Current Events > Dick's and Walmart being sued for age discrimination

(+) Yeah! (+)

http://www.wweek.com/news/courts/2018/03/05/a-20-year-old-oregon-man-sues-walmart-and-dicks-sporting-goods-for-refusing-to-sell-him-a-rifle/

That didn't take long. When they announced their new policy I saw this coming. Can someone explain how It's not age discrimination?
---

I thought it was only against the law to discriminate against the elderly. Youth isn't protected.
---

Theres numerous articles that go over this, basically it boils down to where you live.
---

People under 18 aren't allowed to buy dry ice from the freezer department in grocery stores either.

There's also the whole esrb thing for video games and admission barriers for rated r movies.

Hardly age discrimination.
---

Wow back when I was 18 I should have sued liquor stores for age discrimination
---

BuckVanHammer posted...

Theres numerous articles that go over this, basically it boils down to where you live.

Apparently this place in Oregon does have laws that deal with age discrimination
---

If they are store wide policys then I'm not sure what the lawsuit will do.

They aren't banning something out right just gating it to later.
---

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Wow back when I was 18 I should have sued liquor stores for age discrimination

Nice try, but federal law dictates the drinking age not store policy.
---

ClunkerSlim posted...

gunplagirl posted...

here's also the whole esrb thing for video games and admission barriers for rated r movies.

Didn't someone just point out that there's no law enforcing the ESRB. It's just stores agreeing to abide by the labels. And no one has ever won any discrimination suit there that I'm aware of.

Never thought about that. Has someone actually been sued for not selling a video game to a minor? Lol
---

Why is Oregon the only state I ever see abbreviated with three letters?
---

Fishy posted...

Why is Oregon the only state I ever see abbreviated with three letters?

It's just OR
---

Theres an argument to be had, but I doubt that theyll prevail. Restrictions on age are viewed through the constitutional lens of intermediate scrutiny in which the challenged law must further an important government interest and must do so by means that are substantially related to that interest.
---

Next they should try lscorpion41 posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Wow back when I was 18 I should have sued liquor stores for age discrimination

Nice try, but federal law dictates the drinking age not store policy.

And 21 should be the age for a gun.
---

A lot of car rental places only rent to folks 25+
---

Genocet_10-325 posted...

It's just OR

A 20-year-old Gold Hill, Ore. man sued Walmart and Dick's Sporting Goods today for discriminating against him because of his age, after an employee refused to sell him a rifle because of the stores' newly-adopted policy to limit firearm sales to people under 21.

---

creativerealms posted...

Next they should try lscorpion41 posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Wow back when I was 18 I should have sued liquor stores for age discrimination

Nice try, but federal law dictates the drinking age not store policy.

And 21 should be the age for a gun.

But, thats not what were discussing right now. What these stores are doing is basically age discrimination based on the existing law. A store could choose to sell alcohol to people under 21 as part of its policy, but it still doesnt make it legal.
---

Lmao good fucking luck.

Also, the common abbreviation for Oregon is OR. Whoever wrote that article is a moron who is wrong.
---

Damn it. Ive lost my fucking mind. Its a store policy, not a law. Ill just delete that nonsense.

Ive drank too much to be arguing.
---

scorpion41 posted...

creativerealms posted...

Next they should try lscorpion41 posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Wow back when I was 18 I should have sued liquor stores for age discrimination

Nice try, but federal law dictates the drinking age not store policy.

And 21 should be the age for a gun.

But, thats not what were discussing right now. What these stores are doing is basically age discrimination based on the existing law. A store could choose to sell alcohol to people under 21 as part of its policy, but it still doesnt make it legal.

Can you post some sources, cause other products being sold similarly have been brought up and it's perfectly legal to discriminate in age with them.
---

scorpion41 posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Wow back when I was 18 I should have sued liquor stores for age discrimination

Nice try, but federal law dictates the drinking age not store policy.

Technically, it doesn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Drinking_Age_Act

States have to put it at 21 or they lose a percentage of their federal highway funding.

