Wal-mart; Knuckling under to political pressure, or a convenient excuse for desired policy changes?

By Eyes_Open

I have confirmed with other sources, Wal-mart is suspending ALL orders of ammo and firearms to their stores that carry these items, pending the final wording of the “Federal Gun Control Act” which is now in the hands of President Obama. Is this the beginning of, or escalation of, governmental control of the market? Or the next step in controlling arms to the public? Or both? Or is it just an excuse for Wal-mart to do what it may have wanted to do all along, but couldn’t because of customer pressure?

http://investmentwatchblog.com/breaking-confirmed-wal-mart-is-not-going-to-order-any-more-ammo/

132 thoughts on “Wal-mart; Knuckling under to political pressure, or a convenient excuse for desired policy changes?”

  1. First it was Bank of America withholding deposits made into the account of a customer who happens to be a gun manufacturer and now Walmart administering Gun Control through their consumers. Fine, may they both feel the wrath of their client base.

    Doing something stupid is just like saying something stupid. Go ahead, do it or say it, but there are consequences to the freedom of speech. My example of this, the Dixie Chicks. They were the top of the country charts when they opened their mouths. Now, they do main stream music, and are only so-so. Their fans overwhelmingly disapproved and loudly said so via the millions of requests to radio stations saying that they would stop listening if the stations continued playing their music.

      1. So businesses must make a calculated risk with things like this.

        Like the guy who says he'd refuse to sell guns to Obama-voters. Turning away so many potential customers?? Such a "sacrifice" for his beliefs!… except that it wasn't… in reality it was simply a smart marketing move that turned out to be a boon for his gun-toter-centric clientele.

        1. Sure it is a risk for them, and their right to do so. I have no problem with them being within their right. I have the right not to go there anymore. Will I? Probly.

          1. Of course I did enjoy their buying power in play with the prices of ammo. I think the only rounds I was getting from them was for my .22, not the 30-06.I am not a big purchaser ( I wish I could be) but it all adds up doesn't it?

        2. Wal mart's selection is so limited I wouldn't buy rifle ammo from them anyway, shotgun shells are a different story. But in my area there are so many hunting goods stores and gun shop that it really won't make any difference. In areas where there are few shops to create competition the prices will go up, and some areas where there are no gun shops will be the worst.

          The underlying effect (if you are into conspiracy theories) is that this will force many people to go on-line to find good deals, especially if you live in the sub-urb or metro, that means that your purchases can be traced and cataloged, unlike point of sale purchases (or at least much more easily). So putting together a database of gun owners and ammo stock pilers will literally be a push of a button. One more step closer to confiscating all the legal civilian firearms.

          1. I don't buy ammo from them, I order online. Their firearm selection is very poor to boot.

            Now when they declare that they are going to stop selling fishing supplies until they know whether or not fishing poles are going to be banned, then we will have a problem.

              1. Name calling Cogster? More people are killing every year with cars than guns. All car must be banned immediately. Cars are not granted as a Constitutional Right either. They have to go right now!

                    1. The answer to your question is yes. The feds dictate a great deal of regulation for cars.Now answer my question, do cars kill people?

                    2. No. the logic I ascribed shows that guns, like cars, should be heavily regulated.

                      The only remotely plausible counter argument to my point is that: Guns, unlike cars, have Constitutional protections.

                      However, the regulation I am personally championing – while heavier than what we have today – is not so heavy as to infringe on 2nd Amendment rights.

                      I'm just arguing for better background checks and better tracking of the mentally ill. Both are popular notions too.

                      Since anyone who should get a gun will still be able to… how does this infringe on the 2nd Amendment?

                    3. Yep, just finished watching the coverage. No Eo but a promise to push for an all out ban on assault weapons (no indication of what will be classified and assault weapon), a ban on clips over 10 rounds, and universal background checks for anyone selling or buying a firearm.

                      I can only see a use for one of these objectives, the universal background checks, but how to enforce it? It has been tried before and failed. First, who is going to bear the burden of paying for the check? The buyer I suppose. Then, where are they going to get the funds to pay for tripling (or more) the size of government officers to do the background checks (this is what ultimately stopped it the last time they tried to put that in place)? And who is going to enforce that private citizens actually do a background check? The only way to guarantee that is to require that ALL firearms be registered so they can be tracked….HEY! Wait a minute, that means that everyone that owns a firearm has to register with the government! (sarc)

                      Yep, a backdoor to getting all firearms registered, which leads to the next step of collecting them when registration fails to stop the criminals. All part of the greater plan.

