Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Store refused gun sale because of name, race, Charlotte couple says(NC)
wbtv.com ^ | 25 February, 2012 | Brad Hyatt

Posted on 02/26/2012 5:56:52 AM PST by marktwain

CHARLOTTE, NC (WBTV) - A Charlotte couple says Dick's Sporting Goods refused to sell them a gun because of their last name and race.

Bernard and Francine Miller tell us they went to the store on W. T. Harris Boulevard looking for a rifle because they spotted a coyote in their yard.

After forty minutes of shopping and working with the sales agent, they settled on the one that fit their price range. A 22-rifle that cost just over $200.

Bernard was then asked to fill out paperwork. But the couple says after filling out the paperwork, a salesperson refused to sell them the rifle.

"I get ready to hand him the papers back, that's when he come out with a silly grin on his face talking about how he couldn't sell me the rif... how HE wasn't going to sell me the rifle," Miller told WTBV. "HE MADE the decision! He said HE MADE the decision not to sell me a rifle."

-----------------------cut----------------------

We asked the company for a response to this story but they had no comment. But we did hear that audio tape Francine Miller says she recorded in the store.

In it, the manager said this wasn't a prejudiced act, rather, that it's a federal offense to sell someone a gun which they believe is intended for someone else.

(Excerpt) Read more at wbtv.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; US: North Carolina
KEYWORDS: atf; banglist; nc; straw
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101 next last
To: Mercat
And refusing service to anyone for any reason? That issue has long since been settled.

We own a retail store and I can and have refused to sell to people and I'm sure I will again.

Just last week I had some one try and play us against another dealer on pricing. I called the other dealer on the phone confirmed the person was lying and refused to sell to them even though they wanted the original deal. I've already caught them in a lie and I'll be damned if I will sell them anything.

I have to warranty what what I sell.

My store, my stuff, I'll sell or refuse to sell to who ever I want.

51 posted on 02/26/2012 7:34:48 AM PST by Kakaze (Exterminate Islamofacism and apologize for nothing....except not doing it sooner!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: trebb

How many decades ago was that?


52 posted on 02/26/2012 7:35:09 AM PST by panaxanax (0bama >>WORST PRESIDENT EVER.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Regarding the couple making a recording:

Small digital recorders are relatively inexpensive (not to mention that many cellphones have a recording capability).

I’ve read comments on other forums from people who carry them and leave them on all day, erasing them as needed. They do so because they want a recording of events to prove their side in the event of a confrontation with a robber, the police or some trouble maker claiming sexual harassment, discrimination, etc.

Some people carry them and only turn them on as they think necessary for the purposes noted above.

Some carry them to take verbal notes and so forth and might turn them on for the purposes noted above.

Some don’t carry them and wish they had a recording of certain events.

As reported in the story, that the couple in question had a recording of the events doesn’t say much except that we should all be aware that the “other person” might be recording our interaction. And maybe that we should get a digital recorder ourselves.


53 posted on 02/26/2012 7:36:54 AM PST by KrisKrinkle (Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of their ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jocon307; All
“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.”

Did anyone consider the fact that both of the stores likely have security cameras and the salesman in the second store was able to view the tape from the first store?

That denied sale tape, and the flagged name used, showed that it was in fact the same person?

The article says they were there for 40 min., plenty of time to check the tape and list of flagged names.

54 posted on 02/26/2012 7:38:50 AM PST by Beagle8U (Free Republic -- One stop shopping ....... It's the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Their last name, "Miller" is what stopped the sale? I have no idea what 'race' Miller comes from but I'm pretty sure none have flown planes into the WTC.

This doesn't pass the smell test and who the hell records themselves buying something? Try that in Ca. and you will quickly find out it's illegal if you don't notify the other person, unless you're a dem.

While I'm here, $200 for a .22? Really, these people were haggling over a $200 purchase? I've seen people this cheap before when I worked retail, they're the reason restocking fees were invented.

55 posted on 02/26/2012 7:38:50 AM PST by Lx (Do you like it, do you like it. Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExpatGator

CORRECT


56 posted on 02/26/2012 7:41:24 AM PST by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Jup, that’s the point. They don’T have to provide any reason to refuse to sell something, why should they?

I don’t understand the point though, what’s that about the name ? Couldn’T he just show his ID, or doesn’T he have to do so anyways? ( I obviously never have bought a gun up to this point)


57 posted on 02/26/2012 7:42:11 AM PST by fordD89
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kakaze; Mercat

“My store, my stuff, I’ll sell or refuse to sell to who ever I want.”

