Activists On Both Sides See Walmart's And Others Policy As A "Middle Ground"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Speedo66

Speedo66

Member
Joined
May 31, 2008
Messages
11,066
Location
Flatlandistan
According to this article, many see the "request" not to open carry as striking a middle ground. Retailers don't wish to alienate anyone, they're in the business of selling goods, not wanting to risk sales.

So if either side is placated into believing something is OK with them, it takes the social pressure off the business. Stores no doubt look at the fiasco that Starbucks dealt with, i.e., boycotts, extreme displays of weapons, etc. and want no part of it. Starbucks wouldn't even comment for the article, probably not wanting to stir up past hard feelings.

"In a statement, Kroger said of its policy, “We believe this strikes the right balance between creating a friendly, caring and welcoming environment for associates and customers in our stores and respecting law-abiding citizens.”

So Walmart, Krogers, Wegmans, Walgreens, and CVS will stick with this policy for now. Big media coverage, but really, no rights have been diminished. I personally can't fault them for not wanting to lose business.

Here's the article: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/09/...html?action=click&module=News&pgtype=Homepage
 
We have NO open carry in Florida and seemed to have survived for many years. To me open carry is a big to do about nothing.
It's private business they can do what the want.

Now if we can just keep dogs out of the shopping carts at the supermarket and Mini Horses as service animals on planes!
(and I like both of those animals)
No smoking either and I am an ex long time smoker
 
cheygriz said:
When you come to my house, you play by my rules. It really is that simple.
Click to expand...
Yep.

Personally I choose not to open carry in a location with people, because it will draw unwanted attention to myself. However if it's legal in your state, and you choose to do so in a responsible way, go for it.

But bottom line is their house, their rules. If you don't like it, don't shop there. If they catch you and tell you to leave, then leave.

If it's viewed as a middle ground, then whatever. I personally still shop at Walmart as my options are limited. But I am limiting how much I shop there now.
 
I believe strongly in the Second Amendment, yet if you come on my property openly armed, you'll be under extreme scrutiny. Depending on the situation, it could go from being asked to leave, the law being called, or being held at gunpoint for the law to come--or on the other end, being invited for iced tea and a conversation about shooting.

Virginia has always had open carry, but since Walmart existed, I've only seen three people carrying openly in their stores. And my guess is the vast majority of people in the store didn't notice them.

This recent statement on open carry by Walmart and others is a reading of the water. They see the anti-gun forces as the stronger of the two positions politically, and it's their attempt to placate their perception of the majority without risking anything significant. Chances are good, in conservative areas local managers will ignore the national policy, not that I would recommend testing it.

Open carry, even where legal, is kind of over, and has been for a long time. Sure, sometimes in the summer when I need to rush into town and buy a part for a machine, when I'm trying to get in a crop in front of advancing thunderheads, I might not bother to take off a heavy revolver, and just pull a shirttail over it, but I'll only do that in equipment parts places or the kind of store usually habituated by outdoor people. The gun is obvious to the close observer, but not quite open carry. Nobody cares and most never see it.

In places populated by those of more pinkish persuasion, I show a bit more care about concealment.
 
Trunk Monkey said:
Except it apparently not a request. They are tresspassing people out of the stores for it
Click to expand...
You read the post about it here, no doubt. Open carry is one thing, sitting in a store, maybe playing with your gun and taking pictures, is another. He should have been escorted out, I have no sympathy for idiots.

If he removed a gun from its holster, he increased the chances of an accident. Would anybody want somebody doing that in their place of business? Not taking action might have been negligent. If I had a store, I certainly wouldn't want him back.
 
While I support open carry, I believe there is time and place. We need to exercise discretion.

Just because I can dance anytime anywhere does not mean I should dance at a funeral.

The fool who open carried at Walmart after 22 people were recently shot at Walmart was like dancing at a funeral smiling and wondering why grieving people are upset with him.

As to open carry policy change, it's their store and they can choose to make whatever changes they want to make. And I can also choose to shop wherever I want to.

As to Walmart CEO/management changing their ammunition/handgun sales policy, I believe it was a foolish decision on their part that will piss off many gun owners who will boycott Walmart and continue to irritate antis because they still sell guns and ammunition.
 
Rule3 said:
We have NO open carry in Florida and seemed to have survived for many years. To me open carry is a big to do about nothing.
It's private business they can do what the want.
Click to expand...
Agreed, no issues. We prefer people not carry in the store unless they tell us or of course, they're bringing in a gun to pawn.
OC/CC, if it's legal in your area. it's up to you which way you go with it IMHO.
I can understand the no OC from their perspective, after all, if you see someone now going in with an open firearm, pretty good bet he's a nutcase shooter. I'd like to know that about someone I meet unexpectedly.

