Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - An Oregon man filed suits Monday claiming Dick's Sporting Goods and Walmart discriminated against the 20-year-old when they refused to sell him a rifle.
Dick's and Walmart restricted gun sales to adults 21 and older in the wake of the Florida high school massacre. The 19-year-old accused in the school slaying bought the AR-15 used in the attack legally.
Oregon law allows residents to buy shotguns or rifles starting at age 18.
I believe he will win this one in court. It is a constitutional right and the law states that 18 year + can purchase a shotgun or a rifle.
Is he trying to make a buck? Sure..... most likely... He can go somewhere else to buy one....
Ah liberalism, it's OK for Dick's, etc. choosing not to sell a rifle to a legal buyer BUT---it's a crime for a baker not to sell a wedding cake to a gay couple ?
No hypocrisy here !
Ah liberalism, it's OK for Dick's, etc. choosing not to sell a rifle to a legal buyer BUT---it's a crime for a baker not to sell a wedding cake to a gay couple ?
No hypocrisy here !
It does make sense, even pro gun control folks must agree if you look at this rationally. Right now it is legal for a 18year old to buy a long rifle. Now you might think that is wrong, you might think it SHOULD be 21, or it SHOULD all be banned. But the laws right now say, 18yr old ok to buy rifle. We have to be a nation of laws and obedience(as long as it is constitutional). We can't have companies running around discriminating.
What are the odds that this guy's legal expenses are being bankrolled by the NRA? Not clear that he's a fervent Second Amendment advocate or just another opportunist trying to make a buck.
Off-hand, I tend to agree that this young man should prevail. After all, he was seeking to purchase a .22 rifle that was (I assume) in stock and available for purchase. He was not (thinking of the silly cake argument) asking the store to build him a rifle.
I guess it is akin to an owner of a bar in an area where one must be 18 years old or older to drink, and the bar owner telling me that it is his personal policy to not sell alcoholic drinks to those younger than 63 years of age. I would file suit.
It may be noble sounding for Dick's and Walmart to proclaim "no long rifles for those under age 21", but if the law (which also allows them to actually sell arms) proclaims age 18 as the minimum age, then they quickly run into trouble.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