If you refuse to sell something to a homo or based on race, you WILL be in deep trouble, and may lose your business. The protected categories have expanded, but you haven’t had the right to refuse business for many years now.


58 posted on 02/26/2012 7:47:39 AM PST by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

Based on the story - the store messed up.

You really don’t understand strawman gun purchases and liability. I don’t give a rats patoot what your dad did in the 50’s


59 posted on 02/26/2012 7:47:44 AM PST by Figment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: fordD89

See #54


60 posted on 02/26/2012 7:47:57 AM PST by Beagle8U (Free Republic -- One stop shopping ....... It's the Conservative Super WalMart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
The protected categories have expanded

And the "rights" right along with them. After all, banks have been forced to give loans to people who couldn't afford them based on race. At this point there are marxists in the streets demanding that homes be taken away from people who have more than one.
61 posted on 02/26/2012 7:53:50 AM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I truly despise the impact of the Civil Rights laws. I understand why they were passed - I lived in Selma Alabama in the mid-60s. But they are wrong.

And I would not want to rent out my house, for example, because I don’t get to say who rents it.

But while I don’t approve of the law, I also wouldn’t want to lose everything I own when it is enforced...


62 posted on 02/26/2012 7:59:20 AM PST by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: panaxanax

It was about 1990 - have bought handguns since, but no rifles...I guess time keeps passing me by.


63 posted on 02/26/2012 8:01:11 AM PST by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

“Probably the single biggest hammer in the socialist toolbox.”

Another big hammer is the Voting Rights Act which allows Eric Holder to review and approve voting district boundaries in the southern states. George W. Bush signed into law a 25 year extension of the act which applies only to the southern states. Why?


64 posted on 02/26/2012 8:05:19 AM PST by Soul of the South (When times are tough the tough get going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South
the act which applies only to the southern states.

On the bright side, it burns them here in the north because the voter ID laws they're trying to stop in the south are being implemented all across the north and they can't stop it.
65 posted on 02/26/2012 8:09:48 AM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: ExpatGator

ANY recording NOT including the entire conversation and not with cognizance of both parties is ultimately self-serving for the party doing the recording..

If it is true that even the slightest inkling that this person might not be buying the weapon for himself, but for another, the gunstore SHOULD have cancelled the sale, period.

In my opinion, this was a setup. For whatever reason, this couple was out to complete a straw purchase and then had to rely on the backup racism charge - a charge they had cemented by the mere fact of whoever wanted to ‘out’ the store had planned for by enlisting black straw purchasers.

Long story short - screw that couple. They can take it up with Holder and the ATF.


66 posted on 02/26/2012 8:12:09 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Yep, obviously a set-up straw purchase sting. It may be a reverse sting.

Since Fast & Furious, Gunwalker and such criminal conspiracies by Holder, word has likely spread about the deceit used by ATF and sales personnel won't even trust an ATF OK as it might be a Gunwalker sale and ATF will lie about giving the OK to the gun shop to cover their own criminal acts.

Sending ringers technically over the line for a straw purchase to complain and sue when refused, intimidates the salesperson to risk a questionable sale in the future.

The sales person is stung for complying with the letter of the law.

67 posted on 02/26/2012 8:26:49 AM PST by Navy Patriot (Join the Democrats, it's not Fascism when WE do it. (plagiarized))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tai_Chung

“Maybe the address that was given could not possibly have coyotes in the back yard.”

Coyote media hysteria has been sweeping Charlotte for the past couple of weeks:

https://www.google.com/search?q=coyote+charlotte&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=coyote+charlotte&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=8g2&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=nws&ei=AV1KT4aqFIWatwfjpo3-Aw&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=5&ved=0CB4Q_AUoBA&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=9268d6f80aae7cf4&biw=1280&bih=630


68 posted on 02/26/2012 8:26:49 AM PST by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: trebb
"What kind of paperwork is necessary to purchase a .22 rifle?"

I thought the same thing until recently.
I never buy from dealers because I flat-out refuse to do the background check (well, there are the rip-off prices too I guess). I mean, I'd pass for the sale no problem... but I have a serious gripe about it like most people. I thought this applied only to handguns (I'm in Indiana).

