Wal-Mart is striking a deal with New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (Merged) - Page 3

Wal-Mart is striking a deal with New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (Merged)

This is a discussion on Wal-Mart is striking a deal with New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (Merged) within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; LenS, Why would the BATF need to contact in reverse Wal-Mart in specific? The BATF would already know and have information toward who the purchaser ...

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 71

Thread: Wal-Mart is striking a deal with New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (Merged)

  1. #31
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    LenS,

    Why would the BATF need to contact in reverse Wal-Mart in specific?

    The BATF would already know and have information toward who the purchaser was as per the 4473 form turned into them by Wal-Mart.
    The local police though upon investigation of the firearm theft, if reported to them which is most proper and sensible too, would not know or think to alert Wal-Mart to as much. Theft occurs and contacting Wal-Mart to indicate that a citizen who reported his home as having been looted including theft of a firearm(s) makes no sense and further is not relevant to them in any way.

    Following your scenario though the GG citizen has his gun stolen in '08 and he reports as much to the police in a timely manner (within the same year muchless month or even day of loss) who then take note of this fact within their own database. A month or year(s) later that same gun pops up on the street be it used in a crime or not, and they contact the original owner to alert them of the find. This is a normal common mode of operation. No alert or comment to Wal-Mart is necessary nor likely to happen, and again is not relevant to them and their initiative.

    As a modification of that same scenario though you have a citizen that buys a firearm or multiple firearms from Wal-Mart and later he sells or transfers it/them to a secondary person(s). That secondary person(s) later proves by subsequent action to be a person of criminal intent or activity.
    Upon involvement the police contact the BATF (not Wal-Mart) to find out who the original owner was and the 'dealer' of record, Wal-Mart. They speak with that person the buyer and find out that he sold or in some way transfered the firearm improperly. Or he 'lost' it but never reported the firearm as having being lost/stolen/missing. Now they the police choose to contact the dealer, in this case Wal-Mart, and state to them that their past customer purchased serial no. 123XYZ on date at time and that said person (not the firearm) was directly related if not involved with an unlawful/illegal handling or transfer of the firearm. Wal-Mart says thanks and makes a note in their DB to choose to no longer do business with said unlawful acting or criminal intent person. Any dealer if they were in open communications with law enforcement could and may choose to do the same toward past customers with a proven and known to police history of improper activity toward firearms, or where state law applicable ammunition purchase.

    This is reasonable, sensible, and to my mind most likely an occurrence and application of this tech and law enforcement relationship.
    As a citizen I would have no problem with law enforcement going back to any dealer, not just Wal-Mart, and stating to the dealer that a person known to have bought a firearm from them in the past has proven to be a person of unlawful activity if not outright criminal activity. I would expect that same dealer to exercise their right as a business to not do business in sale of arm, or ammunition, to that person thereafter. As such is not unreasonable, to my mind, and would not stop the current has occurred crime but will help toward reducing potential for the same specific person doing the same or other related crime again and again.

    - Janq

    P.S. - Nothing is different here than it was yesterday or last year at large.
    The use of databases by stores/dealers/FFLs to track customer purchases and record info, storage of purchasing documents as "images" (that is what a PDF file is...an image of an imported or scanned document in a digital container), or choosing to not do business with specific customers known to be unlawful or criminal in intent or act as per alert by law enforcement of said factual findings. Other businesses do same and have been for decades including automotive dealers, banks, insurance companies, and more to which no one gets bent about that (?).
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing


  2. #32
    Senior Member Array cwblanco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Amarillo, Texas
    Posts
    835
    Quote Originally Posted by iball View Post
    Great, Wal-Mart already muscled out the local small grocer and businessman now they want to muscle out BATFE.
    I have never seen a Wal-Mart store that sold guns. If Wal-Mart is not selling guns anyway, why bother to alienate a customer base when it is not selling guns. The ghost of Sam Walton will come back to bite them in the butt for not using common marketing sense.

  3. #33
    Distinguished Member Array LenS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Commiechusetts
    Posts
    1,646
    Janq,

    Your basing your thoughts on some inaccurate data.

    Normal FFL transaction (NOT a MA transaction):

    - 4473 form filled in, form is kept by the DEALER, NOT turned into BATFE until/unless the Dealer goes out of business.

    - NICS called in. Info on buyer given to FBI for NICS check and whether it is a rifle/shotgun/handgun. No S/Ns given, no models/mfr info given. NICS is supposed to destroy the info within x days of transaction by law.

    So now if the gun is bought by "John" at WM, BATFE has NO IDEA who bought the gun or where it was shipped to by the mfr/distributor until they do a query.

    If a gun is stolen, gun & owner info (if known) is entered into NCIC.

    If a gun is recovered, especially many miles away, from a crime, checking S/N on the NCIC "hot list" may or may not get a hit (S/N may not have been known or entered accurately). Also, unless a lot has changed since I last ran one of these queries (admittedly many years ago), the hits are by S/N only . . . then the investigator must go thru it very diligently to figure out if the brand/model match with that S/N. [e.g. I think that the S&W revolver K-22 was also known as a Model 17 (IIRC, I won't swear to this) and if it was entered one way, the investigator may not spot a "hit" on the secondary model number.]

