WalMart dodges meetings with Biden Gun Control Group

[TexasCajun]

"Biden, NRA to meet on guns." http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... un-groups-

This headline gave me hope that the two sides will actually start talking to each other.

Then I read this sentence in the article:

“We are sending a rep to hear what they have to say,” NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said -- not to talk, just to listen?

Now there appears to be no reason for me to think other than that Biden's meeting with whoever this NRA rep is will produce anything but statements from both sides reflecting that there is no chance of accommodation. Perhaps that may have been the case all along, as almost every commentator here has argued, but I still think the result of intransigence could be much worse than the sides having a two-way chat.

Jim

It's posture. Both sides can say that they met & couldn't come to any agreement on 'reasonable' measures. I'm ok with the NRA & other pro-2A groups going there to listen. Maybe they can gain some insight into the tactics that the anti's are going to use without tipping their own hand & be able to mount a more effective defense or proactive offense. We'll just have to wait & see.

[Abraham]

"He told the guy they are "still selling them but are not displaying them until things settle down".

The above reminds of a certain men's magazine...

[Charles L. Cotton]

"Biden, NRA to meet on guns." http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... un-groups-

This headline gave me hope that the two sides will actually start talking to each other.

Then I read this sentence in the article:

“We are sending a rep to hear what they have to say,” NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said -- not to talk, just to listen?

Now there appears to be no reason for me to think other than that Biden's meeting with whoever this NRA rep is will produce anything but statements from both sides reflecting that there is no chance of accommodation. Perhaps that may have been the case all along, as almost every commentator here has argued, but I still think the result of intransigence could be much worse than the sides having a two-way chat.

Jim

The NRA will state our position and that we will not compromise on any of our positions. If Biden's group wants to talk about the real causes of school shootings, then we'll be happy to participate and stand ready to do so. So whether there is a two-way chat will depend upon whether Biden/Obama are serious, or whether this is just window dressing.

Chas.

[baldeagle]

"Biden, NRA to meet on guns." http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... un-groups-

This headline gave me hope that the two sides will actually start talking to each other.

Then I read this sentence in the article:

“We are sending a rep to hear what they have to say,” NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said -- not to talk, just to listen?

Now there appears to be no reason for me to think other than that Biden's meeting with whoever this NRA rep is will produce anything but statements from both sides reflecting that there is no chance of accommodation. Perhaps that may have been the case all along, as almost every commentator here has argued, but I still think the result of intransigence could be much worse than the sides having a two-way chat.

Jim

The NRA will state our position and that we will not compromise on any of our positions. If Biden's group wants to talk about the real causes of school shootings, then we'll be happy to participate and stand ready to do so. So whether there is a two-way chat will depend upon whether Biden/Obama are serious, or whether this is just window dressing.

Chas.

Isn't that already patently self-evident?

[Charles L. Cotton]

"Biden, NRA to meet on guns." http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... un-groups-

This headline gave me hope that the two sides will actually start talking to each other.

Then I read this sentence in the article:

“We are sending a rep to hear what they have to say,” NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said -- not to talk, just to listen?

Now there appears to be no reason for me to think other than that Biden's meeting with whoever this NRA rep is will produce anything but statements from both sides reflecting that there is no chance of accommodation. Perhaps that may have been the case all along, as almost every commentator here has argued, but I still think the result of intransigence could be much worse than the sides having a two-way chat.

Jim

The NRA will state our position and that we will not compromise on any of our positions. If Biden's group wants to talk about the real causes of school shootings, then we'll be happy to participate and stand ready to do so. So whether there is a two-way chat will depend upon whether Biden/Obama are serious, or whether this is just window dressing.

Chas.

Isn't that already patently self-evident?

I would hope so, but I wonder how long it will be before some other so-called pro-gun groups send a fundraising email blast claiming the NRA is participating so they can "compromise" or "sell out gun owners?"

Chas.

[canvasbck]

"Biden, NRA to meet on guns." http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... un-groups-

This headline gave me hope that the two sides will actually start talking to each other.

Then I read this sentence in the article:

“We are sending a rep to hear what they have to say,” NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said -- not to talk, just to listen?