So unless I'm reading this wrong (possible), they technically COULD set it at 18 if they really wanted to for some reason.
---

If the person is of legal age to buy a weapon within their state, and a business is operating with licensing reflecting the current laws--- I believe this individual absolutely has a case to sue. And good for him.
---

This is what happens when companies give into the rabid mob's peer pressure. You start tossing aside the law.
---

Ben_Ruggiero posted...

http://www.wweek.com/news/courts/2018/03/05/a-20-year-old-oregon-man-sues-walmart-and-dicks-sporting-goods-for-refusing-to-sell-him-a-rifle/

That didn't take long. When they announced their new policy I saw this coming. Can someone explain how It's not age discrimination?

I'm guessing(and entirely possibly wrong) they just didn't consider it because their HQ state doesn't have age discrimination laws? Or they just made a dumb kneejerk decision.

Either way, fair, next.

A_Good_Boy posted...

scorpion41 posted...

creativerealms posted...

Next they should try lscorpion41 posted...

Genocet_10-325 posted...

Wow back when I was 18 I should have sued liquor stores for age discrimination

Nice try, but federal law dictates the drinking age not store policy.

And 21 should be the age for a gun.

But, thats not what were discussing right now. What these stores are doing is basically age discrimination based on the existing law. A store could choose to sell alcohol to people under 21 as part of its policy, but it still doesnt make it legal.

Can you post some sources, cause other products being sold similarly have been brought up and it's perfectly legal to discriminate in age with them.

No, it isn't. If there is a federal law restricting the age, it isn't discrimination. But a store can't ust determine an age arbitrarily.

Fair on both sides. Next
---

This is just stupid.
---

Troll account
---

Dick's gon get dicked.
---

Fair, next
---

No one else finds it suspect that this person went to both stores that announced such a new policy and immediately tried to buy a Rifle within 1 week of each other?
---

So honest question. What about car rental places that won't allow you to rent unless you're 25? Or game stores that won't sell you a game if it's not rated in your age range? Hell, what about movie theaters that charge kids, adults, and seniors differently for a ticket? Or restaurants that give senior discounts, etc. Why are these examples of age discrimination allowed?
---

Dustin1280 posted...

No one else finds it suspect that this person went to both stores that announced such a new policy and immediately tried to buy a Rifle within 1 week of each other?

I don't think anyone cares because these stores are doing nothing but pandering to popular opinion and disregarding legal rights.

Why are we so desperate to increase the minimum age for buying a rifle because of brain development, but no one bats an eye at all the fools joining the infantry at 18?
---

Conflict posted...

Dick's sold a firearm to the Parkland shooter. They take a measure to try and curb these shootings just a 'tad bit' and they get sued by some idiot employee who would've reached the new age requirement to buy a gun from the store in just a number of months anyway.

They could be banned from purchase by that time.
---

Twin3Turbo posted...

So honest question. What about car rental places that won't allow you to rent unless you're 25? Or game stores that won't sell you a game if it's not rated in your age range? Hell, what about movie theaters that charge kids, adults, and seniors differently for a ticket? Or restaurants that give senior discounts, etc. Why are these examples of age discrimination allowed?

While this was like 15 years ago, the last time I tried to rent a car, the age is set because of the insurance companies rental places use set the policy so high for anyone under 25 that the rental places would rather loose that potential business then pay the premiums to insure drivers under 25.
---

thanosibe posted...

Twin3Turbo posted...

So honest question. What about car rental places that won't allow you to rent unless you're 25? Or game stores that won't sell you a game if it's not rated in your age range? Hell, what about movie theaters that charge kids, adults, and seniors differently for a ticket? Or restaurants that give senior discounts, etc. Why are these examples of age discrimination allowed?

While this was like 15 years ago, the last time I tried to rent a car, the age is set because of the insurance companies rental places use set the policy so high for anyone under 25 that the rental places would rather loose that potential business then pay the premiums to insure drivers under 25.

Makes sense. Then I guess we'd have to get into why it's ok for insurance companies to discriminate based on age as well. I mean, I know WHY they do it, but at the end of the day it's still accepted age discrimination no?
---

This is what happens when you make bad knee jerk reactions, I hoppe these two places get fucked hard for this.

Dont be a dick Dicks.
---

Twin3Turbo posted...

thanosibe posted...

Twin3Turbo posted...

So honest question. What about car rental places that won't allow you to rent unless you're 25? Or game stores that won't sell you a game if it's not rated in your age range? Hell, what about movie theaters that charge kids, adults, and seniors differently for a ticket? Or restaurants that give senior discounts, etc. Why are these examples of age discrimination allowed?

