Bi-Mart is no-go

[Argonaut]

We buy a lot of stuff from Bi Mart. Have never bought a gun (they don't sell most of the guns I prefer) and rarely buy other shooting supplies........(I buy more fishing gear there) but it is nice to know if I need something they may have it in stock. They seem to work hard keeping prices down allowing more people access to the shooting sports. We were buying 22 ammo from them when no one else had it and the prices were not inflated. The people that work in our store are neighbors and friends in our community (one rents a house from me). I really think the angst and virtual directed towards them could be better directed. Someplace like Fred Meyers that has stopped selling guns all together or some local politician that won't allow a gun store to come in. Those are the enemies that deserve this kind of calling out. The problem is people won't even take the time to identify who those people are let alone confront them. It is the same as a terrorist seeking out a soft target instead of confronting an equal opponent.

 

[Superglide]

^^^^^
This right here.

 

[shibbershabber]

how can you consider that Bi Mart is trying to kill gun culture when they are one of the largest retailers of guns and shooting products in the northwest........do you even read what you are writing? It seems you are trying to live up to your screen name.

Not specifically BiMart, another post asked why the push for 21?
That was my view on it.

BiMart wants to jump on the bandwagon... well... That's on them.

I cant think of any other reason to do what they did?

There is certainly no logic behind it.
The only explanation is that they think that it is in their interest to cast their lot with the anti-gun crowd.
Today its young people.
Tomorrow its semi-autos or handguns
Then its ammo
Then what? No gun counter at all?

They caved in on this one without much noise from actual customers...... really, what makes you think that they wont cave in to the next wave of BS?

I don't see how you can look at this as an innocuous decision that doesn't speak to the ideology of those running the company.

 

[shibbershabber]

I guess it depends on your shooting style.
Find your target, place bead on target, control breath, squeeze trigger, eliminate bullseye and repeat.
Or spray and pray, yell yahoo and too bad -- your were in the way.

At this point, Id say its more like the Chosin Reservoir... we're surrounded and can shoot in all directions.

Id also say we got ourselves in this position because the fight for our rights resembled a game of lawn darts for so long.

By the time I was able to get into shooting, we were already under attack... No one was taking careful, aimed shots nor was anyone spraying and praying either. Sitting back on their laurels twiddling their fingers while forces amassed against us.


I get that you like BiMart... and that they still sell guns. In my opinion, they cannot be trusted any longer. Its like your wife cheating on you... Sure, it was only one time, shes still living with you and still says she loves you.... but can you ever really look at things the same way?

 

[Argonaut]

Not specifically BiMart, another post asked why the push for 21?
That was my view on it.

BiMart wants to jump on the bandwagon... well... That's on them.

I cant think of any other reason to do what they did?

There is certainly no logic behind it.
The only explanation is that they think that it is in their interest to cast their lot with the anti-gun crowd.
Today its young people.
Tomorrow its semi-autos or handguns
Then its ammo
Then what? No gun counter at all?

They caved in on this one without much noise from actual customers...... really, what makes you think that they wont cave in to the next wave of BS?

I don't see how you can look at this as an innocuous decision that doesn't speak to the ideology of those running the company.

Because they have been shown to be dedicated gun retailers. There isn't a lot of money in guns or discounted ammo. They could surly make more profit with a jewlry counter. But they have stayed the course, selling guns and even shooting supplies as intricate as bullets, primers and powder. I am sure they would not make a change like this without logic. I for one see no problem with the 21 year old decision. It allows the parents to make the decision whether there teenagers are responsible enough to have a gun. (They have to buy it for them) I had my first gun at 11, my dad went with me to buy it (a 12 gauge pump shotgun) but if I hadn't been responsible enough, he wouldn't have done it. I think that system works fine.........you know very little history, our gun rights have been under assault for the last 150 years. The 2nd amendment and Supreme Court have done a credible job defending them. Even the NFA act of 1934 didn't outlaw machine guns....only required a licence to own them. The only way to win a fight is to chose a single target, breath in and squeeze. Even if you are shooting at a cove of quail, you have to shoot at them one at a time......shooting at the covey rarely works.....but you probably haven't experienced either shooting at an enemy or a covey.

 

[3MTA3]

^^^^^
This right here.

Agreed. @Argonaut has nailed it a couple of times in this thread.

 

[Superglide]

No one was taking careful, aimed shots nor was anyone spraying and praying either.

In my humble opinion, Heller decision was a deliberate bullseye.

 

[shibbershabber]

I figured it was an "I got mine" justification. Thats fine.

PARENTS???? parents aren't deciding anything... If you are 18, you are an adult.

The law decided they were responsible enough to have a gun. Uncle Sam decided they could go to war with a rifle... Hell there was a time when they'd issue you a rifle and send you to war whether you wanted to go or not. Not to mention there is ZERO evidence that 18-21 years olds commit a disproportionate amount of crime with them either...

