Posted on 02/26/2012 5:56:52 AM PST by marktwain
CHARLOTTE, NC (WBTV) - A Charlotte couple says Dick's Sporting Goods refused to sell them a gun because of their last name and race.
Bernard and Francine Miller tell us they went to the store on W. T. Harris Boulevard looking for a rifle because they spotted a coyote in their yard.
After forty minutes of shopping and working with the sales agent, they settled on the one that fit their price range. A 22-rifle that cost just over $200.
Bernard was then asked to fill out paperwork. But the couple says after filling out the paperwork, a salesperson refused to sell them the rifle.
"I get ready to hand him the papers back, that's when he come out with a silly grin on his face talking about how he couldn't sell me the rif... how HE wasn't going to sell me the rifle," Miller told WTBV. "HE MADE the decision! He said HE MADE the decision not to sell me a rifle."
-----------------------cut----------------------
We asked the company for a response to this story but they had no comment. But we did hear that audio tape Francine Miller says she recorded in the store.
In it, the manager said this wasn't a prejudiced act, rather, that it's a federal offense to sell someone a gun which they believe is intended for someone else.
(Excerpt) Read more at wbtv.com ...
I truly despise the impact of the Civil Rights laws. I understand why they were passed - I lived in Selma Alabama in the mid-60s. But they are wrong.
And I would not want to rent out my house, for example, because I don’t get to say who rents it.
But while I don’t approve of the law, I also wouldn’t want to lose everything I own when it is enforced...
It was about 1990 - have bought handguns since, but no rifles...I guess time keeps passing me by.
“Probably the single biggest hammer in the socialist toolbox.”
Another big hammer is the Voting Rights Act which allows Eric Holder to review and approve voting district boundaries in the southern states. George W. Bush signed into law a 25 year extension of the act which applies only to the southern states. Why?
ANY recording NOT including the entire conversation and not with cognizance of both parties is ultimately self-serving for the party doing the recording..
If it is true that even the slightest inkling that this person might not be buying the weapon for himself, but for another, the gunstore SHOULD have cancelled the sale, period.
In my opinion, this was a setup. For whatever reason, this couple was out to complete a straw purchase and then had to rely on the backup racism charge - a charge they had cemented by the mere fact of whoever wanted to ‘out’ the store had planned for by enlisting black straw purchasers.
Long story short - screw that couple. They can take it up with Holder and the ATF.
Since Fast & Furious, Gunwalker and such criminal conspiracies by Holder, word has likely spread about the deceit used by ATF and sales personnel won't even trust an ATF OK as it might be a Gunwalker sale and ATF will lie about giving the OK to the gun shop to cover their own criminal acts.
Sending ringers technically over the line for a straw purchase to complain and sue when refused, intimidates the salesperson to risk a questionable sale in the future.
The sales person is stung for complying with the letter of the law.
“Maybe the address that was given could not possibly have coyotes in the back yard.”
Coyote media hysteria has been sweeping Charlotte for the past couple of weeks:
I thought the same thing until recently.
I never buy from dealers because I flat-out refuse to do the background check (well, there are the rip-off prices too I guess). I mean, I'd pass for the sale no problem... but I have a serious gripe about it like most people. I thought this applied only to handguns (I'm in Indiana).
Then when my search for a small youth rifle in the used market came up empty, I went to a gun shop to get my boy a shiny new Henry Mini Bolt... guess what? I had to get FBI approval to buy a single shot .22 rifle. Man was I fuming!
And by the way, it's a fine little rifle for a beginner in case you were wondering.
I found plenty of black “Benard Millers” on a facebook and google search. What’s your exact point?
“I have a dream... “ to put any one in jail for not sharing the dream...
Unintended consequences...
What part of the Declaration people do not get that man and woman in America are an inherently sort of Civily “Divorced” Independent lot, yet not necessarily divided.
WE are all sinners, and I am getting tired of the Bunny Ranching everyone into a forced Kumbaya of men loving each other etc...
“I have a dream... “ to put any one in jail for not sharing the dream...
Unintended consequences...
What part of the Declaration people do not get that man and woman in America are an inherently sort of Civily “Divorced” Independent lot, yet not necessarily divided.
WE are all sinners, and I am getting tired of the Bunny Ranching everyone into a forced Kumbaya of men loving each other etc...
ANd the problem with the KKK is that they refused that divorce, let us remember that, but, now, we are back to “I have a dream... “ the kinder version of the KKK, I guess.
The way I read the article, she started recording when they were denied. My phone will record and I carry it with me all the time. I have on a couple of occasions, recorded what was going on and if I had been Mrs. Miller I would have done so in this instance.
Sorry, that war was lost and the legislation was passed. Get over it.
This is the first time I’ve seen so many freepers rejoicing that someone was denied the right to buy a gun.
I don't see a lot of "rejoicing".
I see most people pointing out the fact that the store shouldn't be blamed for being put in this position.
Fact of the matter is, I believe anyone should be able to purchase and own any firearm they want... felon or otherwise.
I don't like gun dealers because most of them are a ripoff and most especially because they insist on treating me like I don't know what I want and am somehow stupid.
That being said, there isn't a damn thing they can do about these stupid laws. I'm certain they hate them more than we do.
That is a rather bizarre conclusion you came to.
Rather, a black guy named Miller trying to buy the exact same gun that another black guy named Miller tried to buy earlier from the same chain, and was found ineligible, is considered suspicious enough by the protocols of the licensing agency for the store to refuse the sale.
Actually, it may be your business, but unless your business owns its own well, barters, has its own generator and is not connected to the road system in any way, you’re using the public’s infrastructure to discriminate against certain sectors of the public for no other reason than they’re different.
How is it fair to me, a private citizen that I am subsidizing somebody banning my religious, ethnic or racial group when my tax dollars make it possible that this business is easily accessible and has all the amenities it has?
Indeed many wars have been fought over personal liberty. Thankfully, the Founders didn't just "get over it" as you suggest people should, when their basic property rights and liberty of association are violated.
No, I don't think I'll get over it. If you don't respect personal liberty, I suggest you take a walk on over to DU. You will fit in better in their world of group rights (mandates on others).
It sounds like Dicks (heavily corporate) was being paranoid about a straw purchaser which is a big deal. The question I have is was this other Miller at the same address? If so, I'd deny the sale. If not, I would have sold it if he passed NICS. Miller is a common last name, so it's hard to tell based on that alone. I'm wondering what the address is of that other Miller they want to avoid.
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.