http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/03/05/oregon-20-year-old-sues-dicks-sporting-goods-refusing-sell-rifle/

 

This did not take too long to start. Will be very interesting to see how this all works out. Looking me like he has a good case, with some prescient. 

This is Great! It's in Oregon though, hopefully some libtard judge doesn't contort the policy and throw the case out "because it makes people feel safe!"

It a shame the public won't hear about this. If this was an anti gun lawsuit the media would be parading the plaintiff around all over, but they will be strangely silent on this because it doesn't fit their agenda!

It will be interesting to see how that one goes.

If a baker has to sell a cake to a gay couple even though they refused on religious basis, one would presume that Dick's and WalMart would be compelled to sell to the 20 year old.

The way court cases drag on it will probably be a moot point as the kid will turn 21 by the time there's a verdict, but I'm still interested in the outcome.

2 hours ago, 124gr9mm said:

It will be interesting to see how that one goes.

If a baker has to sell a cake to a gay couple even though they refused on religious basis, one would presume that Dick's and WalMart would be compelled to sell to the 20 year old.

The way court cases drag on it will probably be a moot point as the kid will turn 21 by the time there's a verdict, but I'm still interested in the outcome.

Sexual orientation is a protected class. Age is much less so. Depending on where you live the protected class is 40-50+ and the protection is pretty much only for employment discrimination. 

On 3/6/2018 at 10:55 AM, raz-0 said:

Sexual orientation is a protected class. Age is much less so. Depending on where you live the protected class is 40-50+ and the protection is pretty much only for employment discrimination. 

According to the law that convicted the the great cake caper, age is the same as sexual orientation gender, bla,bla,bla. It makes no distinction or weights any differently than the others. That being said, I think your point is still valid and they will likely use it as wiggle room. Not because they can, but because they lack even basic integrity and honesty. A case in that region is subject to the influence of the 9th circus.

4 minutes ago, bzer1 said:

According to the law that convicted the the great cake caper, age is the same as sexual orientation gender, bla,bla,bla. It makes no distinction or weights any differently than the others. That being said, I think your point is still valid and they will likely use it as wiggle room. Not because they can, but because they lack even basic integrity and honesty. A case in that region is subject to the influence of the 9th circus.

Actually according to law age is handled differently. Best I have been able to find is that age receives protected class status via the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. For which the protected class begins at age 40. 

The suit was brought up in the state it was because state law there expands it to people under 20 as well. 

Also sexual orientation does not make one a protected class as of yet. Although they have been working on legislation for it for a while.