                      Now, does that mean Walmart will start stock hunting rounds again?

                    4. The one that bothers me the most, it's a doctor asking me if I own guns? All medical history is recorded online. How very easy for them is that? I will not answer any question like that from anyone.

                    5. Why would a doctor have reason to ask you if you own a gun? Unless you've shot yourself, what business is it of theirs?

                    6. What about when they ask the kids, does mommy and daddy have any guns at home? LAWSUIT IS FORTH COMING.

                    7. I never leave my kids alone with a doctor, but that's me. Also, the doctors that I go to also are gun owners so I don't think they would be a part of such a scheme.

                    8. Me either, but mine are grown now. Now that King Obamo has pronounced the royal proclamation, I wonder who he thinks will enforce it? All of my police buddies know I have thirty round clips at home. The only thing they would come to my house and get is a beer.Brown shirts?

                    9. Is it scare mongering when the administration is already advertising list of guns and gun attachments that they want to make illegal? No.

                      Again, they should regulate the people that can buy weapons, not the weapons, not the ammo, not the quantity. Violent criminals and mentally ill shouldn't be allowed weapons, other than that, there should be little or no restriction.

            1. Ok, I have no problem making them do what the big sporting goods stores do, the background checks. If that's it then it fine. I don't want guns in the hands of nutjobs either. Let's go for that.

              What the people propose in Washington seem by in large targeting law abiding citizens in gun ownership.

              1. What the people propose in Washington seem by in large targeting law abiding citizens in gun ownership.

                don't believe the NRA hype!

                There are legitimately popular steps that can be taken, primarily beefing up background checks and increasing the robustness of who-is-who among the mentally ill. That is where this is going, that is what is popular with the people.

                BUT: Make no mistake: Even these popular reforms will cut into gun makers & sellers bottom line, so the NRA will fight it tooth and nail all the same.

                1. How much do you know about hand guns, Coggy. You realize that limiting magazines to below 7 rounds will eliminate over 75 % of them? You don’t know what you are talking about. Just one round more would remove this problem. You think that they didn’t know this when they said 7 rounds? Ha!

                  1. now you are engaging in a different type of argumentative tactic – smoke screen.

                    I don't give a fuck about how many rounds are in a magazine.

                    PERHAPS… PERHAPS, to prevent a violent dictator from seizing power, 8 rounds in a magazine will be needed. DID YOU EVER THINK OF THAT, RM?

                    1. No I’m not. This was just passed in New York yesterday, not some phony “straw men” argument.You need to read more sir, you don’t seem to know what’s going on. Why don’t you tell me how many rounds makes a magazine “high capacity?” You don’t know do you?

                    2. Sure it is. High capacity magazines is on the list of 19. How many will Mr. Obama say is too many? If it’s more than seven, we all have a real big problem.

                    3. the people who's guns would become illegal…

                      not that it wouldn't be a uber pain in the ass, but technically speaking, they could still go and get guns that had less rounds. They could still have guns.

                    4. Would you then require me to turn in mine, which have 8 round clips? I have done nothing wrong. I have a license to carry a concealed handgun. I have been fingerprinted and had an FBI background checks, five times now for my work and my license. I have had licenses for concealed guns in more than one state. All mine are locked up in guns safes. You and your ilk will put my life at risk now with this. I am required to go into areas that are extremely seedy for my work. Five times I have dealt with bad people. Only one time did I draw my weapon and I did not fire. Do you think that the nut jobs out there will care one bit when they shoot people with guns that have 7 rounds or 8? The only ones who will obey the laws are the ones these laws are directed at, not the criminals. That is the fallacy here with all this.This is an attack on my rights to make me do this.

                    5. What these people do not understand is that more extensive back rounds checks and tracking of mentally ill will not stop somoene who wants to kill someone else. Gun or no gun. It really makes no sense.

