Thread: Target Addresses Firearms
July 2nd 2014: "Starting today we respectfully request that guests not bring firearms to Target – even in communities where it is permitted by law."
"This is a complicated issue, but it boils down to a simple belief: Bringing firearms to Target creates an environment that is at odds with the family-friendly shopping and work experience we strive to create."
The anti-gunners were thrilled with the announcement. Target said they will not ban them nor will they post signs. So what will Target do if people continue to open carry in their stores. Seems like they wanted to please the anti-gunners without actually doing anything. We will see...............
Target spokesperson clarifies in this interview: "Molly Snyder, a Target spokeswoman, said the retailer will not post signs at its stores asking people not to bring guns inside. "It is not a ban," she said. "There is no prohibition."
Last edited by carracer; 07-03-2014 at 01:07 PM.
Chuck Norris/Ted Nugent That's the ticket for 2016!
They should have went the Home Depot route.
“Our feeling is that ultimately, the voters direct the laws on gun carry issues, so we defer to the prevailing ordinances in states and communities,” said Stephen Holmes. “Therefore, customers who are legally permitted to carry firearms are allowed to do so when entering our stores, provided the firearms are carried in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.”
Our **** stirring anti-firearms news media mogles couldn't wait to make this headline news here. Stirring up the anties and training the sheep into believing guns are bad! And we cannot even legally CC or OC anywhere, except at the gun club or rifle range?
OUTRAGED customers have taken to social media after US retail giant Target “respectfully” asked shoppers not to bring firearms into its stores.
In a statement posted Wednesday on the retailer’s corporate blog, interim CEO John Mulligan said that Target wants a “safe and inviting” atmosphere for its shoppers and employees.
“This is a complicated issue, but it boils down to a simple belief: Bringing firearms to Target creates an environment that is at odds with the family-friendly shopping and work experience we strive to create,” he said.
But shoppers took to Facebook, with some claiming they would no longer shop at the store which was impinging on their rights.
“I am no longer shopping at Target due to your policy of allowing firearms in your stores. I appreciate you ‘respectfully’ asking people to leave their assault weapons at home but the people who want to bring their guns in don’t really care about respect for others,” wrote Marsa McKnelly Swatzell.
Another shopper Peggy Conrick said: “No more shopping at Target for my family since Target feels it necessary to prevent me from protecting my family with a legally owned and legally carried firearm. Leaving it at home or in my car is not at option. Any store that doesn’t allow me to protect my family is a store I will not be shopping at.”
When a criminal invades your home and has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.
My Definition of Gun Control: The idea that dozens of people found dead in the Broadway Café, Tasmania, and many also seriously wounded, all while waiting for police, who were called to show up and protect them, is somehow morally superior to having several armed and therefore alive civilian's explaining to police how the attacker got that fatal bullet wound.
Classic example of how trying to sit on the fence pleases no one.
I don't get too excited about these "requests". As I business owner I certainly understand why they use this approach. I also understand that for at least a few of these we have no one to blame but our fellow OC supporters whose exuberance finally pushed outside the envelope.
Most of these businesses huge corporations that just want to sell widgets or widget juice and make money. They don't want to be in this fight. So they say, "Hey, we are going to just follow local laws." Which is good for us. But then some group of people show up looking like a swat team caricature and freak out some patrons who are leveraged by anti-OC types to paint all of us with a broad brush.
Now the corporation, instead of selling widgets and widget juice is having to deal with twitter campaigns, email campaigns, news reporters requesting interviews, activists requesting meetings, and a whole bunch of other stuff that doesn't make them or their shareholders any money. So the corporate tops meet and say, "OMG, how do we get these people to quit trying to out-pee each other on OUR patio and get back to selling widgets and widget juice and make more money for our shareholders? Hey, how about we just tell the anti-gun people that we will ask gun people to stop carrying guns in our business and we'll let the gun people know we aren't serious about it by not banning it or putting up any signs about it. Then they can all **** and we can get back to, you know, doing our flippin' business."
I'm still going to shop at Target just as much as I did before unless they start posting their stores. Signs go up, I go away, but until then, I am taking this as what I think it is - a corporation extricating itself from being in the middle of something that, as a business, they don't give 2 rips about and want nothing to do with one way or the other.
I don't get too excited either considering they didn't BAN firearms inside or anything. They just wanted to set a tone so some of the action would boil down some. I'm wondering when the next BIG STINK in media from the Anti-folks will come about again. Just from reading the news it looks like they've been making some wins, but nothing to really worry about. One of these days, something will bite and the anti-folks will be crying about more protection for the American people and such.
