• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fred Meyer, Bi-Mart sued for refusing to sell ammo to Oregon man, 20

I mean the OP was going to use age discrimination as his angle to fly his victim card... so how is any imposed age limitation not age discrimination then?
Look I'm as pro gun as they get but even I can see 12 is a little young.
 
What discrimination? That the guy was under age? That store does not have to sell anything it doesn't to as long as that rule applies to ANYONE under 21.

Now, if the store refused to sell ammo only to black people under 21, but white people under 21 could buy it, that would be discrimination. This lawsuit won't survive an hour in court.

This is a correct position. There is no suspect age category in this matter.
 
Look I'm as pro gun as they get but even I can see 12 is a little young.

Of course I do too but his argument is flawed.
 
I mean the OP was going to use age discrimination as his angle to fly his victim card... so how is any imposed age limitation not age discrimination then?

The OP posted a case where a 20 year old was denied ammo while the state law states ammo and long arms are allowed at 18....
 
The kid wasn't under age. It's legal for an 18 year old in Oregon to purchase a shotgun and ammunition. The decision was made at the store or corporate level.

I thought these decisions were completely up to the store owners, and the marketplace would respond?
 
Try again, it's legal to sell firearms and ammunition to people over the age of 18 in Oregon.
Minimum Age to Purchase & Possess in Oregon | Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

This is store policy, not Oregon law and it is clearly age discrimination. So do you support this kind of discrimination or do you fight against it?

Do you support a business to conduct business in the way they choose (within the law) and to serve or not serve customers in the way they want? Should the baker be forced to sell wedding cakes to homosexuals? Let's see if you are consistent.
 
Unless they're gay. and want to buy a cake.

So, the store should be forced to sell to this particular customer? So you support the baker being forced to sell wedding cakes to homosexuals? Are you consistent?
 
Are you for allowing 12 year olds to leave school to go to an anti-gun protest?

Let's see... selling a gun to a 12 year old, illegal... 12 year olds leaving school to go to an anti-gun protest, legal. Hmmm...
 
Are you for selling a gun to a 12 year old?
We're for selling guns to people who are legally able to. The law states that a person 18 years old can buy a long gun.
 
We're for selling guns to people who are legally able to. The law states that a person 18 years old can buy a long gun.

So what's your point? You think this is illegal age discrimination and the company should, by law, be forced to sell to anyone 18 and up?
 
So what's your point? You think this is illegal age discrimination and the company should, by law, be forced to sell to anyone 18 and up?

Simply put, yes. Either than or give up their FFL and stop selling guns completely.
 
Fight (or at least object on internet message boards). I’m opposed to refusing to sell firearms to adults based on their age, refusing to bake wedding cakes for couples based on their sexual orientation and refusing to allow innocent people in to your country based on their nationality. Are you with me? :)

Only one of those actions is based on the law, the rest are based on what people want the law to be.
 
Do you support a business to conduct business in the way they choose (within the law) and to serve or not serve customers in the way they want? Should the baker be forced to sell wedding cakes to homosexuals? Let's see if you are consistent.

There is no law which states that homosexuals are allowed to buy cakes, there is one that states that 18 year olds are allowed to buy long guns and ammunition.
 
Stupid question since a 12 year old isn't a legal adult. But you knew that, you were just trying to distract from the issue.

So.. Do you support age-based discrimination? C'mon, step up to the plate and stop playing stupid games with semantics and answer the question. You know what the question is and you know what the criteria are, so how about just answering the question instead of trying to play games...

It is obvious that you do not understand what discrimination is. You need to get some book learning before posting next time. Meanwhile a company can set any limits it wants on purchases as long as it applies to all protected groups equally.

Walmart to raise age limit on gun purchases | TheHill
 
So what's your point? You think this is illegal age discrimination and the company should, by law, be forced to sell to anyone 18 and up?

In Oregon, yes they should be. Age is a characteristic within Oregon's public accommodation laws. I'm for following those.
 
Only one of those actions is based on the law, the rest are based on what people want the law to be.
Your question wasn't about what the law currently is, it was about whether we fight discrimination. The moral principles shouldn't be any different whether you're fighting someone breaking anti-discrimination laws or you're fighting laws that are themselves discriminatory. :)
 
It is obvious that you do not understand what discrimination is. You need to get some book learning before posting next time. Meanwhile a company can set any limits it wants on purchases as long as it applies to all protected groups equally.

Walmart to raise age limit on gun purchases | TheHill

So you can discriminate as long as you are highly discriminatory about who you discriminate against.
 
So you can discriminate as long as you are highly discriminatory about who you discriminate against.

Again you show your ignorance of the meaning of discrimination. Age limits are not discriminatory.
 
Again you show your ignorance of the meaning of discrimination. Age limits are not discriminatory.

There are some exceptions to this actually, even in public accommodation laws, and are dependent on state.
 
Again you show your ignorance of the meaning of discrimination. Age limits are not discriminatory.

No, I understand perfectly well what discrimination is. It's when you apply your personal standard to a defined group of people in order to deny them their legal rights.
 
It is obvious that you do not understand what discrimination is. You need to get some book learning before posting next time. Meanwhile a company can set any limits it wants on purchases as long as it applies to all protected groups equally.

Walmart to raise age limit on gun purchases | TheHill
And something tells me these places WM/FM are trying to catch the wave. After all where do all these school kids shop at? I recall after Sandy Hook and all the hysterics about open carry that FM was one of the first big corps. to say we welcome them. So what happened?
 
No, I understand perfectly well what discrimination is. It's when you apply your personal standard to a defined group of people in order to deny them their legal rights.

So it is your assertion that liquor laws governing age of purchaser are discriminatory and 14 year olds should be allowed to buy whiskey?
 
Back
Top Bottom