Dicks and Walmart getting sued HAHA

[Redfish]

Do age discrimination laws only cover 18 and older??? And not 17 or younger?

You dont seem to understand the situation very well

How so??? If rental car businesses can legally refuse to rent to those under 25 why can't Dicks do the same?

I could be wrong, but I think the rental car companies charge more per day if under 25 and require that drivers under 25 buy the optional insurance.

 

[Redfish]

Republicans should just change their name to the Socialist Party of America now that they want to tell private businesses what to do.

You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?

a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?

 

[Hiryuu]

Like a Hooters hiring only young female waitresses.....

Was legal, and not discrimination against men or the elderly, it was their business model.....

Ooops ... I should have also added that Hooters does have male, older, fat and ugly employees.
It would be difficult to pursue a case on the idea Hooters discriminates when it is simply a matter of employee placement.

Although it shouldn't be assumed that fat and ugly have achieved protected status yet.

 

[martybegan]

They actually can be used to protect the young, as in cases where some car rental companies wouldn't rent to anyone under 25.

Is there a law in Oregon that makes it illegal to rent a car to someone under 25?

There were plenty of places years ago that had "de facto" restrictions on who they would rent cars to based on age. In some States without age protections, that still happens.

No, it is not illegal in Oregon to rent a car to a person under 25 years old, just like it is not illegal in oregon for a 19 year old to purchase a firearm, hence why Dicks and Walmart are in trouble in Oregon.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Republicans should just change their name to the Socialist Party of America now that they want to tell private businesses what to do.

You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?

a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?

As far as I can tell Oregon law is on the 'kid's' side.

 

[martybegan]

They actually can be used to protect the young, as in cases where some car rental companies wouldn't rent to anyone under 25.

Is there a law in Oregon that makes it illegal to rent a car to someone under 25?

If there is not, then maybe Dicks has a fighting chance???

They are denying sale, in a Public Accomodation to a person who is legally entitled to buy a given product.

Unless they get the right (progressive) judge, they are hosed.

 

[Care4all]

Do age discrimination laws only cover 18 and older??? And not 17 or younger?

You dont seem to understand the situation very well

How so??? If rental car businesses can legally refuse to rent to those under 25 why can't Dicks do the same?

I could be wrong, but I think the rental car companies charge more per day if under 25 and require that drivers under 25 buy the optional insurance.

I thought they simply refused to rent them, but even if it is as you say, with a PENALTY.....That seems like it could have been age discrimination, yet it is not???

 

[Redfish]

Republicans should just change their name to the Socialist Party of America now that they want to tell private businesses what to do.

You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?

a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?

As far as I can tell Oregon law is on the 'kid's' side.

so, discrimination due to sexual preference is illegal but discrimination due to age is perfectly ok? is that your, and Oregon's, position?

 

[martybegan]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...420060cb7bd_story.html?utm_term=.aad35c23c783
PORTLAND, Ore. — An Oregon man filed suits Monday claiming Dick’s Sporting Goods and Walmart discriminated against the 20-year-old when they refused to sell him a rifle.

Dick’s and Walmart restricted gun sales to adults 21 and older in the wake of the Florida high school massacre. The 19-year-old accused in the school slaying bought the AR-15 used in the attack legally.

Oregon law allows residents to buy shotguns or rifles starting at age 18.

Watson is asking judges to force Dick’s and Walmart “to stop unlawfully discriminating against 18, 19, and 20 year-old customers at all Oregon locations.” Additionally, he is asking for unspecified punitive damages.
-----------
2015 ORS 659A.403¹
Discrimination in place of public accommodation prohibited
Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is of age, as described in this section, or older.
Looks like those fascist PA laws are coming back to haunt some people

So if the conservative nuts on this forum had any intellectual honesty and consisitency,

they would be supporting Dick's and Walmart,

since the RW consensus on this forum at least is that a business should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

oops.

Your blanket statement is wrong as usual.

First, if the law is in place, it has to be equally applied. Dicks is an actual PA, in a State where age discrimination is illegal.

2nd, I for one support PA laws when applied to actual PA's. My issue has always been applying them to any business at all.

So you want to pretend that most righties on this forum don't support the right of a business to refuse service to anyone for any reason?

lol, good one.

