Dicks isnt' selling Assault rifles anymore

Dicks won't wilt under pressure. Stands hard.

Sorry, DWags, but you’re a little late on this.

But I love your headline.

tGreenWay wrote:Sorry, DWags, but you’re a little late on this.

Well, it's better than shooting it off prematurely.

+1

DWags wrote:Dicks won't wilt under pressure. Stands hard.

Wal-Mart moving up the age limit.

Walmarts made it 21+

Curious if this age bump will be contested. If they will sell a product to a 22 year old but not a 20 year old, both legal adults, aren't they discriminating by age?
Would seem simpler just to not handle that product.

I.B. Fine wrote:Curious if this age bump will be contested. If they will sell a product to a 22 year old but not a 20 year old, both legal adults, aren't they discriminating by age?
Would seem simpler just to not handle that product.

I don’t think you can get in trouble for age. Just sex race sexual orientation gender. I know restaurants can keep kids below 16 out.

I.B. Fine wrote:Curious if this age bump will be contested. If they will sell a product to a 22 year old but not a 20 year old, both legal adults, aren't they discriminating by age?
Would seem simpler just to not handle that product.

now we're getting somewhere.

DWags wrote:

tGreenWay wrote:Sorry, DWags, but you’re a little late on this.

Well, it's better than shooting it off prematurely.

giggity.

But for real though, this really surprises me. I'm happy about it, but I never expected a brand like this to make that decision

DWags wrote:

I.B. Fine wrote:Curious if this age bump will be contested. If they will sell a product to a 22 year old but not a 20 year old, both legal adults, aren't they discriminating by age?
Would seem simpler just to not handle that product.

I don’t think you can get in trouble for age. Just sex race sexual orientation gender. I know restaurants can keep kids below 16 out.

A 16 year old is a minor, different story.

Federal protected classes include:

Race.
Color.
Religion or creed.
National origin or ancestry.
Sex.
Age.
Physical or mental disability.
Veteran status.
Genetic information.
Citizenship.

Age is a Federal protected class, sexual orientation, incidentally is not, but is protected in most states.

Granted our laws about 18 & 21 are contradictory at times, but there's nothing, currently, on the books that would deny selling rifles to 18 year olds, only pistols.

I am not a lawyer, and could be totally wrong, but seems like there will be a law suit shortly testing this.

I.B. Fine wrote:

DWags wrote:

I don’t think you can get in trouble for age. Just sex race sexual orientation gender.  I know restaurants can keep kids below 16 out.  

A 16 year old is a minor, different story.

Federal protected classes include:

   Race.
   Color.
   Religion or creed.
   National origin or ancestry.
   Sex.
   Age.
   Physical or mental disability.
   Veteran status.
   Genetic information.
   Citizenship.

Age is a Federal protected class, sexual orientation, incidentally is not, but is protected in most states.

Granted our laws about 18 & 21 are contradictory at times, but there's nothing, currently, on the books that would deny selling rifles to 18 year olds, only pistols.

I am not a lawyer, and could be totally wrong, but seems like there will be a law suit shortly testing this.

yeah, I'm just guessing too.  I guess if that is so, I can also see people suing to get the same discounts as senior citizens. I'm betting it's the next great controversy in our country.  Common sense will be thrown to the wayside.  We'll argue about age, when we should ask ourselves about bump stocks and assault rifles.  But I have a feeling it will happen.  

I'm just tired of the people who say we need assault rifles to protect ourselves from enemies foreign and domestic.   Seriously.  I'll give you 10,000 AR15's.   and a million rounds of ammo.  Our government will use f15's to smart bomb the shit out of you.  Bazooka's and Nukes too.   You have no chance.   If a foreign enemy has breached our borders, defeated our armies and are walking in your neighborhood, go use that AR15, cause Red Dawn is real, and the citizens will do a better job defeating them than our fricken army.   And finally, if you tell me there are too many out there, we can't do anything about them, well then, lets add 100's of thousands more to them.  Makes complete sense.

It's a damned good thing that you can't buy one of those awful things at Dicks anymore....now if we could only cure constipation,

LooseGoose wrote:It's a damned good thing that you can't buy one of those awful things at Dicks anymore....now if we could only cure constipation,

yay - Goose chimed in..

what up, Goose??

LooseGoose wrote:It's a damned good thing that you can't buy one of those awful things at Dicks anymore....now if we could only cure constipation,

oh - and lawnmowers and such.. those are accidents. Accidents happen.

angry white men walking into schools, movie theaters and such.. mowing down innocent people with assault weapons? Not accidents.

but you knew that already.

