Hence Their Irrelevant Prefab Response

I complained to Wal-Mart about their efforts to disarm their employees and the employees of thousands of other companies and render them vulnerable to predators while traveling to and from work. This is their response:

Dear Stephen,

Wal-Mart understands its role as a leading, responsible retailer in the U.S. and is making strides to strengthen its already existing security processes to help combat illegal gun activity in the communities we serve. Wal-Mart has a long and proud history of offering the products hunters and outdoorsmen want and need and that will not change.

It is important to note that these procedures should not impede law-abiding citizens from purchasing firearms at our stores that sell them. These processes merely provide us, as a retailer, an additional mechanism to assist law enforcement when illegal activity occurs.

We are hopeful these enhanced processes with help from law enforcement and other retailers committing to do the same can make a positive difference in our communities.

Thank you,
Wal-Mart Customer Relations

This is obviously a boilerplate response they send out to anyone who seems like a “gun kook.” It has absolutely nothing to do with what I complained about. I wrote them about Wal-Mart’s sponsorship of a lawsuit to overturn HB503, a law which enables employees to carry arms in their private vehicles.

I am sick of hearing about “hunters and outdoorsmen.” That’s liberal propaganda. Obama uses those words, and he’s a gun-hating, anti-second-amendment nut of the first water. The second amendment is not about shooting rabbits. It’s about defending yourself from criminals and tyrants. It’s about SHOOTING PEOPLE. Sorry to put it that way, but that’s the truth.

Hunting is important, but it’s trivial compared to the second amendment’s true objective.

I can walk in and out of Wal-Mart all day with a pistol in my pocket, legally. Publix Supermarkets is co-sponsoring this anti-civil-rights legislation, but I carry a pistol into and out of Publix several times a week. Yet they want to fix it so their employees can’t have weapons outside in their glove compartments. Does that make sense? How would you like to be a battered wife with a ludicrous restraining order, raising kids on Wal-Mart pay, and have to drive to work without a gun in your car? I assure you, there are women in that situation right now, and Wal-Mart could not care less.

Statistics tell us about 7% of shootings at businesses are perpetrated by employees or ex-employees. That shows that the threat from these people is much, much lower than the threat from the general public. What it doesn’t tell us is how many of those shootings would have been prevented by allowing permit holders to carry at work. If I went nuts tomorrow and decided to shoot up a business, which would I pick? Gun-free Wal-Mart, or Jorge Garcia’s strip-mall liquor store, with the 12-gauge under the counter? See if you can guess.

As I’ve said before, it’s just plain stupid to think that an employee will be worried about breaking a company rule and getting fired, when he’s breaking that rule in the process of committing a stack of violent felonies. Employees who want to shoot up businesses will do so, regardless of whether it means receiving pink slips later in the month. When you walk in the door at your place of business and start shooting your coworkers, it’s safe to assume you’ve decided your job isn’t working out, and that you’re ready to move on. Some might go so far as to call it a constructive resignation.

In a “going postal” situation, the violent employee is about as concerned about being fired as he is about being fined for littering the parking lot with spent casings. Does anyone seriously believe Lee Harvey Oswald regretted losing his job at the schoolbook depository?

Do you realize what these rules mean? They mean that when I’m carrying at Wal-Mart, and a violent criminal comes in and starts trouble, the best hope this giant, well-heeled corporation has of avoiding a bloody catastrophe is ME. How would you like to have to rely on a fat old lawyer to shoot a lunatic while you cringe behind a girdle display? Let me warn you in advance: don’t count on much. My behind will be the first one out the door, if at all possible, and once it’s outside, it and my Glock will stay there.

God bless the NRA. I used to think they were extreme, but that was before I got to know the enemy. Extreme is the way to go. We have to push these pansy freaks back to the point where fighting them is like fighting terror in Afghanistan instead of letting it happen in America. We can’t retreat and concede until we find ourselves reduced to the nominal right to keep unloaded long guns in locked boxes under our beds, like the pathetic folks in DC. We have to keep pushing them back, nearly to the point where they have to mount lawsuits to prevent us from carrying on airplanes. The second amendment frontier is like the border of Israel. We need to keep it as far out as possible, so our enemies will have a terribly difficult job, fighting their way to the point where they can attack our most vital rights.