Dicks Sporting Goods

[zload]

Dick's CEO chose to make it a political issue not a business issue and specifically called for additional federal gun control legislation including total bans on SA rifles, private sales and standard capacity mags while doing it...

"Chief executive Edward W. Stack made the announcement during an appearance on “Good Morning America”, as well as through a company statement that said “thoughts and prayers are not enough” in the wake of America’s latest mass shooting. Two weeks ago, a gunman killed 17 people, most of them teenagers, in Parkland, Fla., with an AR-15 that was legally purchased. The alleged shooter, Nikolas Cruz, bought a shotgun from a Dick’s store in November, Stack said during the television interview.

Although the weapon purchased at the Dick’s outlet was not the one used in the massacre, Stack said his company was moved to act.

“We did everything by the book, and we did everything that the law required, and he was still able to buy a gun,” Stack told host George Stephanopoulos."

"On Good Morning America, Stack urged Congress to put aside partisan politics and enact swift changes to gun laws. A statement called on those in office to ban assault-style firearms, ban high-capacity magazines and bump stocks, and require universal background checks that “include relevant mental health information and previous interactions with the law.” The statement also demanded a comprehensive database of people banned from buying firearms and the closure of the private sale and gun show loophole that waives background checks."

One of many sources WaPo

[Apalachee Inshore]

Personally I buy all my guns from strangers in a Walmart parking lot that I met on the internet like everyone else.

[Salty Gator]

Dick's CEO chose to make it a political issue not a business issue and specifically called for additional federal gun control legislation including total bans on SA rifles, private sales and standard capacity mags while doing it...

"Chief executive Edward W. Stack made the announcement during an appearance on “Good Morning America”, as well as through a company statement that said “thoughts and prayers are not enough” in the wake of America’s latest mass shooting. Two weeks ago, a gunman killed 17 people, most of them teenagers, in Parkland, Fla., with an AR-15 that was legally purchased. The alleged shooter, Nikolas Cruz, bought a shotgun from a Dick’s store in November, Stack said during the television interview.

Although the weapon purchased at the Dick’s outlet was not the one used in the massacre, Stack said his company was moved to act.

“We did everything by the book, and we did everything that the law required, and he was still able to buy a gun,” Stack told host George Stephanopoulos."

"On Good Morning America, Stack urged Congress to put aside partisan politics and enact swift changes to gun laws. A statement called on those in office to ban assault-style firearms, ban high-capacity magazines and bump stocks, and require universal background checks that “include relevant mental health information and previous interactions with the law.” The statement also demanded a comprehensive database of people banned from buying firearms and the closure of the private sale and gun show loophole that waives background checks."

One of many sources WaPo

So he urged Congress to do those things? Big deal . It didn’t involve any contributions. I’m ok with that. Minus the assault style rifles and hi cap mags. I like better background checks. My elderly mom said the same thing the Dicks ceo said. I’m not worried about her ruining the second amendment for us either.

[luckywsp]

So there are gulp shrimp on sale for 4.77 right now. Good to know. I have found them to be very effective in our area. I like new penny personally. Anyone else want to talk fishing or post some nice fish they caught?

[Salty Gator]

So there are gulp shrimp on sale for 4.77 right now. Good to know. I have found them to be very effective in our area. I like new penny personally. Anyone else want to talk fishing or post some nice fish they caught?

I like new penny also

[onefishtwofish]

Thanks for the heads up OP, but Dick's has the right to express their opinion and I have a right to express mine with my wallet. I might get some Gulps at Dick's for 4.77 but that is probably the least they would have to pay me.

[GaryDroze]

Dick's just sent me a $10 gift card. I'll be picking up some free terminal tackle there this weekend. Hooray for naked amoral capitalism, upon which this great nation keeps chugging along.

[dombern34]

you can put whatever "gun law restrictions" you want on guns. But, if a bad person wants to cause harm, I'm pretty sure there isn't going to be a "Law" to stop them.

[StMarksAngler]

you can put whatever "gun law restrictions" you want on guns. But, if a bad person wants to cause harm, I'm pretty sure there isn't going to be a "Law" to stop them.

Common Fox News crowd talking point (and this is literally circulated in NRA marketing literature), that has absolutely zero basis in reality. US gun violence is thousands of magnitudes beyond all other first world countries. The only difference is, the laws. Adjusted for population size, you're literally hundreds of times more likely to be killed in the US by a gun than you are in the UK, Germany, China, Japan, etc. Even with active war/conflicts, you're still currently three to four times more likely to be killed here by a gun than you are in Syria, Pakistan, Iran, Libya, Yemen, Palestine, India, Sri Lanka, etc. Pretty much the only places you're more likely to be killed by guns are Colombia, Honduras, Venezuela, Thailand, the Philippines... in other words, countries with vast swaths of remote, unpoliced territory plagued by drug violence.

