If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS Dallas/Ft. Worth)   Did you get f*cked by Dick's?   (dfw.cbslocal.com) divider line 215
    More: Asinine, Dick's Sporting Goods, sports equipment, automatic rifles, Flower Mound, Russell Kellner  
•       •       •

24922 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Dec 2012 at 7:08 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



215 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-30 07:46:24 PM

Mrbogey: Milo Minderbinder: Contract law does not work that way. You get your money back, you have no damages.

Dick's agreed to sell an item that cost, upon termination of the deal, about $1100 for $700. It's clear the gift cards were a way to offset the damages.

But the whole issue, regardless of lawsuits, Dick's deserves bad PR and to lose customers hand over fist for their actions. Sucks for Troy that they hitched their horse to a wagon that screwed them over so callously.


Contract damages put parties where they were prior to the breach. In this case, the purchaser gets his front money back. The gift certificate is gravy. There are no "super-deal-I-can't-get-anywhere-else" damages.
 
2012-12-30 07:46:58 PM

Mrbogey: Milo Minderbinder: Contract law does not work that way. You get your money back, you have no damages.

Dick's agreed to sell an item that cost, upon termination of the deal, about $1100 for $700. It's clear the gift cards were a way to offset the damages.

But the whole issue, regardless of lawsuits, Dick's deserves bad PR and to lose customers hand over fist for their actions. Sucks for Troy that they hitched their horse to a wagon that screwed them over so callously.


There are no damages.
 
2012-12-30 07:50:39 PM
The only damage that was done in this case is the gun manufacturer lost money, these people have no leg to stand on (or it got shot off).

If they really want to show their anger, then ignore the big box store that reneged on their sale and *BUY LOCAL* like you should be doing to support your community!
 
2012-12-30 07:50:40 PM
Man, I wish I'd gone ahead and gotten one of those Troy AR15s they had on black friday special. My wife would have been pissed though.
 
2012-12-30 07:52:22 PM

wyltoknow: What damages?


The cost for the person to fulfill the order that Dick's unilaterally terminated has now gone up by several hundred dollars.

If I enter into a contract to buy gold for you at $1500 and after the price of gold goes up several hundred dollars I send you a check to refund your money along with an apology about how I got out of the gold buying business and can't complete your order, you'd be pissed at losing out at entering at the low price point as now it'll cost you more.

So right now the AR-15 buyers are looking at several hundred dollars needed to make them whole. If there hadn't been a rush nationally, yea, no damages. But they can't find any AR-15 for 700$ much less the 800$ Dick's offered in total refund.

You may not like the argument but it's up to the courts to decide.
 
2012-12-30 07:53:25 PM

MarkEC: Ed_Severson: I can understand being frustrated that the sale didn't go through, but what in the world could you possibly sue them for?

The sale did go through. The Customer was out the money, and it was deposited in Dick's account. Once a retailer charges your card, they are bound by contract to deliver the goods you just paid for. If they cancel due to arbitrary reasons, you can sue.


You paid too much for you GED in Law.
 
2012-12-30 07:53:44 PM

Milo Minderbinder: Mrbogey: Milo Minderbinder: Contract law does not work that way. You get your money back, you have no damages.

Dick's agreed to sell an item that cost, upon termination of the deal, about $1100 for $700. It's clear the gift cards were a way to offset the damages.

But the whole issue, regardless of lawsuits, Dick's deserves bad PR and to lose customers hand over fist for their actions. Sucks for Troy that they hitched their horse to a wagon that screwed them over so callously.

Contract damages put parties where they were prior to the breach. In this case, the purchaser gets his front money back. The gift certificate is gravy. There are no "super-deal-I-can't-get-anywhere-else" damages.


There's also the false advertising part of it. It was an advertised special. Dick's cancelled sales that had already gone through just because they didn't want to sell that item anymore.
 
2012-12-30 07:54:02 PM

Apos: Someone might be looking down the barrel of a very expensive lawsuit soon.


No they won't. They refunded the money, end of story. Anyone who files a lawsuit will get laughed out of court. And should also be smacked with costs for wasting the court's time.
 
2012-12-30 07:55:40 PM

182: Subby's mom got banged by mine.


