Friday Question of the Day – Should DC’s Future Walmarts Sell Guns? (reader request)

Photo by Flickr user paix120

WTOP reported on Thursday:

The D.C. chief of police said Friday that Walmart could be one of the solutions to the city’s current void for residents who wish to register handguns.

A defacto ban exists for gun registration in the District, after the sole licensed firearms dealer went out of business earlier this year.

A retailer like Walmart filling that void “makes a lot of sense,” the chief said on WTOP’s “Ask the Chief” program with Mark Segraves.

The Friday Question of the Day is a simple one – do you think Walmart is an appropriate place to sell handguns in DC? And whether or not you think they should – at the end of the day – do you think Walmart will sell guns? If it were easier to buy a gun – will you buy one?

152 Comment

  • Fuck guns, we need a ban on bullets.

    • I agree, fuck guns. And here’s a link for all you morons who want to say that “if law abiding citizens owned guns we’d all be fine.” Sure ya would. What you’d do is turn D.C. into a shooting gallery, just like these two thugs, because only a very limited proportion of law abiding citizens in this city has ever fired a gun.

      • What? You think Bryant’s gun was legal? Hahaha. He was breaking about six gun laws.

        If you think that murderers are worried about misdemeanor gun charges, you’re the moron. Anyone who’s going to purchase a gun at Wal-Mart won’t be the subject of one of your links. I don’t think you’ve given this much thought.

        • No fool, what that guy was trying to say is that arming everybody is only going to lead to shootouts in the streets. You make it easy for every Tom, Dick, and Harry to carry a gun, and will get a bunch of morons like yourself shooting at thugs, and vice versa, and more innocent bystanders will get killed.

      • Your argument makes very little sense…

        “because only a very limited proportion of law abiding citizens in this city has ever fired a gun.”

        Exactly. Law abiding citizens don’t, and won’t, go around shooting indiscriminately. Just like we don’t go around stabbing each other.

  • WHAAAAT???? DC needs not one more gun. This is just a moth to a flame…

    • Let it be known that there is a distinct difference between law abiding citizens owning a firearm and a criminal owning a firearm.

      The former will go through a background check, waiting period etc and the later will just buy something off the street. As it is now – its pretty easy to buy guns off the street and this will not change unless DC cracks down on illegal gun ownership.

      Having a legal intently selling guns to legal, law abiding residents will not suddenly increase the number of guns falling into criminal hands. Please keep them as separate discussions.

      • It’s exceptionally naive to think allowing gun sales doesn’t increase the number of guns that end up on the streets (whether people buying them to turn around and sell them on the street or thugs stealing legally purchased guns from other people). That said, it’s equally naive to think banning gun sales in DC makes it exceptionally hard for thugs to acquire guns that come from neighboring states. Guns will always be easy to get a hold of so long as there isn’t a broad ban on their sale. The distinction between legal and illegal sale you’re trying to make is irrelevant on any practical level.

      • + 100

        Ban the morons first.

    • So you’re saying black people in DC can’t keep their hands off of guns?

  • Oh God yes. Its time for the innocent citizens to strike back.

  • Absolutely yes. Time for the public to strike back.

  • May Bernard Getz have mercy on this thread.

  • I hate guns, I really do. I don’t own one.

    But I would buy one of these if I had $800 to blow:

    This is also one of the funniest videos I have seen in a while.

    So the real question for me is, will Walmart sell the Taser XREP?

    Too bad Tasers are illegal in DC… Odd that guns are de jure allowed but tasers aren’t. Shoot to kill, right?

    Is there really no place in DC to buy long guns at the moment?

  • Yes. Walmart should be able to sell guns, and all grocery stores should be able to sell all alcoholic beverages from beer to hard liquor. Why we choose to make people jump through so many hoops for acquiring legal products is beyond me. Does this really help anybody?

    • It helps two groups of people – politicians, who want to be re-elected for “doing the right thing” and criminals, who pray upon the opportunity…..

      Needless to say, law abiding citizens are left in the dust….

    • I’m from Wisconsin. I miss beer, wine and liquor sold in all grocery stores unless they were across the street from a school. 🙁

      • I think that’s pretty normal outside the east coast and south.

      • well, maybe walmart will cure your one stop shopping fix, up to liquor anyway.
        as for me, i really don’t mind having to go to different stores to get different things.

