Twenty-year-old sues Dick’s for refusing to sell him gun

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Pushback: A twenty-year-old in Oregon has sued Dick’s Sporting Goods for refusing to sell him a rifle, based on his age.

The plaintiff, Tyler Watson, claims he faced “Unlawful Age Discrimination.” Watson attempted to buy the rifle “on or about February 24” at a Medford, Oregon, Field and Stream store. (Field and Stream is subsidiary of Dick’s.) Watson’s suit, filed in the Circuit Court of Oregon for the County of Jackson, says a store employee refused the purchase and indicated, “He would not sell [Watson] any firearm, including rifles and shotguns, or ammunition for a firearm, because [Watson] is under 21 years old.”

The employee referenced Dick’s recent policy shift, disallowing firearm sales to anyone under 21, and cited the policy as the reason for denying the sale.

Watson’s suit alleges that Dick’s policy violates Oregon law against age-based discrimination for people 18 years and older in places of public accommodations. State law includes prohibitions against discrimination in stores that are open to the general public.

Watson has also sued Walmart, for the same reasons.

The irony here is that Oregon, a decidedly liberal state, was very quick to pass age discrimination laws in the past, a traditional tactic of the left to create groups of victims it can utilize politically in order to maintain its power. Watson here is now using those laws against them.



  • Orion314

    This may be a case headed to SCOTUS , who knows? It’s the kind of issue that must be faced, do we have a 2nd amendment anymore or not? Time to find out , bring it on…

  • wayne

    The actual Case is here:

    It’s filed in an Oregon Sate Circuit Court, under an Oregon Statute, for injunctive relief.

  • Cotour

    Reposted from an earlier subject:

    And once again, right here at BTB WE are very, very prescient.

    I suppose though you really do not have to be a Nostradomus to figure this all out. But you do have to have the ability to put forth your thinking in an understandable and reasonable format and structure and make the call. I thought it would take a bit longer.

  • Cotour


    Check this fake crap out.

    David Hogg, interview / interviews total crafted media.

    This kid is a professional, Operative?

  • Commodude

    It will be interesting to see how it plays out, however, it’s Oregon, and while other states may have similar legislation, I doubt the case makes it to SCOTUS. There might be a valid claim under state law, don’t think it would be considered a national interpretive issue .

  • Chris

    Item to note is that Field and Stream is a subsidiary of Dick’s. If you as I am are no longer purchasing from these stores please make note.

  • pzatchok

    Would this have to go through the 9th circuit court?

  • FC


    In a saner world, no. So, probably yes.

  • Orion314

    re: And once again, right here at BTB WE are very, very prescient.

    EXACTLY, I know of no other site which has a better collection of INTELLIGENT, SANE , EXPERIENCED, WORTHY , CONTRIBUTING men than here. If the world turned upside down tomorrow, this would be my 1st goto site to touch base with reality. This , of course, would never happen without a superb visionary and a true leader, Mr Z.. In a world gone mad. we need everyone here, now , more than ever. I am drowning in a sea full of politically correct brain-donors..may God save us from the proudly stupid.

  • Orion314: Thank you for the kind words. However, I must beg to differ on one point. We also have some very intelligent, sane, experienced, worthy, and contributing women here.

  • Judy

    Thank you!

  • Cotour


    Thanks for the kind and enthusiastic feed back, you and Steve Earl are very wise men :)

    A quick story from the other day about the idiocy and the “proudly stupid” (I like that term and will be borrowing it from you) that you speak of.

    At lunch the other day a Liberal lady friend and true believer and committed Trump hater was at my table and she began talking about politics. Keeping in mind that she obtains her “news” from 1. Morning Joe and Mika, and 2. CNN. Do you see where this is going?

    Now she has first hand and full knowledge of how intensely I have applied myself on the subjects of politics and the Constitution and the nature of abuse of power, especially for the last two years in interpreting Trump and the Trump phenomenon. She edited for spelling and punctuation one of my first political mailers that I produced (Which to my surprise was read aloud on air in a 3 minute spot by Bob Grant himself!)

    She asks me the question: So what do you think of this guy Sam Nunberg and all of the stuff he said about Trump and the people that surround him and him being drunk while being interviewed on CNN?

    “I heard of him and the interview but I did not listen to them but I did hear that he was asked by the CNN interviewer if he was drunk?”

    “That should tell you all you need to know about anything that he may have said. Any news organization that intentionally puts an intoxicated person on their air is not doing news but is doing something else. He is not relevant, a distraction. Thats what I think”.

    Her response to me? “Everything that you think about politics is all based in conspiracy theory.”

    My response: “So you have been fully aware of my fairly intense reexamination of my and the nature of politics in general and the Constitution and the nature of abuse of power over the past 10 years and very specifically over the past 2 years in understanding Trump, and everything that I believe and understand is ALL based in “conspiracy theory”. Really? That is your conclusion? Thats what you think?”

    And to add to her “Proudly stupid” position she knows first hand and through evidence very well how accurate, rational and balanced my prognostications and analysis has been. Being proudly stupid is to emotionally choose ignorance over rational thinking and it brings the rewards that it brings. Its a metaphor for the formerly Democrat now Leftist and un American Democrat party, of which she is a member.

    When she has a problem or does not understand something essential in her life, who does she come to? Who does she ask to explain what is what? Yeah, you guessed it, she calls Mika for some solid life guidance. (SRCSM)

    And to be fair not to just pick on my female Liberal friends, I have several other male friends that agree with and are right behind her in her thinking and her limited ability to comprehensively understand the subject matter at hand.