Subby's mom got banged by your mom?
 
2012-12-30 07:56:29 PM

jake_lex: Some grade A derp from the comments:

It sickens me that a corporation would shirk from our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. This knee jerk reaction to a deranged killer is senseless and guns were never the problem!

OK, then, Hobby Lobby and Chic-Fil-A should be forced to open on Sunday because the First Amendment protects my right to not practice a religion, right?

I love how, to the right, the 2nd amendment is holy and cannot be intruded on in any way, but the rest of the Constitution is, to use Dubya's phrase, "a goddamned piece of paper."


If I wasn't an atheist id say "amen".
 
2012-12-30 07:57:36 PM

Mrbogey: wyltoknow: What damages?

The cost for the person to fulfill the order that Dick's unilaterally terminated has now gone up by several hundred dollars.

If I enter into a contract to buy gold for you at $1500 and after the price of gold goes up several hundred dollars I send you a check to refund your money along with an apology about how I got out of the gold buying business and can't complete your order, you'd be pissed at losing out at entering at the low price point as now it'll cost you more.

So right now the AR-15 buyers are looking at several hundred dollars needed to make them whole. If there hadn't been a rush nationally, yea, no damages. But they can't find any AR-15 for 700$ much less the 800$ Dick's offered in total refund.

You may not like the argument but it's up to the courts to decide.


They have decided. There is a whole body of law that says you are wrong. The non-breaching party has the right to be made whole, NOT specific performance. This is for policy reasons; courts want to encourage economically efficient breaches.
 
2012-12-30 07:57:42 PM
Best Buy and Toys R Us have done the same in the past. Nothing to do with Connecticut/guns and everything to do with $$$$$.
These type of actions will soon become the norm for retailers.
 
2012-12-30 07:57:44 PM

IlGreven: fusillade762: Krieghund: fusillade762: A week before Christmas, Dick's announced it was suspending sales of modern sporting rifles in all stores, out of respect for the victims of the Connecticut massacre.

Riiiight. I'll bet they just ran out of stock. Or they're waiting to jack up the price to milk more money out of panicked nitwits.

Because Dick's in the only place you can buy a gun in Texas.

Assault rifles are sold out across the country. Rounds of .223 bullets, like those used in the AR-15 type Bushmaster rifle used in Newtown, are scarce. Stores are struggling to restock their shelves. Gun and ammunition makers are telling retailers they will have to wait months to get more.

...and this is Dick's fault how?


Antagonism: Wow. Just wow. You got a free $100 you didn't have before, your full refund, and you still think they need to "make it right"?

Sounds like the only dicks are the ones that shop there.



Troy Industries has some nice but inexpensive rifles they sold through Dick's (exclusive distributor). Troy has the rifles ready to ship, but Dick's isn't taking them, even to fulfill backorders. Sure, they're giving the customers refunds plus $100, but these rifles are worth a lot more than that $100 now everyone's in panic mode. I'd be pissed too. Picture placing a bid for a futures commodity, and the price unexpectedly shoots way up, then the contractee refuses to ship, but here's your capital back and a few extra bucks. Hey, why the biatching? It's sort of like that.
 
2012-12-30 07:59:59 PM

Hagbardr: Dick's gave them a full refund plus $100 gift card? The monsters!


This
 
2012-12-30 08:01:29 PM

MarkEC: Ed_Severson: I can understand being frustrated that the sale didn't go through, but what in the world could you possibly sue them for?

The sale did go through. The Customer was out the money, and it was deposited in Dick's account.Once a retailer charges your card, they are bound by contract to deliver the goods you just paid for. If they cancel due to arbitrary reasons, you can sue.


No, they aren't. I am constantly amazed at the bizarre assortment of rights consumers think they have.

Unless there is some weird law in the municipality where these sales took place, a retailer is bound only to deliver the product within a reasonable time frame (FFC Mail Order Rules allow 30 days, typically) or to offer a full refund of monies paid within the same reasonable time frame. Can you imagine what kind of chaos could ensue if someone absolutely and under penalty of law had to deliver a product once they've charged someone for it, regardless of the actual availability of the product or cost to the seller?

