Washington Post Is Super Happy That Walmart Is Curbing Gun Violence Or Something

See, Walmart always requires a federal background check, as required by federal law, when they sell a firearm, so, the people who buy them are following the law and have to be law abiding to pass said NICS check, which is what Democrats want, right? They also stopped selling any scary looking “assault style weapons” back in 2015, and rarely had them in the first place. And stopped selling handguns, something most stores didn’t have in the first place. Their sales accounted for maybe 2% of lawful sales. But, now, the Washington Post Editorial Board is super happy

Walmart is acting to curb gun violence. How about Congress?

THE SPARK for Walmart’s action is terrible: deadly shootings at two of its stores this summer, with 24 people slaughtered. Nonetheless, the giant retailer’s realization that “the status quo is unacceptable” should be applauded. Walmart will change its gun policies, ending the sale of ammunition that can be used in military-style assault rifles. By acknowledging it has a role in helping to make the country safer, Walmart hopefully sets an example that other companies — not to mention Congress — will follow.

Walmart on Tuesday waded full-stream into the national gun debate with its unexpected announcement that it will no longer sell certain kinds of ammunition, will completely end the sale of handguns and will prohibit customers from openly carrying guns in its stores, even where doing so is permitted by law. Walmart already had stopped selling assault-style weapons and had imposed age limits and background checks on gun sales that were stricter than federal law.

Tuesday’s announcement — notably its call to Congress to increase background checks and consider a new ban on assault weapons — showed a bold willingness to take a lead on this fraught issue. That Kroger quickly joined Walmart in asking customers not to openly carry guns in its stores and also called for stricter background checks underscored the importance of the country’s largest employer paving the way.

What do background checks solve? Is Walmart admitting that they weren’t performing them?

No doubt, as some critics have pointed out, Walmart’s evolution on gun sales might be tied to other motives, such as new emphasis in building online markets in East and West Coast cities and suburbs where gun sales are not key and the clientele is more liberal. But if, indeed, Walmart has determined that guns and the violence that accompanies them are bad for business, so much the better. We hope Republicans in Congress who refuse to wake up to the need for gun reform find their stance is bad for business, too.

See, this is exactly why gun rights supporters are loathe to allow anything to go forward, because we know it is just the beginning. Give the gun grabbers expanded background checks, which only works with a owned gun database, and bans on “assault weapons”, then they will want bans on other semi-automatics. On this rifle and that handgun. On open and concealed carry. On ammunition

(CBS News) The Bentonville, Arkansas-based discounter said Tuesday it will stop selling handgun ammunition as well as short-barrel rifle ammunition, such as the .223 caliber and 5.56 caliber used in military style weapons, after it runs out of its current inventory. That in turn will reduce Walmart’s market share of ammunition from around 20% to a range of about 6% to 9%, according to a memo by the company CEO Doug McMillon.

So, I can’t get my .22LR ammo for my tiny popgun anymore? Huh. I guess 9mm is out, as well. And people can’t get .223 for their hunting rifles? Wow, that’ll teach criminals and mass murderers! Which is what the gun grabbers want. Ban ammunition. If they can’t get that, then they want background checks, which cost money and time, as well as high taxes, on ammunition. Plus limiting the amount that can be purchased. So, when I buy 3-5 boxes of .22LR to use at the range, at 100 rounds per box, nope, they would stop me at 100.

It’s all about dinking and dunking their way towards what was done in Australia, Great Britain, and most recently in New Zealand.