                    6. Let’s say they win. Everyone turn them in. This killing with guns will not stop. The only difference will be that more bodies will be lined up in the morgue because they were defenseless. What will stop these nuts is that they ran out of bullets. But, then there is something called a black market.

                    7. Don't forget that the ones who do no thave guns will probably resort to making simple but effective home made bombs to increase the number of dead.

                    8. Matches, baseball bats, knives, hammers, All prescription drugs that are potential poison, etc., on and on and on.Or, maybe we should just make it illegal to kill people, hunh? Oh wait—we’ve already done that and the criminals don’t obey the law. Imagine that.

                    9. We just need the government to control evey aspect of our lives. They know whats best for us.

                      BTW that is sarcasm. My stalker trolls will see that and use it out of context

                    10. It doesn't work that way, especially with pistols. The round count has to do with the length of the clip, which with a pistol is dictated by the length of the grip. A shorter clip just won't fit.

                    11. NO sir it is not. I will be watching closely when he tells us how many rounds makes a magazine “High Capacity.”

                    12. Over 10, and it is clips, there is no limit for magazines. So my 17 round semi-auto hunting rifle will still be legal when my 10 round "assault" rifle that is converted to a hunting rifle is not. That makes lots of since….

        1. When they abuse their authority is when we will need them, that is the reason for the 2nd Amendment. There are the same kind of photos showing all the guns around his kids. I will not be showing you those. I want my grandkids protected just like he does his.

          1. "When they abuse their authority is when we will need them, that is the reason for the 2nd Amendment." true, but that's different. some gun availability is appropriate, and of course, protected by the 2nd amendment. But not for mentally ill.

            "I want my grandkids protected just like he does his."

            You mean that you want your grand kids to be protected by expertly trained secret service agents?

            1. I mean by armed guards or trained and licensed teachers participating in the Texas Guardian Plan. They need High capacity eight round magazines just in case the attacker has on body armor just like the Colorado Movie theater gunman did. It will take multiple shots to slow him down enough to lay hands on him.

            2. No one is advocating guns for the mentally ill, that is just what the liberals would have you think. The armed security is to protect our children from the mentally ill. As well as from the drug cartels that this administration is arming with the very same weapons that they seek to take away from the law abiding public.

              And yes, I want my kids protected by trained, armed security. That just happens to be me and most of the people that I know. You don't have to have a job in a security firm to be able to provide security for those around you.

        2. How is that a strawman argument? More "citizens" are victims of crimes every year than presidents, or all the government officials for that matter. Strip them of their armed guard and see how fast they jump on removing any and all restrictions to firearms so they can protect themselves. Typical "golden parachute" attitude, pass laws "for the good of the people" as long as they aren't effected or restricted by those laws. Just like healthcare reform, social security reform, and welfare reform. It doesn't effect them so they can restrict the people as much as they like. Force all government official to take the Obamacare government insurance instead of their top tear elite healthcare plan, I guarantee they will toss Obamacare out like bad water. The President himself refused to answer when asked if he would consider putting his family on healthcare as provided for in HIS healthcare plan, and not a single democratic senator agreed to it either. Scrap their retirement and force them to retire on SSI monthly checks, see how fast the social security issues get resolved.

          I am sick of this elitist "I'll pass laws restricting you, but I'm exempt" crap!

          Amendment 28: Congress shall pass no law that doesn't apply to every member of the United States Government, without exception. Congress shall pass no healthcare, retirement, or social welfare program or reform unless all members of government are subject to those acts. No government official or member of their staff shall have, through employment benefits, any healthcare insurance, retirement plan, or other benefit that is not available to the general public through social services at a sliding scale according to income. All government officials must hold elected office with the federal government for a minimum of 20 years in order to receive lifetime benefits and/or retirement through the federal system.

          And it would be nice if it was retro active, but that would be asking for the moon and stars on top of asking for the sky!

  2. The Presidents gonna do this! The Presidents gonna do that!

    people please. Yes he can do certain things with executive orders, but there's plenty he can't do with executive orders.

    Mostly, he's going to "put pressure on Congress". And we all know the lot of difference that will accomplish: First name- Jack, last name – Squat!

