Wal-Mart is striking a deal with New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg

Status
Not open for further replies.
-shrug-

As someone said, it's no big deal at all. Irritating a might, but no biggie. Not worth getting ticked over.

Besides, Walmart is relatively 'pro-gun' compared to most 'big box stores'. As in they aren't Anti-CCW, they still sell ammo, and SOME RIFLES. Not a lot of rifles anymore, but some. And they don't carry handguns no more.

The only real loss we could get out of Walmart would be stopping ammo sales. That would really hit shooters hard.
 
retain records of all sales in which guns are later found to be used in crimes

are later found

I think we are witnessing the birth of a loophole .
 
Don't be a lazy linker.

By DEVLIN BARRETT | Associated Press Writer
2:36 PM CDT, April 14, 2008
WASHINGTON - Wal-Mart, the nation's largest seller of firearms, announced Monday it will toughen rules for gun sales, from storing video of purchases to creating an internal log of which guns they sell that are later used in crimes.

J.P. Suarez, the chief compliance officer for Wal-Mart Stores Inc., appeared with outspoken gun control advocate Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York to announce the changes at a gathering of Bloomberg's group Mayors Against Illegal Guns.

Changes to come at about 1,100 Wal-Mart stores selling guns include:

_Creating a record and alert system to record when a gun sold at Wal-Mart is later used in a crime. If the purchaser of that gun later tries to buy another gun at Wal-Mart, the system would alert the sales clerk of the prior buy and could refuse to make the sale.

_Retaining the recorded images of gun sales in case law enforcement wants to view them later as part of an investigation.

_Expanding background checks of employees who handle guns and expanding inventory controls.

Suarez said the tougher standards will come with some additional cost to the company.

"The costs are we think part of what it takes to be responsible. Everything is not pain free," he said, adding that small sellers can implement many of the same rules. He did not say how long it would take to implement all the changes, but noted that software must still be created for an internal log of guns later used in crimes.

Suarez said his company may receive some pressure from gun rights groups, but added, "This is not a signal that we're getting out of firearms."

Bloomberg urged other companies to join Wal-Mart in the initiative called the Responsible Firearms Retailer Partnership.

"We didn't pressure them, they're doing it because they think it's the responsible thing to do," said Bloomberg.

Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, had previously tried to establish a store in New York City but failed.

The mayors' gun summit also unveiled a new lobbying effort to close what they call the "gun show loophole" that allows people to purchase guns without background checks at gun shows.

Bloomberg founded the group two years ago with Boston mayor Thomas Menino to reduce the flow of guns from store displays into the hands of criminals.

The group, largely funded by Bloomberg's personal fortune, announced it was spending more than $100,000 on television ads starting Wednesday featuring all three of the current main presidential candidates voicing their opposition to the gun show loophole.

The ads will run in the home states of the three presidential candidates -- John McCain of Arizona, Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois. It also will air across Pennsylvania, which holds its primary next week, as well as Florida, Maryland and Massachusetts.

The mayors group is trying to gather support in Congress to:

_End the gun show loophole.

_Require gun dealers to perform criminal background checks on all gun-handling employees.

_Close a so-called fire-sale loophole that allows gun dealers whose licenses have been revoked by the government to sell off their inventory without background checks.

_Add those placed on the terrorist no-fly list to the list of people prohibited from purchasing a firearm.

I might be wrong, but isn't that very last sentence grossly unconstitutional? Congress is going to deny the 2A to someone who has not committed a crime yet? Maybe they should prevent those on the no-fly lists from going to houses of worship or subjecting them to warrantless searches.
 
The group, largely funded by Bloomberg's personal fortune, announced it was spending more than $100,000 on television ads starting Wednesday featuring all three of the current main presidential candidates voicing their opposition to the gun show loophole.

The ads will run in the home states of the three presidential candidates -- John McCain of Arizona, Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois. It also will air across Pennsylvania, which holds its primary next week, as well as Florida, Maryland and Massachusetts.

The mayors group is trying to gather support in Congress to:

_End the gun show loophole.

_Require gun dealers to perform criminal background checks on all gun-handling employees.

_Close a so-called fire-sale loophole that allows gun dealers whose licenses have been revoked by the government to sell off their inventory without background checks.

_Add those placed on the terrorist no-fly list to the list of people prohibited from purchasing a firearm.

Thats what pisses me off.

And I wonder if Walmart is gonna start taking mugshot pictures of 18 y/o's holding the rifle in front of them.
 
i though bloomberg resigned?

or am i wrong


i didnt like wal-mart or any other corperation owned company anyway...

thats why i prefer buying from local family owned businesses.

i hate dealing with the idiots behind the counter at sporting goods anyway.

the whole idea of buying .22lr ammo, and getting asked "it it for a rifle or pistol" (im under 21) just irrates the hell outta me

next time i should say "well, sir/madam, the .22lr round can be used in handguns or rifles interchangibly... its for me to know and you not to ask,"
 
Since when does Wal-Mart videotape gun purchases? I've never seen this happen, and never heard of it happening

In case you didn't know, you're under video surveillance from the moment you enter their parking lot. It isn't because they want to track gun sales, it's because there are so many lawsuit happy people willing to sue them for faked personal injuries. They don't care so much that you walk out with some of the cheap merchandise; that's not where they stand to lose the big bucks. You can get a lot more money by faking an injury than all the loot you can carry from the store in one trip. They're already taping gun sales, as well as every other sale. Can't say that I blame 'em. A lot of other stores do, too.

Note that not one of those stores guarantees your personal safety while on their premises. At least Wally World has no corporate policy against lawful concealed carry.
 
you're under video surveillance from the moment you enter their parking lot.

