White House Signals It Will Ask Retailers for Help on Gun Control


PDA






Bartholomew Roberts
January 7, 2013, 08:55 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-weighs-broad-gun-control-agenda-in-wake-of-newtown-shootings/2013/01/05/d281efe0-5682-11e2-bf3e-76c0a789346f_print.html

One of the topics being discussed is to try and pressure gun manufacturers and retailers by offering them special legislative incentives in order to gain their support for more gun control. One specific example was to force all sales through FFLs in return for support of registration laws.

One more aspect to be aware of when you are contacting people. The Administration appears to be very serious about pushing gun control. We have been very fortunate the past 8-9 years in not having the kinds of serious efforts at gun control that were tried in 1994, 1999, and 2004. Those days are officially over and they plan to make up for lost ground. The laws being proposed are much worse than anything I've seen previously and they are taking their time to make a concerted campaign to pass them.

It is absolutely imperative every gun owner contacts their elected representative and supports the RKBA group of their choice with either money, time or both. This is going to be a real fight coming.

If you enjoyed reading about "White House Signals It Will Ask Retailers for Help on Gun Control" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
berettaprofessor
January 7, 2013, 11:16 AM
For instance, this person suggested, Wal-Mart and other major gun retailers may have an incentive to support closing a loophole that allows people to bypass background checks if they purchase firearms at gun shows or through other types of private sales. That could result in more people buying guns in retail stores.


How stupid would that be? Besides the potential backlash against such retailers, the guns bought without "background checks" at gun shows are second-hand guns and doesn't affect Walmart's/Dick's/etc sales at all. Nobody selling guns for a living does so without NICS; the BATFE clearly look at your income in relation to gun sales.

Jeff White
January 7, 2013, 12:29 PM
How stupid would that be?

It's not stupid at all. The "sporting purposes" clause in the import regulations of the Gun Control Act of 1968 were supported by the US firearms industry.

xXxplosive
January 7, 2013, 12:46 PM
IMO..........boycott them all.

raubvogel
January 7, 2013, 12:47 PM
berettaprofessor, I thought that is how they do it in CA: every gun transaction must go through a FFL

tulsamal
January 7, 2013, 12:50 PM
supports the RKBA group of their choice with either money, time

I agree but don't just do one. I would change that "group" to the plural, "groups." I've been an NRA Life Member for a very long time. I've admired the work of SAF but never sent them money or joined them. And I've had certain issues with GOA so never joined them either. I've fixed that, I joined SAF and GOA both. Can't see how it can hurt to increase the membership of those groups! $15 to join SAF (you can contribute more) and $20 for GOA.

Gregg

gc70
January 7, 2013, 01:17 PM
How to entice a retailer to support gun control ....

How about a law that says a retailer gets $15 or $20 a pop for having a minimum wage employee process a 4473?

CharlieDeltaJuliet
January 7, 2013, 01:30 PM
"Dang this nose, I am going to cut it off in spite of my face". That's what the retailers will be doing... I honestly hope every retail chain that would support this, loses their firearms customers. I guess it would help the LGS grow...

El Tejon
January 7, 2013, 10:12 PM
It's not stupid at all. The "sporting purposes" clause in the import regulations of the Gun Control Act of 1968 were supported by the US firearms industry.

Not just supported, but actively pursued via then Senator Jack Kennedy.

Sam Cummings was killing Smith & Wesson.

This is the same play Obama used in getting Obamacare through. Obama does not know that a favorite game to play in the gun culture is "knife the traitor".

How sharp are your knives, brothers?

http://www.pagunblog.com/2013/01/07/they-forget-our-people/

carlrodd
January 7, 2013, 10:19 PM
Not just supported, but actively pursued via then Senator Jack Kennedy.

Sam Cummings was killing Smith & Wesson.

This is the same play Obama used in getting Obamacare through. Obama does not know that a favorite game to play in the gun culture is "knife the traitor".

How sharp are your knives, brothers?

http://www.pagunblog.com/2013/01/07/they-forget-our-people/
very, very sharp.

