David Codrea:

OXFAM? They’re the international citizen disarmament zealots who are conjoined with IANSA to stump for a global gun grab. If they get what they want, they won’t “respectfully request.” And it will be mandatory.

What’s David talking about?  Check here to find out.  Their full statement is as follows.

The debate in the U.S. over gun safety and gun rights is as complex as it is divisive. As a former army officer, a father and business leader, I’ve heard the arguments from all sides. And, as CEO of a 163-year-old company whose products and presence rest at the intersection of culture and community in more than 110 countries around the world, I feel a tremendous responsibility to share our position on the issue, now, at a time when clarity is paramount.

Providing a safe environment to work and shop is a top priority for us at Levi Strauss & Co. That imperative is quickly challenged, however, when a weapon is carried into one of our stores. Recently, we had an incident in one of our stores where a gun inadvertently went off, injuring the customer who was carrying it.

So, while we understand the heartfelt and strongly-held opinions on both sides of the gun debate, it is with the safety and security of our employees and customers in mind that we respectfully ask people not to bring firearms into our stores, offices or facilities, even in states where it’s permitted by law. Of course, authorized members of law enforcement are an exception.

With stores in Paris, Nice and Orlando, and the company’s European headquarters in Brussels, I’ve thought more about safety in the past year than in the previous three decades of my career because of how ‘close to home’ so many incidents with guns have come to impacting people working for this company.

We operate in hundreds of stores across every state in the U.S., and laws are different in each one. We know that the presence of firearms in our stores creates an unsettling environment for many of our employees and customers. We also know that trying to enforce a ban could potentially undermine the purpose of the ban itself: safety. With that in mind we’ve made this decision as a business – a request not a mandate – and we sincerely hope responsible gun owners will respect our position.

It boils down to this: you shouldn’t have to be concerned about your safety while shopping for clothes or trying on a pair of jeans. Simply put, firearms don’t belong in either of those settings. In the end, I believe we have an obligation to our employees and customers to ensure a safe environment and keeping firearms out of our stores and offices will get us one step closer to achieving that reality.

Sincerely,

Chip Bergh

You know he’s lying because he wasn’t careful to craft what he said to hide his lie.  He focused on “safety,” but then excepted law enforcement.  If you except law enforcement then you acquiesce to the notion that someone needs to be armed for self defense, namely LEOs.  He could just as easily prohibit LEOs from carrying on the premises, but doesn’t.

He knows that LEOs commit gross negligence with firearms all the time, so the issue isn’t really about safety.  It’s about making a political statement and ensuring a monopoly of force on the part of the state.  Here’s a quick note to Chip.  You lost the election, and nothing is more popular in America than guns.  Levi’s jeans is certainly no competition for the firearms industry.  And if I was on the BoD for Levi Strauss, I’d make sure you groveled in front of cameras to get loyal customers back.  And then I’d fire you.  Because you suck.