Ben Shapiro OUTRAGED That Walmart Workers Don't Want To Die For His Freedoms
This week Walmart announced that they would be making some changes regarding gun and ammunition sales, in light of the many mass shootings last month, two of which took place in their stores. From now on, they will no longer be selling ammunition for non-sport related guns, selling handguns in Alaska (the last state where they still sell them), or allowing customers to walk around their stores with 87 guns strapped to their person.
While we might be celebrating this move (cautiously, because Walmart is still very gross about unions, killing entire small town economies, and other things), Ben Shapiro is furious! He is not at all happy about this brand new, insidious technique the Far Left has come up with, in which they pressure corporations to be less terrible, often by refusing to give those corporations their money.
Just wait until Ben finds out about Anita Bryant. Or unions! And strikes! And boycotts! If he ever cracks open a history book he is gonna be so pissed.
But who exactly these are nefarious "far left" activists forcing Walmart to do their bidding? Well, mostly, they are Walmart employees who were, for some reason, unwilling to die for Ben Shapiro's freedoms in the course of their job.
These employees took a big risk. They could have lost their jobs. But they won in the end! And that's good, because there is no way Walmart pays their cashiers enough to make "risk of dying in a mass shooting" a part of the job.
Now, I don't know about you, but if I were working in a Walmart (especially post-El Paso) and I saw someone walking in carrying a bunch of weapons, I would shit myself. How the hell is anyone supposed to tell the difference between a shooter who plans to murder them walking around with a giant gun and this open-carry enthusiast walking around with a giant gun?
Of course, Ben Shapiro, gracious little thing that he is, is not just upset about this because it will be a bad time for people like him who just happen to love waltzing around Walmart dressed like Rambo. No, he is upset about this because of how it is bad for America. He just doesn't want us to be so polarized and divided, and the only way we can do that is by doing what he wants all the time. It breaks his heart to see us this way!
Ben Shapiro is just as free as we are to try to make use of that "invisible hand of the free market" he likes so much. Of course, there is almost no way that Walmart did not know that there would be a major backlash from people like him. They likely took that into consideration and decided that What Ben Shapiro Wants was not at the top of their list of concerns. Surely, Ben understands this and is insulted. As he should be.
I should note that this missive comes after Tuesday's bout of conservative pundits like Megan McCain and Tucker Carlson threatening an actual civil war should assault weapons be banned. We "pressure" corporations, they say that they will kill us if they don't get their way, and we're the ones who are being divisive? We're the ones who are setting a "dangerous precedent"? Ain't that something!
Maybe I'm missing something here. The Left has certainly faced its share of losses over the past few years, but I can't think of the last time that we responded to a damn thing with "If this doesn't go our way, we will straight up murder all of you." Can you imagine how they would react if we did? If we said, "Hey, if you guys ban abortion, we are going to start an actual war in which we kill you"? Keep in mind, these are the same people who get the vapours over Antifa activists throwing milkshakes at the poor Nazis, so I cannot imagine they would be particularly blasé about it.
If Ben Shapiro is so incredibly concerned about "polarization," perhaps he should consider taking a look at this Fox News poll showing that two-thirds of Americans support an assault weapons ban. Or this poll showing that 86% of Americans support background checks. It is not that polarized! We have a clear majority. If he is worried about polarization, he should probably get on the side of the majority, rather than demanding that the majority agree with him.
Unless, of course, he is not so much worried about "polarization" and "division" and "setting precedents" as he is about getting his own way and he is attempting to use those things as a cudgel in order to accomplish that. That is also possible.
Wonkette is independent and fully funded by readers like you. Click below to tip us!
Robyn Pennacchia is a brilliant, fabulously talented and visually stunning angel of a human being, who shrugged off what she is pretty sure would have been a Tony Award-winning career in musical theater in order to write about stuff on the internet. In addition to her work at Wonkette, she also has a biweekly column at Dame. Follow her on Twitter at @RobynElyse