Now there appears to be no reason for me to think other than that Biden's meeting with whoever this NRA rep is will produce anything but statements from both sides reflecting that there is no chance of accommodation. Perhaps that may have been the case all along, as almost every commentator here has argued, but I still think the result of intransigence could be much worse than the sides having a two-way chat.

Jim

The NRA will state our position and that we will not compromise on any of our positions. If Biden's group wants to talk about the real causes of school shootings, then we'll be happy to participate and stand ready to do so. So whether there is a two-way chat will depend upon whether Biden/Obama are serious, or whether this is just window dressing.

Chas.

Mr. Cotton,

You and I do not always see eye to eye on every gun related legislative issue. But for this I thank you and any others on the NRA board who are taking this stance. Don't allow them to blur the line you all have drawn in the sand.

[Syntyr]

Now there appears to be no reason for me to think other than that Biden's meeting with whoever this NRA rep is will produce anything but statements from both sides reflecting that there is no chance of accommodation. Perhaps that may have been the case all along, as almost every commentator here has argued, but I still think the result of intransigence could be much worse than the sides having a two-way chat.

Jim

With all due respect what accommodation? Should the NRA rep have gone to the meeting with the thought that if we give up Evil Black Guns and Standard Capacity Magazines then maybe we can keep all other semi autos? The other side has nothing to offer except that if we do X then they will leave us alone for some undetermined period of time. Until the next murder spree and then it will be give up the rest of your semi autos. Then its shot guns. Then its bows and arrows. When will we stop this death by a thousand cuts of constantly negotiating away our rights. At some point we must draw a line and decide that it is time to stop giving our rights away for a temporary peace. In my opinion its past time...

[OldCurlyWolf]

"Biden, NRA to meet on guns." http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... un-groups-

This headline gave me hope that the two sides will actually start talking to each other.

Then I read this sentence in the article:

“We are sending a rep to hear what they have to say,” NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said -- not to talk, just to listen?

Now there appears to be no reason for me to think other than that Biden's meeting with whoever this NRA rep is will produce anything but statements from both sides reflecting that there is no chance of accommodation. Perhaps that may have been the case all along, as almost every commentator here has argued, but I still think the result of intransigence could be much worse than the sides having a two-way chat.

Jim

The NRA will state our position and that we will not compromise on any of our positions. If Biden's group wants to talk about the real causes of school shootings, then we'll be happy to participate and stand ready to do so. So whether there is a two-way chat will depend upon whether Biden/Obama are serious, or whether this is just window dressing.

Chas.

I just rejoined the NRA today. Paid for 3 years upfront.

They needed some more support.

[Abraham]

I'd let my NRA membership lapse - I rejoined this past week.

[koconcept]

The way I see it the NRA put up the only solution or action so far that would help the issue. The last thing i want is my dues going toward someone who is negotiating with Obama on guns. You give the devil an inch he will take a mile. Im glad they sent someone to listen, even happier they didnt go to negotiate with my and your rights. Good job NRA.

[mamabearCali]

I am super proud of the NRA. If you give a mouse a cookie....

We have been NRA members ever for a few years now. We are considering getting lifetime memberships soon ( as soon as we reasonably afford it).

[airboss]

While I'm pleased that WalMart isn't willing to be involved in stealing our rights, I'm disappointed that they don't appear to be willing to stand up for them either. If they don't go meet with him then they don't have a voice at all in that discussion. We need as many pro-2A voices in that room to counter the fear mongers that are trying to infringe on our rights.

I think Wally Mart might be a little wary after being boycotted by the left, and particularly the union just before the elections.

The never invited me to the meeting, but.... at the end of the day, Wally Mart is going to look out for Wally Mart, period, paragraph. What I would be concerned about is having WM suddenly be in favor of background checks, waiting periods and a supposed "fix" for the "gun show loophole" in exchange for some other type of public posturing or who knows what. WM stands to gain quite a bit in the way of gun sales if one of it's main competitors (i,e,- gun shows) had the squeeze put on them. Just my dos pesos.

[TexasCajun]

http://business.time.com/2013/01/11/wal ... with-guns/

Wal-Mart met with Holder yesterday. Although I can't find any definitive information as to what was discussed, the tone of the meeting, or if any agreements were made.

[suthdj]

Walmart should just step back and say not our fight they will anger 1 side or the other if they do anything to support either side.