Month: April 2008

In the comments, TheGunGeek writes:

Target has been anti-gun and anti-hunting for as long as I can remember. They contribute heavily to some anti-hunting organizations. If you want to support a store that is still pretty good on the gun front, I’d suggest Ace Hardware for the things they carry. Most of the Ace stores I know actually have a sporting goods and gun section.

Good to know.  I actually do most of my shopping at the local Giant.  Rarely to I venture to Target or even to Wal-Mart, except when I was looking for some cheap ammunition.  There are a lot of corporations that give money to anti-gun, anti-hunting causes.  It’s tough to boycott them all.  A key thing is awareness.  Not many people realize the Humane Society of the United States is a radical anti-hunting group.  When people hear Humane Society, they think kittens and puppies, and everyone loves kittens and puppies, right?  We have very savvy opponents.

UPDATE: I went digging to find whether these accusations could be sourced, and I’m having a hard time.  Target’s charitable partnerships are listed here.  I suppose some of those groups on there might indirectly support gun control, but I don’t see any anti-gun or anti-hunting groups on that list.  Target foundation grant recipients are listed here.  Still can’t find anything that would be controversial for us.  Here’s what they do say about community grants:

TARGET DOES NOT MAKE GRANTS TO:

• Individuals
• Programs located outside Target communities
• Educational institutions for regular instructional programs
• Religious organizations for religious purposes
• Treatment programs such as substance or alcohol abuse
• Athletic teams or events
• Fundraiser or gala events
• Advocacy or research groups
• Capital or building construction projects
• Endowment campaigns

So unless someone can find an instance of them making grants to anti-gun or anti-hunting advocacy groups, I’m inclined to suggest that Target isn’t doing it.

Word is in on the conference held a few weeks ago from Alan Korwin, who attended as a participant representing the pro-gun side.  Read the whole thing.  At the end we’re told that James Brady didn’t appear because Sarah Brady fell critically ill with pneumonia.  I know Sarah Brady battled lung cancer several years ago, but I had heard it was in remission.  Having lost a mother to cancer, I’m well aware of its consequences and the effects of the treatments, even after they have stopped.  It’s not a fate I wish on anyone, and I do hope Mrs. Brady recovers from her pneumonia quickly.

I do think this is one of those times when the shooting community seriously needs to come together, as we did in the aftermath of Jim Zumbo.  Joe Huffman has exactly why here:

Here is what really got to me:

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.

Have they ever heard of “due process”? The RKBA is about to be declared, by the highest court in the land, as an individual right guaranteed to not be infringed. And yet if I bought a gun at Wal-Mart and someone stole that gun from me and used it in a crime Wal-Mart would hold that against me if I tried to buy another gun. Why stop there? Why not do the same for knives and baseball bats?

If Wal-Mart doesn’t want to sell me guns because I had one stolen, and it ended up getting traced, fine.  In that instance, they will sell me nothing.  More importantly, it appears this database will be maintained by MAIG, which means they will be keeping a list of traced guns.  Get a gun stolen that you bought at one of these retailers, and have the police return it to you, as they should, you’ll be in Mayor Bloomberg’s database.  Screw that!

From Armed Canadian.  It’s actually far worse than I thought.  Go have a look.  Mayor Bloomberg is forcing Wal-Mart to go well beyond federal and state requirements, which Wal-Mart is free to do, and I’m free not to shop there anymore.  As of now I am generally boycotting Wal-Mart. Go Target!  Wal-Mart does not support our second amendment rights.  Don’t shop there.  Tell all your shooting buddies not to shop there.

… give the appearance of winning.

… stupid politicians.  Heh, maybe someone at Brady told California they had to pass this Smart Gun Law, or risk losing their number one spot to New Jersey, which already has one.  It’s a race to the bottom for the states which have decided they are no longer bound by the Bill of Rights.

Contact Wal-Mart corporate headquarters here.  Select “Feedback” then “Corporate Office”.  Let them know you’re unhappy that they signed a deal with Bloomberg.  Keep in mind you’re likely communicating with someone who has no idea what Bloomberg’s mayor coalition is all about, so make sure to explain in brief.  Here’s what I sent:

Dear Sir or Madam,

It was with great regret that I read Wal-Mart has signed an agreement with New York City Mayor Bloomberg’s coalition of “Mayors Against Illegal Guns”.  Despite the name of the Mayor’s organization, it is has advocated policies that would infringe on the second amendment rights of Americans, not merely go after the criminal trafficking of firearms.  The existing federal and state regulations, enforced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which Wal-Mart is legally bound to obey as a condition of retaining its Federal Firearms License, are more than adequate for the purposes of being a responsible corporate citizen when it comes to selling firearms and ammunition.  It was entirely unnecessary for Wal-Mart to concede anything to Mayor Bloomberg’s group.

Because this deal is an affront to myself and gun owners everywhere, I regret that I will take all my purchases for firearms and ammunition elsewhere.  Wal-Mart may have great prices for shooting supplies, but there is no price that I’m willing to assign my second amendment rights.

Sincerely,

[Sebastian]
Langhorne, PA

It was hard to write that, because I really wanted to tell them where they can shove their smiley faced low prices after handing a propaganda coup like that to that jackass Bloomberg.  But anger is seldom persuasive.  Needless to say, I now have a very strong preference for Target, and you can bet your butt I won’t be sticking up for Wal-Mart again when the hippies come bitching about them about not paying a living wage, or providing adequate health care to employees.

Lower Chichester Township, in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, not far from where I grew up, has just provided us with a fantastic example of why preemption is one of the fundamental principles that gun rights advocates won’t compromise on.  As soon as one town passes its own local gun rules, a dozen other towns with anti-gun politicians pile on.  Pretty soon you can’t travel the state to shoot, hunt, or keep or bear a firearm for self-protection without running the risk of unknowlingly becoming a criminal.

While the anti-gun folks keep telling us these local restrictions are reasonable, and that it will only limit itself to big cities with crime problems, experience suggests otherwise.  A patchwork of legal regulations makes gun ownership legally risky, and traveling to shoot or hunt nearly impossible without running afoul of one law or another, and that’s exactly the idea.