Then when my search for a small youth rifle in the used market came up empty, I went to a gun shop to get my boy a shiny new Henry Mini Bolt... guess what? I had to get FBI approval to buy a single shot .22 rifle. Man was I fuming!

And by the way, it's a fine little rifle for a beginner in case you were wondering.

69 posted on 02/26/2012 8:53:29 AM PST by FunkyZero (... I've got a Grand Piano to prop up my mortal remains)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy

I found plenty of black “Benard Millers” on a facebook and google search. What’s your exact point?


70 posted on 02/26/2012 9:00:33 AM PST by NorthStarStateConservative (A conservative, a moderate, and a liberal walk into a bar. Bartender says, "Hi, Mitt!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

“I have a dream... “ to put any one in jail for not sharing the dream...

Unintended consequences...

What part of the Declaration people do not get that man and woman in America are an inherently sort of Civily “Divorced” Independent lot, yet not necessarily divided.

WE are all sinners, and I am getting tired of the Bunny Ranching everyone into a forced Kumbaya of men loving each other etc...


71 posted on 02/26/2012 9:01:29 AM PST by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

“I have a dream... “ to put any one in jail for not sharing the dream...

Unintended consequences...

What part of the Declaration people do not get that man and woman in America are an inherently sort of Civily “Divorced” Independent lot, yet not necessarily divided.

WE are all sinners, and I am getting tired of the Bunny Ranching everyone into a forced Kumbaya of men loving each other etc...


ANd the problem with the KKK is that they refused that divorce, let us remember that, but, now, we are back to “I have a dream... “ the kinder version of the KKK, I guess.


72 posted on 02/26/2012 9:02:53 AM PST by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: TribalPrincess2U

The way I read the article, she started recording when they were denied. My phone will record and I carry it with me all the time. I have on a couple of occasions, recorded what was going on and if I had been Mrs. Miller I would have done so in this instance.


73 posted on 02/26/2012 9:10:07 AM PST by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

Sorry, that war was lost and the legislation was passed. Get over it.


74 posted on 02/26/2012 9:11:03 AM PST by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: BobL

This is the first time I’ve seen so many freepers rejoicing that someone was denied the right to buy a gun.


75 posted on 02/26/2012 9:14:31 AM PST by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Mercat
"This is the first time I’ve seen so many freepers rejoicing that someone was denied the right to buy a gun"

I don't see a lot of "rejoicing".
I see most people pointing out the fact that the store shouldn't be blamed for being put in this position.

Fact of the matter is, I believe anyone should be able to purchase and own any firearm they want... felon or otherwise.
I don't like gun dealers because most of them are a ripoff and most especially because they insist on treating me like I don't know what I want and am somehow stupid.
That being said, there isn't a damn thing they can do about these stupid laws. I'm certain they hate them more than we do.

76 posted on 02/26/2012 9:22:33 AM PST by FunkyZero (... I've got a Grand Piano to prop up my mortal remains)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: lwd

That is a rather bizarre conclusion you came to.

Rather, a black guy named Miller trying to buy the exact same gun that another black guy named Miller tried to buy earlier from the same chain, and was found ineligible, is considered suspicious enough by the protocols of the licensing agency for the store to refuse the sale.


77 posted on 02/26/2012 9:26:14 AM PST by free me (heartless=no humanity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

Actually, it may be your business, but unless your business owns its own well, barters, has its own generator and is not connected to the road system in any way, you’re using the public’s infrastructure to discriminate against certain sectors of the public for no other reason than they’re different.

How is it fair to me, a private citizen that I am subsidizing somebody banning my religious, ethnic or racial group when my tax dollars make it possible that this business is easily accessible and has all the amenities it has?


78 posted on 02/26/2012 9:28:32 AM PST by NorthStarStateConservative (A conservative, a moderate, and a liberal walk into a bar. Bartender says, "Hi, Mitt!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Mercat
Sorry, that war was lost and the legislation was passed. Get over it.

Indeed many wars have been fought over personal liberty. Thankfully, the Founders didn't just "get over it" as you suggest people should, when their basic property rights and liberty of association are violated.

No, I don't think I'll get over it. If you don't respect personal liberty, I suggest you take a walk on over to DU. You will fit in better in their world of group rights (mandates on others).

79 posted on 02/26/2012 9:36:10 AM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: 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. ""He was black, and his last name was Miller," he said. "So, automatically they put that off on me."