I am of course assuming no actual legally enforceable contract that says otherwise was agreed to by both parties prior to engaging in the actual sale. A simple point of sale transaction is not such a thing.
 
2012-12-30 08:02:44 PM
Good for Dick's. Their idea is good, even if their execution of it was a little clumsy. But that aspect doesn't bother me.

People who want to keep a firearm or two around the house for personal protection don't bother me, either. But the whining bullies at the N.R.A. do. So good for Dick's.

(How you can be "whining" and a "bully" at the same time is quite a talent. But the N.R.A. pulls it off.)
 
2012-12-30 08:02:54 PM

jake_lex: "... to use Dubya's phrase, "a goddamned piece of paper."


Citation, please. From a reliable source, without an agenda or an ax to grind.
 
2012-12-30 08:02:57 PM

MarkEC: Milo Minderbinder: Mrbogey: Milo Minderbinder: Contract law does not work that way. You get your money back, you have no damages.

Dick's agreed to sell an item that cost, upon termination of the deal, about $1100 for $700. It's clear the gift cards were a way to offset the damages.

But the whole issue, regardless of lawsuits, Dick's deserves bad PR and to lose customers hand over fist for their actions. Sucks for Troy that they hitched their horse to a wagon that screwed them over so callously.

Contract damages put parties where they were prior to the breach. In this case, the purchaser gets his front money back. The gift certificate is gravy. There are no "super-deal-I-can't-get-anywhere-else" damages.

There's also the false advertising part of it. It was an advertised special. Dick's cancelled sales that had already gone through just because they didn't want to sell that item anymore.


That is not false advertising. Its an intentional breach, and if the front money is returned, there are no damages.

/hurt feelings are not actionable
//nor disappointment about not getting what you want for Christmas
 
2012-12-30 08:03:03 PM
What a bunch of Dick's


Out of respect of the victims of Sandy Hook I went out and cranked off a few hundred rounds. Being legally able to defend oneself is AWESOME.
 
2012-12-30 08:03:20 PM
The Sandy Hook shooting wasn't what changed my minds on guns (from don't want them but think you should be allowed to have them to believing in close to a full ban), it was another round of listening to gun owners crazy logic that convinced me that we were just arming the inmates at the asylum. If sane gun owners want to keep their guns they need to help us get the guns out of their nutjob friends' hands. Several of my friends have guns. Of the eight that pop in my head first, five absolutely shouldn't have them, and the other three are military (or ex-military) and law enforcement. (One is untreated bipolar, the second is almost certainly bipolar as well, and untreated. The third has had serious bouts of depression (a friend walked in on him sitting on his bed with his shotgun contemplating suicide, and he also kept an unregistered, loaded handgun in his car, loose in the trunk.) My other friend has some hording tendencies. Walking through his place I stepped on a shotgun lying unsecured in a house with children, underneath a pile of clothes. One was a schizophrenic who used to walk around his house at night on armed patrol (he was ex-military, and a nice guy, but seriously mentally ill, including voices that told him to do violent things- his guns were eventually taken away).

So that leaves me with the last three. The police officer, fine. The Air Force guy, well, he keeps them locked up and he's pretty sane. He is a recreational shooter. The other one is a little paranoid (he is a 'buy gold for the financial apocalypse' type), but he has a carry permit. He is scared about the world and the gun makes him feel safer. Statistics show they don't actually make him safer, but he thinks they do. Of the 8 that popped in my head, only two have any 'need' to be armed, (and saying the Air Force guy, who is not deployed, needs to be armed, is stretching it.)

That's just the people I know who I've talked guns with. I had a friend in grade school who brought a live grenade to school because his dad, who was in the military, was stealing and hording guns and artillery in the basement. Another neighbor (and this was a 'good' neighborhood, if that means anything) had given his son a real (but disabled) gun to play guns with. That, in of itself, wasn't a problem. It had had lead poured down the barrel. The attitude about guns in the family seriously had problems though. His older son would shoot BB's at us. (He was in his late teens, we were 3-4th graders.)

A bunch of my friends got in trouble for shooting in an old gravel pit. The charge was bogus. The land wasn't posted, but the reason that charges were pressed was because homeowners had complained. Other people had been using the pit recently and had hit nearby homes with stray gunfire. (It wasn't my friends, it wasn't even the day my friends were there, but they were the ones there when the cops showed up.) The fact remains though, that some 'responsible' gun owners had been shooting up there and hit houses.
 
