Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Sue em till their dick falls off

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.

Watson also filed a separate suit claiming a Walmart store in Josephine County, Oregon, discriminated against him by denying him a rifle sale “on or about March 3, 2018.” As with Dick’s, the Walmart employee at the gun counter allegedly told Watson that rifles and shotguns could not be sold to individuals under the age of 21. The employee indicated that ammunition for firearms could not be sold to anyone under 21 either.

In both suits Watson alleges that the defendants, Dick’s and Walmart, not only discriminated but “advertised … unlawful discriminatory policies by issuing a press release, and other materials, stating that [the defendants] will no longer sell any firearms or ammunition to any person under the age of 21.”
On February 28, 2018, Breitbart News reported Dick’s Sporting Goods’ announcement that they would no longer sell firearms to anyone under the age of 21. That same day, Walmart announced that it would no longer sell guns to anyone under the age of 21.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...icks-sporting-goods-refusing-sell-rifle/

That was waiting to happen... Should be interesting.

Publicity stunt or clueless lawyer. Frivolous suit.

How long before they nare jammed up in court with a thousand or more lawsuits. Doesn't matter if they can be won or not they have to defend themselves against each one. It's going to cost these pricks a lot of money.

#4. Make the enemy live up to its own rule book.

But...but...conservative folks don't play these games! Hope the young man wins.

The only thing that might save the 2nd... Litigation and a conservative SCOTUS
Here's to hoping that buck toothed old windbag Ginsburg goes peacefully in her sleep.
Sooner than later.

Pretty sure they still have to spend their money to hire a lawyer of their own; and dicks may not get a liberal judge.

It's no more frivolous than the wedding cake suit. That one put the company out of business. The law is clear on age discrimination so how is Dicks or Walmart any different? Sure, the suit is just to get it in court and he could have gone to any of many of other stores to buy it. The wedding cake suit was exactly the same thing.

You are spot on, my man❗️👍

Absolutely...

Good for him. I hope he wins his lawsuit.

Finally. In a perfect world I think a business should sell/perform services to whomever it wants. Unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world and after the cake suite...I'm glad.

I'd like to see Dick's and Walmart have to deal with a few hundred of these lawsuits, all at once.

I wouldn't be surprised if Walmart pulled a Target, soon, and just stopped selling guns/ammo/fishing gear. Yeah, that'd be kinda sad, but would open lots of opportunities for competitors and smaller shops.

Local boy. Got some good advice sounds like huh?

It will take years before a court decision is final.

Again; depends on the judge.

Unfortunately age discrimination is the weakest claim in the book.

Unless you are 55 and want to set chokers then someone has to hire you.

We should be picketing Walmart like the [bleep] would do If they would not sell them cakes.

Do attorney charge less per hour to defend against the plaintiff?