Mykeal,
Absolutely.
And the majority of the class agrees. In fact, their point was precisely as you have described. The seller committed sin of omission and very likely, it was deliberate. I will avoid him in the future for five reasons.
1. Misleading (and this is putting it kindly) ads.
2. Terrible attitude following the sale.
3. "As-is" refund policy
4. $20.00 shipping on a pistol which can be mailed priority for a little over a third that amount.
5. High (opinion) prices.
She was focusing on the technical accuracy of the ad. In every class I find at least one student who wants to over-lawyer things. And as you say, these business majors get only one class in law and one in ethics both of which are in the future for them.
This is why these students are just that, students.
As the class broke up, she left, saying (with her mouth) that the seller was technically correct and thus it was up to Sabot to choose to buy or not to buy. My sense though is that, given a similar situation she might arrive at a different conclusion. Her ego would not allow her to acknowledge that in the classroom. But this was a class in ethics, not in human nature.
As the professor of the class, I could call her attention to the nuances of the transaction that we have already discussed here. But I could not force her to take a different position.
I really had a good time doing that discussion. I hope that ALL of the students had an opportunity to learn something. We will never know.