    1. Just what is it that he cannot do with an Executive Order? The record is pretty fuzzy on that.Where is the check and balance on the Executive Order? (Yes, this discussion has been had before)

      1. well, my understanding is that, with EOs, he can address this whole thing about enforcing the existing laws that are already on the books.

        that is my bet: Tomorrow when they present the new gun control agenda… when he gets to the part about Executive Orders, it will be of this nature.

        1. But if he issues an order to enforce the existing laws, the first person they will have to arrest is his buddy, Eric Holder. So even if he "says" they are going to redouble their efforts to enforce existing law, there will be no real movement in that direction.

  3. Here, since my time is short today, let me cut this to the quick…
    Walmart (while brilliantly brutal businessman) has totally pussed out on this one.
    Perhaps it is a trade to make the feds/states back off in other areas where they don't want scrutiny.

    Piss off Walmart!

    1. My understanding was that WalMart did not want to get stuck with huge warehouses of guns & ammo that they could no longer legally sell. The small retailers can't keep anything in stock.
      Cabela's just pulled out of a large east coast shooting competition, because they suddenly banned the AR style rifle.

    1. It's cheaper to buy in bulk from sporting goods stores, but Walmart was cheaper for just 20 and 50 round boxes. I used to pick up a box or two from there when I'd go out to kill a few bottles and cans, so's not to deplete my current inventory. No more, it appears. Guess it's time to break down and invest in some RCBS equipment.

    1. I shop there quite often (not for ammo though). Pride cometh before the fall, and my kids are hungry, so I'll go to where I can get the most for my dollar. If that happens to be Walmart, well that sucks but it is what it is.

    1. I'm hoping the Obama administration's anti-2nd Amendment stance will help change Washington State into a red state. Even though it is fairly blue on most issues, it is very pro 2nd Amendment, even amongst the lefties. Texas is just too hot for my tastes. Now Idaho …….

      1. I love Washington State. But it’s just too cold up there for me in winter. This morning it was 24 degrees when I left for work. It is a very good thing that we have all this global warming going on or I would freeze to death. My blood is too thin down here to take the cold weather.

        1. But it's not that cold on west side. It gets down to the low 30s, and that's usually about as cold as it gets. There are exceptions, but they are exceptional. Now, east of the mountains, temps in the teens and single digits are fairly common.

    1. The leadership (and the goals) of the NRA changed in the late '70s. I can't say whether or not racism played a part in the NRA's decision regarding Mulford, and if it did, it makes their poor choice even worse. But even if racism didn't play a role, the NRA was wrong, as was the Mulford Act. It was a knee-jerk reaction.

      " (The NRA) became more heavily politicized in the late 1970s, when newer NRA members decided to focus more on halting gun control legislation instead of recreational hunting and safety training."
      http://www.npr.org/2011/01/27/133247508/the-histo

    2. It was done because CA was at a loss to stop the BPP from roaming the streets with weapons. Not because of their color, but because of their intent. They were looking to shoot any white cop that so much as cleared their throat.
      I lived in the Bay area during that time. Our family steered clear of the Oakland area for years because of the BPP's actions.

  4. “My daughter is a New York City police officer, and under this legislation, we’ll be taking bullets out of her gun while the bad guys have no such limitations,” said Assemblyman Al Graf, in reference to the bill passed in the state of New York.

    And there you have it, a politician stating plainly that no law will take the high capacity firearms out of the hands of the criminals. Now, he is concerned about his daughter, the police officer, but what about the rest of the law abiding citizens, don't they have the same right to defend themselves as a cop? Or would he care that the cops were limited by this act if his daughter wasn't among them? From his track record I would think he would care, but that leaves the bigger question; If they know and admit that this act won't stop the criminals from using these weapons, then what use is the act? Just political games on the governors road to the white house.

    If only the cops and the criminals have guns, who is going to protect the public? When ever second counts a cop is only a minute away!

    1. Law Enforcement and the Military typically use 15-round magazines. Mine is 8-rounds with 6-rounds in my backup. Only my little bitty gun would pass their restrictions.

      New York State is a place that is far too dangerous for me to go to, therefore, I will never again.

      1. I saw where your great state of Texas has invited all the gun owners in New York to come on down. LOL You may have to learn how to speak New Yorkian soon my friend….