        • Don’t mind, cause you’ve never known the convenience. Pick up wine with dinner? One stop shop. Although, I think the concept of BYOB restaurants is pretty awesome, and they didn’t have that in the midwest. Although, haven’t seen that in DC yet.

          • But Meg, don’t you remember that the yuppie creed eschews all things even remotely related to the Midwest? Part of the reason why there’s so much anti-suburban hostility here. Yuppies strive for urbanity. It allows them to forget how very middle-America bourgeois their families were when they grew up in the suburbs.

          • meg, anon,
            you’re both full of assumption about something you’ve no idea.

          • Because like the universe, the yuppie mind is a deep and complex expanse…

          • jburka

            Me, I don’t mind because liquor stores and grocery stores are both within walking distance of my house. As are coffee houses, restaurants, theaters, movie theaters, and my workplace. Which is why I live in a city. So what’s this about convenience?

          • I think it all boils down to urbanity = no parking. Other than that and the fact that people don’t mind going to liquor stores to pick up their beer (absurd that you wouldn’t want more convenience), there is no difference. And I live in DC, I think I have some idea of what goes on here.

          • meg,
            you having a bad day or something? so i think differently than you? it doesn’t mean it’s absurd.

          • No, I’m just trying to understand why you wouldn’t want more convenience. Is there a benefit of going to two separate stores, when you could go to just one? If so, I’d love to hear it.

          • Living in DC, I have picked up wine at the grocery store more times than I can count… whats your point..?

          • Well originally the argument was “I don’t mind going to different stores to get differen’t things.” Which I didn’t understand. You know, in other states, you can get wine AND beer AND tequila AND all your food in one place. Makes taco night a breeze. That was my point from the get-go. I’m not sure why we’re arguing this.

            All you people using “Anonymous” or some variation of your name are confusing me.

          • Jburka – I wish I had these conveniences you describe, but they’re not available in my neck of the woods. I live in upper Petworth, where we don’t a) have this wealth of available stores selling everything, or b) have metro stops every 6 blocks, or c) have a population of folks who can afford to pay the generally higher prices charged by smaller, niche stores.

            The benefit of Walmart is that people can take the bus there, do their shopping in one site (very convenient for older folks, or folks who have to get around by outdoor bus stops in the cold or heat), and then be done for the week. When you don’t pass shops on the walk home from work, when you have to go out of your way to get someplace, it makes shopping a chore, not a pleasure.

            I appreciate that many people don’t feel there’s a need for Walmart in this city, but quite frankly, these are probably the same people who wouldn’t shop there anyway. They have options. They have greater mobility. They have more money. So let’s keep Walmart for the people in the city who need it, and let’s not demonize or scoff at it as low-end abomination on our lovely city. (Please note I’m not suggesting that you did this, but I have heard this sentiment expressed elsewhere).

      • I’m from Wisconsin too. In Green Lake there is (or used to be) a gun/liquor store. Maybe there should just be Vice Stores for all such things.

      • Liquor at the supermarket would be awesome, but I’d settle for buying on sundays and not having ridiculous laws like the Georgetown safeway not being able to sell cider because they are across the street from a school.

        Really? A child is going to wander into the beer section and pick up a Strongbow because they thought the store kept the apple juice in the beer cooler?

        Better ban all wine because a kid might think it’s Welch’s.

    • I am in love with you.

  • The only easier way to buy a gun in DC for about the last 50 years would be to have them as free prizes in cereal boxes. It is stupid to pretend otherwise.

    • Really? Where would someone pick up a gun in DC today or the past 50 years?

      I’ll check it out to see if you’re not just blowing smoke.

  • Walmart should sell guns, but I don’t see them doing it. They have enough people doing everything possible to keep them out of the city, why give them a new excuse?

  • The only way to obtain a firearm legally in dc is to be a legal resident elsewhere, purchase it in your state of residence and then bring it to dc and register it. Permanent DC residents are essentially denied their 2nd amendment rights right now since there are no operating gun shops in the city.

    If this is not rectified DC will be sued and will lose the lawsuit. People concerned with gun violence are better off spending the hundreds of thousands of dollars used to defend innane and unconstitutional laws on programs that actually work, like education and addressing poverty.

    • jburka

      I’m not aware of any operating militias in the city either.

