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

I was hoping You’d clarify that !

Jon Jordan wrote:

Ok, this was too funny to not pass on….

Cabelas sells guns to people 18-20 years old. Why? Because they are not Dicks.

-J.

Hahaha

Since the PR stunt, 17 other companies are distancing themselves from the gun industry and the NRA.

eyeguy507 wrote:

Since the PR stunt, 17 other companies are distancing themselves from the gun industry and the NRA.

Not sure how this effects anyone? Distancing your company is your choice, but not sure how it matters even in the least?

Rei doesn’t count. I know of people that basically got run out because they had snowmobile jackets on.

blackbay wrote:

Rei doesn’t count. I know of people that basically got run out because they had snowmobile jackets on.

I’ve been in one once….to buy a rock climbing harness for hunting.

It’s the most yuppy…..granola eating…..Subaru driving…..”outdoor store” there is. Chuck full of “outdoorsey type hipsters”….

The sales guy was more interested in MY beard than he was about rock climbing harnesses.

Far worse than any Gander Mountain, but somehow better than Dick’s (doesn’t take much).

Never again.

TripleA wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>eyeguy507 wrote:</div>
Since the PR stunt, 17 other companies are distancing themselves from the gun industry and the NRA.

Not sure how this effects anyone? Distancing your company is your choice, but not sure how it matters even in the least?

Exactly! It’s a choice but it’s a choice that is being made. Do nothing, that is the easy way out.

eyeguy507 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>TripleA wrote:</div>

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>eyeguy507 wrote:</div>
Since the PR stunt, 17 other companies are distancing themselves from the gun industry and the NRA.

Not sure how this effects anyone? Distancing your company is your choice, but not sure how it matters even in the least?

Exactly! It’s a choice but it’s a choice that is being made. Do nothing, that is the easy way out.

If the NRA was totally abolished, what would change?…

A bunch of lobbyists would be out of work.

Pitchfork nation is out and about I see!

FYI: Wal-Mart has had a Dick’s-like ban on assault rifles for years, since Sandy Hook I believe.

Walmart announced they wouldn’t sell ammo or any weapon to someone under 21.

What I don’t understand is the FL legislature.

They’re considering a bill that would require a person to be 21 to purchase and a 3 day waiting period. Neither of which would have stopped the wacko (whatever his name is) from his crimes.

Clearly a “do something” so we feel better move.

walleyevision wrote:

FYI: Wal-Mart has had a Dick’s-like ban on assault rifles for years, since Sandy Hook I believe.

So where are the chants to ban walmart!? Id like to see that happen. I guess we all draw the line in the sand there huh? Easy to ban Dicks lets see everyone take a stand on Walmart.

^ Trouble maker.

crappie55369 wrote:

So where are the chants to ban walmart!? Id like to see that happen. I guess we all draw the line in the sand there huh? Easy to ban Dicks lets see everyone take a stand on Walmart.

From what I read here on IDO, I think everyone already has….

-J.

Looks like a 20 year old is going after Dicks and Walmart for age discrimination.

Brian Klawitter wrote:

Looks like a 20 year old is going after Dicks and Walmart for age discrimination.

*clapping*

crappie55369 wrote:

Easy to ban Dicks lets see everyone take a stand on Walmart.

I wouldn’t like anyone standing on mine(ouch), so I don’t stand on others…Start a thread about it and I’ll gladly tell you I boycotted Walmart years ago…I apologize, if it would have come up in conversation earlier, I would have told you about it…

If you draw too many lines in the sand, you’ll end up with a moat and no one to play with…

Brian Klawitter wrote:

Looks like a 20 year old is going after Dicks and Walmart for age discrimination.

He’s old enough to carry 1 in combat……..Why can’t he buy 1?

404 ERROR wrote:

If you draw too many lines in the sand, you’ll end up with a moat and no one to play with…

^ This is how I went from being a Facebook user to somebody with a Facebook account and no reason to check Facebook.

I sent friend requests to some of the alligators in the moat but I think their internet is down. Before you ask, yes I sent a carrier pigeon. Two actually. One was eaten by a gator and the other flew straight into the glass at US Bank Stadium.

So I just gave up and went fishing.

Brian Klawitter wrote:

Looks like a 20 year old is going after Dicks and Walmart for age discrimination.

So, somebody told this guy that his right to be 20 years old trumps WalMarts right is set limits on when to sell to it’s customers. Let the young man go to a state where you have to be 21 years old to purchase liquor. Even if his home state the legal age is 18 he isn’t buying. Let him try suing the state. The young man will get a education on the legal system very soon. Hopefully somebody else is footing his legal bills.

Not trying to stir the pot but this lawsuit is taking place in Oregon. The state law in Oregon is it is legal to buy a gun at the age of 18. That is the reason for the age discrimination lawsuit.

We will have to see how the case turns out. I would think a national store policy would hold up. Now if they only refused to sell unless 21 in Oregon but under 21 elsewhere he would for sure have a case.

I’d bet if got Dr Bull on the case…..

Dutchboy wrote:

So, somebody told this guy that his right to be 20 years old trumps WalMarts right is set limits on when to sell to it’s customers. Let the young man go to a state where you have to be 21 years old to purchase liquor. Even if his home state the legal age is 18 he isn’t buying. Let him try suing the state. The young man will get a education on the legal system very soon. Hopefully somebody else is footing his legal bills.

People need to keep in mind that that buying a gun or alcohol or driving are privileges based on several things, not an requirement. Any chain of stores will set policy that goes to the entire chain for protection against age related law suits. This 20 year old would have a better chance of finding a 1/2 carat diamond in a four mile stretch of crush rock road.

glenn57 wrote:

I’d bet if got Dr Bull on the case…..

I thought your hero was Dr. Ruth.

Tom Sawvell wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>glenn57 wrote:</div>
I’d bet if got Dr Bull on the case…..

I thought your hero was Dr. Ruth.

OUCH!!!!!!!!!!!

Dutchboy wrote:

We will have to see how the case turns out. I would think a national store policy would hold up. Now if they only refused to sell unless 21 in Oregon but under 21 elsewhere he would for sure have a case.

I think without a law on the book that says you can’t purchase a rifle unless you are 21, this could fall under age discrimination. Like I said previously, everyone would be up in arms (no pun intended) if say Ford/Chevy/Dodge all decided they were no longer going to sell trucks to anyone over the age of 60.

I think the young guy has a case, especially without a law prohibiting him from buying a rifle.

Tom Sawvell wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Dutchboy wrote:</div>
So, somebody told this guy that his right to be 20 years old trumps WalMarts right is set limits on when to sell to it’s customers. Let the young man go to a state where you have to be 21 years old to purchase liquor. Even if his home state the legal age is 18 he isn’t buying. Let him try suing the state. The young man will get a education on the legal system very soon. Hopefully somebody else is footing his legal bills.

People need to keep in mind that that buying a gun or alcohol or driving are privileges based on several things, not an requirement. Any chain of stores will set policy that goes to the entire chain for protection against age related law suits. This 20 year old would have a better chance of finding a 1/2 carat diamond in a four mile stretch of crush rock road.

I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but recently there was a cakeshop in Colorado that got sued and lost for discrimination for not making a cake for a gay couple’s wedding.

That was because they would do regular wedding cakes but not wedding cakes for a gay marriage. Night and day difference.