Now if we can just keep dogs out of the shopping carts at the supermarket and Mini Horses as service animals on planes!
(and I like both of those animals)
No smoking either and I am an ex long time smoker
Click to expand...
For the love of the gods YES!
 
LiveLife said:
As to Walmart CEO/management changing their ammunition/handgun sales policy, I believe it was a foolish decision on their part that will piss off many gun owners who will boycott Walmart and continue to irritate antis because they still sell guns and ammunition.
Click to expand...

One thing that's a head scratcher.... Are they quitting selling anything that will load into a handgun or just ammo that is handgun exclusive?
There's a whale of a lot of crossover ammunition, I wonder how they're going to decide which to carry and which to discontinue.
 
Good Ol' Boy said:
What???

That's not at all what I think when I see folks open carrying a pistol on there hip in public. And I see it quite often.
Click to expand...
I think the new policy gives them cover to ask tacticool morons to leave. I don't think they're gonna bother someone in a ranching area who comes in with a holstered handgun on the hip.
 
Ill-ANNOY is a non-OC state so it matters little here. However, almost any time I went in I would go by the ammo display to check prices and availability.
 
FlSwampRat said:
One thing that's a head scratcher.... Are they quitting selling anything that will load into a handgun or just ammo that is handgun exclusive?
Click to expand...
AFAIK, traditionally considered "handgun" ammunition and short rifle cartridges like .223/5.56, 7.62x39, .300 Blackout and .224 Valkyrie.

In their clarification, Walmart was not sure about 22LR (Which kinda goes against their "handgun ammunition" ban ;)) - https://freebeacon.com/issues/exclu...statement-on-ending-certain-ammunition-sales/

To me, the fact that Walmart called short rifle cartridges "short-barrel rifle ammunition" tells me either this was intentional or CEO/upper management at Walmart is grossly misinformed as two are very different in meaning.

The biggest head scratcher for me is the fact that Walmart sells 20% of ammunition and this policy change will SIGNIFICANTLY affect their bottom line, NEGATIVELY. And Walmart is publicly traded company and they must act to benefit their shareholders, not push their agenda.

They managed to piss off gun owners who will respond with boycott, continue to irritate antis because they still sell guns/ammunition and now they are willingly giving up the 20% market share of ammunition sales when competition from Amazon/Costco/Blue Apron is fierce? That's LOSE - LOSE - LOSE :eek:

If this policy change results in revenue loss, I could see CEO getting fired and replaced with new CEO who will work to benefit shareholder interest.

Somebody bumped their head at Walmart.
 
Last edited:
FlSwampRat said:
One thing that's a head scratcher.... Are they quitting selling anything that will load into a handgun or just ammo that is handgun exclusive?
Click to expand...

Will have to wait and see when they run out of their "stash" to see if they kill off the 22LR and other crossover cartridges. Course the OHIO shooter may be why they specifically targeted 556/.223???????
 
I wouldn’t allow strangers to carry in my home. It’s their business, they should do as they see fit.

Typically if I see a person open carrying I can never see myself in their shoes.

I can legally walk around without a shirt on. Doesn’t mean its appropriate.
 
LiveLife said:
To me, the fact that Walmart called short rifle cartridges "short-barrel rifle ammunition" tells me either this was intentional or CEO/upper management at Walmart is grossly misinformed as two are very different in meaning.
Click to expand...
I think with that they were trying to call AR/AK's something other than "assault rifles".
The biggest head scratcher for me is the fact that Walmart sells 20% of ammunition and this policy change will SIGNIFICANTLY effect their bottom line.
They managed to piss off gun owners who will respond with boycott, continue to irritate antis because they still sell guns/ammunition and now they are willingly giving up the 20% market share of ammunition sales? That's LOSE - LOSE - LOSE :eek:
Click to expand...

Otnay Ootay Ightbray.
 
tarosean said:
Will have to wait and see when they run out of their "stash" to see if they kill off the 22LR and other crossover cartridges. Course the OHIO shooter may be why they specifically targeted 556/.223???????
Click to expand...
20% of national ammunition sales is HUGE.

I bet handgun and .223/5.56/7.62x39 cartridges make up a significant portion of that 20%. And they sell A LOT of 22LR.

Walmart board may not have objected to this ammunition/handgun sales policy change (maybe they weren't part of the decision) but if revenue suffers significantly (And I believe it will), shareholders won't stand for it.

Time will tell but I don't see this ending well for Walmart, especially for CEO.

Somebody bumped their head at Walmart.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Speedo66
  • Locked
There Goes Ruger......
Replies
10
Views
900
Walkalong
Walkalong
hso
2022 Concealed Permit Holder Defensive Handgun Use Against Mass Shooting Compilation
Replies
2
Views
479
old lady new shooter
O
F
  • Locked
First Degree Murder--on Uncle Sam's Dime
Replies
5
Views
676
Car Knocker
C
Back
Top