Are you going to stop a mad genius from concocting homemade sarin gas in his basement and setting off an improvised device in Times Square, by restricting access to ARs and high capacity magazines? No... but that's not the point. The point is that by having reasonable, logical laws preventing unnecessary access to powerful weaponry you prevent the other 95% of attacks, committed by bullied kids and Pizzagate conspiracy rednecks.

I own lots of guns, and lots of ARs. But our current laws make less than zero sense, and there is absolutely no tenable position that argues otherwise.

[doomtrpr_z71]

you can put whatever "gun law restrictions" you want on guns. But, if a bad person wants to cause harm, I'm pretty sure there isn't going to be a "Law" to stop them.

Common Fox News crowd talking point (and this is literally circulated in NRA marketing literature), that has absolutely zero basis in reality. US gun violence is thousands of magnitudes beyond all other first world countries. The only difference is, the laws. Adjusted for population size, you're literally hundreds of times more likely to be killed in the US by a gun than you are in the UK, Germany, China, Japan, etc. Even with active war/conflicts, you're still currently three to four times more likely to be killed here by a gun than you are in Syria, Pakistan, Iran, Libya, Yemen, Palestine, India, Sri Lanka, etc. Pretty much the only places you're more likely to be killed by guns are Colombia, Honduras, Venezuela, Thailand, the Philippines... in other words, countries with vast swaths of remote, unpoliced territory plagued by drug violence.

Are you going to stop a mad genius from concocting homemade sarin gas in his basement and setting off an improvised device in Times Square, by restricting access to ARs and high capacity magazines? No... but that's not the point. The point is that by having reasonable, logical laws preventing unnecessary access to powerful weaponry you prevent the other 95% of attacks, committed by bullied kids and Pizzagate conspiracy rednecks.

I own lots of guns, and lots of ARs. But our current laws make less than zero sense, and there is absolutely no tenable position that argues otherwise.

And you are basing all of that on what NPR circulates, 99% of violent crime in the US occurs in area equivalent to 5% of the population. But you are correct, our current laws don't make sense as they are infringements and home depot and Lowes sell all the parts necessary to build a machine gun on the plumbing aisles.

[dombern34]

you can put whatever "gun law restrictions" you want on guns. But, if a bad person wants to cause harm, I'm pretty sure there isn't going to be a "Law" to stop them.

Common Fox News crowd talking point (and this is literally circulated in NRA marketing literature), that has absolutely zero basis in reality. US gun violence is thousands of magnitudes beyond all other first world countries. The only difference is, the laws. Adjusted for population size, you're literally hundreds of times more likely to be killed in the US by a gun than you are in the UK, Germany, China, Japan, etc. Even with active war/conflicts, you're still currently three to four times more likely to be killed here by a gun than you are in Syria, Pakistan, Iran, Libya, Yemen, Palestine, India, Sri Lanka, etc. Pretty much the only places you're more likely to be killed by guns are Colombia, Honduras, Venezuela, Thailand, the Philippines... in other words, countries with vast swaths of remote, unpoliced territory plagued by drug violence.

Are you going to stop a mad genius from concocting homemade sarin gas in his basement and setting off an improvised device in Times Square, by restricting access to ARs and high capacity magazines? No... but that's not the point. The point is that by having reasonable, logical laws preventing unnecessary access to powerful weaponry you prevent the other 95% of attacks, committed by bullied kids and Pizzagate conspiracy rednecks.

I own lots of guns, and lots of ARs. But our current laws make less than zero sense, and there is absolutely no tenable position that argues otherwise.

Common CNN crowd talking point. every time a mass shooting happens, everyone wants to point fingers at the gun, never the trigger puller. there will never be a law that will prevent a mass shooting. lets go back to the Boston Marathon bombing for second. not ONCE did they blame the "pressure cooker" for the lives of the innocent people. the MEDIA only glorified the people involved. granted, if those same terrorist opened fired, they would've glorified the gun and been screaming about gun laws. which gun laws are you referring to that make zero sense? Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the US, their crime sure is dwindling it'll be the good guys who will suffer the most from stricter gun laws. you're still putting the blame on the gun.. we should possibly look into revising the laws on Drugs, that'll fix that issue as well.

[StMarksAngler]

Common CNN crowd talking point.

No, it's called data. It would literally take you 5 minutes to Google and confirm, if you cared to have any conception of the truth, or reality. There are thousands of peer-reviewed, scientific papers that all show the same empirical results. These are conducted by thousands of people who dedicate their entire lives and careers to the study of statistical analysis, and everyone comes up with the same endpoint.

...except the Fox News armchair experts that apparently know better than the collective knowledge of the world's academic institutions.

[StMarksAngler]

Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the US, their crime sure is dwindling

Another Fox News favorite that holds zero water. This is the kind of "analysis" you see coming from those with a 4th grade grasp of using logical fallacy to twist reality into a completely ungrounded narrative.

