Posted on 03/06/2018 3:50:09 AM PST by Yo-Yo
A 20-year-old is suing Dick’s Sporting Goods after being refused a Ruger .22 rifle purchase based on his age.
The plaintiff, Tyler Watson, claims he faced “Unlawful Age Discrimination.”
Watson attempted to buy the rifle “on or about February 24” at a Medford, Oregon, Field and Stream store. (Field and Stream is subsidiary of Dick’s.) Watson’s suit, filed in the Circuit Court of Oregon for the County of Jackson, says a store employee refused the purchase and indicated, “He would not sell [Watson] any firearm, including rifles and shotguns, or ammunition for a firearm, because [Watson] is under 21 years old.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Watson’s suit alleges that Dick’s policy violates Oregon law against age-based discrimination for people 18 years and older in places of public accommodations. State law includes prohibitions against discrimination in stores that are open to the general public.
So we shall see if state age discrimination laws trump federal firearm sales laws (which state that an FFL can refuse a sale to anyone.)
Good thing Dick’s Sporting Goods was not selling wedding cakes.
I would be surprised if this had not already gone to court as "White gun dealer would not sell to a black person solely on account of skin color."
The irony here is just too sweet.
>
So we shall see if state age discrimination laws trump federal firearm sales laws (which state that an FFL can refuse a sale to anyone.)
>
“Shall not be infringed.” Believe he has a case.
LOL....because we are not Dicks.
I kinda agree but I think that Dicks will delay this case for six months, then offer the kid $10,000 to settle and would then reverse their entire stand (quietly on a Friday afternoon). The age discrimination thing would be the big hit. But even if they get into court....the kid’s lawyer would tear them up because most all mass murder episodes are male, and so the Dick’s logic should be to only sell guns to females.
When can we contribute to his legal fund to get this as far in the courts as needed to get his constitutional rights restored?
In 1959, at the age of 13, I had save up money from my paper route and went into the Western Auto hardware store where I purchased a .22LR bolt action Winchester rifle. I needed the rifle for marksmanship and gun safety training at Hampton High School where I was taught by NRA certified instructors.
Hahaha.. Perfect!
>
When can we contribute to his legal fund to get this as far in the courts as needed to get his constitutional rights restored?
>
If he doesn’t have a page already, he should get one up pronto...I’d donate.
Not a ONE of the D.C. enclave “Conservative brain-trusts” worth a sh!t (but they’ll sure take any/all donations....to further ‘the cause’, y’know). Only Judicial Watch seems to be doing *anything*.
In 1976, at the age of 17, I took the school rifle team rifle home on a public bus to practice on the weekend.
This was in NY
The age discrimination thing is irrelevant on Dick's part since almost every mass shooting since Columbine was committed by a male OVER the age of 21. Case in point:
The “logic” that Dick’s is using is sort of like a corner store saying, “Hey, listen, we are fed up with drunk driving, so we are going to only sell alcohol to anyone over the age of 30.”
Have fun convincing the judge that just because that flies in the face of local laws, they have a right to do it because it feels good.
I think Dick’s will lose on this.
In 1964 my friends and I used to ride on our motorcycles with rifles slung on our backs out to our favorite shooting spots. Mine was a M-1 carbine purchased from the Army for the then handsome sum of twenty dollars. This was in Tampa, Florida.
Florida is going to raise the minimum firearm purchase age to 21. If you’re 18 to 20 YOA now is the time to cash in at Dick’s and Walmart in Florida.
Bkmk
ML/NJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.