What gives Walmart the right to set the age to buy a gun?

It's, in part, the fight of the ACLU to protect the civil rights of those with mental problems that has been a contributing factor in the Sandy Hook and this last shooting. Those young men were sounding a klaxon that was ignored because, for a large part, the fear of being sued for said violations. Similarly, the fear of violating the civil rights of a Muslim led to the Fort Hood shooting. That guy was a walking klaxon.
 
Add San Bernardino and possibly even the pulse (not to mention the Boston bombers) to that list. No one in this debate has clean hands.
 
What’s the difference between refusing to sell a rifle to a law abiding 20 year old, and refusing to sell a wedding cake to a gay man

Nothing at all, because rifles and cakes are equivalent, as are 20 year olds and gay men. :rolleyes:
 
I am for Socialism, disarmament and ultimately, for the abolishing of the State itself … I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.

Roger Baldwin
Founder, ACLU
 
No, when it comes to a "right" all things should be equal. That means a business owner has a right to sell to whatever, to whoever. What if gun nuts had walked into the same shop and demanded an AR15-style wedding cake and the Christian was one of those conscious-objector types who refused to bake a cake that went against his religious beliefs? Would the Progressives have gone bat guano crazy over that one? I don't think so. Do you?
 
It's a predictable course, that it will likely not be long before someone somewhere shoots up a Walmart, and the entire corporation will be demanding that 'something be done' to protect them. Hey, here's an idea, invite all the conceal carry patrons that no longer shop at your crummy stores back? Maybe you can offer a blue light special in aisle 7, which is now selling kiddie pools and lawn fertilizer where your ammo used to be!! LOL
 
"However, the ACLU opposes any effort to create a registry of gun owners and has worked with the National Rifle Association to prevent a registry from being created, and it has favored protecting the right to carry guns under the 4th Amendment."

Oh no!!!!
 
It’s store policy, not public policy. Big difference.

Exactly. I don't have much experience with Walmart as they weren't up here until about 10 years ago so I have no idea what they were like "back in the day". However I do remember K-mart (recall them?) and Sears used to sell rifles all the time. Hell even the local hardware store used to sell them. Now, not so much (if you can even find a K-mart or Sears that is still open). But this was a trend that was happening LONG before the current hoopla.

Even most of the so called "sporting goods" stores have been reducing their inventory on firearms for the last 10-15 years.

So no I don't find this to be a trend that is going to make much difference. There's always going to be retailers who will sell firearms. Maybe more of the specialty shops for those who are into shooting. I haven't heard Bass Pro or Cabelas are doing this same thing with The AR that Dicks and Walmart are doing so I'm not really concerned.

If these retailers what to jump on this bandwagon, let 'em.
 
Exactly. I don't have much experience with Walmart as they weren't up here until about 10 years ago so I have no idea what they were like "back in the day". However I do remember K-mart (recall them?) and Sears used to sell rifles all the time. Hell even the local hardware store used to sell them. Now, not so much (if you can even find a K-mart or Sears that is still open). But this was a trend that was happening LONG before the current hoopla.

Even most of the so called "sporting goods" stores have been reducing their inventory on firearms for the last 10-15 years.

So no I don't find this to be a trend that is going to make much difference. There's always going to be retailers who will sell firearms. Maybe more of the specialty shops for those who are into shooting. I haven't heard Bass Pro or Cabelas are doing this same thing with The AR that Dicks and Walmart are doing so I'm not really concerned.

If these retailers what to jump on this bandwagon, let 'em.

The general drift of a store isn't lost on the customers, who get tired of being given the stink eye, and reviled for their purchases. Sooner or later, the customers who used to go there top coming for all the other things they sell as well. Next thing you hear, they're closing stores here and there, and eventually going out of business. Businesses who fail their customers deserve to go out of business.
 
Just like building a wall won't keep illegals out :rolleyes:

Count me as one in favor of simply seeding the border with land mines, and post warning signs in English and Mexican that you need to bring your documents to the legal entry checkpoints if you want in...
 
Oooo, this is gonna be good!

Have any lawyers stood up to fight against big business age discrimination yet?

Also, don't know if someone has mentioned it already, but you have to be 21 to buy a handgun now.

