• 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

iguanaman said:
So it is your assertion that liquor laws governing age of purchaser are discriminatory and 14 year olds should be allowed to buy whiskey?
Click to expand...
AH Yeeeah right then the 14 year old can go to gun store with the 12 year old so at least one of them can buy a firearm.
 
iguanaman said:
So it is your assertion that liquor laws governing age of purchaser are discriminatory and 14 year olds should be allowed to buy whiskey?
Click to expand...

No. Those are laws passed by our elected representatives. In Oregon, the law says that an 18 year old can buy ammunition and long guns. Telling someone who is legally allowed to do something that they can't do it for no other reason than an arbitrary age is discriminatory.
 
poweRob said:
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?
Click to expand...

Morally they should, however I'm for private business decisions.
 
Bark said:
Can bakers refuse to bake a cake for gays? Businesses can set their policy and take it up in court. Sometimes retailers are the leading edge of change. Piss of a bunch of low income twenty year olds or appease those with much more spending power?
Click to expand...


This stupid argument again?? There is no law that states that ANYONE has a legal right to buy a cake, there are laws that state that people between the ages of 18 and 21 are allowed purchase ammunition and long guns.
 
poweRob said:
By the OP's standard of discrimination I'm just trying to find out how not selling to a 20 year old is discrimination but not selling to a 12 year old is okay.
Click to expand...

I bought or was given guns at 12. As did most of my friends. It never occurred to any of us to use them to settle our differences.

Guns and ammo are not the problem.
 
jimbo said:
I bought or was given guns at 12. As did most of my friends. It never occurred to any of us to use them to settle our differences.

Guns and ammo are not the problem.
Click to expand...

The ease with which anyone not like your mindset can buy them is the problem.
 
faithful_servant said:
This stupid argument again?? There is no law that states that ANYONE has a legal right to buy a cake, there are laws that state that people between the ages of 18 and 21 are allowed purchase ammunition and long guns.
Click to expand...

Neither of these is true actually. There are laws, public accommodation laws, that require equal treatment within the marketplace. Those laws apply in both of these cases, due to the state that each group has been in and how those laws in their states are written. There is no specific law that prevents anyone from being denied certain rights according to age (which could actually be a loophole that could cause court challenges in the future if exploited or truly challenged). What part of the 2nd Amendment limits a child from not being able to own/possess a handgun or rifle? They are US citizens and the Amendment does not specify that it only applies to adults. Most of the rest of the protected rights apply to children (unless specifically indicating an age, such as voting). Why are their rights denied?
 
faithful_servant said:
Fred Meyer, Bi-Mart sued for refusing to sell ammo to Oregon man, 20 | OregonLive.com

So do we support or fight discrimination??
Click to expand...

How is this discrimination? People can't buy cigarettes under the age of 18. They can't buy alcohol under the age of 21

People can't rent cars if they are under the age of 25. Are people complaining about discrimination for that?

leekohler2 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Come on, we can't rule the only thing many people have as an argument, ridiculous associations to try to play the victim because they can't argue using facts, logic or reasoning.

faithful_servant said:
You forgot "I'm going to play silly games and avoid a serious discussion that would expose my hypocrisy."
Click to expand...

Silly games? LOL. THis entire stupid OP is a silly game. This pathetic deflecting post is a silly game. People have clearly pointed out why its not discrimination. Notice the silly game of the people that ignoring that.
 
Last edited:
Sampson Simpson said:
How is this discrimination? People can't buy cigarettes under the age of 18. They can't buy alcohol under the age of 21

People can't rent cars if they are under the age of 25. Are people complaining about discrimination for that?
Click to expand...

Not a right. Not a right. Not a right.
 
Sampson Simpson said:
How is this discrimination? People can't buy cigarettes under the age of 18. They can't buy alcohol under the age of 21
Click to expand...

That is because of the law. This is because of their own decision.

Big difference.

Maybe we should return the old laws that prohibit Indians from buying alcohol.
 
roguenuke said:
Neither of these is true actually. There are laws, public accommodation laws, that require equal treatment within the marketplace. Those laws apply in both of these cases, due to the state that each group has been in and how those laws in their states are written. There is no specific law that prevents anyone from being denied certain rights according to age (which could actually be a loophole that could cause court challenges in the future if exploited or truly challenged). What part of the 2nd Amendment limits a child from not being able to own/possess a handgun or rifle? They are US citizens and the Amendment does not specify that it only applies to adults. Most of the rest of the protected rights apply to children (unless specifically indicating an age, such as voting). Why are their rights denied?
Click to expand...

Just show us the law that states that being able to buy a cake is right. It's a simple request, one that you seem well able to accomplish. Just give us that "Cake Eaters Bill Of Rights".
 