While this was like 15 years ago, the last time I tried to rent a car, the age is set because of the insurance companies rental places use set the policy so high for anyone under 25 that the rental places would rather loose that potential business then pay the premiums to insure drivers under 25.

Makes sense. Then I guess we'd have to get into why it's ok for insurance companies to discriminate based on age as well. I mean, I know WHY they do it, but at the end of the day it's still accepted age discrimination no?

Not precisely. Because the costs would be different, they'd have to charge much more for it, and by my understanding they're allowed to opt out in a case like that. Age discrimination doesn't mean you CAN'T treat people differently based on age, but that you have to have a justifiable reason.

As for age restrictions on games, that's the government setting those restrictions, not the businesses. I'm not sure about the justification for theater ticket pricing, though.

Twin3Turbo posted...

thanosibe posted...

Twin3Turbo posted...

So honest question. What about car rental places that won't allow you to rent unless you're 25? Or game stores that won't sell you a game if it's not rated in your age range? Hell, what about movie theaters that charge kids, adults, and seniors differently for a ticket? Or restaurants that give senior discounts, etc. Why are these examples of age discrimination allowed?

While this was like 15 years ago, the last time I tried to rent a car, the age is set because of the insurance companies rental places use set the policy so high for anyone under 25 that the rental places would rather loose that potential business then pay the premiums to insure drivers under 25.

Makes sense. Then I guess we'd have to get into why it's ok for insurance companies to discriminate based on age as well. I mean, I know WHY they do it, but at the end of the day it's still accepted age discrimination no?

If it is proven that the wide majority of drivers under the age of 25 drive recklessly more than those over 25, then the discrimination isn't based on age but driving ability and safety. That is how I would guess an insurance company might win a claim. Just like it is statistically more likely opening a life insurance policy and 75 is going to cost more than 25. It's not just the age but what comes with being that particular age, for whatever particular service a company is providing.

That's completely out of my ass though. I have no real clue.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

I thought age wasn't a protected class unless you are over 55 or 60 (something like that)?

I thought it was 40 but looking it up that's the the EEOC and I'm not sure how it'd pertain to cases like this

https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/age.cfm
---

Asherlee10 posted...

I thought age wasn't a protected class unless you are over 55 or 60 (something like that)?

I think its 50ish and yeah that is what I thought as well.

Honestly, the stores should be able to set a policy for gun ownership if they feel like it and it's company wide. I don't think he will actually win this case or even have a case to begin with, kinda hope he fails actually and ends up costing himself a bunch of money.

I don't have a strong enough opinion on gun control to see this as anything other then someone trying to get rich quick off of the system and stores setting a policy. If they wanted to limit buying cereal to 18 year olds, they should be able to, just don't expect the market to follow suit.
---

thanosibe posted...

If it is proven that the wide majority of drivers under the age of 25 drive recklessly more than those over 25, then the discrimination isn't based on age but driving ability and safety. That is how I would guess an insurance company might win a claim. Just like it is statistically more likely opening a life insurance policy and 75 is going to cost more than 25. It's not just the age but what comes with being that particular age, for whatever particular service a company is providing.

That's completely out of my ass though. I have no real clue.

No I think you're definitely right that they do have statistics that show that people in X age range get into more accidents or that people in Y age range are more likely to die and use that to discriminate. At the end of the day though it is age discrimination though and it's accepted. So I guess that would lend credence to the what Octillery is saying in that you're allowed to do it if you have a good reason. I guess my question is "What constitutes as a good reason" because a "good" reason can be subjective. For the life of me I can't figure out ANY reason to charge different prices for kids, adults, and seniors at the movies. I guess I could google it but meh.
---

Hell didn't Walmart recently age restrict kids from buying Tide Pods?
---

foreverzero212 posted...

I thought it was only against the law to discriminate against the elderly. Youth isn't protected.

depends on the state, but that is true federally
---

OctilIery posted...

As for age restrictions on games, that's the government setting those restrictions, not the businesses.

According to post 8, there might not actually be any laws backing the ESRB ratings / stopping stores from selling any game to anyone of any age. I'll check into it later though.
---

OctilIery posted...

No, it isn't. If there is a federal law restricting the age, it isn't discrimination. But a store can't ust determine an age arbitrarily.

so you have to rent cars to 18 year olds in Oregon?
or can they use some kind of actuarial standards to show the discrimination is justified in that case?
---

Tag for later
---