Dick's won't be selling "assault" rifles…

KUDOS to Dick’s for achieving a million dollars worth of free advertising. PR stunt. Makes me want to puke

Ha while serving my country back in the 60’s I wasn’t allowed to buy my dad a shotgun for his birthday, vote, or buy beer…too young!!!

jighead-two wrote:

while serving my country back in the 60’s

Thanks for your service sir! I was wondering if jighead-two was a call sign?

thewalleyechaser wrote:

Haha good even more of a reason not to go to a Dick’s.

Everyone has their reasons. I won’t buy walleye from any Minnesota store or eatery but that horse has been beaten before. Pretty sure Dicks gun sales were a miniscule percent compared to the yoga pants. I didn’t even know they sold them at all. I think we can all agree that Dicks is geared more towards the ritzy soccer moms than the outdoorsmen.

404 ERROR wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>SpoonbillSlayer wrote:</div>
I’m fine with the clip ban, but should really be 5-6 shot to make a real difference.

95% of ammo clips are 10 rounds or less. I could get behind this…

I hope the lawmakers ban those evil clips so I can keep my 30rd magazines……

suzuki wrote:

I have no problem with clip bans as long as I can still purchase high capacity magazines.

Nice crack on semantics. I’ll listen for the howl when the restrictions step on your nuts.

Dick’s Sporting Goods = Dunham’s on steroids
Dick’s Sporting Goods = Gander Mountain plus golf equipment

Dick’s is still open?!?! I honestly thought they all closed.

…I learned something new today

Crappy part regardless of opinion on these political statements is the common employee has no say on the matter. Its all publicity.

I would really like to see the numbers on how many they sell in a year.

Also we’ve come to a point where a young adult could enlist in the military but isn’t able to purchase a fire arm?

How can anybody, especially those on an outdoor site support an assault on a Constitutional right? What part of shall not be infringed don’t you understand. When gov’t successfully steps on our Constitutional Rights it over for this country. The Second Amendment was drafted to stop this kind of tyranny. Whether it be banning AR rifles or magazines. Give them an inch and they’ll take 2 miles. The root of the problem lies much deeper than firearms. The mentality of the way kids are raised today hits pretty close to home. Most are raised by video games etc. and not the guidance of their “busy” parents. You take away guns and they will turn to something else.

slowpoke wrote:

How can anybody, especially those on an outdoor site support an assault on a Constitutional right? What part of shall not be infringed don’t you understand. When gov’t successfully steps on our Constitutional Rights it over for this country. The Second Amendment was drafted to stop this kind of tyranny. Whether it be banning AR rifles or magazines. Give them an inch and they’ll take 2 miles. The root of the problem lies much deeper than firearms. The mentality of the way kids are raised today hits pretty close to home. Most are raised by video games etc. and not the guidance of their “busy” parents. You take away guns and they will turn to something else.

see school posting

slowpoke wrote:

How can anybody, especially those on an outdoor site support an assault on a Constitutional right? What part of shall not be infringed don’t you understand. When gov’t successfully steps on our Constitutional Rights it over for this country. The Second Amendment was drafted to stop this kind of tyranny. Whether it be banning AR rifles or magazines. Give them an inch and they’ll take 2 miles. The root of the problem lies much deeper than firearms. The mentality of the way kids are raised today hits pretty close to home. Most are raised by video games etc. and not the guidance of their “busy” parents. You take away guns and they will turn to something else.

Lots of liberal fisherman. Not so much with hunters. I made the mistake of thinking most outdoorsman were conservatives once.

Curious if this could be seen as discrimination based upon age which, to my understanding, is a protected class. If this were reversed and a car dealership said they wouldn’t sell cars to anyone over 70, they would like be sued and lose in court. Obviously, if there was a federal or state law saying they couldn’t sell to anyone under 21, that would be a different story.

Not that it bothers me that Dicks did this since I don’t support them financially and I will gladly continue to exercise that option.

slowpoke wrote:

The mentality of the way kids are raised today hits pretty close to home. Most are raised by video games etc. and not the guidance of their “busy” parents.

This issue is anything but new. There were video games when I was a kid and I haven’t been a kid in over two decades. The graphics are better now days, but that doesn’t change the fact that there are many thirty-somethings who grew up with video games who’ve managed to not go on killing sprees. It’s not the guns, it’s not the video games, it’s not the way millennials are raised. You simply cannot pinpoint specifics like this on someone who is willing to murder. We used to call these people psychotic, and when we label them that way it makes way more sense to blame the psycho than it does inanimate objects and outside influences.

