[I_Publius]

Can we show Walmart the power of the American dollar?

This is a ridiculous attempt to keep guns out of the hands of the average, law-abiding citizen.

I vote for a Freeping of Walmart and perhaps a boycott, which wouldn't be hard for me to do anyway.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

The Great Wal-of-China? Employing stricter gun checks in America? Couldn't be!

[alaskanfan]

Thank God we don't have one yet (to drive the little ma and pa stores out of business).

I guess I'd tell them to pound sand!!!!

[Viva Le Dissention]

Well, I don't think Wal-Mart is going to miss you. Honestly, I'd have to say that even if everyone who has ever been on this site never went to Wal-Mart again, I doubt the folks in Bentonville would even blink.

Sometimes it's good to be king, or in this case, the largest company in the world.

[CecilRhodesGhost]

Wal-Mart is a local friend to most cities and towns. It contributes to local scholarships, fund-raisers and community events. Wal-Mart provides affordable goods at the lowest prices, and is a major winner in NAFTA. Global economic policies lean in favor of the Wal-Marts, not the NRA member in some backwater town. Global economic policies will see that Wal-Marts prosper. In exchange, is it unreasonable for Wal-Mart Corporate to look upon the UN policy on strict gun control as a favorable thing? Yes. Because Wal-Mart works with globalization, not against it like the black-helicopter crowd. Wal-Marts and corporations like it are going to set policies on a global level much much more than old-style national governments... because the world is shrinking and multi-national corporations swing more weight than local lawmakers. Corporations, not politicians, will set more and more of the policies and rules that the world will live by... get used to it.

[RAT Patrol]

I think it would be unwise to make too much of this. It is harmless for a business to make this decision on their own. It is their right to do so. What we need to be concerned with is the government mandating something like this. There is a huge difference in my opinion. If you don't like Wal-Mart's policy then don't buy your gun there.

[EBUCK]

Well, if Wal-Mart wants to do stricter background checks fine. I just won't spend a dime of my 3000 a year hunting/fishing/camping/BBQ budget there.

EBUCK

[archy]

Can we show Walmart the power of the American dollar?

What is Wal-Mart doing to ensure that illegal aliens are not employed at or shopping in their stores? I'd like to hear an answer from them on that one, too.

-archy-/-

[The KG9 Kid]

After this news and the report of how they treat their lowly 'associate' workers earlier this week, can anyone give a good reason why they still choose to go to Walmart and buy their Chinese crap?

Prices can't be THAT good at Walmart.

[San Jacinto]

You should not really blame Wal-Mart. Unless you have a law that says the gun seller will have no liability from the sale of the gun as long as it complies with the minimum requirements of the applicable law, then it is understandable and reasonable for Wal-mart not to sell the gun until the background check is actually complete, eventhough the law would let them sell the gun at the end of a certain timeline, even if the results if the background check have not come back.

In othe words, Wal-Mart could sell a gun to some dude without the background results because the time limit has run out first. It turns out this dude is an ex-con and goes out and kills someone. Wal-mart gets sued for millions. Wal-mart says "Hey, we complied with the law." Absent a statute that grants them immunity, Wal-mart runs the risk of a court saying "You were still negligent, now fork over the bucks."

It does not seem to me Wal-mart is anti-gun in this instance, just looking out for themselves in an overly litigious society.

[habaes corpussel]

Who in his right mind would buy a gun at Wally-World anyway?

[pabianice]

Way to make a sale, Walmart!

[Gabz]

I don't like the policy anymore than the next guy, but I understand why they are doing it. They are looking to cover their butts - its plain and simple.

I would venture the particular language of the law says you "may" turn over the purchased weapon if the mandatory check is not returned within a particular time frame. I doubt is says "shall."

Anyone that has spent anytime dealing with law or the writing of legislation will understand the immediate difference here. In the sue happy world in which we live that difference in language is crucial. "may" means a dcision can be made; "shall" means it is mandatory.

If the language, as I suspect, says "may" - Wal-Mart has made the correct decision. I would suspect other gun dealers will make the same decision to protect themselves as well.

What is needed here is not a boycott of Wal-Mart - what is needed a groundswell to MANDATE any and all background checks on gun purchases ARE completed within the proper time frame. Wal-Mart has openned the door for true protection of the honest gun dealers in the country. We need to work to force the gun-grabbers to abide by their own laws

The "may"/"shall" situation here is part of the plan to disallow the sale of firearms to lawabiding citizens.

[El Gato]

I doubt you'll find many storefront dealers that will sell you a gun if your background check doesn't come back approved in the required 3 days. Too much potential liability, or at least percieved liability.

[steamroller]

WalMart is good for DVD's and household goods,etc.Their gun prices and selection are no big deal.So why even bother?I have found local gun dealers here who outdo WalMart with ease.Actually,where I live (Rhode Island) there is a 7 day waiting period,so the question is moot for us.

[mn_b_one]

GUN FACT: Over a 30 year period, the number of firearmss increased almost 300 percent and the population increased 34 percent-even while the number of fatal gun accidents decreased roughly 70 percent.

[Scutter]

This is just a corporation trying to protect itself from the lawyers. If some yahoo were to purchase a firearm because the 3 day period expired without his background check coming in, then kill someone with said firearm, and it was later shown that the background check eventually came back negative, you can bet some enterprising lawyer would come up with the idea to sue Walmart.

If enough people boycott Walmart over this, don't be surprised if the end result is that Walmart simply stops all firearms sales.

[truth_session]

"We wanted to make sure we were doing our part to keep guns out of the hands of those who should not be getting them,"

Your customers?

Everything I've bought in Wal-Mart is made in China.

[antidisestablishment]

I already don't shop at Chinese Slave Mart, but I would support a full boycott for any reason.

[AD from SpringBay]

Should read:

Wal-Mart, formerly the nation's biggest gun seller, is strengthening its policy on background checks of firearms buyers beyond the requirements of federal law.

[freekitty]

Look who Walmarts friends are. Didn't Hildabeast sit on the board? What a company to work for. I hear they work their employees to death, cut whatever little hours and pay they have and demote everyone. I hear they also change their schedule weekly so people never know when they are off from week to week.