- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 20-year-old sues Walmart, Dick's because they wouldn't sell him guns
Posted on 3/6/18 at 10:52 am to OMLandshark
Posted on 3/6/18 at 10:52 am to OMLandshark
I guess then I am ignorant of the law that states age cannot be a discriminating factor.
2
Posted on 3/6/18 at 10:54 am to Toddy
quote:
All of this cheering on a kid suing to force someone to sell him guns.
Are you reading the same thread I am?
At least as many people side with the store on this thread. And most of the posts are discussing what the law is or isn't.
Personally, I think the store SHOULD be able to restrict their sales. Legally they may have an issue if there is a state public accommodation law that includes age.
So what is your position on this case? Should the store be forced to sell him a gun? Demonstrate your lack of hypocrisy.
Posted on 3/6/18 at 10:54 am to themunch
quote:
guess then I am ignorant of the law that states age cannot be a discriminating factor.
You must be. Plenty of federal court decisions to pluck from.
Posted on 3/6/18 at 10:56 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
If there is only one set of age limits then that is discriminating. How does this hold up?
I am serious.
I am serious.
This post was edited on 3/6/18 at 10:57 am
Posted on 3/6/18 at 10:57 am to fr33manator
quote:
While many of us think they should, the proggies have already set the precedent that you CAN’T refuse service, so this is just using their own ammo against them.
Was that a pun?
Posted on 3/6/18 at 10:58 am to Toddy
quote:
If you don't understand something so blatantly hypocritical as this, I'm not gonna waste my time.
So, just to be clear, your stance is that Dick’s should be forced to sell this young man a gun, amirite?
Posted on 3/6/18 at 10:58 am to themunch
I don’t know what to tell you. SCOTUS has ruled that people 40 and older can have a cause of action for age discrimination in employment situations
There is no such protection for any other age bracket at the federal level. Any discrimination based on age outside of the older people at work receives the rational basis test, just like every other non suspect/protected class of people.
There is no such protection for any other age bracket at the federal level. Any discrimination based on age outside of the older people at work receives the rational basis test, just like every other non suspect/protected class of people.
This post was edited on 3/6/18 at 10:59 am
Posted on 3/6/18 at 10:59 am to MrLarson
I firmly believe that private businesses should be able to do business with anyone they want and, on the flip side, should be able to decline to do business with anyone they want for any reason they want.
It’s going to be funny to watch the left twist and turn to somehow make this okay.
It’s going to be funny to watch the left twist and turn to somehow make this okay.
Posted on 3/6/18 at 10:59 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
quote:
Oregon has age as a protected class In employment situations
You read further than I did. I just looked up a quick "Do they protect age?" answer and went back to making the donuts.
Posted on 3/6/18 at 11:00 am to Ag Zwin
I looked even further, they do have a statue giving rise to this case. However it’s lengthy and appears to give lots of wiggle room for exceptions. I wouldn’t be surprised for a liberal OR judge to find a way for guns not to fit
Posted on 3/6/18 at 11:00 am to UpToPar
quote:
I firmly believe that private businesses should be able to do business with anyone they want and, on the flip side, should be able to decline to do business with anyone they want for any reason they want.
I like this for a business stand point.
Posted on 3/6/18 at 11:01 am to Toddy
quote:
All of this cheering on a kid suing to force someone to sell him guns. This cheering from the same ones who were hysterical that two dykes sued a baker to sell them a cake.
Hypocrisy knows no bounds.
It's called retribution and revenge, not hypocrisy.
The best way to show liberals how stupid they are is to force them to swallow their own stupidity.
Posted on 3/6/18 at 11:07 am to ShortyRob
quote:
government is OPENLY practicing discrimination by making it illegal to discriminate ONLY against certain people.
Exactly! And how does all these protected classes vs non-protected classes square with the 14th?
Posted on 3/6/18 at 11:08 am to ShortyRob
quote:
I mean, why exactly is it illegal to discriminate against you if you're female, but not if you're ugly?
Ok, what if I need to hire a model? Should I be forced to hire an ugly person? What if I’m hiring a personal trainer and the person is 200 pounds overweight? I can descriminate against both of these people and say I won’t hire them because they are ugly and fat.
What do you think bouncers at nightclubs do?
quote:
Maybe bikini shops should ban selling bikinis to women over a 25 BMI.
Yes, that is legal. You shouldn’t have to make a swimsuit for someone on “My 600 Pound Life “ that compromises your brand’s integrity.
Posted on 3/6/18 at 11:11 am to SSpaniel
quote:
Just like those cake decorator suits were, right?
Except age has always been on of the protected classes.
Imagine the uproar if Walmart stopped selling an item to everyone over 55 because they felt like it.
Posted on 3/6/18 at 11:13 am to OMLandshark
quote:I don't think you grasped the point of my post.
Ok, what if I need to hire a model? Should I be forced to hire an ugly person?
Read the whole thing again. That way, I don't have to be repetitive.
quote:See above
Yes, that is legal. You shouldn’t have to make a swimsuit for someone on “My 600 Pound Life “ that compromises your brand’s integrity.
Posted on 3/6/18 at 11:14 am to Steadyhands
quote:Other way around. There is no argument supporting this suit.
There is no worthwhile argument to back stance of these stores.
Posted on 3/6/18 at 11:15 am to HonoraryCoonass
quote:
Exactly! And how does all these protected classes vs non-protected classes square with the 14th?
The problem with the entire concept of "protected classes" is that it also means there are UNprotected classes.
The govt has said, IN LAW.........."hey, if you frick with people in group X......we're gonna step in and protect them OR........we'll let them use our courts to punish you.........but if you frick with people in group Y..........all good".
You don't get more straight up government sanctioned discrimination than that.
This post was edited on 3/6/18 at 11:16 am
Posted on 3/6/18 at 11:20 am to Mid Iowa Tiger
The amount of people who got their law degree from Internet University (TM) on both sides of this issue is crazy.
Posted on 3/6/18 at 11:20 am to ShortyRob
What are these UNprotected classes?
Page 4 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News