Dick’s is simply gambling they will gain more new customers with this publicity stunt than lose existing customers because of it.

biggill wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Mike W wrote:</div>
Im guessing this is to boost their yoga pants sales.

Now that’s a positive attitude!

Now if they would ban the sale of plus sizes everything would be better.

I totally understand where the boycotting is coming from… My local JC Penneys also doesn’t sell AR’s, so I boycott that store too.

suzuki wrote:

Dick’s is simply gambling they will gain more new customers with this publicity stunt than lose existing customers because of it.

If this is the intent and nobody can say that with certainty, it makes them look even worse for using these shootings for self profit. For the record, I own a few handguns for $hits and giggles but could live without them just as easily. Better background checks need to be implemented to keep these nutjobs out of the gun shops. It’s too bad it took a few bad apples to ruin it for the responsible ones but that’s where we stand today.

90 miles to the nearest dicks for me. Guess I won’t have to worry about the yogurt pants boycott

eyeguy507 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>suzuki wrote:</div>
Dick’s is simply gambling they will gain more new customers with this publicity stunt than lose existing customers because of it.

If this is the intent and nobody can say that with certainty, it makes them look even worse for using these shootings for self profit.

Man, I feel like I am taking crazy pills. As I stated and linked above, Dicks is doing exactly the SAME thing they did after Sandy Hook. Back then the news was starting to report that the Sandy shooter had possibly purchased his AR from Dicks, so they enacted a self-imposed ban on AR’s. When things quieted down, they did some creative re-branding and sold them again.

After the recent Florida shooting they found out that they actually sold the shooter a shotgun (not the AR used) so they got in front of it and again enacted a self-imposed ban on ARs with age restrictions. If public opinion shifts they can claim to be “trendsetters against the bad guns”, or if it blows over they can, again, quietly resume sales.

This is all about money – their name has been broadcast nonstop, for free, and attached to a “feel good” story across the country. They are capitalizing on the short term memory of most people.

(Also we’ve come to a point where a young adult could enlist in the military but isn’t able to purchase a firearm?)

coming from personal experience the worst part of it was not being old enough to by a beer for the first 3 years of my enlistment!

And don’t act so surprised, this country was founded suppressing civil liberties and its been a work in progress ever since.

I am all for gun rights I own many and most are “assault” style rifles/pistol/sbr’s set up for home defense/personal protection.

However I find it Overwhelmingly ridiculous that in order to ride a snowmobile or hunt you are required to take a class and get certified
and any dumb a$$ with absolutely no experience or training can go buy a weapon that makes no sense to me. I would be perfectly fine if people where required to complete a firearms safety course in order to buy a firearm.

glad someone is trying to make a difference . Hope more follow.

Doesn’t affect me. They’ll still get my $20-40 every couple months when I am in a pinch. When it comes to fishing, I think most outdoor retailers know it isn’t worth carrying a lot of inventory when the selection online is endless.

Mike Martine wrote:

glad someone is trying to make a difference . Hope more follow.

It looks like Walmart is making some progress as well. It is a good first step in the right direction.

Yes once these big box outdoor retailers stop selling ARs we will finally have saved the mass shooting problem. I know if I was going to buy an AR, Dicks and Walmart are the first places I think of.

Doing nothing is not an option. We must do something that does nothing.

I am a minority in this great country. I am a moderate. I applaud Dick’s for taking a stand on the middle ground. They just earn a bigger cut of my spend. I feel we need to do what is best for the common good not just what pleases the lobbyists who control and have bought the politicians in our country.

Buckeye1 wrote:

I am a minority in this great country. I am a moderate. I applaud Dick’s for taking a stand on the middle ground. They just earn a bigger cut of my spend. I feel we need to do what is best for the common good not just what pleases the lobbyists who control and have bought the politicians in our country.

Read the other posts, Dicks has done this before and then sold long rifles again, it’s totally a PR stunt to win the moderates hearts
….. it apparently works.

Keppinhiemer wrote:

(Also we’ve come to a point where a young adult could enlist in the military but isn’t able to purchase a firearm?)

coming from personal experience the worst part of it was not being old enough to by a beer for the first 3 years of my enlistment!

And don’t act so surprised, this country was founded suppressing civil liberties and its been a work in progress ever since.

I am all for gun rights I own many and most are “assault” style rifles/pistol/sbr’s set up for home defense/personal protection.

However I find it Overwhelmingly ridiculous that in order to ride a snowmobile or hunt you are required to take a class and get certified
and any dumb a$$ with absolutely no experience or training can go buy a weapon that makes no sense to me. I would be perfectly fine if people where required to complete a firearms safety course in order to buy a firearm.

Logic. I wish lawmakers knew what it was.