I remember my Dad buying for me my first semi-auto rifle when I was 16, a Ruger 10/22. Bought it with my own money, but my Dad bought me a scope, and a carrying case, and two 25 round mags. I've done a lot of plinking with that sweetie :heart:
 
It's a predictable course, that it will likely not be long before someone somewhere shoots up a Walmart, and the entire corporation will be demanding that 'something be done' to protect them. Hey, here's an idea, invite all the conceal carry patrons that no longer shop at your crummy stores back? Maybe you can offer a blue light special in aisle 7, which is now selling kiddie pools and lawn fertilizer where your ammo used to be!! LOL

As a long-standing CHL holder for as long as they have been legal in this state, I applaud Walmart. I'm not going to shop there any more or less than I do now, which is pretty infrequently anyway. Maybe Trump can get a job as a greeter after he leaves the White House, because he would rush in whether he was armed or not. :rolleyes:
 
How come you linked to a 20 year old copy of the form rather than the latest version, 2016?
The 2016 form makes it clear it's to prevent straw purchases by you stating you're not buying it on the behalf of someone else. Which doesn't mean you can't buy one as a gift.
In fact, the form explicitly states you can buy it as a gift.

NO, you can't.

Abramski v. U.S.

Per the US SupCt, purchasing a firearm for someone else is a Federal Felony. It is a straw man purchase and violates the Gun Control Act of 1968. Nor can States make laws which override Federal laws.

On top of that, the 2016 version of the form says RIGHT THERE IN BOLD LETTERS that you cannot purchase the firearm for someone else.

When you buy a gun for a spouse or child, YOU still "own" the firearm and the spouse or child only uses it with your permission until it is transferred to them. You cannot purchase the firearm with the intent of immediately transferring it to another even if the person receiving the firearm is not a prohibited person.

What you can do is give the intended recipient the money to buy the gun themselves.
 
Last edited:
Count me as one in favor of simply seeding the border with land mines, and post warning signs in English and Mexican that you need to bring your documents to the legal entry checkpoints if you want in...

Sure...that will work...:rolleyes:

Let's look at the 10 heaviest mined countries
Bosnia/Herzegovnia
Cambodia
Croatia
Egypt
Iraq
Afghanistan
Angola
Iran
Rwanda

Yep...the US belongs on that list for sure...That's would be something to be proud of.
 
The actual actions of the ACLU are ANYTHING but Constitutional and they have NEVER supported the rights of Americans. They are nothing but a front group for the destruction of America and the Constitution. To the contrary of what they say....

Why do you hate America? Seriously.
 
Assholes and kids are covered in current law. It is not the arbitrary decision of the merchant.

Yes it is. Why can't you understand that? A business owner has the right to refuse service to anyone he wants as long as its not a violation of the civil rights act. If a store owner decides you're an asshole he absolutely has the right to tell you to leave and not allow you back in his store.
 
It does not, to decry the label, negate the behavior, especially in the age of social media, bots, and SJWs who seem to have nothing to do other than to berate those whom will not follow their dictates in such a nasty fashion that companies will give in to them just so that they can get back to doing their business.

The past decade hasn't been kind to you, has it Chief?

You used to be able to drown out opinions you didn't agree with via massive shitposting to bump stuff down the front page of Lit. Now you and your former off-board bro Q-#### can shitpost all you like, but people can go around you to other forums like twitter and such.

You've entered your own Tard Twilight.
 
It is no different than refusing to sell a wedding cake to a gay couple getting married even though you'll sell the same cake to a straight couple. Sell them or don't - you cannot not choose your customer.

There is no way you're this dumb. The two are NOT the same and yes they can choose their customers. If this was so illegal then why do these large corporations do it? Certainly they'd have lawyers telling them they can't. Surely the government would step in and say "you are not allowed to do that." But they don't. Guess why.
 
There is no way you're this dumb. The two are NOT the same and yes they can choose their customers. If this was so illegal then why do these large corporations do it? Certainly they'd have lawyers telling them they can't. Surely the government would step in and say "you are not allowed to do that." But they don't. Guess why.

Yea, the government did such a great job prosecuting Hillary for her crimes (divulging classified information, running a 'pay to play' state department with contributions to the Clinton Foundation getting the desired access, and a few dead opponents), so go ahead and play the 'government is our friend' card - LOL
 
Yea, the government did such a great job prosecuting Hillary for her crimes (divulging classified information, running a 'pay to play' state department with contributions to the Clinton Foundation getting the desired access, and a few dead opponents), so go ahead and play the 'government is our friend' card - LOL
It sure wasn't for lack of trying. If any of those crimes were genuine, she wouldn't still be getting Secret Service protection.
 
Back
Top