Yes, and no. As a former Wal*Mart employee that was very friendly with one of the Loss Prevention (plain-clothes security) staff, I will say that most of the camera domes that you see in a Wal*Mart store are phony, with no cameras in them. Try counting them sometime--you'll see that there are nearly 100 in each store. It would be impractical and expensive to record/monitor that many cameras.

However, the gun counter, electronics department, and entrance/exit doors, as well as some sensitive employees-only areas (such as the cash office) are recorded all the time. Have been since at least 1996 when I started working for them. They also installed cameras and began recording the parking lots after a woman was abducted from the Wal*Mart parking lot in Carrollton, Georgia and later found murdered (Toyal Jackson case--never solved) that did receive some national news attention.
 
So, I buy a Remington 870 Express from WW, later legally selling it or trading it in at my local gun shop, who then sells it once again to someone, who returns home from vacation sometime next year to find that all of his guns have been stolen in his absence. Said 870, now owned by some ner-do-well is chopped down fore and aft and then used in a crime spree only to be recovered by LEO... who justifiably seek a trace on said chopped 870 and my name turns up as the original legal purchaser from WW, I gather that I will no longer be able to legally purchase a firearm from any WW that might still be selling them in my state.

Does that about cover it?

That'll teach me a lesson boy, to say nothing of stopping crime in its NYC tracks.
 
this just in: the white House, Capital Building, and the IRS have all been air-lifted and relocated to Manhattan Island.:uhoh:

someone needs to punch Bloomberg in the crotch or something...anything to get him off his high-horse.
 
In this case it's slightly different. Walmart is going to keep track of whether or not the GUN you bought was later used in a crime and then use that information against you.

Two things come to mind.

  1. Are Wal-Mart's vendors keeping track to see if guns they sell to Wal-Mart are later used in a crime? And then quit selling guns to Wal-Mart?
  2. Shouldn't Wal-Mart keep similar records of tires later involved in DUI accidents?
 
All of you are missing the point. Remember that one hand washes the other.

""We didn't pressure them, they're doing it because they think it's the responsible thing to do," said Bloomberg.
Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, had previously tried to establish a store in New York City but failed."

:barf: Anybody want to buy shares on a bridge? I'll make you a special deal for clear title.






.
 
First off, Bloomberg is a POS. I heard on the radio today that he has hired staff to research term limits because his term as NYC mayor is over and NYC has a 2 term limit. Apparently this POS wants to be mayor of NYC for 4 more years. Bloomberg is probably the reason Walmart has refused to open one single store within the 5 boroughs of NYC. I can't recall the last time some gangbanger walked into Wallyworld and bought a Lorcin or high point pistol that was later used in a crime. This press release was just media grandstanding. Bloomberg and Chuckie Schumer have never met a camera they didn't like.
 
This is just Bloomberg making noise and pretending to 'make a difference'
All of this stuff is being done anyway-how pathetic.
 
My take: Wal-Mart is promising to "do something" that won't impact them in the least. NICS would show if someone has a criminal record ANYWAY. Furthermore, it's a serious PITA for an FFL, when a "trace" is done. It costs money. (I'm on the board of a club-owned shooting range, and we are discussing doing firearms sales and transfers. Let me tell you, you want to avoid this stuff if you don't want your employees tied up while paying them.) Wal-Mart might want to track buyers who result in "traces" anyway; it's good business, if it's legal for them to do it.

Sounds to me like a case of telling Bloomberg something that he's too dumb not to understand has no effect, so he leaves them alone.

The only bad thing is that his organized-crime-style techniques are working.

ding ding ding

Everything WM is saying they will do they (and every FFL holder) are already doing. They're just giving the dog the bone from the steak they just ate.


In this case it's slightly different. Walmart is going to keep track of whether or not the GUN you bought was later used in a crime and then use that information against you.

Well, if your GUN is used in a crime and the police track the serial number to WM and WM confirms, how exactly will WM use that against you? What information do you think WM will be storing that is not already on the 4473?
 
Since when does Wal-Mart videotape gun purchases? I've never seen this happen, and never heard of it happening.

What exactly do you think is in those little black plastic bubbles hanging all over the store?

Touchy feely feel good move or not if it comes to be a fact it will be the end of my business with Wal Mart.

Regardless of whether this has any real impact or not I simply won't spend my money with companies that kowtow to any anti's or their organizations.
 
Oops, didn't see this, posted it in General. I *did* think it odd that no one posted yet. :D

I for one don't want to support a company that blatantly buddies up to Bloomberg and his ilk, in their crusade against "illegal guns". If they've already got records, and they already videotape (at least, generally, if not specifically the gun purchases), why are they bothering? And what if someone has their gun stolen, used in a crime, and is then denied by Wal-Mart, despite passing an NICS check?

"People know you by the company you keep", and I think that holds true for corporations. Sure, they've got their good points, but I find this pandering to be a very big negative.
 
Really? Can you please post a link explaining this? I didn't get that from reading the posted article, but I admit I know nothing about MAIG's Responsible Firearms Retailers Policy.

Ask and ye shall receive.

Creating a record and alert system to record when a gun sold at Wal-Mart is later used in a crime. If the purchaser of that gun later tries to buy another gun at Wal-Mart, the system would alert the sales clerk of the prior buy and could refuse to make the sale.

You are even recorded in the parking lot, virtually the entire property. I have personally seen the videos used in numerous criminal investigations.
 
In case you didn't know, you're under video surveillance from the moment you enter their parking lot.

What exactly do you think is in those little black plastic bubbles hanging all over the store?

There's a difference between general store surveillance and "filming all gun sales", fellas. Let's not exaggerate here.

I'm not saying that when you buy a gun you're not on camera doing it, but to say that they "film all gun sales" is a straw man argument, because by that logic they also film all athletic sock sales, dog food sales, mountain bike sales and transfers of value-packs of pez.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top