|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Multiple Companies Abandon Dick's Sporting Goods
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://constitutionnetwork.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Industry response was swift after documents filed on April 27 with the Clerk of the House Representatives and Secretary of the Senate surfaced that showed Dick’s Sporting Goods has hired The Glover Park Group to engage in “lobbying related to gun control.” The move came only a few weeks after the big-box retailer made headlines by enacting a chain-wide policy allowing only those 21 and older to purchase firearms, removal of all modern sporting arms and standard-capacity magazines from its 35-store Field & Stream chain and, ultimately, destruction of those guns instead of seeking refunds from distributors or manufacturers. |
| Comment by:
jac
(5/15/2018)
|
Dick's is basically a clothing store. Many of their stores don't even sell guns and ammunition.l
If you want guns/ammunition go to a real gun store. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