It sounds like Dicks (heavily corporate) was being paranoid about a straw purchaser which is a big deal. The question I have is was this other Miller at the same address? If so, I'd deny the sale. If not, I would have sold it if he passed NICS. Miller is a common last name, so it's hard to tell based on that alone. I'm wondering what the address is of that other Miller they want to avoid.

80 posted on 02/26/2012 9:43:03 AM PST by Darren McCarty (Stop Romney - Rick Santorum in the Michigan primary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trebb
Here in Commie California, there is a 15 day waiting period before you can pickup the gun you purchased.

Dicks Sporting Goods doesn't even sell guns here and neither does Walmart, at least the ones I've been in.

You can buy an “approved” Handgun if you take a test and get a five year certificate that costs $25.

I live in a beautiful place and the Idiots who Vote in the Morons, or vice versa, have ruined it.

81 posted on 02/26/2012 9:50:58 AM PST by Kickass Conservative (Liberals, Useful Idiots Voting for Useless Idiots...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: NorthStarStateConservative

A businessman should be able to choose his customers, just as a customer ought to be able to choose a business.

If I want to rent out part of my home as an apartment, for example, I shouldn’t be forced to rent to anyone at all. The fact that the law now requires that is why I will never have an apartment in my house.

“for no other reason than they’re different.”

How about because they violate what I believe are God’s laws?

Should a wedding photographer be forced to support gay marriages? Should I be forced to rent property to someone I think won’t be able to pay, and who I think will likely damage the property?


82 posted on 02/26/2012 9:59:32 AM PST by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: NorthStarStateConservative

Let me adjust your statement slightly:

“Actually, it may be your [home], but unless your [home] owns its own well, barters, has its own generator and is not connected to the road system in any way, you’re using the public’s infrastructure to discriminate against certain sectors of the public for no other reason than they’re different.”

Sounds like justification for not allowing me to believe what I want in my own home...


83 posted on 02/26/2012 10:05:58 AM PST by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

So you are a second generation liberal?


84 posted on 02/26/2012 12:13:06 PM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

No. I’m the proud daughter of a man who did not believe that someone who paid the same amount of money for a bus ticket should be forced to sit in a tiny windowless room rather than the biggest public building in Houston. He also refused to enforce Jim Crow when he was a bus driver. If that’s “liberal” to you then spare me from your definition of conservative but tell me when you have ever in your entire life, taken a stand that could threaten your life or you livelihood.


85 posted on 02/26/2012 1:04:03 PM PST by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Relax folks, nothing, and I mean NOTHING is going to happen to this gun dealer.

a) He was clearly within his right.

b) Since your federal government prefers that black men don't have guns at all(and I don't care who's in the white house or attorney general), especially since they may be the first to 'go off' in a um... non-pro-government manner when more and more people start to realize we're living under a criminal regime. I think they'll just give this gun dealer a pass.

Point is, if your resident media morons think they see racism, it's a story - the truth be damned.

86 posted on 02/26/2012 3:42:54 PM PST by jimjohn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kickass Conservative
Kickass Conservative said: "Here in Commie California, there is a 15 day waiting period before you can pickup the gun you purchased."

My FFL only makes me wait 10 days. I guess I'm special.

87 posted on 02/26/2012 4:15:50 PM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: William Tell
Thanks William, I stand corrected. Don't lose heart, you are still special though.

I did forget to mention that we can only buy one handgun within a 30 day period.

I have no idea why Liberals think such idiotic Gun Control Laws actually prevent crime, but I'm sure Crime Prevention has nothing to do with it.

88 posted on 02/26/2012 4:32:13 PM PST by Kickass Conservative (New Tagline under construction, please watch your step.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

“A businessman should be able to choose his customers, just as a customer ought to be able to choose a business.

If I want to rent out part of my home as an apartment, for example, I shouldn’t be forced to rent to anyone at all. The fact that the law now requires that is why I will never have an apartment in my house.”

But at the same time, if you’re going to publicly advertise to the public that they’re welcome to rent your house, but restrict certain parts of the public, then it’s false advertising. It’s like if I opened up a family restaurant and then refused entry to divorced men and women, citing my personal beliefs about divorce. If something’s open to the public, which all businesses are, you’re in business because the market and the public has a demand for a certain product and you decided to tap that market. Unless you’re running a private club or a church, you have no right to refuse anybody from buying your particular product. If you’re using resources that the public pays for like roads, the electric grid, currency and the sewer system, then not only are you falsely advertising your product, you’re also using the electric grid, the sewer and water system and the public roads to falsely advertise your product. Simple as that. Again, you’re not in business to promote your beliefs, you’re there to sell your wares and services for publicly minted currency.

“for no other reason than they’re different.”

“How about because they violate what I believe are God’s laws?”
You should read Lk. 6:31; Matt. 7:12., Matt. 22:39, Eph. 2:14-22 and Gal. 3:28. God created ALL people in his image. A Christian wouldn’t discriminate. BTW, nice red herring you threw up there. I mentioned nothing about buggery or homosexuality.


89 posted on 02/26/2012 4:48:45 PM PST by NorthStarStateConservative (A conservative, a moderate, and a liberal walk into a bar. Bartender says, "Hi, Mitt!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

No, you don’t advertise your house as being open to the public nor do you charge admission for people to enter your house.


90 posted on 02/26/2012 4:51:38 PM PST by NorthStarStateConservative (A conservative, a moderate, and a liberal walk into a bar. Bartender says, "Hi, Mitt!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Kickass Conservative
Kickass Conservative said: "Thanks William, I stand corrected."

You also stand accused of not having celebrated Obama's election by purchasing a firearm.

Now if I could only avoid those costly boating accidents...

91 posted on 02/26/2012 5:14:25 PM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: William Tell
Actually, I made a purchase as soon as Obama became the Rat Nominee. That's when I found out about the $25.00 Handgun “Safety” permit.

A older retired Marine was standing next to me when the Clerk asked of I had the “card”. The Retired Marine interrupted and asked the guy WTF? The guy was incredulous. He said “this is what I served for?”

92 posted on 02/26/2012 5:21:49 PM PST by Kickass Conservative (New Tagline under construction, please watch your step.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: FunkyZero

“I had to get FBI approval to buy a single shot .22 rifle. Man was I fuming!”

This was an NRA compromise on the Brady law. Nobody was talking about requiring instant checks on all firearms. Originally, they were only for handguns.

Then the NRA volunteered to compromise by having the system require instant checks on *all* firearms.

It went into effect in 1998.


93 posted on 02/26/2012 6:09:40 PM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Kickass Conservative
Kickass Conservative said: ... the $25.00 Handgun “Safety” permit.

I'm on my second of such permits, at 25 dollars each. I keep both of them in my wallet along with their predecessor, the "Basic Firearms Safety Certificate" which was to be good for life and is now worthless.

The anti-gunners in Kalifornia are limited only by what the courts will allow.

94 posted on 02/26/2012 6:34:47 PM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: NorthStarStateConservative

“But at the same time, if you’re going to publicly advertise to the public that they’re welcome to rent your house, but restrict certain parts of the public, then it’s false advertising.”

But if you advertise that you reserve the right to reject any applicant for any reason, what then?

“Unless you’re running a private club or a church, you have no right to refuse anybody from buying your particular product.”

Under current law, yes. Prior to the 1960s, that was not true - most businesses reserved the right to refuse service to anyone.

“God created ALL people in his image”.

Then man fell. And we are NOT all children of God.

“A Christian wouldn’t discriminate.”

If his goal is to collect money on time, not renting to someone he suspects is a deadbeat would be a good idea. If his goal is to honor God, then renting a basement apartment to homosexuals, or pastors wanting a place to shack up, would NOT be good. A morals clause used to be common in renting rooms. Prior to the 60s...

“No, you don’t advertise your house as being open to the public nor do you charge admission for people to enter your house.”

But my home receives the benefit of sewers, roads, etc - so what gives me the right to do what I want and to believe what I want?

By your argument, anyone who receives any public benefit must conform to what the public wants. Thus you have wedding photographers being sued if they refuse to photograph the weddings of homosexuals.

What gives a church the right to refuse to marry homosexuals, if the church is located on a public road?


95 posted on 02/26/2012 6:37:45 PM PST by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
“But at the same time, if you’re going to publicly advertise to the public that they’re welcome to rent your house, but restrict certain parts of the public, then it’s false advertising.”

>But if you advertise that you reserve the right to reject any applicant for any reason, what then?

Then you lose business, simple. You may also be vilified socially for discriminating against a group based on your own personal biases. Rightfully so. You'll be no different than the people who display these signs on their windows..

>>“Unless you’re running a private club or a church, you have no right to refuse anybody from buying your particular product.”

>Under current law, yes. Prior to the 1960s, that was not true - most businesses reserved the right to refuse service to anyone.

