Gun Range Sued - Page 4

ScottRiqui · August 27, 2012, 12:53 PM

Quote:

I'll answer for you, you'd have Al Sharpton and every politician and "rights" group lined up in droves to sue you

Well of course Sharpton and the rest of the "professional victims" would pitch a fit - I thought that was so obvious that it didn't even warrant discussion. So what's your point?

Considering the trivial crap that sets them off, I'm certainly not going to let their reactions guide my decisions.

Salmoneye · August 27, 2012, 01:01 PM

The Vermont AG has passed my inquiry on:

"I have forwarded your inquiry to the Vermont Human Rights Commission"

sigcurious · August 27, 2012, 01:10 PM

What if you just called ladies night white guy weds? Free box o' ammo for the ladies on white guy weds!

Seriously though, I think Tom has pointed out a critical part of this type of thing. There's a difference between discrimination and incentive.

To frame it in NJgunowners terms, though, what if a small business owner send out coupon mailers by zipcode. But only sends them out to a neighboring zipcode with a different racial demographic, in order to attract new and more diverse clients? Is that incentive or discrimination? What about if the small business owner sends coupon mailers to as many nearby zipcodes as they financially can, but not to all the zipcodes that could easily access the business, is that discrimination? What if all those zipcodes nearby are the same racial demographic, and those left out are statistically different? Discrimination?

I think the nuances of this type of situation are too many to lay it out in black and white. Some people will inevitably see discrimination everywhere, that does not make it so, and conversely some people will see non-discrimination everywhere. But in the end I think for a majority, it may be like pornography vs art, you might not be able to define it, but you just know when you've seen it.

Personally I do not think this is a discriminatory practice, where it's range time or cheap beer.

NJgunowner · August 27, 2012, 01:12 PM

Quote:

What injustice is perpetrated by "Ladies night" that should have a remedy in the law? Or as I asked above,

Really? This is the best you got?

Let's see, you're a girl so you don't have to pay. Oh wait you're guy give me money.

Reverse it and see what happens. The same people who thinks it's ok to give discounts/free stuff to women would be crying about discrimination.

The simple test is if the situation were reversed, how would people react. If it isn't all right for one group, how on earth can you defend it as being right for another?

Quote:

To frame it in NJgunowners terms, though, what if a small business owner send out coupon mailers by zipcode. But only sends them out to a neighboring zipcode with a different racial demographic, in order to attract new and more diverse clients? Is that incentive or discrimination? What about if the small business owner sends coupon mailers to as many nearby zipcodes as they financially can, but not to all the zipcodes that could easily access the business, is that discrimination? What if all those zipcodes nearby are the same racial demographic, and those left out are statistically different? Discrimination?

If a business is offering incentives to one segment of the population over another intentionally, that's discrimination. Quite frankly, money is money and it's all green. Why should any business owner care what percentage of the population is buying their stuff as long as the money is good? If I'm selling a product, I don't give a damn that out of 1000 items they had 25% of this that or the other... I just want the business. If I want to grow it to 2000 items, why would I care what race or gender bought them?

Either way I'm done with this thread. I'll continue to believe we were all created equal and should be treated as such, you guys can continue to believe it's ok to incentivize one part of the population over another.

zukiphile · August 27, 2012, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NJgunowner

Really? This is the best you got?

I am not sure how "This is the best you got?" is responsive. It is a question raised by your prior writing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NJgunowner

Let's see, you're a girl so you don't have to pay. Oh wait you're guy give me money.

So the malignant result you imgaine is that guys have to pay for range time? Don't they have to anyway?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NJgunowner

The simple test is if the situation were reversed, how would people react.

That test is simple, but not probative. Reacting unreasonably because others react unreasonably isn't an excellent guide to wise policy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NJgunowner

If it isn't all right for group, how on earth can you defend it as being right for another?

