Posted on 03/01/2018 4:17:36 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
I suppose if Wal-Mart said.they'd stop selling ammo to Muslims, women, or blacks the media wouldn't be applauding their stupid gun stunt.
I thought AGE was a federally protected status.
So I ask if a LAW ABIDING 18 or 19 year old wants to buy a product that is legal in their state of residence, and the multibillion dollar company WAL-MART refuses, is this a civil rights case?
While I would favor them saying "No gun or ammo sales to Muslims" or "No gun or ammo sales to anyone in gang attire" I bet both would get flagged. Age should as well. These are legal products.
I am sure this is going to piss off a lot of Freepers.
1) 18 and active military no limits.
2) 21+ and pass background check, no limits
3) 14 to 21 and your parents think you are stable, have them buy your guns and ammo and hold them responsible if you are a nutbag.
4) NO GUNS FOR NUTBAGS.
5) No guns for felons or people who have domestic violence convictions
6) Universal background checks for sales and buyers
7) Get rid of the damned tax stamps for suppressors. (Hearing aid lobby)
8) If either parent is CCW, they get the choice to waive the 21 requirement
9) ...
It is common sense, which unfortunately is not common.
ps, bump stocks are a joke. See this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2YLgLj8KVY
Imagine the outrage if Walmart announced its store wouldn’t sell firearms to a selected race with a demonstrated higher crime rate for violence?
These claims are defined by statute. The cake guy was sued under a Colorado statute prohibiting places of public accommodation from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.
There is no federal statute prohibiting places of public accommodation from discriminating on the basis of ageTitle II only prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin. The only federal age discrimination claim is for employment discrimination. There are some states (I think 19) that have statutes prohibiting age discrimination for places of public accommodation. You would have to look at your states laws.
I heard Judge Nap on Fox yesterday discussing this. He said yes, they can be sued. It’s a civil rights case.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/28/florida-muslim-free-gun-shop-owner-wins-discrimina/
For whatever it is worth, Judge Napolitano on Fox News says yes, depending on state laws.
Short answer: of course they can be sued. I bet they will be soon.
Like noted above, though, age is NOT a constitutionally protected class that requires limitations to be analyzed by courts applying strict scrutinity. But remember, participating in deviant sexual behavior did NOT make a person a member of a protected class either twenty years ago.
An age discrimination suit will fail absent some good old leftist style judge shopping.
Interesting, thanks.
The 2nd amendment is not age dependent. It is a right. Corporations should not be allowed to make law affecting the Constitution.
From the outside looking in I would think if the NICS check came back OK, the dealer would be covered.
I can see a gut feel about a bad actor, NICS or not - but a blanket "under age" policy with no other evidence of cause seems excessive (were I an 18-year old). I suppose a dealer might decide to sell me a .22 rimfire but not an AR based on my age... but even that would suck for an Eagle Scout and otherwise upstanding citizen.
I agree with a lot of that. Young people in the military are, or should be, mature. If they aren’t when they go in they will be when they get out.
We have seen over and over that most 18 year olds aren’t as mature as 18 year olds were 40 years ago. I agree that between 18-21 the parents should have to sign or buy the guns and be responsible.
I also think that if these kids are too immature to buy a gun or drink that they are too immature to vote.
“NOT against the law”
Actually, this is the point, but not the way you think.
Unlike other countries, in the US, if it’s not prohibited by statute you CAN do it, i.e., you don’t need to get permission first.
So only where commerce regs include an explicit prohibition against age, can you NOT prohibit sales based on age.
If however, it’s not mentioned, as it is not in fed commerce regs, you can.
Federal commerce regs bar discrimination based on race, sex, and creed.
[The worse part for Walmart is they are calling 18 year olds to incompetent to buy a gun and use it while we have 18 year olds going in the military to serve this country. Does Walmart think these under 21 military people are issued spit ball shooters until the reach 21?]
When the 21 year old age limit to own guns become law, would the U.S. military legally be allowed to let 18-20 year olds join the service?
Can’t gamble in casino or rent a car at 18.
Absolutely you have a case.
Most likely Walmart would sell you the gun.
Sam Walton would never agree with this. He was a Patriot and loved America.
If there have been successful suits over gay wedding cakes, I’d like to think we’d see a successful lawsuit for a 19 year old, who is otherwise good-to-go who cannot get something that is ACTUALLY NAMED in our pesky Constitution.
-PJ
Civil rights? No. But possibly age discrimination. Walmat is refusing to sell something that a person is legally allowed to buy based on their age alone. Most state anti-discrimination laws include discriminating on age.
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.