    Usual practice is for guns recovered from a crime to be "back checked" by the PD requesting BATFE assistance. That is when they find it was first shipped to WM and then perhaps someone goes to the particular WM to get a copy of the 4473. Someone may then knock on a door of the 1st purchaser (who may or may not still have owned it) and tries to track down the last known owner. Many FTF transactions dead-end at this point.

    All that WM knows is that the gun "John" bought was used in a crime. They will not be told that "John" sold it and it has 3 other owners prior to the crime, or that it was stolen from "John's" home.

  4. #34
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    LenS,

    I went to the ATF website FAQ area to be sure my recollection was off (or on) and you are correct, it was off on the points you mentioned. I had to jump back and forth though between the ATF and FBI sites to verify as much; ATF Online - Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and CJIS Division Homepage

    The rest of your posting was fractured in thought process and a bit confusing but I'll assume like me you're posting from work. With that I re-read your latter part three times to be sure I'm following you correctly.

    Lets say the process did in fact occur for 'John' exactly as you described, then I can now see how one would have a concern with that specific area.
    Even still though this W-M program would be of benefit to the person doing the investigation toward getting to the end of the handling line toward who possessed what, where, when, and for how long toward possible closure of a crime.
    Yes again following your stated scenario then it is possible a GG buyer, 'John', could be dinged. That is a problem and if possible there should be a coordination or memorandum made in by law enforcement and Wal-Mart toward letting W-M know that 'John' is not a person of interest in the chain of wrongfulness, so that he is not dinged thereafter.
    Problem for that though will be real world institution which won't 100% jibe with theory. Someone ends up holding the bag and by the above scenario it possibly could be GG and lawful acting customer 'John'. :(
    That is an item of concern and I now more clearly see it.

    The other two points though as per their press release are not affected by this scenario and I still have no problem with them doing as they propose to that end.

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  5. #35
    VIP Member Array cdwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    MS
    Posts
    2,261
    I pretty much agree with Janq but, will not give them much more of my money!
    All the Wal-Marts around here sells guns, just none I want.
    I think I'm going online from here on out on ammo.
    GUN CONTROL= I WANT TO BE THE ONE IN CONTROL OF THE GUN

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  6. #36
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Janq View Post
    Wait...I'm confused.

    SNIP

    Further I have no problem with the police being able to back track purchase/transfer records against a firearms serial number to locate it's buyer and possibly track it back to the criminal. That is a good thing in my world, even if it's a Bloomberg grandstand moment.
    I may be confused too.

    I thought that that what Bloomberg wants/was getting was NOT just the ability to search a one gun back to the original buyer after the weapon was involved in a crime -- e.g., track gun to buyer.

    [BTW -- In Virginia private sales / transfers do not have any government oversight, record, etc. When you move here from out of State you don't need to notify anyone what guns you brought with you. Also, I have no requirement to report any lose, theft, etc.

    Which is one of the reasons Bloomberg has it in for Virginia. ]

    What I understand he wants/was getting is the ability to track people to guns [note plural].

    He wants full national gun registration. This is a short step short of that.

    If you ever bought a gun that a number of owners later (may-be even after a theft) ended up being involved in a crime, he would bar future sales. See Wally announcement, ďCreating 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.Ē

    OTOH by extension, in that Wally once owned every gun that it sells, Wally should never be able to buy another gun from a wholesaler or directly from a manufacture, if one of them ever ends up used in a crime.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  7. #37
    VIP Member Array sgtD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,292
    I'm done with Wal-Mart!
    When you've got 'em by the balls, their hearts & minds will follow. Semper Fi.

  8. #38
    Senior Member Array bluelineman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    854
    And what is the "gun show loophole"? There is NO gunshow loophole. What a bunch of idiots.

    Why doesn't Bloomberg just agree to give all the criminals 1 handgun each.

  9. #39
    Senior Member Array Pitmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wherever there's fried chicken or barbecue
    Posts
    642
    What's really ironic is that Wal-Mart made and makes their money in small town America. There isn't even a Wal-Mart within the city limits of New York City. What the hell does Wal-Mart think they are doing? Sam Walton is turning over in his grave.
    Pitmaster

    HELGA: Where are you going?
    HAGAR: To sign a peace treaty with the King of England.
    HELGA: Then why take all those weapons?
    HAGAR: First we gotta negotiate...

  10. #40
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by Pitmaster View Post
    What's really ironic is that Wal-Mart made and makes their money in small town America. There isn't even a Wal-Mart within the city limits of New York City...
    That's because ironically NYC won't allow them in. :p

    Wal-Mart chief writes off New York: paper
    Wed Mar 28, 2007 1:20am EDT
    Wal-Mart chief writes off New York: paper | Reuters

    Lets see if ironically a Wal-Mart opens in NYC within say the next 12 to 18 months...

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  11. #41
    Distinguished Member Array LenS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Commiechusetts
    Posts
    1,646
    Janq,

    Not sure if this will be clear either, but I'll give it another try . . .

    Back when I ran some items thru NCIC to check for stolen, here's how it worked (hopefully it has changed and my info is no longer valid):

    - Let's say you want to check a S&W K-22 S/N K12345.

