Dick's at it again

[Ballstater98]

Oregon: 20-Year-Old Sues Dick's Sporting Goods for Refusing to Sell Rifle | Breitbart

 

[BiscuitsandGravy]

Oregon: 20-Year-Old Sues Dick's Sporting Goods for Refusing to Sell Rifle | Breitbart

Is this the same as the 'gay cake' lawsuit? Yes/no? Does the 20 year old have any case based upon 'age discriminating'?

 

[daddymikey1975]

I got scooped while reading.


Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Is this the same as the 'gay cake' lawsuit? Yes/no? Does the 20 year old have any case based upon 'age discriminating'?

Ethically and economically, I believe it is. It's the same "we sell widgets, but we won't sell widgets to you" argument I've put forward several times.

Legally, I've no idea. Instead of a blanket law of "if you offer a widget for $5, you sell to everyone willing to give you $5 for a widget" we have protected classes who you can't refuse widgets to based on their membership/status of whatever class. I don't think age discrimination for being too young puts you in one of those classes. Age discrimination, at least as far as employment, is only for "you're too old" cases.

 

[bwframe]

Dunno why there is much argument or discussion about this?

Dicks threw pro 2A folks under the bus after Sandyhook, PUBLICLY caving in to the gun grabbers wishes.

There shouldn't have been any discussion after that debacle years ago, yet here we are again.

Maybe if we'd have ALL followed through, Dicks wouldn't have the large voice they do now?

 

[d.kaufman]

Dunno why there is much argument or discussion about this?

Dicks threw pro 2A folks under the bus after Sandyhook, PUBLICLY caving in to the gun grabbers wishes.

There shouldn't have been any discussion after that debacle years ago, yet here we are again.

Maybe if we'd have ALL followed through, Dicks wouldn't have the large voice they do now?

Not sure about a large voice. Only reason they have any voice at all is because of the anti gun, liberal media

 

[bwframe]

Not sure about a large voice. Only reason they have any voice at all is because of the anti gun, liberal media

A lot of gun owners support Dicks with their dollars. Some out of negligence, some out of greed.

Without gun owner support, would Dicks still be in business?

 

[Kutnupe14]

A lot of gun owners support Dicks with their dollars. Some out of negligence, some out of greed.

Without gun owner support, would Dicks still be in business?

Yeah. I'm betting the markup on yoga pants and soccer gear is probably significantly higher than on shotguns.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Yeah. I'm betting the markup on yoga pants and soccer gear is probably significantly higher than on shotguns.

Yeah, but what about the gun owners that wear yoga pants? Does 511 make tactical yoga pants?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

A lot of gun owners support Dicks with their dollars. Some out of negligence, some out of greed.

Without gun owner support, would Dicks still be in business?

Yeah...golfers, fishermen, youth league sports, fudds, and butters....there's probably more than enough that either don't care about your ability to buy an "assault weapon" or just don't stay informed about who's caving to what interest group to keep them in plenty of business.

 

[bwframe]

Yeah...golfers, fishermen, youth league sports, fudds, and butters....there's probably more than enough that either don't care about your ability to buy an "assault weapon" or just don't stay informed about who's caving to what interest group to keep them in plenty of business.

How many of those folks also have a 10/22 in the closet or shoot grampa's?

 

[dusty88]

Yeah, but what about the gun owners that wear yoga pants? Does 511 make tactical yoga pants?

Actually yes they do Tights with nice big belt loops so you can carry.

The larger point being that I haven't yet found a store I can do without.

But I have my doubts they depend on carbine gun owners much. I think the bigger question is do all of their stores have a big hunting section, or could they do without that? And what cross-section of the hunting community cares about this issue enough to reject Dick's, as some of us have.

Has there ever been a time where so many corporations have openly and intentionally chosen a political side?

 

[chipbennett]

Ethically and economically, I believe it is. It's the same "we sell widgets, but we won't sell widgets to you" argument I've put forward several times.

Legally, I've no idea. Instead of a blanket law of "if you offer a widget for $5, you sell to everyone willing to give you $5 for a widget" we have protected classes who you can't refuse widgets to based on their membership/status of whatever class. I don't think age discrimination for being too young puts you in one of those classes. Age discrimination, at least as far as employment, is only for "you're too old" cases.

If we had a SCOTUS that did its job properly, such a law would not be needed, because the legal principle would be inherent under the 14th amendment.

As it is, I am perfectly willing to use otherwise needless lawsuits to cause (unconstitutional) protected-class laws to their breaking point.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Is this the same as the 'gay cake' lawsuit? Yes/no? Does the 20 year old have any case based upon 'age discriminating'?

Turns out in Oregon, he probably does.

While federal age discrimination laws and those in most states apply only to people over 40, Oregon’s law generally prohibits age discrimination against the selling of goods to anyone above the age of 18, said John Donohue, a professor at Stanford Law School.

The law provides that “all persons … are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is of age, as described in this section, or older.”

Discriminating on the basis of age is no more acceptable under the law than discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. And that’s exactly what retailers have proposed to do by saying they’ll sell a rifle to someone who’s 21, but not someone who’s 20.

 

[KLB]

Turns out in Oregon, he probably does.

Now that is funny right there. Progressives get bitten by their own law.

 

[DLW07]

Good riddance, I say. I occasionally found a good deal on target ammo, but they have received my last dollar now.

 

[Beans&Bullets]

So, for sake of argument, say I own a Gun Store and I feel that 21 isn't good enough. I feel that anyone under 25 is not mature enough to own a gun, am I any worse off than those who are moving their required age to purchase a gun to 21? Just to Be CLEAR, I don't actually feel this way, just posing a question for thought/debate. Hate to admit it, but I too purchased .22 ammo from the peckers at Dicks during the last Great Ammo depression. But never again! I also golf, but I will NOT purchase anything from Dicks, don't care how cheap or small their balls are!!!!

 

[solarpimp]

I won't buy anything from them again. They're prices were never that great to begin with.

 

[solarpimp]

Nevermind that they insult service members under the age of 21 who DO carry AR-15's in foreign lands to give them the right to make such decisions.

 

[mdunn]

No more shopping at Dick’s for me