2012-12-30 08:04:50 PM

Ed_Severson: I can understand being frustrated that the sale didn't go through, but what in the world could you possibly sue them for?


Maybe for the lost opportunity to buy it somewhere else while it was on sale? You can't buy it elsewhere while expecting delivery, after giving your money.
 
2012-12-30 08:05:12 PM

jake_lex: Some grade A derp from the comments:

It sickens me that a corporation would shirk from our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. This knee jerk reaction to a deranged killer is senseless and guns were never the problem!

OK, then, Hobby Lobby and Chic-Fil-A should be forced to open on Sunday because the First Amendment protects my right to not practice a religion, right?

I love how, to the right, the 2nd amendment is holy and cannot be intruded on in any way, but the rest of the Constitution is, to use Dubya's phrase, "a goddamned piece of paper."


What does the # of submitted links always correspond with the amount of libberagle warrrrrgle?
 
2012-12-30 08:06:30 PM

HawkEyes: Hagbardr: Dick's gave them a full refund plus $100 gift card? The monsters!

This


You paid $1000 to back-order a rifle, the company that makes the rifle, which is now worth about $2000, has that rifle ready to ship to us but we're refusing to accept them because of politics, but here's $1100 back for your trouble? Yeah, this.
 
2012-12-30 08:07:22 PM
Dick's can suck mine. I won't be buying from them again. Their right not to sell guns, my right not to shop there because of the asinine nature of their illogical knee-jerk reaction to a national tragedy.
 
2012-12-30 08:08:41 PM
You don't need 3 carbines you piece of shiat.
 
2012-12-30 08:09:41 PM

Mrbogey: wyltoknow: What damages?

The cost for the person to fulfill the order that Dick's unilaterally terminated has now gone up by several hundred dollars.

If I enter into a contract to buy gold for you at $1500 and after the price of gold goes up several hundred dollars I send you a check to refund your money along with an apology about how I got out of the gold buying business and can't complete your order, you'd be pissed at losing out at entering at the low price point as now it'll cost you more.

So right now the AR-15 buyers are looking at several hundred dollars needed to make them whole. If there hadn't been a rush nationally, yea, no damages. But they can't find any AR-15 for 700$ much less the 800$ Dick's offered in total refund.

You may not like the argument but it's up to the courts to decide.


They have, and in they decided that there are no damages.
 
2012-12-30 08:12:15 PM

HoratioGates: The Sandy Hook shooting wasn't what changed my minds on guns (from don't want them but think you should be allowed to have them to believing in close to a full ban), it was another round of listening to gun owners crazy logic that convinced me that we were just arming the inmates at the asylum. If sane gun owners want to keep their guns they need to help us get the guns out of their nutjob friends' hands. Several of my friends have guns. Of the eight that pop in my head first, five absolutely shouldn't have them, and the other three are military (or ex-military) and law enforcement. (One is untreated bipolar, the second is almost certainly bipolar as well, and untreated. The third has had serious bouts of depression (a friend walked in on him sitting on his bed with his shotgun contemplating suicide, and he also kept an unregistered, loaded handgun in his car, loose in the trunk.) My other friend has some hording tendencies. Walking through his place I stepped on a shotgun lying unsecured in a house with children, underneath a pile of clothes. One was a schizophrenic who used to walk around his house at night on armed patrol (he was ex-military, and a nice guy, but seriously mentally ill, including voices that told him to do violent things- his guns were eventually taken away).

So that leaves me with the last three. The police officer, fine. The Air Force guy, well, he keeps them locked up and he's pretty sane. He is a recreational shooter. The other one is a little paranoid (he is a 'buy gold for the financial apocalypse' type), but he has a carry permit. He is scared about the world and the gun makes him feel safer. Statistics show they don't actually make him safer, but he thinks they do. Of the 8 that popped in my head, only two have any 'need' to be armed, (and saying the Air Force guy, who is not deployed, needs to be armed, is stretching it.)

That's just the people I know who I've talked guns with. I had a friend in grade school who brought ...


