Beware Crony Gun Control
Matt Lewis is worried that Walmart is going to cut a deal with the administration
By Kevin Spak, Newser User
Posted Jan 14, 2013 1:20 PM CST
In this Tuesday, Nov. 13, 2012 photo a woman pushes a shopping cart away from the entrance of a Walmart store in North Kingstown, RI.   (AP Photo/Steven Senne)

(Newser) – When President Obama took on health care, he wasted no time getting big business onboard, even managing to get big pharmaceutical companies to spend $70 million fighting US Chamber of Commerce attacks. And "if you substitute the name Walmart for Big Pharma—and the NRA for the Chamber of Commerce—you will understand" the retailer's meeting with Joe Biden last week, writes Matt Lewis at The Week. "After years of fighting big business, some astute liberals" have decided they're better off getting its blessing.

Walmart could easily benefit from a bill that closed the gun show loophole (sending customers to its stores instead), but which didn't ban the assault rifles it sells. This is why—stereotypes to the contrary—conservatives mistrust big business. "The fact is that big business loves regulation, because they have a competitive advantage" complying. This kind of crony capitalism is corrosive, undermining free market meritocracy and confidence. "Whether you care about guns or not, there is a lot more at stake here than first meets the eye," he concludes. Click for Lewis' full column.

More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
Beware Crony Gun Control is...
Show results without voting
You Might Like
Showing 3 of 9 comments
Jan 14, 2013 3:13 PM CST
Just remember, you get the government you deserve.
Jan 14, 2013 3:06 PM CST
I wish people would learn what the "gun show loophole" was before they tried writing articles on it. It's not a loophole, and it has nothing in particular to do with gun shows. If you close the "loophole," it will not drive more sales to Walmart one bit. It's not a loophole because lawmakers were aware of it, and discussed it, and decided to leave it the way it was for particular reasons. So it's no loophole. All the law says is that if you are not a gun seller, and have a gun you want to sell as a private citizen to someone else (or you want to give a gun as a present to someone), then you don't have to bother with the paperwork of a background check. It can be done at a gun show, yes, but it can be done in your own home. In other words, let's say you have an older pistol that you don't want anymore. You sell it to your friend Chuck. It's just like any other private sale. He gives you the money, you give him the gun. Done. If you are a firearms dealer, then you have to do background checks. Let's say you want to give your son a gun for Christmas. You buy it, and give it to him. Done. No background check. Now, we can make everyone do a background check, even private citizens who are non-firearms dealers, and make that dad do a background check on his son before giving the Christmas present, but it will not drive sales to Walmart or to anywhere else in particular. It will just be an added cost and paperwork. And the background check won't really make us safer at all. Do you realize how many illegally owned firearms (owned by felons) are used in homicides? A lot. People can get them, background checks or not.
Jan 14, 2013 2:29 PM CST
After reading his article, I have two words for Mr. Lewis: OH PULEEEEEZE!! This is silly in the extreme. Explain, if you can, why "cooperation" among key players/stakeholders is "co-optation." Crony capitalism is a catchy sound bite. But, I wonder, if Mr. Lewis' feathers are equally ruffled when the GOP engages (for their personal profit) in the same activity.