      • Unfortunately for your empty headed liberal arguments, the majority of American AND the Supreme Court disagree with your logical argument.

      • You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but in current court interpretation (an interpretation that is here to stay by all indications) the right to bear arms is not contingent on being a part of a militia.

        • if you’re not going to acknowledge the climate under which our constitution was written, then I say it’s totally unconstitutional to not allow citizens the right to build and use nuclear weapons.

          • I agree. Freedom of unnecessary arrest is outdated an unnecessary since the British Monarchy no longer controls the US.

            Let’s allow cops to arrest and detain anyone for any reason indefinitely.

            Especially bicyclists who run red lights and snowball throwers.

          • VI. That every man between the age of sixteen and fifty, do with all convenient speed furnish himself with a good musket, or firelock, and bayonet, sword, or tomahawk, a steel ram-rod, worm, priming-wire, and brush fitted thereto, a cartouch box containing twenty three rounds of cartridges, twelve flints, and a knap-sack, agreeable to the directions of the Continental Congress; under the forfeiture of five shillings for the want of a musket, or firelock; and of one shilling for the want of a bayonet, sword, or tomahawk, cartridge box, cartridge or bullet, the whole to be judged of and determined by the Captain, or next commanding officer. That every man shall, at his place of abode, be also provided with one pound of powder, and three pounds of bullets, of proper size to his musket, or firelock.

          • you can say whatever you want, it does not even have to make any sense, but the facts as they currently stand are:

            1) you don’t have to be in a militia to own a firearm that is “in common use” as defined by Heller.

            2) this is a civil right per the supreme court

            3) DC denies this right to its citizens by policy, such as unreasonably burdensome regulation and zoning that effectively prevents firearms being sold in the city.

            4) This is legally not sustainable, if DC council wants to keep donating money to the pro-gun cause they can keep losing hopeless lawsuits and being ordered to pay Alan Gura for his time.

      • U.S. Code

        The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
        (b) The classes of the militia are—
        (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
        (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

  • gotryit

    What? They’re going to bring guns to Georgia Ave?

    Also, I’m up in arms about the medicinal marijuana program bringing drugs here.

    Please note sarcasm.

  • In a perfect world, guns wouldn’t exist. However, DC has proven that when you ban guns (or make them incredibly hard to get) only criminals have guns.

    Ease gun regulations for law abiding citizens and toughen gun crimes is the answer. Remember folks, even if Wal-Mart were to sell guns – it would still be only to law abiding citizens…..

    • do you think that criminals manufacture guns? no, they don’t. the initial purchase of nearly every gun used in a crime in dc was acquired legally.

      • So your solution is to ban them and only allow criminals to have them?

        That, unfortunately, would never work in the United States. Plus a lot of guns that end up on the street are not acquired legally – stolen, smuggled etc.

      • Based on what reporting? It’s been impossible to legally purchase a gun in DC for the 30+ years preceding 2009.

        And the only people using guns illegally in DC are drug dealers. So you have to ask yourself the question whether drug trade is the major problem.

        But then all the stoners our there want to ignore the fact that their money is financing mexican drug cartels.

        • Aye carumba carbron!

        • so legalize it!

          • That may be the only solution to end the corruption, violence and murder associated with drugs, but it’s caused by drugs, not guns.

        • based on the reporting of the washington post that did a series of pretty in depth articles about gun crime and traffic in dc.

          also, of course they weren’t purchased in dc. they were by and large purchased in va and md.

          also, no, the only people using guns illegally aren’t just drug dealers. that’s a pretty ignorant statement.

          also, yeah no shit the drug trade in a major problem. thanks.

      • Well so DC is screwed until you convince MD and VA to stop selling guns.

        So you convince them to stop selling guns, and maybe DC can reconsider it’s stance.

    • “Remember folks, even if Wal-Mart were to sell guns – it would still be only to law abiding citizens…”

      Right. And legally acquired guns are never used for murder, or in crimes of passion. And a law abiding citizen (on paper) who acquires a gun would NEVER use it for the wrong reasons.

      I literally cannot believe the rationalizations of the pro-gun people on this board.

      • Someone in a crime of passion is going to kill someone anyway with any weapon available. It’s a crime of passion.

        You need to go back and take logical reasoning 101.

        People who will wink wink at someone smoking pot will get all bent out of shape over someone owning a handgun is crazy.

