• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Here we go......

Status
Not open for further replies.
What about the companies freedom? I get it we think it's all stupid and anti gun etc etc.
But we can't turn our backs on the fact that this company should have the freedom to set it's own rules to go by.
 
dragman said:
What about the companies freedom? I get it we think it's all stupid and anti gun etc etc.
But we can't turn our backs on the fact that this company should have the freedom to set it's own rules to go by.
Click to expand...


Such as the freedom to refuse a sale because:

We don't think a black person should own a firearm.

We don't think women should buy guns.

We don't think you are capable of handling a firearm because you are wheel chair bound; No sale.

I see the plaintiff's case...the merchants are denying him a legal right, afforded to other citizens, based solely on his age. No different than racial or gender discrimination.
 
Last edited:
And if your a private company and that is what you want to do go for it. My point wasn't right and wrong. it was if you believe in freedom then just believe in that freedom and don't jump on the other side when it hurts a company you don't like.
If your choices make people mad and that loses you business that's your choice, but a law suit it shouldn't be.
I believe people should all do what they believe in and own the consequences of those actions.
 
I understand your point Dragman and respect it...I am not saying 'right or wrong'. I was just pointing out by analogy that the policy enforced on this young gentleman appears to violate state law. Regardless of my position on the issue it appears the two companies may have violated civil rights.
 
I wish i was 20- id sue every store out there that discriminated against me. I hope he wins and gets millions these stores are rediculous. Im sick of people and companies cowering down to a very small minority of crybabies. That shooter would have got a gun if he wanted no matter what law was in place
 
dragman said:
........but a law suit it shouldn't be.
I believe people should all do what they believe in and own the consequences of those actions.
Click to expand...

Companies, employers and the like can all do what they believe in as long as what they do does not go against the constitution. As soon as what they "believe in" violates the constitution then they either stop, get sued or pay the price.
Here are some examples...

a local judge heard a case in which the defense alleged that the defendant only got into trouble when he visited his relatives in this county. The judge cut him loose with a deal where he dissmissed the case in return for the criminal agreeing to stay out of the county. Two seconds after the judge clicked the gavel on that case the defendant complained to the bar that you cant order a citizen where he can and cannot go in America. The defendant won and the judge was immediately "retired".

a local veterinarian recruited a new vet fresh out of med school to help with his practice. They both signed an employment agreement in which the new guy agreed not to leave and open another practice in the closest three counties for so many years after his start date. He stayed almost the entire time, but left and went into the next county to start his own practice. The first vet sued and lost because, again, it's not constitutional to tell someone where and when they can conduct business in America. The court held that if the agreement was for just the county the first vet was in they would have likely upheld it.

Policies and agreements are great as long as they are not for the wrong reasons, race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, etc. and as long as they are not unconstitutional. That's not to say the so-called wrong reasons aren't skirted, they are, all the time. But it is done carefully and in such a way that it is very difficult to prove.
 
Last edited:
shooter65 said:
https://www.outdoorhub.com/news/201...sporting-goods-stores-refusing-sell-22-rifle/
Click to expand...
Walmart and Dicks allready knew this would happen. its part of the plan. They put the age rule in anyway so they could say to the media " we are trying to do something". now when they lose a court case or two they can cry to the media " we tried to help but got sued so well have to put the buying age back to 18. Playing the game all the while jumping on the band wagen for their own benefit.
 
I thought that no competition clauses in employment contracts have been upheld in the courts for a long time now!!
On the other note I remember thinking how wrong it was that they could draft me to go to war and yet I couldn't vote or drink alcohol still doesn't make sense to me! At least they changed the voting age!! RW
 
We the people have the rights till there taken from us.
We have the right to not buy from them.
It may cost us more.
It may cost them to.
 
We went helicopter hog hunting in Texas a few weeks ago, there were about 25 of us, all out of state hunters. We ALL went to Dicks to buy licenses, while we were there several of us bought cold weather gear, ammo, and other stuff. I do not think ANY of us will ever go into a Dicks again. We could just as easily have gone to another store, and next year we will.
The point is, stores that do stuff like this will end up seeing a drop in customers. It may be only in the short run, but it will cost them. Just like the businesses dropping the connection to the NRA, they will lose business big time. All so they could pander to the noisy minority.
 
What about the dining establishments with a sign, “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.” Don’t know if that is legal either, and I see the point that a business owner has rights too, but I’m pretty amused by the lawsuit. I hope he wins.
 
Dusty Stevens said:
I wish i was 20- id sue every store out there that discriminated against me. I hope he wins and gets millions these stores are rediculous. Im sick of people and companies cowering down to a very small minority of crybabies. That shooter would have got a gun if he wanted no matter what law was in place
Click to expand...
Why Dusty, They have laws where criminals can't buy guns. It's against the law. You know all criminals go to these dumbass stores to buy their weapons. We need more laws the criminals obey. Seems like these laws work perfect. Now let's all hold hands and sing cumbiya dance around the campfire and all our problems will go away all because we got "The Law". By the way, the sarcasm is not meant toward our LEO,Just the dumbasses that think up and allow these laws to be passed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Classified Ads

Forum statistics

Threads
165,421
Messages
2,195,632
Members
78,901
Latest member
Kapkadian

Share This Page

Back
Top