I feel the exact opposite way from listening to anti-gun nuts frothing along like the tea partiers they so despise.
 
2012-12-30 08:12:26 PM
Stop whining.
 
2012-12-30 08:13:03 PM

Milo Minderbinder: Mrbogey: wyltoknow: What damages?

The cost for the person to fulfill the order that Dick's unilaterally terminated has now gone up by several hundred dollars.

If I enter into a contract to buy gold for you at $1500 and after the price of gold goes up several hundred dollars I send you a check to refund your money along with an apology about how I got out of the gold buying business and can't complete your order, you'd be pissed at losing out at entering at the low price point as now it'll cost you more.

So right now the AR-15 buyers are looking at several hundred dollars needed to make them whole. If there hadn't been a rush nationally, yea, no damages. But they can't find any AR-15 for 700$ much less the 800$ Dick's offered in total refund.

You may not like the argument but it's up to the courts to decide.

They have decided. There is a whole body of law that says you are wrong. The non-breaching party has the right to be made whole, NOT specific performance. This is for policy reasons; courts want to encourage economically efficient breaches.


You may say that the $100 that Dick's gave them was sufficient, but you can't say their actions would not be actionable. they had the customers' money for almost a month before deciding they just didn't want to sell that item anymore. If taking money and refunding it a month later instead of fulfilling an order were not actionable, you could become a millionaire by taking tens of thousands of orders and gaining interest on it before refunding it back. Ponzi would have gone that route and not gone to jail.
 
2012-12-30 08:13:03 PM
For the internet GED's in law, please look at U.C.C. § 2-713. Buyer's Damages for Non-delivery or Repudiation.

(1) Subject to Section 2-723, if the seller wrongfully fails to deliver or repudiates or the buyer rightfully rejects or justifiably revokes acceptance:

(a) the measure of damages in the case of wrongful failure to deliver by the seller or rightful rejection or justifiable revocation of acceptance by the buyer is the difference between the market price at the time for tender under the contract and the contract price together with any incidental or consequential damages under Section 2-715, but less expenses saved in consequence of the seller's breach; and

(b) the measure of damages for repudiation by the seller is the difference between the market price at the expiration of a commercially reasonable time after the buyer learned of the repudiation, but no later than the time stated in paragraph (a), and the contract price together with any incidental or consequential damages provided in this Article (Section 2--715), less expenses saved in consequence of the seller's breach.

and

U.C.C. § 2-716. Buyer's Right to Specific Performance or Replevin.

(1) Specific performance may be decreed if the goods are unique or in other proper circumstances. In a contract other than a consumer contract, specific performance may be decreed if the parties have agreed to that remedy. However, even if the parties agree to specific performance, specific performance may not be decreed if the breaching party's sole remaining contractual obligation is the payment of money.

(2) The decree for specific performance may include such terms and conditions as to payment of the price, damages, or other relief as the court may deem just.

(3) The buyer has a right of replevin or similar remedy for goods identified to the contract if after reasonable effort the buyer is unable to effect cover for such goods or the circumstances reasonably indicate that such effort will be unavailing or if the goods have been shipped under reservation and satisfaction of the security interest in them has been made or tendered.

(4) The buyer's right under subsection (3) vests upon acquisition of a special property, even if the seller had not then repudiated or failed to deliver.
 
2012-12-30 08:15:20 PM

HoratioGates: The Sandy Hook shooting wasn't what changed my minds on guns (from don't want them but think you should be allowed to have them to believing in close to a full ban), it was another round of listening to gun owners crazy logic that convinced me that we were just arming the inmates at the asylum. If sane gun owners want to keep their guns they need to help us get the guns out of their nutjob friends' hands. Several of my friends have guns. Of the eight that pop in my head first, five absolutely shouldn't have them, and the other three are military (or ex-military) and law enforcement. (One is untreated bipolar, the second is almost certainly bipolar as well, and untreated. The third has had serious bouts of depression (a friend walked in on him sitting on his bed with his shotgun contemplating suicide, and he also kept an unregistered, loaded handgun in his car, loose in the trunk.) My other friend has some hording tendencies. Walking through his place I stepped on a shotgun lying unsecured in a house with children, underneath a pile of clothes. One was a schizophrenic who used to walk around his house at night on armed patrol (he was ex-military, and a nice guy, but seriously mentally ill, including voices that told him to do violent things- his guns were eventually taken away).

