View Full Version : Why Walmart is getting out
Multidigits
06-04-2007, 01:05 PM
of the gun business
http://s4.images.proboards.com/xx.gifWhy Walmart has stopped selling guns....
« Thread Started on Jun 2, 2007, 7:45am »http://s4.images.proboards.com/buttons/quote.gif (http://huntingindiana.proboards52.com/index.cgi?board=campfire&action=post&thread=1180788323"e=1180788323&page=1) http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/walmart_ca_gun_laws.html (http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/walmart_ca_gun_laws.html)
consumeraffairs.com
Wal-Mart to Pay $14.5 Million for California Gun Law Violations
June 5, 2004
Wal-Mart will pay more than $14 million to settle charges that it committed thousands of violations of California state gun safety laws between 2000 and 2003, including selling ammunition to minors and selling firearms to convicted felons.
California Attorney General Bill Lockyer said that under the settlement, Wal-Mart will pay $5 million in fines, submit to court-enforced compliance with all gun laws, and provide more than $4 million to fund state compliance checks, prevent the sale of ammunition to minors and educate the public on gun laws.
”Wal-Mart’s failure to comply with gun safety laws put the lives of all Californians at risk by placing guns in the hands of criminals and other prohibited persons, Lockyer said.
”Although Wal-Mart has suspended gun sales in California, this settlement will ensure that it follows state law if it renews sales and will also provide valuable public education about the importance of gun safety. I will continue to vigorously regulate all gun dealers in California to ensure compliance with the law - the health and safety of all Californians depends on it.”
Lockyer’s lawsuit alleged that Wal-Mart engaged in unfair competition by committing thousands of violations at five separate stores. Among the laws Wal-Mart allegedly violated are:
• Selling and delivering firearms to 23 individuals the Attorney General’s Office had informed the store were prohibited from possessing firearms,
• Delivering firearms to 36 persons prohibited from possessing a firearm by means of a “straw purchase” to a relative or friend,
• Delivering firearms to persons prior to the completion of a criminal background check,
• Failing to verify the identity of purchasers through thumbprints and by scanning driver's licenses, and
• Failing to document that a firearm safety device, such as a trigger lock, was delivered with each firearm......
C.L.Button
06-04-2007, 02:00 PM
OMG the sky is falling ! :rolleyes: No wonder, I would have quit too, atleast in California. :mad: I know that the laws are supposed to be followed, but to go to the extent of ruining someones name not to mention running them out of business is unexceptable. EVEN if it is Walmart ! Wonder how many small stores they went after ? Where's that list ? :rolleyes:
kycowboy
06-04-2007, 02:49 PM
Hiring stupid people who didn't know what they were doing and putting them in a position like that is the biggest mistake
C.L.Button
06-04-2007, 02:55 PM
Hiring stupid people who didn't know what they were doing and putting them in a position like that is the biggest mistake
I agree. Training is everything. Some of those violations are downright stupid.
It's just because it was Walmart and somebody in the Atty Gen's office got peeved cause they ran out of toilet paper and Walmart didn't carry their brand. :rolleyes:
Multidigits
06-04-2007, 03:51 PM
I agree. Training is everything. Some of those violations are downright stupid.
It's just because it was Walmart and somebody in the Atty Gen's office got peeved cause they ran out of toilet paper and Walmart didn't carry their brand. :rolleyes:
I wouldn't begin to expect a minimum wage earner to be able to complete the require paper work and do it correctly without being trained. Walmart should have expected trouble by not doing so.
C.L.Button
06-04-2007, 03:54 PM
I wouldn't begin to expect a minimum wage earner to be able to complete the require paper work and do it correctly without being trained. Walmart should have expected trouble by not doing so.
I agree with you Multi, but I think they could have pressed Walmart for more training or handling it alittle differently instead of making an example out of them.
westkybanded
06-04-2007, 05:26 PM
Multi, are you serious? We've beaten this subject to death over and over.... It's simple economics... They weren't making enough money on guns to justify the expense associated with them! The CA problems had nothing to do with the guns disappearing from the Walmarts arround here.