Yes, Chicago's gun violence is above national norms. There are two data point that predict this, always. 1) Population density (check, Chicago is crowded) and 2) access to guns. "HA! Chicago has strict gun laws, but high gun violence, so this is all a big liberal conspiracy to take our ARs and overthrow Trump!" Problem with that is, the city of Chicago has strict gun laws, restricting access to purchase and possess. But in addition to the surrounding counties that have no such laws, just down the road from Chicago are two states with hardly any restrictions on gun sales whatsoever. Police data shows that fewer than 50% of of the weapons used in Chicago were even purchased in the state of Illinois. In other words, there's a thriving black market to smuggle guns into the city, due to the difficulty of obtaining them locally. You end up with a massive metro area, that's densely populated, that still has easy access to guns... and hence increased gun violence over national averages (which as we've already established, are staggeringly high compared to the rest of the Earth).

Don't believe what you're spoon fed by pundits. Go out and do the research, and come to your own conclusions.

[dombern34]

Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the US, their crime sure is dwindling

Another Fox News favorite that holds zero water. This is the kind of "analysis" you see coming from those with a 4th grade grasp of using logical fallacy to twist reality into a completely ungrounded narrative.

Yes, Chicago's gun violence is above national norms. There are two data point that predict this, always. 1) Population density (check, Chicago is crowded) and 2) access to guns. "HA! Chicago has strict gun laws, but high gun violence, so this is all a big liberal conspiracy to take our ARs and overthrow Trump!" Problem with that is, the city of Chicago has strict gun laws, restricting access to purchase and possess. But in addition to the surrounding counties that have no such laws, just down the road from Chicago are two states with hardly any restrictions on gun sales whatsoever. Police data shows that fewer than 50% of of the weapons used in Chicago were even purchased in the state of Illinois. In other words, there's a thriving black market to smuggle guns into the city, due to the difficulty of obtaining them locally.

Don't believe what you're spoon fed by pundits. Go out and do the research, and come to your own conclusions.

Your last sentience contradicts your first post which brings me back to my point I was trying to make... no LAW will stop the black market or keep guns out of the hands of the people who wish to do harm.

[MudDucker]

you can put whatever "gun law restrictions" you want on guns. But, if a bad person wants to cause harm, I'm pretty sure there isn't going to be a "Law" to stop them.

Common Fox News crowd talking point (and this is literally circulated in NRA marketing literature), that has absolutely zero basis in reality. US gun violence is thousands of magnitudes beyond all other first world countries. The only difference is, the laws. Adjusted for population size, you're literally hundreds of times more likely to be killed in the US by a gun than you are in the UK, Germany, China, Japan, etc. Even with active war/conflicts, you're still currently three to four times more likely to be killed here by a gun than you are in Syria, Pakistan, Iran, Libya, Yemen, Palestine, India, Sri Lanka, etc. Pretty much the only places you're more likely to be killed by guns are Colombia, Honduras, Venezuela, Thailand, the Philippines... in other words, countries with vast swaths of remote, unpoliced territory plagued by drug violence.

Are you going to stop a mad genius from concocting homemade sarin gas in his basement and setting off an improvised device in Times Square, by restricting access to ARs and high capacity magazines? No... but that's not the point. The point is that by having reasonable, logical laws preventing unnecessary access to powerful weaponry you prevent the other 95% of attacks, committed by bullied kids and Pizzagate conspiracy rednecks.

I own lots of guns, and lots of ARs. But our current laws make less than zero sense, and there is absolutely no tenable position that argues otherwise.

First, your reference to Fox News is the typical liberal response that attempts to degrade the responder. Second, the 2nd Amendment says "shall not be infringed" and all of these attempts at idiotic regulation spoken as "common sense" gun laws are un-Constitutional and far from common sense. If you read the book "Unintended Consequences", it tells of how a bad case made for bad law allowing some restriction of our 2nd Amendment rights. As an attorney and avid student of both the law and history, there is NO data to show a direct relationship between gun control and crime control. Why, well for a starter, the shooter is usually (a) a criminal or (b) a nut case. Guess what, neither of these will obey gun laws. Gun laws will not control crime or gun violence as evil people always find a way around the laws. Look at London where knife and acid attacks replaced guns. Even there, criminals still have guns. There are FAR too many guns in circulation in the US for any law to prevent anyone from getting a gun. An FBI bud told me that there are MORE guns sold on the black market than from legal sources. Also, do you know you aren't speaking Japanese ... because the Japanese knew that there was no way an invasion of the US would succeed, because there was an American with a gun behind every blade of grass.

Many of today's attacks are carried out in declared gun free zones. The media does not report how many times a good man with a gun stopped an evil man with a gun. That happens far more than the media highlighted attacks.

As for me, you gun regulationists can pound sand. I advise you that I am not slave to the government and will not be made one by being disarmed. The British tried to seize the colonists' weapons and they got the wrong end of those guns. While I am a peaceful man, I will not stand by and allow people with no common sense to sing the song of commons sense gun controls to come take my guns. I advise all to guard all of their rights, but the 2nd amendment is the cornerstone to preventing a tyrannical government from taking the rest.

Have a nice day!