    - Best case you get a listing of every stolen gun (handguns and longguns) with S/N K12345

    - You then have to pour thru this list to find any listings for S&W . . . which might have been entered as S&W, Smith and Wesson or Smith & Wesson.

    - Now you check for K-22 . . . which could have been put in as K22, K-22, Model 17, M17 or M-17.

    - Now you check what's left to see if S/N K12345 shows up. What if it was entered as "12345" because someone wasn't sure that the "K" was part of the S/N? [I have some old C&R guns where the letters are separated by a fair distance from the numbers. I'm sure that it leads to some confusion entering S/Ns.]

    - Also while pouring thru the listings, one has to figure out if a S&W 39 is the same as a S&W 39-2, etc. Could the same S/N have been issued for each model (e.g. S&W 29 and 29-2, etc.)?

    To say that the process was tedious would be a gross understatement.

  12. #42
    VIP Member Array havegunjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,206
    Why is anyone buying a gun from Wally World in the first place? I know, I know, itís cheaper but for crying-out-load folks letís not sell our souls to save a couple bucks. Letís make them the nationís smallest seller of firearms, not the largest. That will do more to change their policy than anything else. Spread the word and ask everyone to buy guns and ammo someplace else. This tradition of going to Wally World for nachos and ammo when you get a permit needs to end now. They are not our friend.
    DEMOCRACY IS TWO WOLVES AND A LAMB VOTING ON WHAT TO HAVE FOR LUNCH. LIBERTY IS A WELL ARMED LAMB CONtestING THE VOTE.

    Certified Instructor for Minnesota Carry Permit
    NRA Pistol and Personal Protection Insrtuctor
    Utah Permit Certified Instructor

  13. #43
    VIP Member Array havegunjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,206
    Here is a copy of what I just sent to Wally World.

    Dear Wal-Mart,

    As a result of your decision to align your company and its policies with the pro gun control, anti civil liberties Mayor of New York Michael Bloomberg I and my family will no longer be a customer of any Wal-Mart store. I feel I should let you know that your decision has sparked much conversation on pro gun websites and word of this is spreading fast in the gun owning community. I believe most gun owners feel as I do and if they have not already done so they will also be shopping elsewhere. If in the future you decide that you want the business back of those that supported you in the past instead of Mayor Bloomberg who I understand will not let a Wal-Mart open inside the city limits feel free to contact me and I will be happy to spread that news also.

    Sincerely,

    Joe DeSua
    DEMOCRACY IS TWO WOLVES AND A LAMB VOTING ON WHAT TO HAVE FOR LUNCH. LIBERTY IS A WELL ARMED LAMB CONtestING THE VOTE.

    Certified Instructor for Minnesota Carry Permit
    NRA Pistol and Personal Protection Insrtuctor
    Utah Permit Certified Instructor

  14. #44
    Senior Member Array dunndw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    1,123
    I actually returned the electronic ear muffs I purchased. I can't talk the wife out of Wal Mart...only other option is Target around here which I don't like either. Not one piece of gun related merchandise will leave Wal Mart with me until they change their policies.
    "If I was an extremist, our founding fathers would all be extremists," he said. "Without them, we wouldn't have our independence. We'd be a disarmed British system of feudal subjectivity."

  15. #45
    Senior Member Array Pitmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wherever there's fried chicken or barbecue
    Posts
    642
    Quote Originally Posted by Janq View Post
    What is not to like here?
    What is different than what has been going on since ages ago and if not in specific to Wal-Mart as a firearms and ammunition retailer should have been?

    - Janq
    As far as I'm concerned the less restrictions on guns the better off society is. I think any adult should be able to walk in to a store and walk out with a gun. No questions asked. That is what the 2nd Amendment means to me. I don't think the laws have had any impact on reducing firearms deaths. The greater awareness of safety as taught by the NRA has probably had the most impact of anything at reducing firearms related deaths.

    I firmly believe if we eliminated gun law restrictions that over the next generation firearms deaths and violent crime will reduce over those years. I would expect an increase in the short term but once the dust settles society will be better off.
    Pitmaster

    HELGA: Where are you going?
    HAGAR: To sign a peace treaty with the King of England.
    HELGA: Then why take all those weapons?
    HAGAR: First we gotta negotiate...

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Mayor Bloomberg, how is your gun policy working out for you?
    By HowardCohodas in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: May 29th, 2008, 10:36 AM
  2. Mayor Bloomberg testifies
    By mrreynolds in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 29th, 2008, 07:28 PM
  3. Bloomberg recruits Cincinnati Mayor
    By buckeye .45 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: April 18th, 2007, 10:29 AM
  4. Another Mayor and SAF says NO to BLOOMBERG
    By DOGOFWAR01 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: March 16th, 2007, 03:04 PM
  5. Billings, MT, Mayor Allies With Bloomberg
    By Captain Crunch in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: February 25th, 2007, 12:32 AM

Search tags for this page

michael bloomberg wal-mart

,

walmart deal with bloomberg gun sales

,

walmart supporting gun control

Click on a term to search for related topics.