  • wayne

    just to clarify slightly, Dick’s does-business-as ‘Field & Stream’ in Oregon & other States.(as noted on the Complaint) The magazine of the same name, interestingly… I discovered this at Wikipedia:
    “Field & Stream magazine now belongs to (Publishing group) Bonnier, the right to use the Field & Stream name on goods and services belongs to a private investment group unrelated to Bonnier or the magazine, while Dick’s Sporting Goods owns the rights to the name for Field and Stream retail stores.”
    (personally, I’ve never been in a Dick’s, or any of their other brands.)

    Referencing the Oregon lawsuit;

    “Due to federalism, both the federal government and each of the state governments have their own court systems. Discover the differences in structure, judicial selection, and cases heard in both systems……”

    “State courts are the final arbiters of State laws and (State) constitutions. Their interpretation of federal law or the U.S. Constitution may be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. (but)…only certain cases are eligible for review by the U.S. Supreme Court

  • wayne

    referencing Oregon;
    Let’s go just slightly deeper, referencing Federalism, State vs. Federal Courts, and State vs. Federal Laws….

    I find it hilarious that weed is ‘legal’ and ‘regulated’ under Oregon State Law, and the State taxes it, while under Federal law (Controlled Substances Act, Money Laundering, Commerce Clause, RICO, etc., etc., etc…..) the DEA/ FBI could target any Oregon citizen for violating Federal drug laws, and throw them in a Federal prison.
    (Federally regulated Banks for example, You process cash from illegal drug transactions….the Feds call that money laundering and they throw you in a Federal prison.)

    Personally, I do not think the underlying claim of the 20 year old, in this situation, under Oregon Statutes, has merit, for reasons discussed in-part, in a different thread.

    On the other hand, SCOTUS has made it clear the Federal Government can force you to buy a service/product.
    (Welcome to Ameritopia, where the wheel has already turned.)

  • Cotour

    Want to ensure some level of higher age guarantee for an AR / gun purchaser and eliminate arbitrary sales practices?

    Change the law.

    “Razi” has a set “Will not sell to anyone under 21 years old” policy in his store. Legal? He seems to be making it work for his store. Want to eliminate or lessen the potential for well known mentally ill children like Cruz from getting his hands legally on firearms? (which does not eliminate the possibility that he just steals one) Then make sure that he is properly dealt with within the many GOVERNMENT RUN systems that he plainly has existed within given his lengthy record of abuse, violence and threats.

    The system as we have come to understand has been dialed down to allow the non reporting or legal classifying in the legal system of these kinds of children for the facilitation of a Liberal social agenda designed to eliminate records. This failure in the GOVERNMENT system is what allowed this child to make the purchase that he did and in turn helped facilitate the murder of his fellow children.

    And to add to some additional level of deterrence and second thoughts to bad actors and their as of this moment un opposed plans in many venues. Let it be known that reasonable people who are armed exist within facilities that will reasonably and quickly dispatch and deal with anyone who intends harm or violence within.

    There is a theme that is laid out above, does anyone want to guess what that theme is?

  • wayne

    I’m not getting your point. (but that’s ok) just don’t think the filing of this suit, is as substantial or meaningful as you might put forth.

    circling back….
    we were covering this topic in-part, in the other thread. (protected classes & ‘civil rights’ et al)

    – I don’t have a problem with Dick’s excluding 18-20 year olds. I think it’s dumb on their part, but I don’t think it’s ‘illegal’ under the Oregon statute. (And apparently Dick’s has curtailed sales of selected firearms, in various state’s, starting back in 2012, and firearms sales make up a shrinking & relatively small part of their total Revenue, which is substantial.)
    Not a lawyer, but….I just can’t see the Oregon State court’s, ordering Dick’s, to sell firearms to 18-20 year olds.
    -They would happily force Baker’s, to bake cakes, but requiring Dick’s to sell firearms… just not seeing that. (There are a lot of cool people in Oregon, but most of them don’t run the government in Oregon.)

  • Cotour


    Sales or no sales issue aside, that will figure itself out, the over arching theme of my last post is what I think is the take away from most all of these events. THE GOVERNMENT HAS DISTURBED REASON AND INSISTS ON IRRATIONAL RULES OF OPERATION WHICH SERVES ITS AGENDA OF DEPENDANCY. I.E. the Liberal agenda which threatens everyone.

    Whether it be the systemic failures of the FBI, the DOJ or the school systems, they are ALL for the most part run by those people of the Left. That is what is behind the facilitating of these acts of violence.

    Low standards, which is about certain levels of social engineering designed to further a Liberal agenda, is no standards. And that is what is intended so as to create the “It takes a Village” / Big government model. That is what is killing innocent children.

  • Gene

    This idea came from the book below

    And what happened as set out in the book is that; much of the money flowing into terror organizations’ coffers was coming by small donations from the United States.

    After Israel defended itself from attacking Hezbollah rockets (which included bullets and bombs and also going to banks and seizing the money in accounts used for terror operations) Lebanon was in a state of rebuilding. And Hezbollah is paying to rebuild the homes and businesses of South Lebanon, and sustaining the incomes of widows who lost their husbands in the fighting.

    At this time, Israel’s spies created a Bernie Madoff who elicited a wealthy investment manager, who was friends with Hezbollah, to invest in a ponzi. Many poor lebanese and some high ranking Hezbollah folks invested with the investment manager since the reputation was so good.

    When all of the investments and their glorious returns vanished into thin air Hezbollah was the bad guy in addition to the investment manager.

    Want to put a drain on your enemy’s bank accounts? How can the Welfare State, Big Gov, TSA, and leftists have their teeth kicked in in the court of public opinion and in their bottom line?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *