Recent

Check Out Our Forum Tab!

Click On The "Forum" Tab Under The Logo For More Content!
If you are using your phone, click on the menu, then select forum. Make sure you refresh the page!
The views of the poster, may not be the views of the website of "Minnesota Outdoorsman" therefore we are not liable for what our members post, they are solely responsible for what they post. They agreed to a user agreement when signing up to MNO.

Author Topic: Oregon man, 20, sues Dick's  (Read 1802 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline HD

  • Administrator
  • Master Outdoorsman
  • *
  • Posts: 15577
  • Karma: +57/-23
  • #1 Judge (Retired)
    • Minnesota Outdoorsman
Oregon man, 20, sues Dick's, Walmart over new gun sale policies


By Aimee Green

A 20-year-old southern Oregon man filed suit Monday against Dick’s Sporting Goods and Walmart after he says both national retailers refused to sell him a rifle in recent days.

Tyler Watson's lawsuit could be the first of its kind in the U.S., according to his attorney, Max Whittington. Whittington knows of no others.

Watson claims he encountered age discrimination when he tried to buy a .22-caliber Ruger rifle on Feb. 24 in Medford at Field & Stream, which is owned by Dick's Sporting Goods.

That was four days before the retailer announced that it wouldn't sell guns to anyone under 21 in the wake of a 19-year-old gunman's rampage at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida that killed 17 people on Feb. 14.

Walmart made a similar nationwide announcement the same day as Dick's.

Watson, who lives in Gold Hill, isn't part of an organized movement against retailers that have tightened policies on gun sales, Whittington said.

“He was really just trying to buy a rifle,” the lawyer said. “He didn’t know about the policy when he went into" Field & Stream.

Watson on Saturday then went into the Grants Pass Walmart and again tried to buy a gun, according to his suit. He was told no, his suit states. It's not clear if Watson knew then of the restrictions.

Walmart spokesman Randy Hargrove told The Oregonian/OregonLive on Monday that the retailer will defend its new policy.

“In light of recent events, we reviewed our policy on firearm sales,” Hargrove said in an emailed statement. “As a result, we raised the age restriction for the purchase of firearms and ammunition to 21 years of age. We stand behind our decision and plan to defend it. While we haven’t seen the complaint, we will respond as appropriate with the court.”

Hargrove said he knows of no other lawsuit filed against Walmart over the new gun sale policy.

A representative from Dick’s didn’t immediately respond for a request for comment.

Oregon law allows residents to buy shotguns or rifles starting at age 18. Watson’s lawsuit says that Dick’s and Walmart’s policies violate Oregon statutes protecting residents against discrimination based on race, religion, sexual orientation or age, among other things. The law specifically says that the state can ban the sale of alcohol or marijuana to minors but doesn't mention guns.

Federal law bans firearms retailers from selling handguns, but not rifles or shotguns, to anyone under 21.

Whittington said his client owns a few guns already.

Watson is asking judges in Jackson and Josephine counties to force Dick’s and Walmart “to stop unlawfully discriminating against 18, 19, and 20 year-old customers at all Oregon locations.”

Watson also is asking for a yet-to-be-determined amount of punitive damages and his attorney’s fees to be paid.
« Last Edit: April 04/21/18, 11:11:43 AM by HD »
Mama always said, If you ain't got noth'in nice to say, don't say noth'in at all!

Offline Rebel SS

  • Master Outdoorsman
  • Posts: 26405
  • Karma: +185/-50
  • "Seems like time is here and gone".....Doobie's
 :rolleyes:

[attachment deleted by admin]

Offline glenn57

  • Master Outdoorsman
  • Posts: 45133
  • Karma: +207/-191
  • 2015 deer contest champ!!!
 :happy1: good for him. I hope he kicks them in the gonads!!
2015 deer slayer!!!!!!!!!!

Offline Steve-o

  • Master Outdoorsman
  • Posts: 6676
  • Karma: +17/-10
Yes, it seems like a slam dunk case of age discrimination, but in an earlier MNO thread someone reminded me that adults under 21 years of age are not a protected class.  I seem to remember something about "Protected Classes" from my business law class almost 40 years ago.  It will be interesting to see how this one plays out in the courts.

Offline Rebel SS

  • Master Outdoorsman
  • Posts: 26405
  • Karma: +185/-50
  • "Seems like time is here and gone".....Doobie's