Sampson Simpson said:
How is this discrimination? People can't buy cigarettes under the age of 18. They can't buy alcohol under the age of 21

People can't rent cars if they are under the age of 25. Are people complaining about discrimination for that?
Click to expand...

Poor argument... Every example you gave is a law that has been passed. Being able to buy ammunition and long guns between the age of 18 and 21 is the law in Oregon. These businesses are denying people the right to do something that the law EXPLICITLY states they are allowed to do.

/flush
 
faithful_servant said:
Just show us the law that states that being able to buy a cake is right. It's a simple request, one that you seem well able to accomplish. Just give us that "Cake Eaters Bill Of Rights".
Click to expand...

It is part of the public accommodation laws, the same as the law that restricts businesses like Fred Meyer in Oregon from refusing to sell guns to someone between 18-20. Both cases are covered under those laws, and those laws are generally based on state.

https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/659A.403

And in case you are going to question the definition of a place of public accommodation, that is defined as well.

https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/659A.400
 
faithful_servant said:
Just show us the law that states that being able to buy a cake is right. It's a simple request, one that you seem well able to accomplish. Just give us that "Cake Eaters Bill Of Rights".
Click to expand...

And it goes beyond that.

If I remember, the baker offered to sell them a cake, he simply refused to decorate it. So he was willing to sell them a cake, he simply refused to do the additional work that they had requested in decorating it.
 
faithful_servant said:
Fred Meyer, Bi-Mart sued for refusing to sell ammo to Oregon man, 20 | OregonLive.com

So do we support or fight discrimination??
Click to expand...

Heck, I was given a .410 by my dad at the age of 13 and was buying shells for it at our local Western Auto at the same age. But this was back in the 1950's when there was no to very little gun control or ammo laws. Back when for that entire decade there were zero school shootings and only one mass shooting for the entire decade.
 
Oozlefinch said:
And it goes beyond that.

If I remember, the baker offered to sell them a cake, he simply refused to decorate it. So he was willing to sell them a cake, he simply refused to do the additional work that they had requested in decorating it.
Click to expand...

No actually. The bakers have so far refused to sell them a "wedding cake". If you have other info, please provide. I have always read that they were told no to "wedding cake", which is illegal, regardless if you offer them an "undecorated cake" that you are trying not to call a wedding cake for their wedding. In reality, the bakers all have only made the claim that "they could buy any other cake we offer" after the fact. There is no evidence they offered the cakes beforehand undecorated for a wedding. But the laws are written that says that nothing you offer as a good or service to the public as a whole can be denied based on certain characteristics of the customer, including sexual orientation in all the states that these cases came from. A baker can refuse to make designs or write things on a cake that they would not do for anyone. They can refuse to put certain requested items on a cake.
 
poweRob said:
The ease with which anyone not like your mindset can buy them is the problem.
Click to expand...

But that's not an age or gun problem. That's a people problem. And a rare one at that.

The average of mass murderers is 32. No one is advocating raising the buy limit to 33.

I don't believe that there is any law that can stop the 2 or 3 mass shooters/year without seriously infringe on the rights of a hundred million or so law abiding gun owners, and I don't believe that infringing on a hundred million law abiders rights will reduce the mass murder count to 1 or 2.
 
jimbo said:
But that's not an age or gun problem. That's a people problem. And a rare one at that.

The average of mass murderers is 32. No one is advocating raising the buy limit to 33.

I don't believe that there is any law that can stop the 2 or 3 mass shooters/year without seriously infringe on the rights of a hundred million or so law abiding gun owners, and I don't believe that infringing on a hundred million law abiders rights will reduce the mass murder count to 1 or 2.
Click to expand...

They don't care.
 
roguenuke said:
No actually. The bakers have so far refused to sell them a "wedding cake". If you have other info, please provide.
Click to expand...

Actually, it is an issue I really could not care less about. However, do not forget that recently in California a judge ruled that a baker indeed did have a right to refuse to bake a cake based upon their religious beliefs.

A California bakery owner can continue to refuse to make wedding cakes for same-sex couples because it violates her Christian beliefs, a judge ruled.
Click to expand...
https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc...ke-same-sex-wedding-cakes-judge-rules-n845501

And I think ultimately, this case you are talking about will ultimately probably side (mostly) with the baker. Otherwise, you are opening up the "legal trolling" of almost any kind of business there is. Satanists going in to "Christian Bakers", and demanding cakes made. Delis being forced to violate their Kosher food laws. A Christian book publisher will be forced to print books along the lines of "50 Shades". There has to be some kind of limits to what kind of pressure the Government or individuals can place upon an individual or business, or there is no point in even owning a business.

I myself closed my computer store this year, a lot of it due to the insane restrictions the City and State was placing on us. It finally got to the point in February that we simply closed everything down and gave up. And I am pretty much of the opinion now that anybody who tries to run a business in California more than likely has rocks in their head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom