Posted on 02/26/2012 5:56:52 AM PST by marktwain
“Bernard Miller says he was told that’s because another African-American man with the last name Miller, but a different first name, had tried to buy the same gun at a Dick’s Sporting Goods store in Matthews and been denied.”
*If* this couple are as they claim (and I say so reservedly from what I’ve seen), they’ve now painted a huge “I’m trouble” sign on themselves. They’ve shown that they go around anticipating (deliberately?!) trouble. They’ve proven that their idea of dispute resolution is very public displays of emotion-based allegations - including the race card.
I wouldn’t sell them a picture of a firearm, and I doubt anyone else will now, either.
Looks like the gun stores might have their own means of knowing what was going down and the Millers are "known".
They may be on the "Top Ten" list of people not to sell weapons to.
Recording runs both ways (security cameras) and "shopping around" don't mean what it used ta mean.
Yeah, I wondered about that too. Of course, cell phones have lots of capabilities these daze. Sounds like they only started recording after they got the news they were turned down and started speaking to the manager. It would unquestionably be a setup if they had recorded the whole visit.
Bernard and Francine Miller What’s so unusual about their name? I see nothing that would lead me to believe their name was a reason for charges of discrimination.
But...but...but...that would violate the Civil Righrs Act /s
I can kill any coyote on Earth with a good .22 rifle loaded with the high velocity ammo, nothing heavier is needed unless you are shooting at long range which is not going to happen when the coyote is in your yard. My older brother once told me that .22LR was too small to use on feral dogs that were roaming the rural area where we grew up but then he killed one of those dogs at at around 100 yards with a .22LR revolver!
The same brother had a medium size dog (about forty pounds) that chased a neighbor’s cattle and got shot with a .270 deer rifle, the bullet passed just beneath the spine at about the last rib. The dog survived and lived for years afterward, the only lasting effect was that it turned from yellow to white haired and stopped chasing cattle.
Here is the reason given, from the article “Bernard Miller says he was told that’s because another African-American man with the last name Miller, but a different first name, had tried to buy the same gun at a Dick’s Sporting Goods store in Matthews and been denied.”
This seems pretty silly in a variety of ways. First of all Miller is a very common name. Secondly if I want to be sneaky and get someone to buy a gun for me am I going to pick somebody with the same last name as mine? I could see if the two men had the exact same name you might well think they were the same guy, but I don’t see why you’d think these 2 have anything to do with each other.
They wouldn’t sell me a rifle. I’m black. Ergo, they wouldn’t sell me a rifle because I’m black. Perfect, unassailable logic.
The civil rights act violates the rights of all Americans.
He probably from Nantucket Island and did not notice their race for the first 40 minutes?
Got it.
That I didnt know. But it makes sense. If it looks like it is going to blow up on your later, a person would be a idiot to sell a gun if it even has the slightest risk of going south.
I whole heartedly agree with that statement.
What kind of paperwork is necessary to purchase a .22 rifle? Last time I bought one at WalMart (Mississippi), I picked it out and paid for it, then left with it.
Miller us a common AMISH name. ;-)
If the clerk saw the recording item, he could refuse out of fear of being stuck in jail as several other gun sellers are under Fast and Furious.
Yeah, and those are the just the people who post on FR gun threads../sarc
worth repeating
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.