Dick's and Hypocrites

[Revoltingest]

You should have kept looking. . .

I looked all I could stand.
Just eat the cake.

 

[Curious George]

Dick’s Sporting Goods, Major Gun Retailer, Stops Selling Assault-Style Weapons

Dick's Sporting Goods has announced that they will no longer be selling assault rifles at any of their stores. The actual Dick's pulled them after Sandy Hook, and now they won't be available from their outdoor specialty store, Field and Stream. I think this is a very good decision, both morally and from a public relations point of view. They made the decision after they found out they had sold the Parkland shooter a shotgun.

However, they also made a second announcement. From now on, Dick's will not sell a firearm to anyone under the age of 21, regardless of law. This is wrong. How many of us screamed bloody murder when bakeries wouldn't make a cake for a gay couple because they had a moral objection? If the kid is legally allowed to buy the gun who the %$@& is Dick's to tell him "No" based on their corporate morality? Isn't that the same thing as the bakery?

If Dick's wishes to deny service based on their version of right and wrong, it is the duty of all the people who attacked that bakery to level the same attack against Dick's. If they don't, they're just hypocrites. Either a company may, or may not, behave this way. You can't have your penis-shaped cake and eat it, too.

Unfortunately, "young people" is not a protected class. It is not the same issue. However, it does seem a questionable practice.

 

[Curious George]

In Michiganistan, it's Elliott-Larsen.

It, like discrimination based on sexual orientation, will bee state based. I am guessing that Dick's will abide by the state laws where applicable. However, the reason for the discrimination would be more easily justified than discrimination based on sexual orientation. Whether or not they would prevail in claims against them will be seen.

Personally, I think they should not. That does not they will not.

 

[Revoltingest]

It, like discrimination based on sexual orientation, will bee state based. I am guessing that Dick's will abide by the state laws where applicable. However, the reason for the discrimination would be more easily justified than discrimination based on sexual orientation. Whether or not they would prevail in claims against them will be seen.

Personally, I think they should not. That does not they will not.

One way to skirt the law would be to not carry any
gun they wouldn't want to sell to anyone under 21.

 

[columbus]

One way to skirt the law would be to not carry any
gun they wouldn't want to sell to anyone under 21.

What law?
Is there a law requiring Dicks to sell guns, under circumstances they don't want to?
Tom

 

[sayak83]

Dick’s Sporting Goods, Major Gun Retailer, Stops Selling Assault-Style Weapons

Dick's Sporting Goods has announced that they will no longer be selling assault rifles at any of their stores. The actual Dick's pulled them after Sandy Hook, and now they won't be available from their outdoor specialty store, Field and Stream. I think this is a very good decision, both morally and from a public relations point of view. They made the decision after they found out they had sold the Parkland shooter a shotgun.

However, they also made a second announcement. From now on, Dick's will not sell a firearm to anyone under the age of 21, regardless of law. This is wrong. How many of us screamed bloody murder when bakeries wouldn't make a cake for a gay couple because they had a moral objection? If the kid is legally allowed to buy the gun who the %$@& is Dick's to tell him "No" based on their corporate morality? Isn't that the same thing as the bakery?

If Dick's wishes to deny service based on their version of right and wrong, it is the duty of all the people who attacked that bakery to level the same attack against Dick's. If they don't, they're just hypocrites. Either a company may, or may not, behave this way. You can't have your penis-shaped cake and eat it, too.

Obviously if you keep a product, gun or cake, you have to sell it to anybody who is legally allowed to buy it and has the money. This plan of not selling to kids below 21 won't be allowed by the courts unless the law itself is changed to that effect.

 

[esmith]

In my opinion the only way any of these business can not sell certain items to persons under the age of 21 is to not sell to anyone; unless it is a Federal Law. The State sets the law, if the business does not conform to the law of the State they are doing business in they are in violation of the law. And no if you are using the renting a car theory. Renting and selling are two different situations.
I could be mistaken but I see no way that this could become Federal law, and if it does it will be challenged in court.
Let me ask a very simple question. What do you think the publicity would be if a Marine, Soldier, Sailor, or Airman under that age of 21 walked into a store that were selling these items and they were denied?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Age discrimination.

Which law is that? I can’t find any law titled “age discrimination.”

