Should LGS’s and FFL’s refuse transfers based on ideology?

[OH58D]

You sure it's only left wingers, seems they're trying to weed out everybody.

Who's got the money - Pro-Capitalist, hard-working Americans, or dirty, sandal wearing, Marxist hippies? Cheaper than Dirt serves a purpose. If you absolutely, positively have to have it (whatever that is). They do ship fast, at least to this part of New Mexico. Just don't buy from them during a panic.

Mail Order is a way of life in the rural American outback.

[TomMcC]

Who's got the money - Pro-Capitalist, hard-working Americans, or dirty, sandal wearing, Marxist hippies? Cheaper than Dirt serves a purpose. If you absolutely, positively have to have it (whatever that is). They do ship fast, at least to this part of New Mexico. Just don't buy from them during a panic.

Mail Order is a way of life in the rural American outback.

Their prices are so high it seems they push away all customers. But, yeah, free to do what they want.

[OH58D]

Their prices are so high it seems they push away all customers. But, yeah, free to do what they want.

Sure, they're the poster child for ripoff prices, but I have driven by their facility in Fort Worth, TX, and it's a huge outfit. They're making money off of a lot of people.

Our mentality in the rural west is different. When the railroad came thru Wagon Mound on the way to Albuquerque in 1880, mail order for us was a new luxury. You could order pre-fab building kits from Sears-Roebuck and meet the train with wagons to pick it up. My predecessors bought buggies and leather tack, clothing, guns, etc. the same way.

I use Cheaper than Dirt for specific small items or calibers that I just have to have, and will pay the price. I do the same with Brownells, Midway USA and others. You have the local Gun Store for many of you - I have miles and miles of nothing, and no cell service. Different way of thinking out here.

[titsonritz]

They're my damn guns and I'll sell them to whom I please and that does not include commie whores, gang banger assholes or anyone with a shit attitude.

[docsherm]

MSRP + 20%

Socialism tax

[Bulletdog]

At that point you're punishing their dying parent, not the person who voted against it.

If you refused a gun sale to an Obama or Biden voter that wanted to use it to defend their family in case of "civil unrest", would that not be punishing the family members that they would have protected with it?

[THCDDM4]

This will not be a popular post, I predict.

I don't see a problem with it. I feel very strongly that people/businesses should deny people services or goods for whatever reason they choose.

Yea, yea, I know you're thinking it- "but what about race, religion, creed, etc..."

I don't care.

If a business wants to make a stand and not sell to someone for any reason- I'm fine with it. Let them then reap the rewards and deal with the consequences of their choices.

If people agree with them they will support them and they prosper, so be it, if people don't let them boycott them and they fail, so be it.

If there is a niche or void to be filled, let free enterprise rise up and people start businesses to fill that void.

Forcing someone to sell a cake to a gay couple won't change their mind about homosexuality and that gay couple can get a cake on the next corner from someone who would be proud. and happy to make it for them and charge them for it.

Let people be free to do as they wish regarding business dealings and deal with the consequences of their actions.

Before you step up on that soap box, I am not advocating racism, sexism, etc- I am merely fine and dandy with letting people decide how they wish to run their businesses and then dealing with the consequences of their actions. Free-market-Anarcho-capitalism.

It's like this- I'd rather know who the person is and decide to work with them and give them my business rather than them hide and I don't know who they are.

You don't want to sell to white people- fine, personally I don't want to buy from you. You don't want to sell to black people- fine, personally I don't want to buy from you.

Then we can truly support who and what we feel is the best option and people will prosper or fail due to their practices.

I've never discriminated based on anything, other than people being hard to work with- assholes, they get charged fees for being hard to work with, I don't care if they are white, black, rich, poor, purple, Wicca, vegan, muslim, etc- if you're a dick and hard to work with you get a PITA charge!

I also have a red flag rule- if you give me 2 of them before entering into a contract- I fire you as a client, no questions asked, rescind offer of contract- bye-bye.

I've learned the hard way through the years of not following my rules or my gut.

So yeah, I'm fine with people deciding with whom they do and do not want to work with, sell to, etc.