    2. I picked up my Glock 21 at a local gun shop today. I noticed that they had received a new shipment of AR-15 30 round mags, and thought I'd pick up a couple more. Huh-uh. $49.95, up from $13.95 in just a couple of weeks. I figure I got enough, and I'll wait till this blows over. If it blows over. Gun and accessory manufacturers must love Obama.

        1. No, more like they love the left's knee-jerk response to Adam Lanza. It was the left that decided to make political hay out of Newtown, but I won't be so insensitive and say the left loves Adam Lanza's actions, even though they seem more than willing to capitalize on the event.

    3. The Assemblyman is either clueless, or is referring to his daughter’s off duty weapons.LEO’s are normally exempted by firearms legislation. Just like they are exempt from needing a permit to carry concealed.

      1. Actually, getting your CCP is part of the paperwork that you do when you become an officer. Most don't even realize they are getting it (most already have it before becoming an officer) until the card comes in the mail. And technically officers aren't carrying concealed, they just get the permit encase they carry a second pistol hidden.

        I know in Georgia, and apparently in NY State, Law enforcement are subject to all the same laws as the rest of the citizens of the state, including gun laws. SWAT officers even have to get special permits to carry and use some of the special weapons that they take to the field. They're not allowed to go into the field until they acquire the permits, and it is up to them to get it.

        1. I believe (too long ago that I checked) that Maryland, Oregon, and Washington all had specific exemptions for current officers as well as retired officers to carry concealed at all times. To me that precludes the need to obtain a permit to carry concealed.

          1. Hmmm. I suppose it is different state to state, just as the CCP laws are different state to state. I know my CCP is not recognized in certain states, I think Maryland is one of them. Heck GA an SC don't even recognize each others CCWP, but they both recognize FL. Same with Washington state, Utah is about the only one I know of that is recognized in MOST other states. Kind of makes cross country road trips a pain in the ass, just one more thing to add to the planning.

            1. Yeah, the Washington State CCP is only good in 12 other states, but it does qualify you to get an Oregon permit (but like SC and Ga, neither state recognizes the others permit. Money scam?), which makes the two permits good in, not counting duplicates, 25 states. Utah is good for, I believe, 32 states, but a few of them require the permit holder to be a resident of Utah. Nonetheless, I might have to take a little trip there this summer.

      2. New York, in their haste to "protect us" forgot to exempt active and retired, Police, Marshals, FBI and others from their new legislation. In fact a police officer armed with just 7 bullets can not respond to a call at any school in NY.

        Gotta love the politician!

    1. As I said in my previous comment, they are not restocking. They are not making any larger purchases, until they know what the government is going to do. They don't want to get stuck with a bunch of ammo they can't legally sell.
      Considering the quantity they purchase at one time, as a business owner, I would bring in enough for a month or so, maybe only put so many out each day, and wait till the government is done fluffing their feathers…

    2. From the manager at my local Walmart, "we are ordering more ammo, but corporate has put the orders on hold. I don't know if they are doing it to see if we are going to be able to sell ammo for assault rifles or if it is just a marketing ploy, they won't answer us directly, but we should have shelves fully restocked by early February."

      So it seems they are using this situation for whatever reason, whether to avoid possibly having stock they can't sale or just to push prices up, but my local store still has lots of ammo on the shelf for most calibers, they always overstock for hunting season.

      What ticks me off is that walmart quit stocking soft point and hollow point for 7.62 x 39 two years ago, they only carry FMJ now. I've got plenty FMJ because I never use them, I'm almost out of hunting rounds!

            1. Partially Obozo, partially to the hysteria that has been created. The hysteria is only somewhat grounded in truth. I think the manager I quoted hit the nail on the head. Retailers are pushing the hysteria to make it look like there is less available ammo and firearms than there really are, which allows them to up their prices and profits. The two little mom and pop gun shops a few miles from my house still are selling ammo at the same price as always, but the slightly bigger gun shop up in town doubled his prices. But the owner of that one has always been greedy and two faced.

              I still wonder how much of it is just a shell game, it's starting to look like a lot.

              1. All good points. When the school shooting took place, the week after I ordered all my ammo. I expected this to be coming out of them. The Yankie Trader stuff is kind of the American way. I have a pretty good memory too.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.