In Michiganistan, it's Elliott-Larsen.

It seems like you’re right: they’d probably be breaking that law if they tried to implement that policy exactly as written in Michigan. We’ll have to see if they give an exception for Michigan (as the car rental companies apparently do).

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Dick’s Sporting Goods, Major Gun Retailer, Stops Selling Assault-Style Weapons

Dick's Sporting Goods has announced that they will no longer be selling assault rifles at any of their stores. The actual Dick's pulled them after Sandy Hook, and now they won't be available from their outdoor specialty store, Field and Stream. I think this is a very good decision, both morally and from a public relations point of view. They made the decision after they found out they had sold the Parkland shooter a shotgun.

However, they also made a second announcement. From now on, Dick's will not sell a firearm to anyone under the age of 21, regardless of law. This is wrong. How many of us screamed bloody murder when bakeries wouldn't make a cake for a gay couple because they had a moral objection? If the kid is legally allowed to buy the gun who the %$@& is Dick's to tell him "No" based on their corporate morality? Isn't that the same thing as the bakery?

If Dick's wishes to deny service based on their version of right and wrong, it is the duty of all the people who attacked that bakery to level the same attack against Dick's. If they don't, they're just hypocrites. Either a company may, or may not, behave this way. You can't have your penis-shaped cake and eat it, too.

The difference is they are applying their discriminatory stance to everyone, not a specific protected group.

 

[Revoltingest]

What law?
Is there a law requiring Dicks to sell guns, under circumstances they don't want to?
Tom

Any law prohibiting age discrimination.

 

[Revoltingest]

Which law is that? I can’t find any law titled “age discrimination.”
It seems like you’re right: they’d probably be breaking that law if they tried to implement that policy exactly as written in Michigan. We’ll have to see if they give an exception for Michigan (as the car rental companies apparently do).

Laws aren't always enforced.
"Black robe syndrome" rules in Michiganistan.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Obviously if you keep a product, gun or cake, you have to sell it to anybody who is legally allowed to buy it and has the money. This plan of not selling to kids below 21 won't be allowed by the courts unless the law itself is changed to that effect.

You have it backwards: you can choose to refuse your products to whoever you want except for cases where it's prohibited by law.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Laws aren't always enforced.
"Black robe syndrome" rules in Michiganistan.

Well, at this point, there's only an internet letter and - AFAIK - no policy actually being implemented yet.

All that Dick's has done so far is give some broad strokes in a social media post. I'm sure the details - e.g. tweaking the policy state-by-state as needed to adhere to the laws in each area - will come in time. I'm also sure that a company the size of Dick's has a large enough legal staff to identify and avoid major potential breaches of the law.

Edit: IOW, maybe wait until they actually break a law instead of assuming that they intend to break the law.

 

[sayak83]

You have it backwards: you can choose to refuse your products to whoever you want except for cases where it's prohibited by law.

That would be discrimination.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That would be discrimination.

Discrimination is legal in your country except for the specific cases where it's prohibited.

Outside of Michigan (tip of the hat to @Revoltingest for the law reference), what law says that a gun shop can't refuse to sell a gun to someone because they're under 21?

 

[sayak83]

Discrimination is legal in your country except for the specific cases where it's prohibited.

Outside of Michigan (tip of the hat to @Revoltingest for the law reference), what law says that a gun shop can't refuse to sell a gun to someone because they're under 21?

Not my country.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Not my country.

My mistake: I assumed you were American.

 

[esmith]

Discrimination is legal in your country except for the specific cases where it's prohibited.

Outside of Michigan (tip of the hat to @Revoltingest for the law reference), what law says that a gun shop can't refuse to sell a gun to someone because they're under 21?

That will have to be answered in a court of law and it will probably go all the way to the SCOTUS. That is unless the companies back-down

 

[sayak83]

My mistake: I assumed you were American.

Nah Indian. I have little idea of what the laws are but have some ideas of what they ought to be based on contractarian ethics.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That will have to be answered in a court of law and it will probably go all the way to the SCOTUS. That is unless the companies back-down

What law do think would be the basis of a case that goes to the Supreme Court?

Say Dick's refuses to sell a 19-year-old a gun and the 19-year-old sues. What would be the grounds for their lawsuit?