Where there is a snag in this is GOV funded institutions, they cannot and shouldn't discriminate. Play for all.

The funny thing is, that's where the most rampant abuse is currently- in fed.gov. IRS- Lois Lerner anyone?

There will always be someone who will sell to anyone regardless of if they even should or not. Let people find them, let that person earn the business.

[chadbag]

Are we past the point of taking the high road? I think a large percentage of us are.

What you are suggesting is morally and ethically wrong. Doing it because almost everything the other side does is wrong bothers me.

I am interested in why you think it is morally or ethically wrong. Just like any other business, doesn't a LGS/FFL have the right to do business with anyone they like (ignoring so-called "protected classes")? Is it right to force a business owner, due to moral or ethics concerns, to do business with someone he does not feel comfortable with?

[LMT Shooter]

This will not be a popular post, I predict.

I don't see a problem with it. I feel very strongly that people/businesses should deny people services or goods for whatever reason they choose.

Yea, yea, I know you're thinking it- "but what about race, religion, creed, etc..."

I don't care.

If a business wants to make a stand and not sell to someone for any reason- I'm fine with it. Let them then reap the rewards and deal with the consequences of their choices.

If people agree with them they will support them and they prosper, so be it, if people don't let them boycott them and they fail, so be it.

If there is a niche or void to be filled, let free enterprise rise up and people start businesses to fill that void.

Forcing someone to sell a cake to a gay couple won't change their mind about homosexuality and that gay couple can get a cake on the next corner from someone who would be proud. and happy to make it for them and charge them for it.

Let people be free to do as they wish regarding business dealings and deal with the consequences of their actions.

Before you step up on that soap box, I am not advocating racism, sexism, etc- I am merely fine and dandy with letting people decide how they wish to run their businesses and then dealing with the consequences of their actions. Free-market-Anarcho-capitalism.

It's like this- I'd rather know who the person is and decide to work with them and give them my business rather than them hide and I don't know who they are.

You don't want to sell to white people- fine, personally I don't want to buy from you. You don't want to sell to black people- fine, personally I don't want to buy from you.

Then we can truly support who and what we feel is the best option and people will prosper or fail due to their practices.

I've never discriminated based on anything, other than people being hard to work with- assholes, they get charged fees for being hard to work with, I don't care if they are white, black, rich, poor, purple, Wicca, vegan, muslim, etc- if you're a dick and hard to work with you get a PITA charge!

I also have a red flag rule- if you give me 2 of them before entering into a contract- I fire you as a client, no questions asked, rescind offer of contract- bye-bye.

I've learned the hard way through the years of not following my rules or my gut.

So yeah, I'm fine with people deciding with whom they do and do not want to work with, sell to, etc.

Where there is a snag in this is GOV funded institutions, they cannot and shouldn't discriminate. Play for all.

The funny thing is, that's where the most rampant abuse is currently- in fed.gov. IRS- Lois Lerner anyone?

There will always be someone who will sell to anyone regardless of if they even should or not. Let people find them, let that person earn the business.

I agree, and I have never understood how anyone thinks the Constitution prevents private citizens from doing this, it doesn't say that anywhere. Obviously the Bill of Rights goes into specifying what the government could not do, but still leaves the door wide open for citizens to conduct themselves as they see fit, and, as you say, reap what they sow. I don't recall later Amendments specifically prohibiting acts by individuals, I'll have to re-read them to be sure. Either way, the intent of the Framers doesn't seem to be to limit an individual's rights to behave as you said.

How close is it morally for the government not just telling a business not to refuse customers for whatever reason, but to telling consumers that they cannot refuse to do business with whomever they disagree with? If I run a business, I have to deal with everyone who chooses to try to do business with me. Why does the consumer never have this compelled upon them by the government? You would not have the right to refuse to patronize an establishment run by anyone? Maybe I'm screwed up, but that seems like the exact same thing to me.

[gaijin]

If you refused a gun sale to an Obama or Biden voter that wanted to use it to defend their family in case of "civil unrest", would that not be punishing the family members that they would have protected with it?

You buys your ticket and you takes your ride.

This is about survival. Fuk the Libtards, hippies and Fags.