They did not do it on an individual basis, they made a corporate wide policy, and made everyone aware of it....

So that makes it a little different.....

Also, age discrimination laws are there and written to protect the elderly.....not certain about the young???

This suit will be interesting......

Yeah, lets open up alcohol, pot, sex, voting etc. No need for any age laws.

This case is DOA.

Alcohol is illegal for people under 21, (actually it's the sale that's illegal) hence discrimination by age does not apply.

Pot is illegal under federal law, and even in States where it is legalized, the State decides the legal age, hence discrimination by age does not apply.

There is no sex restrictions on people over the age of 18, or even 17 or 16 depending on the State. any restrictions deal with minors, hence discrimination by age does not apply.

Voting is mandated by the federal constitution to be open to all over 18.

In this case, under Oregon's PA law, he is trying to buy a legal product, and is being told "no" based on his age, in a State where age discrimination is illegal.

Dick's allows the public in for point of sale transactions, and thus falls even under the most narrow definition of a public accomodation.

 

[Redfish]

Do age discrimination laws only cover 18 and older??? And not 17 or younger?

You dont seem to understand the situation very well

How so??? If rental car businesses can legally refuse to rent to those under 25 why can't Dicks do the same?

I could be wrong, but I think the rental car companies charge more per day if under 25 and require that drivers under 25 buy the optional insurance.

I thought they simply refused to rent them, but even if it is as you say, with a PENALTY.....That seems like it could have been age discrimination, yet it is not???

since its been a long time since I was 25 I really don't know, but I do remember seeing something about higher rates and mandatory insurance for those under 25 on the Hertz website. I'm sure someone on here knows the facts, if so, please post.

 

[TNHarley]

Do age discrimination laws only cover 18 and older??? And not 17 or younger?

You dont seem to understand the situation very well

How so??? If rental car businesses can legally refuse to rent to those under 25 why can't Dicks do the same?

Renting cars involves signing a contract. They way i understand it is, all but 2 states allow rental car companies to set their own standards.

 

[Redfish]

So if the conservative nuts on this forum had any intellectual honesty and consisitency,

they would be supporting Dick's and Walmart,

since the RW consensus on this forum at least is that a business should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

oops.

Your blanket statement is wrong as usual.

First, if the law is in place, it has to be equally applied. Dicks is an actual PA, in a State where age discrimination is illegal.

2nd, I for one support PA laws when applied to actual PA's. My issue has always been applying them to any business at all.

So you want to pretend that most righties on this forum don't support the right of a business to refuse service to anyone for any reason?

lol, good one.

They did not do it on an individual basis, they made a corporate wide policy, and made everyone aware of it....

So that makes it a little different.....

Also, age discrimination laws are there and written to protect the elderly.....not certain about the young???

This suit will be interesting......

Yeah, lets open up alcohol, pot, sex, voting etc. No need for any age laws.

This case is DOA.

Alcohol is illegal for people under 21, (actually it's the sale that's illegal) hence discrimination by age does not apply.

Pot is illegal under federal law, and even in States where it is legalized, the State decides the legal age, hence discrimination by age does not apply.

There is no sex restrictions on people over the age of 18, or even 17 or 16 depending on the State. any restrictions deal with minors, hence discrimination by age does not apply.

Voting is mandated by the federal constitution to be open to all over 18.

In this case, under Oregon's PA law, he is trying to buy a legal product, and is being told "no" based on his age, in a State where age discrimination is illegal.

Dick's allows the public in for point of sale transactions, and thus falls even under the most narrow definition of a public accomodation.

and so do bakeries, but the libs create a non existent distinction regarding gays.

 

[martybegan]

Your blanket statement is wrong as usual.

First, if the law is in place, it has to be equally applied. Dicks is an actual PA, in a State where age discrimination is illegal.

2nd, I for one support PA laws when applied to actual PA's. My issue has always been applying them to any business at all.

So you want to pretend that most righties on this forum don't support the right of a business to refuse service to anyone for any reason?

lol, good one.

They did not do it on an individual basis, they made a corporate wide policy, and made everyone aware of it....

So that makes it a little different.....

Also, age discrimination laws are there and written to protect the elderly.....not certain about the young???

This suit will be interesting......