Cosmoline
January 7, 2013, 10:32 PM
This is the first thing I've heard that scares me. A new dark alliance between Obama and Wal-Mart could be extremely dangerous. I've never trusted those Arkansas boys and have refused to shop there my whole life. Hopefully they'll prove me wrong but I have a real bad feeling about this.

As far as the backlash, if NICS is made universal and all private sales are outlawed, how can we boycott anyone? We're stuck in a cage and it's a captive market for all the dealers. Just like Obamacare has created a captive market for the carriers. This worries me a lot more than the AWB nonsense. I could see it happening. It's cheap for the feds, has no real constitutional hurdles and divides our camp by giving massive gobment kickbacks to dealers. It also opens the way to a de facto registration system, which is precisely what Biden's people are contemplating according to early reports.

HEAVY METAL 1
January 7, 2013, 11:08 PM
Interesting that an administration responsible for GUN SMUGGLING a.k.a. operation F&F seeks to try to track our guns.

Wayne L has been branded as a kook for suggesting that armed guards be placed in schools, but when the Left's Golden Child, Bill Clinton, suggested the same thing it was a "common sense" measure.

The antis are always calling for "compromise" on the gun issue; what is it they are willing to compromise on-total confiscation? I would be willing to compromise on the so called gunshow loophole if and only if after we throw them that bone they would agree to no further gun control efforts.

Remember ol' Bill Ruger, he didn't want to produce hi-cap mags for us mere mortals.

Bartholomew Roberts
January 8, 2013, 12:36 AM
How sharp are your knives, brothers?

I bought a Wicked Edge Pro sharpener. They'll cut you if you just look at them wrong.

hovercat
January 8, 2013, 12:48 AM
Do you really believe that the antis will stop if given 'the gun show loophole"? Forget what they call it and say it like it is. "I am willing to give up some more of my God given and Constitutionally guaranteed rights, if y'all just quit bothering me and promise not to take anymore".
God had to march the Israelites in circles in the desert for 40 years. Until the generation who had grown used to slavery, who would accept chains for someone guaranteeing daily bread, over the struggle of freedom, had died off. Open the circus lion's cage and he will go back in when hungry.
Is the USA that far gone?

Kim
January 8, 2013, 12:53 AM
Clinton tried something like this. Tried to get all States to only buy Smith and Wesson or might have been Ruger cause they were on the gun control side. Mike Huckelbee Governor of Arkansas sent a letter to Clinton and set him straight. It is probably on the internet somewhere.

SilentStalker
January 8, 2013, 02:56 PM
So, in other words, they are going to raise taxes (since they obviously cannot afford these incentives) and use our money to give to these people to take our rights away. Wow. That is just brilliant. You know the real easy solution to all of this? All everyone has to do is quit paying taxes and the government as a whole would come to a screeching halt. That is as peaceful as you can get and they would listen to you then. The problem is I do not see everyone doing it because they fear the government, which is a problem in itself IMO. And, nobody really wants to lose the way of life we have. If people did do this on a mass scale then it would take awhile for things to resume as normal making people live outside of their comfort zone for a bit. However, I am betting that if this was done on a large scale that DC would shape up real quick. They would find ways to listen to people, get their debt in order, and actually work to solve problems instead of lining their own pockets. I am just saying...

baz
January 9, 2013, 04:22 PM
I sent an email to Walmart coporate, and received a prompt reply. It may be "canned," but at least they are taking the time to read the emails (this was sent through a generic contact form, with no subject header), and respond.

Thank you for your inquiry. There are a lot of views on this topic and the country is about to engage in a national conversation about the sale and regulation of certain firearms.

In areas of the country where we sell firearms, we have a long standing commitment to do so safely and responsibly. Over the years we’ve tried very hard to find the right balance between serving hunters and sportsmen and ensuring that we sell firearms responsibly.

We will be paying attention to this important conversation like everyone else in America. We hope Congress and the Administration will reach a consensus on the right path forward in this area.