        Drugs = Violence.

        • Pot=munchies

        • What are you smoking? A crime of passion is MUCH more likely to occur when there’s a handgun available, as opposed to, say, a meat cleaver or a hammer.

          • Based on what evidence?

            Or is this just your own little fantasy?

          • You can’t be serious. Let’s say for argument’s sake that people are as likely to attempt a crime of passion murder with the handgun in the upstairs closet as the meat cleaver in kitchen. Even with this ridiculous theoretical concession, the success rate for the murder is going to be much higher with a gun. It’s a pull of a trigger at distance vs. a half dozen or more close range chops with a knife, during which the victim at least has an opportunity to defend himself.

            I can’t believe I have to write this out. And this doesn’t even begin to address the increased rates of suicide when there is a gun in the house.

            You cowboy types who think you’re going to solve DC’s violence problems with a gun-toting public baffle me. Look at the correlations between gun deaths per capita and state permissive gun laws. The argument just doesn’t hold water.

          • A “crime of passion” is about losing your mind and trying to inflict bodily harm on another as a way to punish or control. It doesn’t follow logic and no one says, crap I can’t find a gun so I’m going to go for a run instead. The overwhelming urge is to commit violence not to shoot a gun.

            Don’t misunderstand me, a gun can commit unequal violence when combined with an unstable or intoxicated person. However, we don’t ban things in the US, especially not things that have other intrinsic value, just because the unstable and intoxicated can’t handle themselves. That’s why in states with more liberal gun ownership, you’re still prevented from bringing a gun into a bar.

            I would hate to have to tear down the Golden Gate bridge just because it’s ‘convenient’ for suicide. Stupid argument. More people die of suicide by prescription drugs than guns.

            DC’s violence problems haven’t been solved by banning guns in DC either, so at best, gun control is neutral when it comes to violence. Banning guns is not going to solve your violence problem.

        • “Someone in a crime of passion is going to kill someone anyway with any weapon available.”

          this is just not true.

  • Why would you go to Walmart to get your gun, when it’s so easy to get on east of the river in the militarized zone? Didn’t we have yet another child gunned down over there this week? WTF, this place is nuts.

    At least our new prosecutor seems to actually be serious about justice.

  • I support law abiding citizens in DC having the right to bare arms. Hey, the criminals are packing and terrorizing our neighborhoods. Why shouldn’t law abiding DC residents not be armed to protect themselves from the ‘savages’ on the streets?

  • My only concern is how do we prevent straw buyers? The folks that are clean and buy guns to move them along to criminals. This happens in states w/ looser gun laws, so let’s just not let it happen here.

    I would say that W-Mart only selling rifles and shotguns (along with a provision that allows us law abiding folk to buy them) would be the way to go. Personally (and I’m only speaking for me), I’d be fine with a shotgun to defend my home.

    • me

      It’s just as easy to go across the river to Virginia to do that. Don’t pretend like DC has some sort of inviolability dome around it.

    • I would equally be concerned about the quality of Walmart employees selling these guns in DC. The locations of these proposed Walmarts and they type people they will be looking to hire, are not exactly the type people I would want to be the gatekeepers of thousands of guns flowing into the city.

    • You can already purchase a long gun in MD/VA as a DC resident. The lawsuit and discussion is about handguns.

  • Wal-Mart should absolutely be allowed to sell guns. There are some really simple facts here folks;

    1)The many many years of “no guns” laws in the District did not work.
    2) Law abiding citizens are not the folks you need to worry about owning a hand gun.
    3) The Constitution of the United States allows for it’s citizens to be armed.

    All of those aside, you may still only use a weapon in the home for protection. The District is not considering handing out permits to carry sidearms or concealed weapons. We are talking about people who have been back round checked, waited the appropriate time, and have them registered. Registration will stop people from buying guns just to turn them around and sell them. If the serial number of a legally purchased gun is used in a crime then you hold the purchaser responsible. Also, the thought that a shotgun is all that is needed for home defense is ridiculous. Anyone who says this is true has never been involved in a Close Quarters Battle situation. The handgun is hands down the most appropriate weapon for self defense. Why don’t we make a certified safety and ownership course a stipulation of gun ownership? That way we know that all of the law abiding folk who want a gun are adequately trained on its operation and safe use. As soon as that law passes, I’m getting this:

    • There is a a certified safety and ownership course requirement for owning a handgun in DC. Most are run by NRA instructors. It’s 4 hours of classroom and 1 hour of firing at a range.