LooseGoose wrote:It's a damned good thing that you can't buy one of those awful things at Dicks anymore....now if we could only cure constipation,

Fair enough. I think I would be open to seeing some sort of nation wide research that would show amount of gun deaths to those lives saved by a gun. I don't know if one is out that is peer reviewed.

For the record I wouldn't count killing oneself but some other countries do not have the same rate of suicide by guns with stricter gun laws and the rate of suicide is less. I'm generally curious. I expect but could be wrong that more guns probably equal more unnecessary deaths.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:It's a damned good thing that you can't buy one of those awful things at Dicks anymore....now if we could only cure constipation,

oh - and lawnmowers and such.. those are accidents. Accidents happen.

angry white men walking into schools, movie theaters and such.. mowing down innocent people with assault weapons? Not accidents.

but you knew that already.

And you know the whole "murder wave" and "mass killings" wave are made up.....or is the New Yorker now fake news?

There Is No ‘Epidemic of Mass School Shootings’

If mass school shootings were the only form of gun violence in the United States, the case for treating the regulation of firearms as a pressing policy issue would actually be fairly weak. For the past quarter-century, there has been an average of one mass murder (a killing of four or more people committed with any weapon, as opposed to just firearms) in an American school each year. Every one of those atrocities is a blight on humanity. But it is nearly impossible to design a policy that can bring the incidence of an already exceptionally rare crime down to zero — and given the inherently limited nature of legislative time and resources, it would make little sense to prioritize such a marginal and difficult issue over public health challenges that kill exponentially more people.

Betcha thought it was more than that.

Goose is easily duped.

I enjoy how the mainstream media gets people to believe that lawn mowing accidents and constipation = using assault rifles to murder kids in school.

And the guy that wrote the "assault" weapons ban worked....admits he cherry picked his data.

Tom Maguire @Tom_Maguire 2h2 hours ago
"Rampage Nation" showed a notable drop in "mass shootings" deaths during the 1994-2004 assault weapons ban, so it is widely cited today.
The data was cherry-picked.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-stokes-assault-weapon-ban-20180301-story.html …

LooseGoose wrote:And the guy that wrote the "assault" weapons ban worked....admits he cherry picked his data.

Tom Maguire @Tom_Maguire 2h2 hours ago
"Rampage Nation" showed a notable drop in "mass shootings" deaths during the 1994-2004 assault weapons ban, so it is widely cited today.
The data was cherry-picked.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-stokes-assault-weapon-ban-20180301-story.html …

sweet mainstream media link.

You just said that the guy that wrote the assault weapons ban admits something and provided a link that.... hold on I want you to pay attention to this... that does not include a single quote from that person. Like, he didn’t actually admit anything you world class dipshit.

Honestly. That’s pathetic goose. Truly pathetic.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:You just said that the guy that wrote the assault weapons ban admits something and provided a link that.... hold on I want you to pay attention to this... that does not include a single quote from that person. Like, he didn’t actually admit anything you world class dipshit.

Honestly. That’s pathetic goose. Truly pathetic.

hence the reason I always warn people before relying on the mainstream media for information.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:You just said that the guy that wrote the assault weapons ban admits something and provided a link that.... hold on I want you to pay attention to this... that does not include a single quote from that person. Like, he didn’t actually admit anything you world class dipshit.

Honestly. That’s pathetic goose. Truly pathetic.

hence the reason I always warn people before relying on the mainstream media for information.

Is SPIN still around?

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:You just said that the guy that wrote the assault weapons ban admits something and provided a link that.... hold on I want you to pay attention to this... that does not include a single quote from that person. Like, he didn’t actually admit anything you world class dipshit.

Honestly. That’s pathetic goose. Truly pathetic.

Yeah, the author of the article makes some vauge assumptions but nothing more or less.

msugolfguy wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:You just said that the guy that wrote the assault weapons ban admits something and provided a link that.... hold on I want you to pay attention to this... that does not include a single quote from that person. Like, he didn’t actually admit anything you world class dipshit.

Honestly. That’s pathetic goose. Truly pathetic.

Yeah, the author of the article makes some vauge assumptions but nothing more or less.

But he said things that goose likes so it’s ok

Turtleneck wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote: hence the reason I always warn people before relying on the mainstream media for information.

Is SPIN still around?

[lolz]