20-year-old Oregon man sues Dick's Sporting Goods and Walmart over rifle sale restrictions

[ThatRobGuy]

In California, handguns have a registration requirement. A shotgun or rifle might also cost less.

Both of which go a long way in explaining why rifles are the weapon of choice among mass-shooting maniacs. Perhaps we should consider registering them?

In terms of cost, a cheap handgun is still far cheaper than even the cheapest AR-15.

You can find some cheap shotguns out there (the Mossberg 500 and Remington 870 come to mind), however, I'm not aware of pump actions being the gun of choice for these incidents.


Right now, there's no data that I'm aware of that would indicate that registrations are even remotely effective in terms of shooting prevention.

Murder in the United States by state - Wikipedia

If you cross reference that data with this:
Gun laws in the United States by state - Wikipedia (specifically the registration section)

...it's pretty easy to see that there's no real correlation between the two.

You can find pretty much every combination of murder rate and registration requirement...there's no definitive trend one way or the other.

 

[Aldebaran]

In terms of cost, a cheap handgun is still far cheaper than even the cheapest AR-15.

You can find some cheap shotguns out there (the Mossberg 500 and Remington 870 come to mind), however, I'm not aware of pump actions being the gun of choice for these incidents.

If AR-15's were banned, then the pump actions would become the gun of choice, making them the next target for banning.

 

[Radagast]

Also I should have said this earlier, but I can't imagine any half way competent attorney taking on a corporation as large as Dicks if they didn't think they had a really good chance of winning.

Sounds like an open-and-shut case. The law is quite clear.

 

[Arcangl86]

Sounds like an open-and-shut case. The law is quite clear.

Uh, maybe. It's not clear if he actually attempted to buy a rifle. If he didn't the case can be tossed on procedural grounds.

 

[Radagast]

Uh, maybe. It's not clear if he actually attempted to buy a rifle. If he didn't the case can be tossed on procedural grounds.

I see your point, but given the public announcements by the two chains, he can still argue that he wanted to, and they stopped him.

As I read the Oregon law, it would be illegal to put up a "whites only" sign, even if no actual non-whites walked in the door.