Dick's and Hypocrites

[9-10ths_Penguin]

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.

In this context, is age a protected class?

My admittedly quick Googling suggests that at least at the federal level, age discrimination by private businesses is only illegal when it comes to employment and only with regard to people over 40. Does anyone understand the law differently or know of a state law that says something else?

Offhand, I'd assume that if it's legal to refuse to rent a car to someone under 25, it would be legal to refuse to sell a gun to someone under 21.

 

[Aldrnari]

It's not morality, it's legality.

I suppose morally they could choose not to sell guns at all. Like with the cake, a 18yo could simply go somewhere else to buy a gun. Or get their buddy who's 21 to purchase for them.

Probably a move to take any heat off them as gun sellers.

Hmm, I would agree there could be legal repercussions, so it will be interesting to see how this unfolds.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

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.

There are different issues at play in the two cases. Plenty of consistent positions could say "yes" to the one case and "no" to the other.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It's not morality, it's legality.

What law do you think Dick's is breaking?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

In this context, is age a protected class?

My admittedly quick Googling suggests that at least at the federal level, age discrimination by private businesses is only illegal when it comes to employment and only with regard to people over 40. Does anyone understand the law differently or know of a state law that says something else?

Offhand, I'd assume that if it's legal to refuse to rent a car to someone under 25, it would be legal to refuse to sell a gun to someone under 21.

Same at my clinic. For liability reasons we don't preform chiro, types of PT or massage on people below a certain age even if there's no legal reason not to. Similarly with geriatric patients, many therapists without specialty training won't preform service on them.

 

[Revoltingest]

What law do you think Dick's is breaking?

In Michiganistan, it's Elliott-Larsen.

 

[Skwim]

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.

So, do you think a carnival ride operator unfairly discriminates against kids when they don't permit anyone to ride who's under a minimum height?

Thing is, under federal anti-discrimination laws, businesses can refuse service to any person for any reason, unless the business is discriminating against a protected class." People under the age of 21 are not a protected class.

.

 

[Prestor John]

Why, exactly, is it morally reprehensible? Should Dick's limit gun sales by age at all, or should a child of any age be able to buy one?

Federal law states that a person of 18 years of age can purchase a rifle, shotgun and ammunition from a retail store.

That is the law.

If Dick's does not want to sell a firearm to an 18 year old, then they should not sell firearms at all.

 

[Prestor John]

So, do you think a carnival ride operator unfairly discriminates against kids when they don't permit anyone to ride who's under a minimum height?

Thing is, under federal anti-discrimination laws, businesses can refuse service to any person for any reason, unless the business is discriminating against a protected class." People under the age of 21 are not a protected class.

.

Federal law also claims an 18 year old has the right to purchase a rifle, shotgun and ammunition from a retail store.

So no more gun sales for Dicks.

 

[Aldrnari]

Federal law states that a person of 18 years of age can purchase a rifle, shotgun and ammunition from a retail store.

That is the law.

If Dick's does not want to sell a firearm to an 18 year old, then they should not sell firearms at all.

Alright, that's all well and good. What makes it morally reprehensible, though?

Does something being legal make it moral? There was a time when refusing to sell things to people based on age was legal, so was it moral then, but not moral now?

 

[Nakosis]

What law do you think Dick's is breaking?

Age discrimination.

 

[bobhikes]

Age is also a protected group in public accomodations in some places.
Dick's might be acting illegally.

I doubt it, I remember as a 21 year old there were a bunch of Clubs that only allowed people over 23 and as a bowler there were age specific bowling leagues.

 

[suncowiam]

Is denying a legal right versus denying a legal right different? Or does morality only matter when it agrees with us? I said those bakers should be forced to make the damn cake, because we all are equal and should have equal rights. Ditto the gun. You want an 19 year old not to buy a gun? Call your Congressman or Congresswoman and tell them that. Add that any NRA donations accepted will cost them your vote, but don't deny a 19 year old from Nebraska who wants to go hunting with his Dad because you think you know how he should behave.

You live in Canada right? Your legals rights are a bit different from mine. A Japanese would also answer this a bit differently.

I get the fact that you're pointing to the laws here. That makes sense up to a rational point. Back in the days, someone would have argued their legal right to own slaves because technically they were right.

I'm just making the point that you are technically right but is selling a cake actually the same as selling a gun? Why even have any age restrictions on guns at all in the first place if you want to be completely technical with this comparing it to a cake? Let's allow minors to purchase guns too while were at it. Of course, there are rational distinctions between the two.

 

[Stanyon]

Those that are over the age of 21 will still buy guns from them if the price is right, those under 21 looking to buy a gun will just spend their money elsewhere. I'd say it's mostly a PR decision but it would be interesting to see how much gun sales make up their overall sales. it may not have much of an impact overall since they carry a large variety of non-gun related products.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

I took great care to pick a pic with the least ew factor.

You should have kept looking. . .

 

[Twilight Hue]

Federal law states that a person of 18 years of age can purchase a rifle, shotgun and ammunition from a retail store.

That is the law.

If Dick's does not want to sell a firearm to an 18 year old, then they should not sell firearms at all.

Exactly. Instead of being moral hypocrites they could just get out of the gun business entirely to validate their position if they really wanted to.

More on par, I think Dicks made the decision based on legal advice.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

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.

Maybe Dick's should be forced to sell cigarettes.

 

[Phantasman]

I can understand Dick's decision. With all the attorneys gearing up to sue gun sellers, Dick's has some very deep pockets. Sometimes it's just better to not have the headaches that go with the sales. Just like the idea of being able to sue a bartender if you get a DUI.

Special Interests are the squeakiest wheels there are.

 

[Phantasman]

It just came across the news that Wal-Mart is going to follow Dicks with a 21 YO requirement, as well, nationwide.

 

[Revoltingest]

I doubt it, I remember as a 21 year old there were a bunch of Clubs that only allowed people over 23 and as a bowler there were age specific bowling leagues.

A club doesn't sound like a "public accommodation" under Michiganistanian law.
But laws will vary with the state.