Yeah, lets open up alcohol, pot, sex, voting etc. No need for any age laws.

This case is DOA.

Alcohol is illegal for people under 21, (actually it's the sale that's illegal) hence discrimination by age does not apply.

Pot is illegal under federal law, and even in States where it is legalized, the State decides the legal age, hence discrimination by age does not apply.

There is no sex restrictions on people over the age of 18, or even 17 or 16 depending on the State. any restrictions deal with minors, hence discrimination by age does not apply.

Voting is mandated by the federal constitution to be open to all over 18.

In this case, under Oregon's PA law, he is trying to buy a legal product, and is being told "no" based on his age, in a State where age discrimination is illegal.

Dick's allows the public in for point of sale transactions, and thus falls even under the most narrow definition of a public accomodation.

and so do bakeries, but the libs create a non existent distinction regarding gays.

To me what they actually do is extend the concept of a public accomodation beyond it's original meaning. I have no issue with State law requiring people to be served point of sale items when the business allows the public onto it's property for the purpose of commerce. My issue is that PA laws should not be extended to contracted services.

As an example, a Hotel should be required to rent a room to the public without being able to pick and choose, but they SHOULD be able to pick and choose who they rent their meeting rooms out to on a contracted basis.

 

[HappyJoy]

Do age discrimination laws only cover 18 and older??? And not 17 or younger?

You dont seem to understand the situation very well

How so??? If rental car businesses can legally refuse to rent to those under 25 why can't Dicks do the same?

Renting cars involves signing a contract. They way i understand it is, all but 2 states allow rental car companies to set their own standards.

What does 'signing a contract' have to do with it?

 

[J.E.D]

I assume the plaintiff could buy a gun elsewhere. If Dick’s and Walmart want to change a policy within THEIR private business, unless the law specifically states that sales MUST be allowed to 18 yr olds, then (at least to my limited knowledge on the subject) I would think the plaintiff has no case. Besides, he better bring a good lawyer, because Dicks and Walmart are fucking huge, and probably have lawyers for their lawyers.

does that apply to bakers?

I don’t know. But I see what you’re doing here. Personally, I don’t care if a baker chooses to not provide a service to someone based on moral grounds. If people don’t like it, they can stop giving them business, and natural selection will take care of the rest.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Republicans should just change their name to the Socialist Party of America now that they want to tell private businesses what to do.

You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?

a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?

As far as I can tell Oregon law is on the 'kid's' side.

so, discrimination due to sexual preference is illegal but discrimination due to age is perfectly ok? is that your, and Oregon's, position?

That's the opposite of what I said.

 

[OldLady]

Republicans should just change their name to the Socialist Party of America now that they want to tell private businesses what to do.

Uhhh, did you forget the gay cake case?

Two of three posters say the baker did not win.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Republicans should just change their name to the Socialist Party of America now that they want to tell private businesses what to do.

You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?

I say let em sell cakes to whomever they wish and let the free market decide if they should stay in business.

 

[J.E.D]

I assume the plaintiff could buy a gun elsewhere. If Dick’s and Walmart want to change a policy within THEIR private business, unless the law specifically states that sales MUST be allowed to 18 yr olds, then (at least to my limited knowledge on the subject) I would think the plaintiff has no case. Besides, he better bring a good lawyer, because Dicks and Walmart are fucking huge, and probably have lawyers for their lawyers.

The state law is 18 year olds have the right to buy rifles. They have PA laws that cover age based discrimination.

Ok, they have the right to buy rifles. But what if Dicks and Walmart just stop selling rifles? I know that’s unlikely, but that sounds like an easy way around the law.

some Walmarts don't sell guns and ammo. If the entire company wants to drop those product lines, they have that right, but they don't have the right to discriminate due to age.

Then Dicks and Walmarts in OR could just stop carrying rifles. Done.

 

[Hiryuu]

since its been a long time since I was 25 I really don't know, but I do remember seeing something about higher rates and mandatory insurance for those under 25 on the Hertz website. I'm sure someone on here knows the facts, if so, please post.

Almost all insurance companies charge more for drivers under the age of 25.
This makes the issue a matter of cost in providing the service.

They are not denying the people under the age of 25 the ability to use their service.
They are requiring them to foot the additional cost the service requires.