Wal-mart is a private company, and potential gun-owners are free to shop elsewhere, they are free to not shop at Wal-Mart if they choose.
Now, the NRA (with whom I generally have little quarrel) says:"
I view it as a public relations stunt that stigmatizes law-abiding firearms purchasers exercising their freedom under the Constitution," said NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre.Actually, I doubt that's what it is. A person's "freedom under the Costitution" doesn't include "the right to purchase arms under personally-desired conditions from any seller".
Who knows, there are probably lots of willing capitalists available to fill the niche market Wal-Mart has abandoned and I sincerely--and I mean this--wish them very, very well. And, actually, I trust Wal-Mart way more than the government with the information, anyways.
Just so you know where I'm coming from:
- market solutions with no politicians involved: always the best policy
- I absolutely support private gun ownership,
- I am opposed to government registries, and
- criminals who use guns oughtta pay a very high price.
1 comment:
I think this really reveals one of the bigger problems we have - everything can be spun as some outrage that requires the government to step in. I mean the NRA being upset at Walmart and wanting the "Constitution" to be applied like that is silly.
The NRA ought just to give free adverting to stores and chains that do not do this.
I guess onces you've tasted the milk of the Nanny state wet nurse, its hard to forage on you own.
Yeah, crazy mixed metaphor. I need a coffee.
Post a Comment