it’s not all bad news. After all, a Target store in San Antonio recently booted anti-gun activists from its store. The Bloomberg inspired group, Moms Demand Action (moms I know carry .380 automatics), was asked to leave the premises as they petitioned shoppers to sign a ban on open carry.
So, when taken in the context of recent events, it kinda looks like the retail chain simply wants to be left out of the gun/anti-gun debate. And really, who can blame them? Picket signs, petition drives, and even AR-15s aren’t always good for business. I mean, sure, Target is creating a “solution” to an imaginary problem by banning gun-loving America… But they’re not exactly doing this in a vacuum.
Now, don’t get me wrong: Their decision is absurd. It’s pretty well documented that “gun free” zones tend to advertise a victim-rich environment to would-be criminals. Jack in the Box learned this the hard way when armed robbers took advantage of newly disarmed customers, mere days after the company declared their new anti-gun policy. And, if you really need proof of failure, just look at America’s favorite gun-free zone: Chicago.
A far more amicable solution might have been to allow local laws to preempt store-wide policies on firearms. But, Target is a business… And those who run it have every right in the world to make stupid, ill-informed, or even unfair decisions. Heck, they’re even allowed to make wrong decisions. But their decision does bring up an interesting point about the tactic of open carrying for Second Amendment rights:
In all honesty, recent high-profile open carry stunts have done little to help the proliferation of firearm rights. In fact, it has hurt the cause. And this isn’t the opinion of one “carry advocate” with a Townhall column… Even Open Carry Texas seems to understand that there are potential pitfalls to toting an AK around the grocery aisle of your local Super Target.
Smashburger, Jack in the Box, Wendy’s, Applebees, Chipotle, Starbucks, and even Chili’s have asked patrons to start leaving their guns at home… And most (not all) of these decisions were made Bloomberg minions rallied in response to ill-advised open carry demonstrations. Now, I’m going out on a limb here, but I have to assume that an expanded prohibition on firearm-friendly-policies is not what open carry activists had in mind when they started their organized patronage.
But, welcome to the world in which we live. Movements, people, and even activists are generally judged by their ability to affect positive change. Prior to these most recent skirmishes, many of these locations allowed carry (provided it was in compliance with local laws) on their premises. Now things have changed… And not for the better. Now, please: don’t misunderstand me… I’m a very pro-gun guy. I have a 1911 on my hip right now because – well – because I’m awake. (And even when I’m asleep, it’s not far away.) But, if we are going to judge the activist-open-carry movement by its results, it appears to be a failure.
If the goal is to expand gun rights, let’s try not to bog ourselves down in skirmishes with national retail chains who are primarily interested in avoiding controversy. After all, discriminating against law-abiding citizens is in vogue; but discriminating against the main-stream media, Michael Bloomberg, and rabid-anti-gunners is generally viewed by CEOs and investors as corporate suicide.
It doesn’t take a genius to understand that presentation goes a long way in making, or breaking, a political point. Target is absolutely (without qualification) wrong for trying to ban law-abiding armed citizens from their stores. They may, or may not, feel the pain of their decision as gun-owners begin foregoing their visits to the newly created “victim-rich” retail stores… But, Target’s main goal of avoiding prolonged exposure in the media over a controversial social issue has been achieved.
Battles are launched in an effort to win wars… So, yeah: Moms Demand Action won this battle. Target is wrong. But, it is now up to Second Amendment advocates to make sure they are taking steps that perpetuate their cause – not infringe upon the lives of sympathetic supporters.
And, just to make it clear, here’s a quick guide on how to open carry in a way that disarms the ideologically bankrupt Bloomberg groups who lobby for the dissolution of gun rights:
Nothing has changed at Target, you can still carry there.
Such cowards.
You know why they ASK people to leave their guns at home? LIABILITY:
See, if they ASK and you comply and there’s a mass-shooting that YOU COULD HAVE PREVENTED, well…..you have no tort suit against them, right?
Cuz **YOU** decided to leave your gun behind, DUMMY.
So what this means is they’re cowards x1 for giving into anti-gun-ism but then they’re cowards x2 cuz they won’t stick it out far enough to take even a tiny liability risk.
So they’re being cowards twice over.
What you said.
Seems a lot of Freepers lack reading comprehension skills.
The adage “Because you can doesn’t always mean you should”... comes to mind... Carrying your AR over your shoulder while you’re walking around with the soccer moms is likely to draw the kind of attention that is not desired...
Target REQUESTED that you not open carry. The request really has no teeth other than the fact they can ask you to leave if they see your firearm... They haven’t posted any “no firearm” signs as of yet...
I spoke to my local Target store manager and he is unhappy. He believes this will hurt business... Time will tell
I will continue to CC and ignore their request if I MUST go to Target which is unlikely...
Carry a gun because you sure can’t carry a cop.
However, this is not a retention holster. If I was going to ever go open carry I'd want a good retention holster. Anyone have one they like for something along the lines of a G19?
Blackhawk Serpa.
the open carry “movement” isn’t helping our side in the least. Fact is, they’re aiding our enemies.
Bianchi makes a nice one for the Glock 19. Actually I think it’s a Safariland, since somehow the two are connected now. Model #83. I have it in belt and paddle for my 19. The retention device is a paddle you depress with your middle finger as you draw.
LOOK at Alien, Comp Tac and Galco ‘King Tuk’ IWB holsters as well.
here on Iohio, if there’s no sign posted on the front door, there’s nothing stopping you legally.
the serpa is OK but I gave mine to a buddy. I’m not a fan of anything that inhibits me from drawing and it was terrible for concealed carry. I’m sold on the Akers flatsider series personally.
But I can't. Haven't set foot in a Target since the Salvation Army kerfuffle.
Practice, practice, practice.
>> Seems a lot of Freepers lack reading comprehension skills.
Implying those same FReepers read the article?
They better change their name from Target, too.
No more shopping at Target
“Nothing has changed at Target, you can still carry there.”
Yup. In NV, they didn’t say squat to a bud of mine.
Not only that, but they really oppose the “gospel gun.” It is my practice to graciously offer a few gospel tracts out as i shop, which even Muslim store owners let me do. But very quickly security was on me for doing so, and sternly warned me i would have to leave the store if i continued - even though i was checking out with a $100+.00 bicycle!
Yes, i latter thought i should have asked if he really thought this was such an offense that he wanted me to cancel this purchase. Or something to that effect.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.