I wouldn't assume that it is right for another. That is why I noted it may shed light on why some discrimination is viewed as reasonable while other sorts aren't.

When I was a lad, afternoon admission to a film was $2 and I was $1. I suppose this was discriminatory and set back the cause of senior equality, but I see no harm to be remedied in it.

ScottRiqui · August 27, 2012, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Reverse it and see what happens. The same people who thinks it's ok to give discounts/free stuff to women would be crying about discrimination.

Especially in this age of "professional victims", some of us realize that public reaction to a policy is often a poor gauge, so I'm not sure what the purpose of your "test" is.

Quote:

Why should any business owner care what percentage of the population is buying their stuff as long as the money is good? If I'm selling a product, I don't give a damn that out of 1000 items they had 25% of this that or the other... I just want the business. If I want to grow it to 2000 items, why would I care what race or gender bought them?

I think you're missing out on the entire point behind the "Ladies' Night" promotion.

The owner likely doesn't care what percentage of his clientele is male and what percentage is female - like you said, their money all spends the same.

But, there's nothing in the article to suggest that he's having to turn away male business in order to court female shooters. What he's doing is trying to expand his business **without cannibilizing his current customer base** by tapping into the hitherto under-represented female market.

When Domino's started selling chicken wings, salads, sandwiches and desserts, they weren't trying to cut down on the number of pizzas they sold - they were simply trying to attract the crowd that wanted something besides pizza.

Salmoneye · August 27, 2012, 04:05 PM

I guess this settles it once and for all:

Quote:

Dear Mr. Xxxxxx,

This office is unaware of any Vermont statute, regulation or case law that expressly and specifically prohibits Vermont businesses from offering ladies night-type specials. You may, however, already be aware that Vermont’s statutes at Title 9, section 4502(a) states:

An owner or operator of a place of public accommodation or an agent or employee of such owner or operator shall not, because of the race, creed, color, national origin, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity of any person, refuse, withhold from, or deny to that person any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of the place of public accommodation.

I hope this information is helpful to you.

With best regards, Xxxx Xxxxxxx

Xxxx Xxxxxxx
Vermont Human Rights Commission
14-16 Baldwin Street
Montpelier, VT 05633-6301

According to the VT Human Rights Commission, my distinct memories from well over 20 years ago when I was working bars as a bouncer are completely wrong...

I can live with that...

ScottRiqui · August 27, 2012, 06:49 PM

Salmoneye:

Thanks for following through with that. Vermont's position makes sense to me, but evidently, the matter isn't as "cut and dried" as I had originally thought, because there are some states that have ruled that variable pricing arrangements based on a patron's sex are in fact illegal. Here's a law blog that gives some examples.

Salmoneye · August 27, 2012, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Thanks for following through with that.

Entirely welcome, but I must admit that it was much more for my own edification, than trying to be 'right or wrong'...

The older I get, the more I find that what I thought was black and white, may not be as 'B&W' as I thought...

I'm sure that at some time in the near future my darling Wife will tell me if that is a good, or bad thing...

KyJim · August 27, 2012, 11:41 PM

I'm trying to decide if I would like the kind of life where I could afford to expend my mental and emotional energy worrying about Ladies Night at the range. It would either mean I had absolutely no problems in my life or I was so bitter that I worried about petty little things that didn't even effect me.

ltc444 · August 28, 2012, 10:24 PM

It is legal in bars to have a ladies night. It should be legal to have one at the range.

Frankly I think our sport needs more feminine touches.

ChuckS · August 30, 2012, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ltc444

It is legal in bars to have a ladies night.

It seems that it depends on which state you're in:
Wiki Link

But I must agree that it seems silly to object at the range.

**Glenn E. Meyer** · August 30, 2012, 03:15 PM

Being cranky - I'm going to say that I wonder if the animus against such an event is really some theoretical civil rights/discrimination view point or some problem with women as a group.

