Oregon Dick’s Sporting Goods gun policy lawsuit moves to trial

[Joe Link]

Dick's Sporting Goods gun policy lawsuit moves to trial - KOBI-TV NBC5 / KOTI-TV NBC2

Read More

 

[Diamondback]

I predict it's not gonna matter much... with Dicks stock price and other financials hemorrhaging like Ebola, they're gonna be lucky to stay in business through the trial with how long these things can take.

 

[BillM]

I don't see how that lawsuit has any bite to it.

If I run, say, a bar and decide not to serve anyone under 30, that's really my choice. I'm not discriminating any one person, nor can I find any laws (example) outside of employment (for those over 40) and housing regs where age matters.

Here's the law. ORS 659A.400 defines a place of public accommodation. ORS 659A.403 defines discrimination
in a place of public accommodation.

Short version. Any store etc. is a place of public accommodation. You can not discriminate based on age in
a place of public accommodation. Current Oregon law says 18 to purchase a long gun, 21 to purchase a
handgun. Any store that refuses to sell a long gun to a person 18 yrs old is discriminating under ORS 659A.403

 

[Ura-Ki]

Glad to see this moving forward, and cant wait to stand in the nearest Dicks parking lot on their very last day and wish them well with a single finger wave!




It's been swell, now the swelling is going down, Good Riddance effers!

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Doesn't cover firearms as it does alcohol and marijuana. But watch, as soon as the courts are done, it will.

The law says already says no sales of alcohol or marijuana for under 21. The law also says the minimum age to buy a rifle is 18. Public stores cannot just make up their own laws.

 

[CountryGent]

A Wally World store in Oregon got fined $5,000 under ORS 659A because they wouldn't sell a long gun to a qualified buyer. The young woman was 18, while their story policy was 21 and over.

So it is possible this young fellow will win in court.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

I asked about this at the BiMart gun counter and was told that since BiMart is a membership store, they are not public access and can set their own policies. If you do not like their policy they will gladly refund your membership fee.

 

[Phantom Man]

Companies can make their own policies but we can make our intentions known by not spending money there.

 

[Phantom Man]

I don't see how that lawsuit has any bite to it.

If I run, say, a bar and decide not to serve anyone under 30, that's really my choice. I'm not discriminating any one person, nor can I find any laws (example) outside of employment (for those over 40) and housing regs where age matters.

Heck, seniors have been discounts for decades. Children's meals are often cheaper, but I've seen fat little tubbies scarf down more than a grown adult. I can legally drive a car at (without provisions) at 18, but many car rental places require you to be 20 or older. Probably plenty of other examples of "legal discrimination".

I predict the corporations will win this one.

What ravenswood said.

 

[308]

Good thing Dicks does not sell wedding cakes.

 

[No_Regerts]

I was never fond of Dicks.

 

[308]

^^Good to know

 

[titsonritz]

I was never fond of Dicks.

I like mine.

 

[freestoneangler]

Dicks could give their bubblegum away for free and I wouldn't haul it away. In addition to the ballots, I vote with my wallet and where I live.