Its silly ideas like that which are undermining gun rights. Just like the guys who think that its okay to ban assault weapons for any number of inane reasons... most of all, and Im sure you can sympathize, because they themselves didnt have an interest in them.

 

[3MTA3]

The bigger question is "Why are 18 year olds no longer mature enough to buy a firearm or ammunition"? Is this fact or just a perception?

Why when I was in High School was nobody alarmed that every truck in the parking lot had a 30-30 in a window rack while today drawing a picture of a gun can get you suspended?

 

[shibbershabber]

In my humble opinion, Heller decision was a deliberate bullseye.

Heller was great. It reaffirmed what we all already knew, that an individual has a right to own a gun.

So... when has that been used since as a precedent to deny other gun controls?

Because in the 10 years since then there have been numerous gun control laws passed that were more and more restrictive each and every time..... yet those laws stand.

So, yes, Heller was nice. People in DC can have a 1911 or a J-frame. But what did it really do for gun rights in general?

 

[Argonaut]

I figured it was an "I got mine" justification. Thats fine.

PARENTS???? parents aren't deciding anything... If you are 18, you are an adult.

The law decided they were responsible enough to have a gun. Uncle Sam decided they could go to war with a rifle... Hell there was a time when they'd issue you a rifle and send you to war whether you wanted to go or not. Not to mention there is ZERO evidence that 18-21 years olds commit a disproportionate amount of crime with them either...

Its silly ideas like that which are undermining gun rights. Just like the guys who think that its okay to ban assault weapons for any number of inane reasons... most of all, and Im sure you can sympathize, because they themselves didnt have an interest in them.

Did you read my explanation of how the military uses teenagers and guns? You have to earn the privilege to carry a weapon into war........it isn't a right. A military member has few constitunal rights.

 

[shibbershabber]

Did you read my explanation of how the military uses teenagers and guns? You have to earn the privilege to carry a weapon into war........it isn't a right. A military member has few constitunal rights.

Yes, I read it.

That doesn't change my opinion. I understand that the military does more than just slap a rifle in your hands and send you on your way.
But, they do take adults under the age of 21. And those people seem to be able to take training and handle it just fine.
So, we can assume that adults under 21 are capable of handling a firearm responsibly.

Millions of adults under 21 are able to handle long guns without any trouble, even without military service... or without any formal training in most cases.

SO, did you read my comment about there not being any evidence that people 18-21 are more a problem, thus justifying this restriction?

 

[Superglide]

Just about done here.
Mostly everyone on here does not support these restrictions. You need to get that.
The point is to focus on a more distasteful situation- Like Fred Meyer who STOPPED ALL SALES. We are talking about a corporate decision, not a statute of law.
It's not a point of "I like BiMart". It's that BiMart has value, especially in rural communities.
Trust issues with the wife, I will let you sort that out.

 

[shibbershabber]

...you know very little history, our gun rights have been under assault for the last 150 years. The 2nd amendment and Supreme Court have done a credible job defending them. Even the NFA act of 1934 didn't outlaw machine guns....only required a licence to own them. The only way to win a fight is to chose a single target, breath in and squeeze. Even if you are shooting at a cove of quail, you have to shoot at them one at a time......shooting at the covey rarely works.....but you probably haven't experienced either shooting at an enemy or a covey.

You'd be surprised what I know.

I do know that the NFA was the gateway drug for the gun controllers.
The NFA opened the door to the Federal Firearms Act... which imposed federal bureaucracy into the gun industry, creating much of the regulatory framework we have today. Which was reworked into the '68 Gun Control Act...

The NFA sure made it easier to impose the "machine gun ban" in 1986...
While theyre at it, why not kill importation of semi automatics into the country? Thanks, Bush, we all are so much safer
Then what? Hey! now that we have this massive regulatory infrastructure and some public sympathy... lets impose background checks!!! That will probably make things safer...

Oh wait... restricting SBR, full autos and suppressors... mandating dealer regulation... banning new mfg machine guns... banning imported semi autos and even mandatory background checks didnt work?

Well, how about a 10 year ban on 'assault weapons' and mags over 10rnds? Sure. Why not.

And thats just federal level stuff. ... I dont even know if I could hammer out all of the state level restrictions that have been imposed.
Maybe you dont care because you, until recently, have had the luxury of being over 21 and in a state which had relatively few gun laws.



Come on. Very little has been gained in my lifetime when it comes to gun rights. In fact, it appears that nothing but more burdens have been enacted. Except for concealed carry laws.

You keep talking about winning the battle with your carefully aimed shots... but what exactly have you shot down besides some birds?

AND I dont need to have shot a person or a quail to see that.

