03-04-2018, 10:28 PM
(03-04-2018, 09:41 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:(03-04-2018, 05:53 PM)David Horn Wrote:You don't see an issue/problem with a LEGAL age group of LEGAL status, who are LEGAL to LEGALLY purchase a LEGAL product (firearm, alcohol, cigarettes or any other products available for sale to public in their store) being refused and denied of the right of doing so? THE LAW OR THEMSELVES. IT OBVIOUSLY WASN'T THE LAW.(03-03-2018, 09:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote:David Horn Wrote:You're confusing the right of a company to sell to whom they wish with legal authority, which they do not have. If they are discriminating against a group with legal status, then they are truly barred from doing what they are doing ... but they aren't. Being underage is a legal status issue, as you noted, but NOT being underage is not a protected category like gender and race. You can try to make it one, but right now it's not.
No. I'm saying Dick's doesn't have a legal right or the legal authority to change a state or federal law. Do you agree with me or not? I'm saying an 18-20 year old citizen of the USA are legal adults with legal status who are of legal age who have a legal right to purchase a rifle within Minnesota and The United States of America according to the law of the state and the federal government. Is age another one of those protected categories commonly associated with discrimination? I think so.
No one has the right to tell a company they must sell firearms to anyone. They also have no prohibition on deciding who is or is not eligible to buy -- unless the buyer is denied because he or she is in a protected class. 18-21 is not a protected class. If you have a lawyer, feel free to ask. I know the answer.
C-Xer Wrote:I know what I would do as Republican, I'd let it linger and grow and allow it to turn Dick's parking lots into political battle grounds over gun rights. If Cabelas is listening and wants Dick's disgruntled customer's or employees, I have a marketing slogan for you and others to use. "We Ain't Dick's"
I think you miss the point of the exercise. Dick's management decided that the number of future gun owners is small in the youth demographic, but they do buy other athletic equipment. More to the point, that demographic is trending anti-gun, so doing the same is good business. Cabela's can have the residual business.
Who gave them that right (a group of arrogant blue idiots view themselves as being above the law who are used being held unaccountable or a group self righteous blues who view themselves as morally superior to everyone else or a group foolish blues who make their business decisions based feelings or popularity instead of business knowledge and common sense) to do what they did in AMERICA?
ARE YOU ONE OF THOSE RUSSIANS (AN OLD RUSSIAN ASSOCIATED WITH THE OLD SOVIET UNION IN YOUR CASE OR REMNANT FROM THE COLD WAR IN YOUR CASE) that I'm still hearing about in the news? If so, that would explain why you are so off as far as your understanding and knowledge of AMERICA AND AMERICANS. Now, if its a matter of reasoning and serious lack of reasoning for whatever reason, that would explain it too. My values are clear and rather steady and widely held and recognized. My values aren't confusing and do not contradict and run into conflict and sparsely held and unrecognizable.
If the banks don't kill them by shutting down or severely limiting their credit lines, the class action lawsuits and major lawsuits and the federal and state fines associated with breaking the law and the business disruptions that scare off/turn off customers and costumer losses and the sell off of stock by shareholders are going to severely cripple and most likely kill them from losses of operating capital and cash flow. Bye Bye Dick's Sporting Goods.
The Soviet Union has not been in existence for 27 years now, and it hasn't been an 'Evil Empire' since Gorbachev acceded to power. The only threat of Soviet military expansion would have been created by the victim, such as by terrorist acts against the USSR.
I might prefer that retailers were still selling classical compact disks, but the economic realities do not support this. It is no longer a profit for a merchant of audio and video. I must rely instead upon what I already have or resort to internet transactions. It may be a pity, but that is something to which I must adjust.
All states have a legal minimum age of 21 for the sale and consumption of into0xicating liquors even if the legal age for voting is 18. Youth between the ages of 18 and 21 were troublesome customers of alcoholic beverages because they
were more likely to drive drunk than older drivers and because 18-year-old boys were using alcohol to loosen the inhibitions of girls under 18 to have sex and get pregnant and contract STDs for which they were unready. But as it is, intoxicating liquors are heavily regulated. 18-year-olds have been getting firearms for younger gang members.
Guns? I can think of people to whom I do not want guns sold. People too stupid to merit execution (that is an IQ of 70 or less) probably should be denied firearms. Likewise anyone adjudicated insane. If one has diminished capacity for purposes of criminal sentencing, then one should not have a firearm. Persons who have committed a crime (and making a terrorist threat as did Nikolas Cruz) should not get firearms. Addicts and habitual drunks? Likewise. Me? Sure. A little over a year and a half ago I left hints that I was contemplating suicide as everything went wrong in my life.
I see Dick's Sporting Goods making a decision that capitalist firms do frequently, cutting a line of merchandise because that merchandise either
(1) is no longer profitable to sell
(2) it does not handle well, or
(3) the product line creates risks of huge losses due to liability lawsuits.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.