I've seen that before. At a meeting, we discussed the use of chairman. Using chairperson, chairman and chairwoman seemed stilted. We decided to call folks simply 'the chair'. Some old guy started the blah, blah. These women - blah, blah. I'm not a chair, that's furniture.

I suggested we could call him the stool - to end the argument.

KyJim · August 31, 2012, 12:23 AM

Quote:

I suggested we could call him the stool - to end the argument.

ROFL!

**Tom Servo** · August 31, 2012, 12:57 AM

Quote:

But I must agree that it seems silly to object at the range.

Sadly, there are people who go through life looking for something to object to. Mr. Hunter is one of those.

August 27, 2012, 11:41 PM	#85
KyJim Senior Member Join Date: July 26, 2005 Location: The Bluegrass Posts: 6,510	I'm trying to decide if I would like the kind of life where I could afford to expend my mental and emotional energy worrying about Ladies Night at the range. It would either mean I had absolutely no problems in my life or I was so bitter that I worried about petty little things that didn't even effect me. __________________ Jim's Rules of Carry: 1. Any gun is better than no gun. 2. A gun that is reliable is better than a gun that is not. 3. A hole in the right place is better than a hole in the wrong place. 4. A bigger hole is a better hole.

August 30, 2012, 03:15 PM	#88
Glenn E. Meyer Staff Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 13,149	Being cranky - I'm going to say that I wonder if the animus against such an event is really some theoretical civil rights/discrimination view point or some problem with women as a group. I've seen that before. At a meeting, we discussed the use of chairman. Using chairperson, chairman and chairwoman seemed stilted. We decided to call folks simply 'the chair'. Some old guy started the blah, blah. These women - blah, blah. I'm not a chair, that's furniture. I suggested we could call him the stool - to end the argument. __________________ NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm Being an Academic Shooter http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm Being an Active Shooter

August 27, 2012, 01:01 PM	#77
Salmoneye Senior Member Join Date: December 31, 2011 Location: Vermont Posts: 948	The Vermont AG has passed my inquiry on: "I have forwarded your inquiry to the Vermont Human Rights Commission"

August 27, 2012, 01:10 PM	#78
sigcurious Senior Member Join Date: May 26, 2011 Posts: 1,633	What if you just called ladies night white guy weds? Free box o' ammo for the ladies on white guy weds! Seriously though, I think Tom has pointed out a critical part of this type of thing. There's a difference between discrimination and incentive. To frame it in NJgunowners terms, though, what if a small business owner send out coupon mailers by zipcode. But only sends them out to a neighboring zipcode with a different racial demographic, in order to attract new and more diverse clients? Is that incentive or discrimination? What about if the small business owner sends coupon mailers to as many nearby zipcodes as they financially can, but not to all the zipcodes that could easily access the business, is that discrimination? What if all those zipcodes nearby are the same racial demographic, and those left out are statistically different? Discrimination? I think the nuances of this type of situation are too many to lay it out in black and white. Some people will inevitably see discrimination everywhere, that does not make it so, and conversely some people will see non-discrimination everywhere. But in the end I think for a majority, it may be like pornography vs art, you might not be able to define it, but you just know when you've seen it. Personally I do not think this is a discriminatory practice, where it's range time or cheap beer.

August 27, 2012, 06:49 PM	#83
ScottRiqui Senior Member Join Date: January 27, 2010 Location: Norfolk, VA Posts: 2,896	Salmoneye: Thanks for following through with that. Vermont's position makes sense to me, but evidently, the matter isn't as "cut and dried" as I had originally thought, because there are some states that have ruled that variable pricing arrangements based on a patron's sex are in fact illegal. Here's a law blog that gives some examples.

August 28, 2012, 10:24 PM	#86
ltc444 Senior Member Join Date: March 3, 2011 Location: Vernon AZ Posts: 1,192	It is legal in bars to have a ladies night. It should be legal to have one at the range. Frankly I think our sport needs more feminine touches.