    • “Registration will stop people from buying guns just to turn them around and sell them.”

      Sure. I’m super confident that the 20-something crackheads, PCP-heads, and meth adddicts in my alley would NEVER buy a handgun and exchange it for money.

      Have you ever met/known a drug addict?

      • Most of them can barely afford their $5 hit. What makes you think any of them can afford a $500 handgun?

        • You think the old alcoholic who buys the kids booze buys the kids booze with his own money?

          • You think a crackhead is going to be able to sit still for 4 hours in a classroom, then shoot straight for 1 hour in a range, then order a gun online (there still aren’t any gun STORES in DC), wait 4 days for it to arrive, fill out the paper work, then take the paperwork to the DC City hall, pass a 20 question test on DC gun laws, then return to the gun transfer shop to retrieve the gun and then hand it over to a thug?

            That’s what you’re worried about happening?

          • Yeah. The classes and shooting range instruction requirements are great, but it’s way too easy for this stuff to become hoop jumping formalities.

            What’s your point about no gun stores in DC right now? This thread is about the possibility of Walmart selling guns in DC in the future.

          • The overarching issue is access to handguns by ANY DC resident. Walmart is a non-starter as, apparently, they don’t sell handguns anywhere.

      • “Sure. I’m super confident that the 20-something crackheads, PCP-heads, and meth adddicts in my alley would NEVER buy a handgun and exchange it for money.”

        I’m super confident that the 20-something crackheads, PCP-heads, and meth adddicts in your alley would NEVER pass the back round check. You don’t become an addict of that level without some sort of involvement with the law.

  • The problem with guns aren’t with the law abiding folks, so they should be ok to sell.
    Do I want to hear the stink the anti-gun crowd will raise if they try? Not at all. Inevitably, they’ll find a gramma to get up and talk about how guns are bad because one killed her grandson. The council will balk and disallow firearms, thus fulfilling their one good deed of their terms.

    • Only if they want a lawsuit and congressional interference.

      And denying someone their civil rights is the one area where a government employee or politician can be personally sued outside of their professional capacity.

  • WalMart does not sell handguns. They do sell rifles and shotguns and ammunition. And according to another blog’s article they don’t intend on selling any guns in DC

    “Our D.C. stores will not offer firearms,” Walmart spokesperson Steven Restivo tells DCist. “As always, we strive to provide products that are relevant to customer needs and ensure our merchandise selections reflect the items that our customers want to buy. Satisfying the customer is our number one goal.”

    Hypothetically speaking though I would be in favor of them legally selling shotguns and rifles.

  • i have no issue with guns at all, but i hate distortions in the truth. you people that think that our guns laws made dc the former murder city are not thinking fully about the issue. those that think that violent crime will decrease at a greater rate that it already has because of being able to buy a gun are also fooling yourselves.
    the realities of the situation don’t merit these situations. the only crimes that may decrease are home invasions, and break-ins. even though most break ins according to mpd happen around 2:00. so you won’t be home to defend it anyway. and since you won’t be able to carry your gun to work, the thief will now have your gun.

    the crime prevention arguments are flawed.
    the only real argument is that we have a constitutionally guaranteed right to own arms.

  • Oh no, what about all of the mom and pop establishments that sell guns in alleys? We need to protect them.

  • “Stupid sexy Flanders!”

    Thought I’d lighten the mood here …

  • The question is NOT whether guns are or should be allowed in DC. I think that’s what a lot of people are voting ‘No’ to. That issue has already been decided. I don’t see why Wal Mart is worse than getting a gun from a dealer in VA or MD. Also, for those people who are only registering they may already have the gun. Doing the legal and responsible thing of registering a gun shouldn’t be discouraged in a city that already allows you to own those guns.

  • I want a taser.

  • First, I will set aside the broader issue of guns/no gun sales inside DC.

    With that in mind, I don’t trust Wal-Mart to be the sole vendor in this town. I can too easily imagine “handshake deals” where background checks are skipped, waiting periods ignored etc. It’s not that I think the Wal Mart Corporation doesn’t take the law seriously, it’s that I think the people they may hire from the area might not care…or may profit by not caring. And I (instinctively, without any evidence) don’t believe WM has the management systems in place to overcome that.