 

[shibbershabber]

Just about done here.
Mostly everyone on here does not support these restrictions. You need to get that.
The point is to focus on a more distasteful situation- Like Fred Meyer who STOPPED ALL SALES. We are talking about a corporate decision, not a statute of law.
It's not a point of "I like BiMart". It's that BiMart has value, especially in rural communities.
Trust issues with the wife, I will let you sort that out.

I understand.
Im arguing more about giving them a pass for it.

Fred Meyer wasnt as bad, BiMart has always sold guns and always been representative of rural values...
Fred Meyer changed their mind... BiMart sold us out and will again soon enough.
For the record I dont go to FM either.

The wife? If she betrays me once. Shes gone.
Out she goes... she can go hang out at BiMart

 

[CLT65]

Not relevant to Bi-Mart, but I was discussing the "probationary adult" issue with a coworker recently and made the comment that if 18-20 year old adults are not mature enough to own a rifle or buy ammo, then maybe they're not mature enough to vote, either.

Wow, what a negative reaction. You CAN'T take away their sacred right to vote. Heaven forbid! After all, that age group is the most reliable bloc of Democrat voters.

 

[CLT65]

On second thought, maybe they shouldn't have guns...

 

[shibbershabber]

Not relevant to Bi-Mart, but I was discussing the "probationary adult" issue with a coworker recently and made the comment that if 18-20 year old adults are not mature enough to own a rifle or buy ammo, then maybe they're not mature enough to vote, either.

Wow, what a negative reaction. You CAN'T take away their sacred right to vote. Heaven forbid! After all, that age group is the most reliable bloc of Democrat voters.

Yeah... Maybe it should all get moved to 21...

You know, just to be fair.

Cant cherry pick rights, kids.

No guns, no votes, no smokes, no military service, no buying a car, not renting an apartment... none of it. until you reach the magic age of 21.

Wonder how many David Hoggs out there will like that?
Better yet, the parents of these little Hoggs out in the streets for what they 'believe in'

 

[cigars]

I definitely understand the upheaval about this, but I also find it intriguing. I've seen people state it's a civil rights violation and many other claims. However, I wonder if the outrage was shared when stores stopped selling those cans of air duster to people under 18? Or when they started restricting sudafed sales? Or the numerous other simialr examples that aren't firearms related? I'm not condoning these actions, and find them all ludicrous. I'm also not faulting people for calling them out. I'm just curious if the reaction is across the board, or only when it applies to them?

But they will legalize marijuana and all kinds of other hard core drugs, which kill more on a daily basis than any gun stats.

 

[Argonaut]

You'd be surprised what I know.

I do know that the NFA was the gateway drug for the gun controllers.
The NFA opened the door to the Federal Firearms Act... which imposed federal bureaucracy into the gun industry, creating much of the regulatory framework we have today. Which was reworked into the '68 Gun Control Act...

The NFA sure made it easier to impose the "machine gun ban" in 1986...
While theyre at it, why not kill importation of semi automatics into the country? Thanks, Bush, we all are so much safer
Then what? Hey! now that we have this massive regulatory infrastructure and some public sympathy... lets impose background checks!!! That will probably make things safer...

Oh wait... restricting SBR, full autos and suppressors... mandating dealer regulation... banning new mfg machine guns... banning imported semi autos and even mandatory background checks didnt work?

Well, how about a 10 year ban on 'assault weapons' and mags over 10rnds? Sure. Why not.

And thats just federal level stuff. ... I dont even know if I could hammer out all of the state level restrictions that have been imposed.
Maybe you dont care because you, until recently, have had the luxury of being over 21 and in a state which had relatively few gun laws.



Come on. Very little has been gained in my lifetime when it comes to gun rights. In fact, it appears that nothing but more burdens have been enacted. Except for concealed carry laws.

You keep talking about winning the battle with your carefully aimed shots... but what exactly have you shot down besides some birds?

AND I dont need to have shot a person or a quail to see that.

I have been shot at (and returned fire) on 4 continents during my 13 years in special ops (USAF) with various weapons. I have also shot many types of quail and other game on 3 continents and do aircraft count? There are many old and young vets here with experiance you can not imagine. Real experiance......not watching a movie. You live in the town that another member here was refused the ability to open a gun shop. He posted it a week or so ago.....l.the people that did that are a much better target for your misplaced passion. They are the enemy, not a brick and mortar store trying to supply shooters the best way they know. Do you even know who that was? You live in the town where it went on........the evidence that 18-21 year olds are a problem is the number of school shootings they commit. That is why you will have an uphill battle making your point. At this point they are all copy cats but none the less dangerous and uncontrollable. The NFA laws have been quite effective. Very few (any?) NFA firearms have been used in crime so the system has worked pretty well.