Multidigits
06-04-2007, 06:50 PM
Multi, are you serious? We've beaten this subject to death over and over.... It's simple economics... They weren't making enough money on guns to justify the expense associated with them! The CA problems had nothing to do with the guns disappearing from the Walmarts arround here.
That's bull. Walmart can make as much off of a gun as a gun dealer can, and a lot of them are staying in business. Walmart has runs special made for marts, and they sell those in a flyer or ad. I guy already knows what he wants when he walks in the door, all they have to do is lay it out and follow the paper work and other procedures. Walmart went out because of the liability and because they are fast food service and didn't want to handle the paper trail or the NICS calls.
C.L.Button
06-04-2007, 11:24 PM
That's bull. Walmart can make as much off of a gun as a gun dealer can, and a lot of them are staying in business. Walmart has runs special made for marts, and they sell those in a flyer or ad. I guy already knows what he wants when he walks in the door, all they have to do is lay it out and follow the paper work and other procedures. Walmart went out because of the liability and because they are fast food service and didn't want to handle the paper trail or the NICS calls.
I would have to agree with this. I used to work with a Walmart vendor and they are time/dollar/liability conscious. KMart was the same way before Walmart got as big as they are. IF it becomes a hassle, Walmart will walk away quickly. They don't need the revenue from gun sales. ;)
AteUp
06-05-2007, 12:29 AM
More likely scenario was one homey selling to another that he knew couldn't legally purchase a firearm. What does he have to lose? Only an 8.00/hr job.
Multidigits
06-05-2007, 05:29 AM
Possible.....but if a person can pass the NICS call, he can tell a bald faced lie to the clerk and still buy the gun. Your not required to pass a lie detector test in order to buy. An example would be the VT shooter, he was not elligible to purchase because he had in fact been adjuticated to a mental facility, but he lied about it and NICS didn't have record of it. The clerk couldn't have known.
aceoky
06-05-2007, 02:05 PM
Multi, are you serious? We've beaten this subject to death over and over.... It's simple economics... They weren't making enough money on guns to justify the expense associated with them! The CA problems had nothing to do with the guns disappearing from the Walmarts arround here.
I'd say a $5 MILLION "hit" to their "bottom line" did have some impact on the decision??? Especially since other states might join in against them in the future....:eek:
It's NOT that complicated to follow the procedures, but some people who are not making much $$$ anyway, somehow think it's wise to "bend the rules" (which still doesn't make sense since a Manager MUST call them in ...AND follow the buyer out of the store (store policy):confused:
C.L.Button
06-05-2007, 03:00 PM
I'm sure it is a combination of a bunch of things. I doubt seriously that one factor caused the decision. Doesn't matter, it's done.
Multidigits
06-05-2007, 03:07 PM
I'll tell you this....most mom and pop gun dealers are tickled to death to have them out. Other bigger dealers are too. The marts have always been hard to compete with, mainly because of their buying power. They get special runs from some companies that nobody can beat the deal on. With them out, it levels the playing field some what....except with the mega-dealers that are out there.
westkybanded
06-05-2007, 03:25 PM
I'll tell you this....most mom and pop gun dealers are tickled to death to have them out. Other bigger dealers are too. The marts have always been hard to compete with, mainly because of their buying power. They get special runs from some companies that nobody can beat the deal on. With them out, it levels the playing field some what....except with the mega-dealers that are out there.
Buying power dosen't always have a good effect for local dealers.... Ask Mr. Whittaker why Benelli dosen't sell to him anymore... His prices were too low.
Multidigits
06-05-2007, 03:33 PM
Buying power dosen't always have a good effect for local dealers.... Ask Mr. Whittaker why Benelli dosen't sell to him anymore... His prices were too low.
Benelli is fair traded. Dealers are required to sell at the same price as other dealers, regardless how many units you buy a year (unless it's a closeout or old stock model). When that doesn't happen, it's not long before the other dealers report it and it get closed down. Mr. Whittaker can tell you about it better than me.
AteUp
06-05-2007, 04:07 PM
I for one won't miss their guns one bit. If I were in the market for a new firearm, Walmart would have been the LAST place I would have went shopping.
westkybanded
06-05-2007, 05:27 PM
Benelli is fair traded. Dealers are required to sell at the same price as other dealers, regardless how many units you buy a year (unless it's a closeout or old stock model). When that doesn't happen, it's not long before the other dealers report it and it get closed down. Mr. Whittaker can tell you about it better than me.
How can that be when within 100 miles of here I can find a $100-$400 difference in price on the SAME SBEII?
C.L.Button
06-05-2007, 06:25 PM
I for one won't miss their guns one bit. If I were in the market for a new firearm, Walmart would have been the LAST place I would have went shopping.
Not me,, I went into a Walmart one day to buy a license, as I walked by the gun cabinet I noticed a Browning A-Bolt SS in the rack. It had a different colored tag on it so I asked why. The response was "well we have had the gun for over 1 yr and they want it gone for next years models". I asked to see it, it was a 338 Win Mag.:eek: :D I had to contain myself as not to grab the guy and kiss him ! Then the guy says "we have another one in the back that we don't have room for, it is a .270." I ask how much ? He says "the 338 is 60% off and the 270 is 55% off." I'm thinkin HOLY SHIKZZZ I'm in love ! LMAOOOO Needless to say I walked back outside, got my checkbook and bought them both. :rolleyes: I had been looking for this exact gun at every place between here and Colorado. Here it was right under my nose and I just about stole it. Ever since then I check those racks. I don't care who is selling them if that's the prices and they aren't stolen ! ;)
Multidigits
06-05-2007, 06:29 PM
How can that be when within 100 miles of here I can find a $100-$400 difference in price on the SAME SBEII?
Anybody selling them below suggested retail price is in violation of the Benelli sales policy and subject to losing their franchise.
GunCat
06-05-2007, 10:14 PM
Benelli is fair traded. Dealers are required to sell at the same price as other dealers, regardless how many units you buy a year (unless it's a closeout or old stock model). When that doesn't happen, it's not long before the other dealers report it and it get closed down. Mr. Whittaker can tell you about it better than me.
Sorta OT:
I know with Benelli /Beretta being dealer direct there are certain things the "franchise" dealer agrees to.... but somewhere along the lines I would think that price fixing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_fixing)comes into play.
Rem7600
06-06-2007, 12:56 AM
That makes one million and one reasons that I will never live in California. Sounds as if they violated state laws rather than federal laws. Have to check with the Attorney Generals office to sell a gun? How did they know that it was a straw purchase unless the buyer told them or they were set up? Finger prints / drivers license scan? I have not bought a new gun for a couple of years but when I did, they just did the NICS check and I paid them. IMHO just another way to put all gun dealers out of business.
Multidigits
06-06-2007, 05:27 AM
Sorta OT:
I know with Benelli /Beretta being dealer direct there are certain things the "franchise" dealer agrees to.... but somewhere along the lines I would think that price fixing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_fixing)comes into play.
The only time a Benelli can be discounted is if it's old stock or a discontinued model. OTherwise, they get sold for suggested retail at the same price for all the dealers. Everybody knows that they can find one a bit less here or there, but it's not supposed to happen under the agreement.
talltines
06-12-2007, 09:45 PM
Bottem Line. Californias state laws are ignorant in more ways than one. These idiots would love to get rid of guns altogather. I on the other hand just think we should get rid of California.
Willie
06-12-2007, 10:15 PM
I was on a church mission trip last week to eastern KY and I stopped at the London KY Walmart store.
They still had a fine selection of guns.
They had a Henry .44 that I drooled over.... until momma pulled me away.
wormy8378
06-27-2007, 01:05 PM
Im not a minimum wage employee and make pretty darn good money, 2 degrees and I probably couldn't fill one out right. So my opinion is no matter how much money you make, you still need the training.Not tring to argue but the way I read it made it sound like minimun wage people aren't very smart.
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.