Prior to the 1980s, driving drunk wasn't illegal either. Does that mean drunken driving should be decriminalized?

>>“God created ALL people in his image”. >Then man fell. And we are NOT all children of God.

Oh really, Pastor Rogers? Ok, let's see what the good book says.

Romans 3:10 "What then? Are we better than they? No, in no way. For we previously charged both Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin. As it is written, 'There is no one righteous. No, not one.'"

Or how about this quote? "Colossians 3:11: "Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all."

Or how about Matthew 18:21-35?

>>“A Christian wouldn’t discriminate.” >If his goal is to collect money on time, not renting to someone he suspects is a deadbeat would be a good idea.

But what if that suspicion of being a deadbeat is based on superficial stereotype and not actually giving a person a background check, an interview and a credit check? Who has the poor judgment now? And what does the bible say about that? Oh yeah.. Matthew 7:1,2, Matthew 6:14, Mark 4:24.

>If his goal is to honor God, then renting a basement apartment to homosexuals, or pastors wanting a place to shack up, would NOT be good.

So being a member of a different ethnic group is akin to being a homosexual. Nice stretch of logic there.

>A morals clause used to be common in renting rooms. Prior to the 60s...

Pastor Rogers, what does discriminating against a person based on ethnicity have to do with morality? Oh yeah, absolutely nothing.

>>“No, you don’t advertise your house as being open to the public nor do you charge admission for people to enter your house.”

>But my home receives the benefit of sewers, roads, etc - so what gives me the right to do what I want and to believe what I want?

Do you believe that you think that your right to free assembly and free speech supersedes the right for a person to legally and constitutionally further their well being?

If you do, then you just admitted that a Muslim who is trained in first aid has no obligation to give first aid to an injured Christian they see on the road because it's against their faith to intermingle with Dhimmis.

>By your argument, anyone who receives any public benefit must conform to what the public wants. Thus you have wedding photographers being sued if they refuse to photograph the weddings of homosexuals.

So how does sexual deviancy relate to a discussion about race? Nevermind, this bizarre paragraph only deserves this response...

I'd hate to be your shrink.

96 posted on 02/26/2012 10:47:51 PM PST by NorthStarStateConservative (A conservative, a moderate, and a liberal walk into a bar. Bartender says, "Hi, Mitt!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: bigbob
Normally, how many people RECORD conversations in stores?

At my age, I have probably had thousands of conversations with sales-critters in a wide variety of stores, in more than half of these United States AND several foreign countries.

I have never recorded any of these conversations, nor have I ever felt any need to do so.

97 posted on 02/26/2012 10:55:51 PM PST by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: trebb
What kind of paperwork is necessary to purchase a .22 rifle?

Form 4473.

If you bought a rifle at WalMart (or ANY FFL dealer), you filled one out.

If you bought your rifle any time in the last 15 years or so (again, from ANY FFL dealer), you also had your name run through the National Instant Check System (criminal records check).

98 posted on 02/26/2012 11:04:20 PM PST by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: NorthStarStateConservative

“Then you lose business, simple. You may also be vilified socially for discriminating against a group based on your own personal biases. Rightfully so. You’ll be no different than the people who display these signs on their windows..”

Yes, I believe Mall of America should have the right to ban guns from their private property. As someone who carries regularly, if I’m asked by a property owner not to carry, I either comply or leave.

“Prior to the 1980s, driving drunk wasn’t illegal either. Does that mean drunken driving should be decriminalized?”

No. But then, drunk driving on your own property IS still legal. Can you not see the difference between life-threatening behavior on a public highway, and non-violent behavior on private property?

“>>“God created ALL people in his image”. >Then man fell. And we are NOT all children of God.

Oh really, Pastor Rogers? Ok, let’s see what the good book says.”

