Posted on 03/06/2018 5:50:06 PM PST by Revel
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.”
The employee referenced Dick’s recent policy shift, disallowing firearm sales to anyone under 21, and cited the policy as the reason for denying the sale.
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.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
High five to him.
Very interesting!
I wonder who is funding this?
Hope he can retire on the settlement.
About time the left and these cowards got their own medicine .
Shame he is not suing in a more conservative state where the courts could then set a precedent.
If the bakery has to bake the cake, then Dicks has to sell the rifle.
Let them suffer under the same tyranny they voted for.
Yep.
The first thing I thought of when I heard about these policy changes was how are they legal?
What would it take to file a suit like this in TN? I know a fairly responsible gay 19 year old that could use some college funding. I mentioned the gay for the protected class aspect.
You cannot discriminate in commerce based on age. I predicted right here that Dick’s would get sued for millions. Such idiots!! I am so glad!! Who ever was their lawyer has big mal practice problems.
Careful. It could be a Soros-funded trap to force big businesses to rally for a change in the law. Lefty campaign wedge issue?
If Dick's and Walmart said "no gun sales to anyone over 50" no one would think they could get away with such blatant age discrimination, yet people seem to think they can here.
You have to treat people equally under the law. If state law says a product is legal for anyone over 18, you can't still sell the product and say no to people 18, 19 and 20. If you could, it could be any arbitrary age for anything - no alcohol for those under 37 - a store sells.
I personally think a business should be able to deny sales to anyone they want for any reason they want, but in a country where the courts say public accommodation laws are constitutional and (maybe) a baker has to make some homosexuals' rainbow-colored gay wedding cake even if it's not a style on offer, than this doesn't fly. Either pull the product entirely or sell to every legal customer.
Godspeed, Mr. Watson!
I wish he was living in Indiana where he’d have a MUCH better chance of winning. Oregon is a liberal wasteland. Great luck to him though. Doing God’s work.
Ya freaking hoo!
If I remember correctly, the arguments are in the cases preceding the vote for 18-year-olds.
Rather, the legislators’ arguments preceding the vote for 18-year-olds.
He can buy his guns elsewhere. He shouldn’t be able to force Dicks to sell him a gun and homos shouldn’t be able to force Christians to bake them a cake. He should go to a mom and pop gun store where he will be treated like a man and he won’t have to act like a jerk.
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.