Sincerely,
Walmart Customer Care

Of course, they beg the issue with "we've tried very hard to find the right balance between serving hunters and sportsmen" -- unless "sportsmen" is code for those who arm themselves against govt tyranny. Still, this is a war of wills, and Walmart is caught in the middle. We need to let them know where we stand, just as we would our representatives and senators.

Bartholomew Roberts
January 9, 2013, 05:02 PM
Walmart will be at the meeting with the NRA tomorrow. We'll see how that goes. It appears they originally had planned not to attend and have been receiving a lot f correspondence on the matter. Might want to make sure they hear from us as well.

esquare
January 9, 2013, 05:13 PM
Last time, Ruger supported (very vocally) the AWB. Thankfully, the old man has passed on, so I don't think they'll try that again, but believe me, everyone has a price at which they can be purchased, and remember that we are dealing with chicago mobsters here - they know how to twist an arm. Don't be surprised to see several companies support an AWB that you never thought would.

It's our role right now to start making it very clear to companies how painful it's going to be for them if they cave, because in this fight, most companies are just going to pick the option with the least perceived pain, nothing more to it than that.

mike.h
January 9, 2013, 05:14 PM
thanks for the update

breakingcontact
January 10, 2013, 01:58 PM
Texas gunowners should belong to TSRA.

Just joined.

Bartholomew Roberts
January 10, 2013, 03:10 PM
Thanks for joining! It is a good investment of time and money.

Jim K
January 10, 2013, 10:15 PM
Wait until those innocents see what is being proposed. I doubt many gun makers and dealer will support a ban on the manufacture and sale of all semi-autos, pumps and lever actions, all semi-auto handguns, and all hi cap magazines. The mags would be illegal with 20 years in prison for owning one, the others would be under the NFA with the same rules and laws as machineguns today. Then a followup to ban all bolt action and single shot "sniper" rifles.

Know any dealers or manufacturers who will back those ideas? If you do, try to get them help - they are insane.

Jim

RP88
January 10, 2013, 11:33 PM
Manufacturers don't give a damn about the civvie market as far as guns and ammo and mags are concerned; a lot of the big gun makers consider us the secondary market, and consider law enforcement and military (foreign and domestic) the main market.

And rightfully so.

Think about it: How many ARs do you think the average slew of 'sportsmen' buy? Sure, a lot. but, they aren't a disposable, repeat-buy commodity. Most don't buy any, some buy one or two, and a small amount of us can say with any truth that we have paid someone's salary with our purchases single-handedly.

LE and military guys cycle out guns every few years, mags every few months, and go through more ammo than the average shooter goes through in a lifetime within three weeks - especially for training and cert.

why would big manufacturers not want kickbacks if they could get more money at a greater convenience when 90% of their cash comes from club fed already? Do you think our buying power actually measures up? And, do you think Glock and Sig still won't make a good profit selling 10-rd P226s and Model 19s for CCW or range fun to the average gun buyer?

Depending on how you look at it - especially from the numbers perspective - them NOT doing kickbacks if the gun controllers get their way would be, on a financial level, effing stupid.

Tigerclaw_x
January 11, 2013, 01:26 AM
I do not care if everything must go through the FFL I ALREADY am buying everything through the FFL.

csspecs
January 11, 2013, 01:41 AM
RP88,
The defense budgets are not what had been.
Civilians are paying a lot more for guns these days, China is out of the way. Currently imports are reduced to the budget sporting market or high end with US made parts.

These days most innovation are going to civilian sales. Gun sales are high profits are decent. Heck walmart had AR-15 rifles in their black Friday catalog.

mgmorden
January 11, 2013, 01:44 AM
Manufacturers don't give a damn about the civvie market as far as guns and ammo and mags are concerned; a lot of the big gun makers consider us the secondary market, and consider law enforcement and military (foreign and domestic) the main market.

And rightfully so.

Some do - many do not. Ruger is the largest firearms manufacturer in the country and they have virtually no government contracts of any note.

If you enjoyed reading about "White House Signals It Will Ask Retailers for Help on Gun Control" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!