Yes, lets look:

“5-14 For of this much you can be certain: that neither the immoral nor the dirty-minded nor the covetous man (which latter is, in effect, worshipping a false god) has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Don’t let anyone fool you on this point, however plausible his argument. It is these very things which bring down the wrath of God upon the disobedient. Have nothing to do with men like that—once you were “darkness” but now you are “light”. Live then as children of the light. The light produces in men quite the opposite of sins like these—everything that is wholesome and good and true. Let your lives be living proofs of the things which please God. Steer clear of the activities of darkness; let your lives show by contrast how dreary and futile these things are. (You know the sort of things I mean—to detail their secret doings is really too shameful).” - Ephesians 5

” 18-21 Now the holy anger of God is disclosed from Heaven against the godlessness and evil of those men who render truth dumb and inoperative by their wickedness. It is not that they do not know the truth about God; indeed he has made it quite plain to them. For since the beginning of the world the invisible attributes of God, e.g. his eternal power and divinity, have been plainly discernible through things which he has made and which are commonly seen and known, thus leaving these men without a rag of excuse. They knew all the time that there is a God, yet they refused to acknowledge him as such, or to thank him for what he is or does. Thus they became fatuous in their argumentations, and plunged their silly minds still further into the dark.

22-23 Behind a facade of “wisdom” they became just fools, fools who would exchange the glory of the eternal God for an imitation image of a mortal man, or of creatures that run or fly or crawl.

24 They gave up God: and therefore God gave them up—to be the playthings of their own foul desires in dishonouring their own bodies.

The fearful consequence of deliberate atheism

25-27 These men deliberately forfeited the truth of God and accepted a lie, paying homage and giving service to the creature instead of to the Creator, who alone is worthy to be worshipped for ever and ever, amen. God therefore handed them over to disgraceful passions. Their women exchanged the normal practices of sexual intercourse for something which is abnormal and unnatural. Similarly the men, turning from natural intercourse with women, were swept into lustful passions for one another. Men with men performed these shameful horrors, receiving, of course, in their own personalities the consequences of sexual perversity.” - Romans 1

We are not all children of Gd. We were all made in his image, and we are all capable of repenting and accepting the offer of salvation - but most do not.

Should I be forced to rent out my home to anyone? Or can I use my property in a way consistent with traditional values?

“Pastor Rogers, what does discriminating against a person based on ethnicity have to do with morality? Oh yeah, absolutely nothing.”

I agree. My wife is a Filipina. But when you take away the right to discriminate based on ethnicity, you open the door to remove it for all sorts of other reasons - as we see now, with homosexuals and bisexuals being protected types of people.

That outcome was predicted by conservatives at the time, and is why many conservatives refused to vote for the CRA. Since the 1960s, the government in DC or state capitols gets to decide who is special, and who is not.

When younger, I had a fellow refuse to rent his house to me because I wasn’t Mormon. Did I sue? No, I just rented elsewhere.

I know the reasons the Civil Rights Act passed. I was in Selma Alabama in 1965. Close enough to remember the racial hatred. But when you take away the right of free association, you lose a critical part of freedom.

“If you do, then you just admitted that a Muslim who is trained in first aid has no obligation to give first aid to an injured Christian they see on the road because it’s against their faith to intermingle with Dhimmis.”

I believe the Muslim, in that situation, should be free to do as he believes is right. I’ll trust God’s judgment of him, but not government’s.


In this case: A gun shop gets a lot of scrutiny, and more so now that we know government agents will enter a store and try to get the owner to do something illegal. As the store pointed out, they have a requirement to refuse a sale to someone they think is a ‘straw man’ purchaser. That is true regardless of the race of the buyer.

Had they refused me, I wouldn’t be able to shout “Racist!”. But when I bought a revolver a few years back, the gun shop owner said my unusual last name helped - that if I said my name was Smith, he would have held up the sale fr a few days until he was sure I wasn’t using a false ID. He told me back then, before the revelations of government action, that his business was on the line every time he made a sale.

The government loves to put businessmen in a Catch-22. Hire an illegal, and you can be fined. Ask someone for paperwork, and you can be fined. Depends on the state.

If this “Miller” gave the same address as the “Miller” who was turned down, or if comments made to the clerk indicated he might be buying for someone else, then the gun shop had a legal requirement to refuse the sale. Black or white.

My Filipina wife, daughter, and daughter-in-law have yet to find a store that wouldn’t take their money. I rather doubt a large store in Charlotte NC (45% non-hispanic white, 35% black), with 2 stores in Charlotte & 450 nationwide, is refusing to sell to blacks.


99 posted on 02/27/2012 6:28:01 AM PST by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Bringbackthedraft
But we did hear that audio tape Francine Miller says she recorded in the store.

So, they went into the store with a recorder, EXPECTING a refusal. I suspect that they went out of their way to give the sales clerk the impression that this was a straw sale, so the sale would be refused and they could sue.

100 posted on 02/27/2012 6:32:45 AM PST by PapaBear3625 (In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. - George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson