Use Your Power As A Consumer To Change Gun Laws

It’s all the power we have left to affect change

With “Moscow Mitch” at the helm in the United States Senate there is very little chance of any meaningful gun legislation getting passed of their own accord. Our representatives are going to need some motivation from “we the people” if anything is going to be done about the absurd level of gun violence in this country. For all his constant mumbling about “the American people” and making sure “our” voices are heard, as in the case of Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland whom, you’ll remember, Moscow Mitch refused to take up a confirmation vote on until the “American people” had a chance to chime in – right after the election Comrade Trump. This, of course, resulted in the confirmation of ultra-conservative Neil Gorsuch to the court instead. Well I guess the people have spoken. Thanks, “Moscow”…..

However, “Moscow” hasn’t been waiting to hear from the American people regarding the issue of gun control or, if he has, he hasn’t been listening very well since we’ve been screaming it from the rafters for years. America wants gun control; America wants the gun laws tightened up; America wants meaningful, effective, background checks and gun licensing; America wants military-style assault weapons taken off the market, permanently. Seems like, suddenly Moscow Mitch is as deaf as a fence post. Go figure. An overwhelming majority of Americans – and by that I mean 89 – 91 % of Americans – are in agreement on this issue. Ninety-one percent of Americans couldn’t agree on the colors of the flag let alone meaningful gun reform but there it is. And still nothing from Moscow Mitch and the U.S Senate (queue the crickets, please.) So, help me refresh my memory; I’m having some difficulty: what do you call it when a majority of the people are demanding something and the government refuses to act? Oh, well. I’m sure it’ll come to me.

In my complete and utter frustration over the gall of one person (I wouldn’t describe him as a “man”) holding up the possibility of any progress being made on this heart wrenching issue and not a single member of his party raising their voice in any meaningful way, I thought it necessary to take another tack. We’re going to need to hit the GOP where it hurts and, in political circles, that means the pocketbook. And where does the money come from in their pocket books? From their wealthy donors and corporate masters, that’s where. (You’ll have to forgive the dangling adverbs, etc. Writing in the colloquial requires scrapping such grammatical rules.)

Recently Walmart decided to stop selling certain firearms and ammunition in their stores which reach into every nook and cranny of America. In an open letter to their employees, CEO Doug McMillon announced that the nation’s largest retailer would stop selling ammunition used for handguns and military-style weapons, and end the sale of handguns in their stores completely. They would also take the seemingly bizarre step of discouraging their customers from carrying weapons in their stores, even in the “open carry” states. (Yes, dear readers, there really are places where you can carry your Glock down the frozen foods aisle. I guess you just never know when a slightly-grazed antelope is going to spring out of the meat department!)

Now, there can only be one real reason for this abrupt but well-overdue announcement: business. The management – or possibly (most likely?) the shareholders – of Walmart have made a calculated decision: that it is in the best interests of the company to make this bold reversal of policy. After all, McMillon’s raison d’être is improving the financial prospects of the shareholders of the company. That means that this change in policy was seen as such a move and the executive management – including Walmart’s board of directors – agreed. The management of Walmart is betting that this new policy would be offset by any additional goodwill they would realize from their massive customer base. If this is truly the case, then what other companies are out there that might be convinced of this as well? Or more importantly, how many other companies are there that might put the necessary added pressure upon the “Moscow Mitch’s” of the United States Senate to act in kind before they, too, are targeted by their customer base to make a move like Walmart’s? It would seem better (to me at least) to make such changes in policy before the company would be “forced” to against their will.