    I’d prefer a smaller operation that has to defend its reputation fiercely…someone who gets a very larg proportion of thier revenue from firearms dealing. That way they have more to lose if malfeasance is discovered.

    If WM gets nailed for sloppy management, they just close the gun counter, hold a few PR events and continue with business. The % loss for them would be waaay lower…

    • Wow, so you have no basis for your argument except the fact you seem to hate big corporations. That would not be malfeasance but a federal crime resulting in prison time. You bet your ass Wal-Mart would do anything to protect its reputation.

      If anything a smaller operation has less to lose and would thus more likely to be corrupt. Why do you think a lot of small shops only take cash? It’s not the credit card fees – it’s easier to hide the income.

      Wal-Mart legally and successfully sells firearms in dozens of states, I don’t see why it wouldn’t work in DC.

      • Actually Ben, I call bullshit on your response.

        My analysis is based on the fact that I have been a public affairs consultant for Fortune 100 companies (including Wal-Mart) and I know how they think.

        I don’t believe that senior management is corrupt, or even incompetent. I just believe that middle management may be incompetent, and more importantly that there is a longstanding culture of corruption in the District.

        Combine the two and eventual some douche will abuse the system and cut some corners at WM. In the end, WM will triage the situation as I have described above. The jail time falls on the little guys at the store level, not the CEO and Board of Directors.

        So, I’m not debating that WM is less likely to be corrupt as an overall org (that would be bad business) – just that they have less to lose from “rogue actors/bad apples” in the District.

        …and why do small shops have LESS to lose? Raw $$$ amounts are not relevant here – just the percentage of the owners’ total assets at risk (WM=very very small). And in that case the owner/operator does the actual jail time.

  • Walmart is more likely to be responsible and liable in case of problems than a mom & pop storefront gun store.

    I don’t think that Walmart is the kind of store you see associated with irresponsible sales that lead to crime guns.

    The Post series on guns gives you a sense of where those guns used by criminals come from.

  • The Constitution is outdated, quit hanging on to the “right to bear arms” which had a whole different meaning centuries ago… Look at reality (especially in DC) and the answer is a definitive NO!!

    • I agree. So is that pesky “Freedom of speech” and freedom from search and seizure by cops.

      All you snowball throwing Che Guevara’s would be pissing your pants if we started ignoring the Bill of Rights.

      And oh, by the way it’s the Bill of Rights, not the Constitution that guarantees our freedoms.

      And if you don’t like what’s in the Bill of Rights, then get 3/4 of Americans to agree to change it. Bet you can’t.

      • -1000

        Actually, the Bill of Rights is just the colloquial term for the first 10 AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION.

        You know, kind of like the appendix to a book, it’s still part of that book.

        And I think Slick Rick’s point (whether valid or not) was more about the 2nd Amendment itself rather than a general call for anarchy and the dissolution of the social contract.

        Reading is fundamental.

  • Hell no. I’ve been feeling Walmart would likely be a positive development for certain neighborhoods, but if they decided to sell guns I’d join the protesters.

    I can’t stand “if you don’t like it, you can move” arguments, but those crying about their constitutional right to own a gun really should take that desire to Virginia, where it’s welcome. (excepting Virginia Tech)

    • Someone is going to sell guns in DC, or DC will get sued again and spend millions of dollars defending a lawsuit that they will undoubtedly lose. So, the question is not whether “those crying about their constitutional right[s]” should move, but rather WHO will be selling guns here.

      Wal-mart is a great candidate for this, because they have the most to lose in the event of a lawsuit from an individual or enforcement action brought by DC government. However, Wal-mart knows that one of those will inevitably happen to them if they sell guns in DC, which is probably why they won’t be selling guns in the stores they open here.

      • Mike – I think you have accurately assessed WM’s likely path. Potential profits are FAR outweighed by potential legal and PR liabilities.

    • That’s why we have a bill of rights –to protect a minority against people like you.

  • The fact that all the idiots in charge have so easily been duped into thinking Wal-Mart is the answer to all our problems speaks volumes about their naivety and lack of intelligence.

    Having Wal-Marts in DC will benefit NOBODY but Wal-Mart.

    • Who said anything about “all our problems”??

      Jobs and retail options in neighborhoods where there are none–and no prospects in the pipeline–are, in fact, positive for those areas.

