Posted on 09/02/2018 3:44:50 AM PDT by marktwain
What does Walmart have to pay for this indiscretion?
Gibson's Discount Store... when a small local "department store" closed, a Gibson's opened up in the building and that was where I bought most of my .22LR ammo (invariably Federal). I remember having to sign for it at some point, though there was a time when the signature wasn't required there, IIRC. The Holiday gas station was another place you could get .22LR and shotgun shells - they were open later than Gibson's - but I don't remember what brand(s) they usually carried (maybe CCI/Omark).
The two hardware stores and the farm supply sold ammo as well, but if you were looking for ammo on a Sunday or after 6 PM, you couldn't be too picky about who made it.
Small-town (but not TOO small) Iowa was a wonderful place in the 1960's.
101 ! Cool, My Grandmother on Dad’s side out lived all 3 of Her Sons. She passed at 103. Born in 1901.
Nowhere does it say what the reasoning was on Walmart’s part behind the refusal to sell the gun to her.
Why did they refuse?
Was it the local stores policy? The policy of the clerk?
I don’t remember Springfields being sold like that, but I wish I’d bought at least a few of the Enfield Jungle Carbines displayed in garbage cans for $18.95 with a box of ammo. This was in Payless Drug Store, Roseburg, OR, mid sixties.
My parents gave me a Browning A5 for Christmas when I was twelve. My dad signed my hunting license verifying that I could hunt alone also when I was 12.
“Nowhere does it say what the reasoning was on Walmart’s part behind the refusal to sell the gun to her. Why did they refuse? Was it the local stores policy? The policy of the clerk?”
I’m thinking along those lines too, and think that federal firearms laws pretty much gives sellers total discretion to refuse sales. For example, you put an ad in Crag’s List for a 9mm and an MS-13, tattooed and all, shows up wanting to buy the gun...are you really required to sell it to him?
“I don’t care if the business is single-owner or closely held, or public. Government should stay out of it and let owners, shareholders, and customers (by purchasing or going somewhere else) determine what products a business provides and which customers it wants to serve.”
We’ll see how the social media debacle shakes out. What say you on this?
I agree. We should fight hard for the right to free association.
We lost that right with affirmative action.
Marriage is different. "gay" marriage is completely changing the definition of the word marriage. Marriage has always been between men and women.
Homosexual marriage is an oxymoron.
Personally, I am against any such law that requires any person or business to do business against their/its will.
I believe that discrimination is a right.
I think that unreasoned discrimination is foolish but still with in ones rights.
If a man well known in the community as an abusive A-hole walks in to a gun store desiring to buy a firearm. The proprietor runs the required background check and finds the A-hole is not legally prohibited from making the purchase. The store’s proprietor has no choice but to make the sale regardless of any misgivings he has as to the man’s intensions.
If that man just happens to be a member of one of the protected classes in the above law the owner of the store would be forced to sell the individual a firearm knowing full well that the sale could have tragic consequences. Not making the sale would surely bankrupt the store.
I love when conservatives take the libs silly rules and tactics and use them to the the libs in knots. Well played.
CC
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.