Dicks has reportedly hired gun control lobbyists on Capitol Hill

[PeterD]

The sporting goods retailer in the midst of changing their firearms policies has signed three Washington lobbyists for the purpose of gun control.

http://www.guns.com/2018/05/03/dicks-ret...ts-in-d-c/

[LR1955]

PeterD:

Sorry but this doesn't have anything more to do with the 2A than any other corporation with an anti-gun policy.

How about participating in some of the firearms related forums?

LR55

[LR1955]

PD:

I am opening the thread again but want to know why you thought this was of any importance.

To me, Dick's is just another sporting goods chain and has no bearing on the economy or politics.

Also, I question why a corporation would hire lobbyists to lobby congress to ban firearms. I would understand hiring lawyers to fight off the lawsuits against Dick's but somehow I don't think they were hired to lobby for more gun control.

So, tell us why you think this is so important that it warrants our attention.

LR55

[bj139]

I am glad to see this thread open again.
Keep going Peter.
You are schooling us in many topics the MSM will not show.

[StoneHendge]

I'll take a stab. By supporting Dicks, you are supporting a company that is funding Lobbyists whose mission is to restrict your second amendment rights. If you value these rights, please buy your tennis balls, running shorts, badminton birdies and golf tees elsewhere.

How about participating in some of the firearms related forums?

LR55

Shouldn't the same be asked of Room 2A's resident troll?

[CVCOBRA1]

The disclosure lists the sole issue of “Lobbying related to gun control,” as the only one the GPG reps were retained to address.

From the article above. I was going to post this earlier but saw the thread was closed. If the quote above does not fit the issue of the topic that this forum is for, I don't know what would.

“crafting and implementing legislative strategy.”--------that's what this law firm is known for. Crafting new gun control laws, that's it! These are the people that need to be stopped cold and quick. In the swamp money talks. And there are people out there with more money than the NRA. Don't let them get their foot in the door.

Now stanc, chime in with your drivel.

[LR1955]

I'll take a stab. By supporting Dicks, you are supporting a company that is funding Lobbyists whose mission is to restrict your second amendment rights. If you value these rights, please buy your tennis balls, running shorts, badminton birdies and golf tees elsewhere.



Shouldn't the same be asked of Room 2A's resident troll?

SH:

If you are talking about Stan, you ought to read some of the Military and Police forum. I would say Stan participates in every discussion and has started some of the longest lasting discussions on the Grendel forum.

LR55

[stanc]

The disclosure lists the sole issue of “Lobbying related to gun control,” as the only one the GPG reps were retained to address.

From the article above. I was going to post this earlier but saw the thread was closed. If the quote above does not fit the issue of the topic that this forum is for, I don't know what would.

“crafting and implementing legislative strategy.”--------that's what this law firm is known for. Crafting new gun control laws, that's it! These are the people that need to be stopped cold and quick. In the swamp money talks. And there are people out there with more money than the NRA. Don't let them get their foot in the door.

Now stanc, chime in with your drivel.

Since you ask so nicely, okay.

I agree with LR1955 that this is not a 2A issue. The 2A is a theoretical limit on what the Federal government can do, not what private citizens can do.

It's a 1A issue. Under the 1A, Dick's leadership has the right to implement sales policy in its stores, and to lobby for or against legislation in Congress.

[LR1955]

The disclosure lists the sole issue of “Lobbying related to gun control,” as the only one the GPG reps were retained to address.

From the article above. I was going to post this earlier but saw the thread was closed. If the quote above does not fit the issue of the topic that this forum is for, I don't know what would.

“crafting and implementing legislative strategy.”--------that's what this law firm is known for. Crafting new gun control laws, that's it! These are the people that need to be stopped cold and quick. In the swamp money talks. And there are people out there with more money than the NRA. Don't let them get their foot in the door.

Now stanc, chime in with your drivel.

CVC:

I believe something isn't quite right about this article. Here is why.

Why would Dicks hire lobbyists to lobby for gun control laws when they continue to sell firearms and firearm related gear? Dick's can create their own policies regarding the selling of firearms without Congressional approval. And if they fear law suits, just stop stocking and selling firearms -- as they are now doing.

Somehow I doubt the board of directors or shareholders of Dicks voted to hire anti gun lobbyists. And I also doubt the same wants Dick's CEO to shove the corporation into the political and social science arena.

LR55









Then why does Dicks still sell firearms and other firearm related gear?

[montana]

The 2A is a theoretical limit on what the Federal government can do, not what private citizens can do.

I agree, except it is not a theoretical limit since it states quite clearly what the meaning, intentions, were, are and should be. No where does it say it applies theoretically. Private companies, people do have the first amendment right to say, support, disagree with what ever subject they wish. To say a major business lobbying for more restrictions and erosion of the 2nd Amendment, "is some how not about the 2nd Amendment" is quite bewildering and disingenuous to me.

[Sticks]

Frog in a pot.

[stanc]

I agree, except it is not a theoretical limit since it states quite clearly what the meaning, intentions, were, are and should be. No where does it say it applies theoretically.

Heh, heh. If you truly think it is not a theoretical limit, then how do you explain the 1934 NFA, the 1968 GCA, the 1986 machine gun ban, the 1994 assault weapons ban?
Those acts "infringed" heavily on the RKBA, yet they were passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. That couldn't have happened if the 2A was a real limit.

Private companies, people do have the first amendment right to say, support, disagree with what ever subject they wish. To say a major business lobbying for more restrictions and erosion of the 2nd Amendment, "is some how not about the 2nd Amendment" is quite bewildering and disingenuous to me.

Just calling it the way I see it.

[montana]

Heh, heh. If you truly think it is not a theoretical limit, then how do you explain the 1934 NFA, the 1968 GCA, the 1986 machine gun ban, the 1994 assault weapons ban?

Theoretical American representatives and citizens who profess to understand, support and believe in the Constitution.

[stanc]

Theoretical American representatives and citizens who profess to understand, support and believe in the Constitution.

:confused: Not seeing how that answers my question.

[LR1955]

Well, at least this is now getting into the 2A.

[StoneHendge]

:confused: Not seeing how that answers my question.

I think he answered it quite succinctly.

[CVCOBRA1]

Now I know it was over a dozen

[stanc]

Now I know it was over a dozen

What was over a dozen?

[stanc]

How about participating in some of the firearms related forums?

Shouldn't the same be asked of Room 2A's resident troll?

If by chance you're referring to me, I have in excess of 2500 posts in the firearms related forums here.

[LR1955]

Stan:

I was referring to PeterD, not you.

Again, for those of you who think Stan does not participate in any other forum, you need to look at the Military and Police forums.

Finally, how come no one can seem to come up with an answer to his question about the NFA, GCA of 1968, and various 'Assault Weapons' bans that have been upheld in the courts? I am truly interested in knowing why these bans are possible if the 2A is absolute?

Just saying that these anti gun measures were taken by people who did not 'understand' the 2A is not an answer.

LR55