Nothing better than a Glock.........except maybe another Glock!
U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
"Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)
Hmmm well well will see if they do try this.
Nothing better than a Glock.........except maybe another Glock!
Here's the response I got from target after I emailed them a "no guns, no money" message:
Hello Target Guest,
Thank you for reaching out to us.
We’ve listened carefully to the nuances of this debate and respect the protected rights of everyone involved.
Target’s approach has always been to follow the local laws, and we continue to do so. In return, we respectfully request guests not bring firearms into Target stores – even in communities where it is permitted by law.
This is a complicated issue, but it boils down to a simple belief: Bringing firearms to Target creates an environment that is at odds with the family-friendly shopping and work experience we strive to create.
We’ll share your viewpoint with Target leaders.
The Target team
Almost every sentence in that response confuses me due to the contradictions.
What protected rights other than those interested in self defense are involved?
They allow firearms, but will only continue if we don't bring them into their store?
Firearms create an environment that is at odds with the family-friendly shopping?
I don't get it.
When it's all said and done I believe Target did the Politically correct thing in a Politically correct world. We should all continue to carry where it is legal and go about our business.
@ Arin Morris,
I'm confused, too!
So, I guess when I go to my local Target and OC, I will "confusedly" be OC-ing my handgun (as I used to do there BEFORE this became news) -- and maybe/hopefully nothing will happen?
I hate to find out the hard way though...
Last edited by cloudcroft; 07-09-2014 at 02:15 PM.
True...but you never know how Target stores in a particular state may "interpret" Target's "confusing" Corporate policy -- or a local store manager/employees. Reminds me of the police "interpreting" state laws when they "mistakenly" and/or "inadvertently" hassle or arrest you.
So just in case, I will be looking for any signs at the door (here in The Springs) as I walk in OC-ing as per usual...but by then it'll be too late. At least unlike with the police, the worst Target can do is ask me to leave. :-(
Relatedly, I don't go to Starbucks anymore since CEO Shultz came out "requesting" the very same thing a while back -- gun carriers (OC or CC) weren't welcomed anymore, but they'd serve us 'if necessary' -- so I could stop going to Target, too. Problem is, however, as this trend continues I am not 'welcomed' at more and more stores. Eventually, I will have to stay home and hunt small game for sustenance...and grow my own coffee beans also (already have the espresso machine so I'm good there).
I guess the pigeon population here would be decimated also (and that's good as the hawks & falcons can't do that all by themselves) but not sure the apartment complex management would approve of my attempting to live off-the-grid, as it were -- simply because I can't go shopping anymore, not being 'welcomed' anywhere anymore -- as if we ever REALLY were welcomed in the first place (just tolerated). ;-)
Sad to see the majority of so-called "Americans" nowadays so frightened by an inanimate object...
Last edited by cloudcroft; 07-09-2014 at 08:04 PM.
Just another case of a business preventing customers from defending themselves, yet at the same time, refusing to provide armed security for their customers -- even in the parking lots.
And also just another example of -- had these crime victims been killed on store property -- of businesses getting away with AT LEAST negligent homicide/manslaughter charges (I'd prefer worse) simply because of "the law" (apparently) protecting said business from ANY liability/responsibility whatsoever for their customers' safety.
And once again, all this is just as INSANE and OUTRAGEOUS as it was the LAST time customers got robbed/maimed or killed inside a business or on its property. And the many times before that. Criminals have NO BUSINEES even touching a decent citizen, yet they do that and more with impunity.
And as with school and workplace shootings, there will be more of them in the future...probably sooner than later.
P.S. We have one Walmart here in Colorado Springs I recall having lots of security presence in their parking lots...but it's in a trash/ghetto part of town. Still, considering the "clientele" of this Walmart, the 2 times I've gone there I'm sure glad I carried my OWN security -- especially in the parking lot -- and doing so OC, just in case any of the trash needed a reminder to behave.
And if they didn't behave, well, that'd be fine with me, too...
Last edited by cloudcroft; 07-09-2014 at 11:38 PM.
I have never seen Walmart with armed security here. At one time the parking lot was a meeting spot for low riders/hot rods and they had unarmed security. That didn't last long as the loiterers either ignored or made fun of them. When the Super Walmart was put up the problem disappeared on it's own. About 20 years ago there were some incidents of abduction from the Walmart parking lot, even then they did not provide any security.
Originally Posted by Primus