  • Steps I would take to own a gun:

    1) Go to a range and take classes on how to own and properly maintain a firearm.

    2) Purchase a gun for self defense of my home and loved ones.

    3) Keep it under lock and key and use it only in life threatening situation or at the range.

    I think that people who want a 100% gun ban are a little naive. You can’t undo its invention or un-open Pandora’s box.

  • I have a huge problem with WalMart selling guns in the District. Besides, is anybody really going to need a bargain pack of six shooters?

    Now Target, that’s a totally different story. They even have a bullseye as a logo! How cute.

  • Yet another reason to oppose Walmart from coming into the District.

  • pennyworth

    ugh – doesn’t matter. 99.99999999999999% of people killed by guns in the city are young black males … oh no wait! -___-

    – trollsworth derply

  • There’s a great parallel between the Anti-Drugs laws and certain Anti-Gun laws over the past 30+ years. Neither set of laws was even minimally effective at achieving even a basic level of goals. As long as there are people who want to acquire something, and that something is readily available, it will be acquired. That’s the downside of living in a free society with personal protections.

    So you don’t like gun violence? Give up your pot habit and the gun violence goes away immediately. Gun violence only exists to protect drug turf and enforce payments.

    • This was the most hilarious post so far. Pot is not the source of violent activity. Trust me.

      • Pot smuggling is. Obtaining pot and other drugs is why we have a violence problem in the us.

        Go ask any small town mexican police officer why there’s violence in their region –it’s because they live next to the biggest drug addict in the world –US consumers.

        If you’re not growing your own pot, you’re financing gangs. Gangs move drugs.

        • We are talking about violence in DC. I don’t think that mexican police officer has walked a beat in DC. If you stop lighting up doobies in DC the crime will not decrease. Go ask your mexican police officer and see what he says. Next your going to say a pto habit supports terrorism. Get a clue.

          • Wrong. Quite simply, you’re wrong.

            The fact is that there is a huge amount of violence centered around the large-scale movement of pot in areas south of the border. The fact that you don’t realize it (or, I suspect, don’t care if some Mexicans get killed) doesn’t negate the truth. You need to educate yourself.

          • Opium abuse supported the Taliban as they controlled world opium production. So yes, it did. Are there other uses for opium, of course, but not on the illegal trade.

            Where do you think your pot dollars go? The local economy? Hah! They go to finance drug cartels all over central and south america! Did you think that your pot money was going to finance homeless shelters and the sisters of perpetual mercy? Ha Ha Ha!

          • anon – While you are correct about drug smuggling, and it is a fact that pot is one of those drugs…it is cocaine and to a lesser extent heroin that is the bigger end.

            It’s a value/ounce thing…same risk, higher margins. In the end smugglers are just transporters…Pot is like PBR and cocaine/heroin is like Black Label….where would you put most of your money?

          • Other anon – where does the pot money go?

            Depends on the pot you buy. Nothing in life is simple.

            Most $ for street schwag goes to the Zetas. Most $ for the type of high end chronic PoP readers will probably buy goes to Mendocino county and British Columbia.

        • *pot. Sorry I’ve been smoking.

  • A few random thoughts:

    1) Does anyone really trust WalMart to run proper background checks? Or trust the people WM will hire at 8.50 an hour to run those checks?

    2)Maybe the trade off should be no guns at WalMart until we get a bottle bill?

  • Wow I’m surprised to see so many gun supporters on this blog. Maybe I’m alone here but I don’t even think we should have the constitutional right to own hand guns. I think our society would be better off without them. Of course I know that’s not going to change but at least I can dream.

    • You are clearly not alone, based on the comments made on this topic, but that opinion is both 1) been proven to be completely wrong from a practical standpoint time and time again, 2) completely irrelevant given the state of current interpretation of the law and 3) doesn’t apply to Wal-mart regardless.

  • ALL FOUR proposed WalMart locations run afoul of the DC zoning regs on Gun Shops because of their proximity to schools, parks/playgrounds, or homes. The people who proposed this are morons, and those who came up with the zoning regs are tyrants.

  • Gun rights aren’t about defending your home. They’re about retaining the citizen’s rights to overthrew a tyrannical government again.

    Look at the TSA and tell me you don’t need to arm yourselves!

Comments are closed.