Walmart: Raising minimum age to 21.

twenty-one

Stores can decide to whom they can and cannot sell?

I would understand if there was a codified law and/or statute that mandates one must be at least age 21 before a being able to purchase.

How about restricting sales to short people, bald people, left-handed people.....
 
Walmart can do what they want, I honestly do not care. I don't believe raising the age to purchase ammo will make a difference in any group. I believe it is stupid, and they are giving into the liberal snowflakes.

However, I will continue to shop for food at Walmart regardless. Fact is, if I drive 30 miles, mostly on mountain roads for a food run, I have a choice of Smith's (Kroger subsidiary) or Fred Meyer (Kroger Subsidiary) and Kroger just announced the same restrictions this AM for their stores.

If I lived in a large city with a lot of option, I might boycott Walmart and Kroger, but in many cases, there are no alternatives.
 
This is just more virtue signaling. In fact, Dick's made a big deal of stopping the sale of "assault rifles" after Newtown. Then the shortage hit, and they were selling them again. Cheaper than Dirt did the exact same thing, except they announced they were going to stop selling firearms altogether.

The thing is, "standing on principle" isn't very impressive when the party doing it doesn't have anything to lose. Even if they stocked AR-15's, sales of those rifles don't represent a significant source of income for those companies.

What I do wonder is how much business they're going to lose without realizing it. The pearl-clutchers who are demanding this on social media aren't their actual customers.
 
Stores can decide to whom they can and cannot sell?
Click to expand...

Depends on what they sell. Ask that Christian wedding cake baker that refused to sell to a same sex couple. The government decided for him. Or Chick-Fil-A, or Hobby Lobby.....

Personally, I could care less if WalMart stopped selling guns all together. I used to, but not any longer.
 
Depends on what they sell
Click to expand...

It depends on to whom they restrict the right to purchase. Had this been a discussion about refusal to sell to a protected class it would be a different discussion. "Wal-mart refused to sell firearms to unmarried atheist, homosexual, African-Americans" is an entirely different thing. I don't agree with forcing individuals to do business but at least I understand the legal concept.

We have to be honest with ourselves about the positions others take to build the best possible argument for ourselves.
 
Knee jerk blunders by company exec's.
Such a ridiculous business decision has little effect on my life style. I buy my firearms and ammo from a business place that appreciates its Shooting Sports customers. Although I anticipate one day Walmart will also ban {barbed fishing hooks} thinking: Cruel punishment subjecting a fish too. i.e. Its inability to escape its hook for most of its species.
 
Knee jerk blunders by company exec's.
Click to expand...

I don't think Was Mart's - or Dick's - decisions to change sales policies was knee-jerk. They waited 2 weeks to make a decision. Two weeks of cost/benefit analysis to come to make moral choice? I don't think so. It's PR.
 
I bet a shiny nickel that Walmart, Dicks, Krogers, etc will be back to selling long guns to anyone 18 or older that passes NICS in a year.

In the past, the aftermath of mass shootings made the Walmarts up here in Anchorage put all the black rifles out of sight, in the back storage areas. They still sold them, but they didnt want the public to be aware of it. Eventually they brought them all back out, and even started carrying more of the ARs.
 
It depends on to whom they restrict the right to purchase. Had this been a discussion about refusal to sell to a protected class it would be a different discussion. "Wal-mart refused to sell firearms to unmarried atheist, homosexual, African-Americans" is an entirely different thing. I don't agree with forcing individuals to do business but at least I understand the legal concept.

We have to be honest with ourselves about the positions others take to build the best possible argument for ourselves.
Click to expand...

I heard on the radio this morning that law suits are in the making over this WalMart thing. Seems there are a number of states that have laws considering 18 year olds as full adults, and anyone 18-19-20 years old can not be singled out and restricted from things a 21+ year old is allowed. So WalMart refusing to sell firearms to an 18 year old is illegal.
 
I have not shopped at a Walmart for years and this is just another reason to not shop there in the future. They made their decision and I made mine, and emailed them to let them know so.
 
My first thought when I heard about Walmart stopping selling guns to 18-20 year olds was that some lawyer with a 18 year old child was going to make a fortune on a lawsuit.
 
Let's think of raising the age to 21 & why it might be a good idea. At 18 I saw life a certain way. At 21, I saw life differently. It comes down to maturity and life experience vs. Hormones & being 18. I call on everyone to think about how & what they did at 18 vs. 21. Enlisting into the armed services at 18 is a totally different story. Here there are very strict rules & training that the average young person does not get outside of the service.
 
I’m sure that taking a stand on national social issues can help grease up some permits and tax breaks for some local projects. Making a senator happy can also please dozens of mayors and commissioners. Just saying.
 
Enlisting into the armed services at 18 is a totally different story. Here there are very strict rules & training that the average young person does not get outside of the service.
Click to expand...

The issue is larger than firearm safety.

If an 18 year old lacks the capacity to make informed, responsible or rational decisions so that he shouldn't be allowed to purchase an arm, how is it right to permit him to sign away a wide array of his rights and bind himself to a term of service?

If a lad is too impulsive and lacks the ability to understand and weigh circumstances so he should be denied a rifle, isn't it terrible to give him a vote?

And what madness is it to let him drive?
 
Last edited:
I’m not sure where everyone thinks that the average military person gets all this firearms training that can’t be surpassed by a civilian.
There’s also plenty of 18, 19 and 20 year olds that go off the deep end in training. Personally, I think that’s too young to go to war in exchange for some
College.
 
I dont think its legal to discriminate against someone based on AGE. If the LEGAL age to purchase a long gun or ammo is 18, it seems making a company policy preventing sales to someone thats 19 would not be legal.

Could walmart make a company rule to forbid sales to women?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top