Posted on 08/16/2019 8:33:00 AM PDT by suthener
Walmart said Thursday in a quarterly earnings report that it would support a conversation around an assault weapons ban, even though the company no longer sells that category of firearm.
The retailer also revealed that it sells 20 percent of all ammunition in the United States.
Acknowledging the importance of Walmart's role in national conversation around guns after a shooter targeted shoppers at one of its El Paso stores, the company devoted the second-page of its fiscal report to outlining the steps it has voluntarily taken to reduce gun violence, including on background checks.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Well, that’s it then. I am officially out of places to shop.
Guess I’ll start subsistence farming that little plot up in the mountains.
Why don’t virtue signalling corporations stay out of politics?
Only a matter of time until Walmart stops selling guns. The progressives who work at corporate HQ are no doubt working like busy beavers today to make that happen.
Debate all you want.
First tell me what you mean by assault weapon.
A baseball bat can be used as an assault weapon.
Short answer:
Because every corporate marketing department these days is staffed by Millenial female virtue-signalers who graduated from America’s finest university brainwashing institutions.
They see five negative tweets on something and conclude the sky is falling. They run to their CEO in a panic telling him that you MUST DO SOMETHING NOW!!!! or the company is toast.
CEO’s, being generally disconnected from the nuts and bolts and figuring “I pay people to handle this for me” shrug and go along.
LOL! We should hold a demonstration in front of a Walmart store demanding that they stop selling baseball bats.
“Guess I’ll start subsistence farming that little plot up in the mountains.”
I’ll have to go to Publix and pay about 20% more.
Please, oh please Walmart; stop selling firearms. My local FFL could really use the business.
“Why don’t virtue signalling corporations stay out of politics?”
I don’t know why they can’t just STFU. I’m not kidding, I loved the grocery pick up. Like I told someone else, I’m going to have to go to Publix, go in the store, and pay about 20% more.
Grocery Outlet, WINCO. Good way to alienate a lot of the PJ wearing customers.
This is great news! We should be buying from our local ffl dealers. Supporting the businesses that support us! Walmart has been on my no buy list since they quit selling those evil black rifles.
“Please, oh please Walmart; stop selling firearms. My local FFL could really use the business.”
I sent an email to their customer service and told them if they have any principles they would stop selling firearms and ammo. I also told them they’ll never do it. A knowledgeable person told me one time there are three markets for ammo; the military, Walmart, and everyone else. The irony is, like I told them in my email, I have bought two black rifles at Walmart, and tons of ammo. None of my purchases ever committed or were involved in a crime.
So how about background checks on your employees and new hires, also include credit checks and drug screenings. I mean, if you're serious about wanting to reduce the possibility of violence in the workplace...
Walmart used to sell a complete line of rifles and handguns. When the Brady Center, several decades ago, started screeching, Walmart stopped selling handguns.
Then as the anti-gun screeching continued, they stopped selling military dress-up rifles.
Now the screechers want them to stop selling all firearms. I don’t think WM sells guns in California and have heard they will stop selling in New Mexico due to anti-gun interference.
“No”... there’s your conversation. And the more you discuss ways to disarm me, the more I think I need to keep it.
IF walmart doesn’t accept the legal definition of ‘assault weapon’, which is ‘dual fire gun’ meaning BOTH semi automatic AND fully automatic- then they don’t wish to have any kind of discussion- they just wanna jump on the gun grabbing bandwagon because liberals are threatening to boycott walmart-
The few powers that the states have expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds to regulate arms are limited to regulating militia purpose firearms, evidenced by the Constitution’s Article I, Section 8, Clause 16 for example, and to strengthening constitutionally enumerated rights, including the 2nd Amendment (2A), evidenced by the 14th Amendment (14A).
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming [emphasis added], and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"
From the 14th Amendment:
"Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
"Section 5: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."
Note that the Supreme Court had clarified Congress's 14A power to strengthen constitutionally enumerated rights (including 2A).
“3. The right of suffrage was not necessarily one of the privileges or immunities of citizenship before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that amendment does not add to these privileges and immunities. It simply furnishes additional guaranty for the protection of such as the citizen already had [emphasis added].” —Minor v. Happersett, 1874.
Otherwise, the Supreme Court has also made it clear that powers not expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds by the states are prohibited to the feds.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
In fact, the congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, using murder as an example, had clarified that the states have never expressly constitutionally given the feds the specific power to make peacetime penal laws.
"Our Constitution never conferred upon the Congress of the United States the power - sacred as life is, first as it is before all other rights which pertain to man on this side of the grave - to protect it in time of peace by the terrors of the penal code within organized states; and Congress has never attempted to do it. There never was a law upon the United States statute-book to punish the murderer for taking away in time of peace the life of the noblest, and the most unoffending, as well, of your citizens, within the limits of any State of the Union, The protection of the citizen in that respect was left to the respective States, and there the power is to-day [emphases added].” —Rep. John Bingham, Congressional Globe. (See bottom half of third column.)
Also, regardless what FDR's state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices wanted everybody to think of the scope of Congress's Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3), Walmart's politically correct debate should also probably include that FDR's justices "overlooked" the following when they interpreted that clause.
A previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had emphasized the reasonably clear meaning of the Commerce Clause, that the states have never expressly constitutionally given Congress the specific power to regulate INTRAstate commerce.
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added]." -Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
So how can Congress and the Trump Administration make red tag laws without violating the Commerce Clause? (Consider that PDJT has had no choice but to surround himself with post-FDR era, institutionally indoctrinated "constitutional experts." PDJT needs to start reading Free Republic.)
In fact, consider that the states had ratified the 18th Amendment as an exception to the Commerce Clause so that Congress could stick its big nose into intrastate commerce specifically to prohibit the intrastate sales of alcoholic beverages.
Remember in November 2020!
MAGA! Now KAG! (Keep America Great!)
I bet more people have died by what people pick up at the Walmart Pharmacy such as prescription Opiates than any gun or ammo from their pathetic store.
Walmart should remember what happened to Dicks Sporting Goods.
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.