So that leaves me with the last three. The police officer, fine. The Air Force guy, well, he keeps them locked up and he's pretty sane. He is a recreational shooter. The other one is a little paranoid (he is a 'buy gold for the financial apocalypse' type), but he has a carry permit. He is scared about the world and the gun makes him feel safer. Statistics show they don't actually make him safer, but he thinks they do. Of the 8 that popped in my head, only two have any 'need' to be armed, (and saying the Air Force guy, who is not deployed, needs to be armed, is stretching it.)

That's just the people I know who I've talked guns with. I had a friend in grade school who brought ...



CSB, except it doesn't warrant taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens just because you have a whole bunch of farked up friends. You address the issues that your friends have, not the inanimate objects that the rest of us without issues choose to own.
 
2012-12-30 08:17:18 PM

MarkEC: Milo Minderbinder: Mrbogey: wyltoknow: What damages?

The cost for the person to fulfill the order that Dick's unilaterally terminated has now gone up by several hundred dollars.

If I enter into a contract to buy gold for you at $1500 and after the price of gold goes up several hundred dollars I send you a check to refund your money along with an apology about how I got out of the gold buying business and can't complete your order, you'd be pissed at losing out at entering at the low price point as now it'll cost you more.

So right now the AR-15 buyers are looking at several hundred dollars needed to make them whole. If there hadn't been a rush nationally, yea, no damages. But they can't find any AR-15 for 700$ much less the 800$ Dick's offered in total refund.

You may not like the argument but it's up to the courts to decide.

They have decided. There is a whole body of law that says you are wrong. The non-breaching party has the right to be made whole, NOT specific performance. This is for policy reasons; courts want to encourage economically efficient breaches.

You may say that the $100 that Dick's gave them was sufficient, but you can't say their actions would not be actionable. they had the customers' money for almost a month before deciding they just didn't want to sell that item anymore. If taking money and refunding it a month later instead of fulfilling an order were not actionable, you could become a millionaire by taking tens of thousands of orders and gaining interest on it before refunding it back. Ponzi would have gone that route and not gone to jail.


So sue for one month of bank interest on your deposit, but only if you can prove Dicks entered into the contract in bad faith. Whoops, Newton pretty much disproves that.

/leavw the practice of law to the professionals.
 
2012-12-30 08:17:52 PM

StinkyFiddlewinks: You don't need 3 carbines you piece of shiat.


You don't need most of the stuff you own either...
 
2012-12-30 08:18:13 PM
All this arguing going on in the thread and no one has touched on the fact that every complained ordered multiple guns? I understand collecting, but what the fark do you need 3 of the same rifle for?
 
2012-12-30 08:18:45 PM
i thought it would be cool to put out a female employee swimsuit calendar.

I'd call it "Chicks with Dick's"

WHAT‽‽‽‽
 
2012-12-30 08:21:21 PM

IrateShadow: All this arguing going on in the thread and no one has touched on the fact that every complained ordered multiple guns? I understand collecting, but what the fark do you need 3 of the same rifle for?


Gee... what other legal products are people questioned about when they want more than one. Oh, yeah... nothing.
 
2012-12-30 08:23:33 PM

thorthor: If I wasn't an atheist id say "amen".


No one cares.
 
2012-12-30 08:24:40 PM

twiztedjustin: What a bunch of Dick's


Out of respect of the victims of Sandy Hook I went out and cranked off a few hundred rounds. Being legally able to defend oneself is AWESOME.



Kindergartners defending themselves from gun nuts?

That's a beautiful world you have planned for us.
 
2012-12-30 08:25:33 PM

graeylin: Hagbardr: Dick's gave them a full refund plus $100 gift card? The monsters!

double agree with this. Does it suck to not get what you were hoping for? Sure.

But, you got a good deal on the one(s) you did buy, you got all your money back, you got an EXTRA $100 that they didn't have to give you, and you still want to whine and moan?

Move to California and join the self entitled twits who populate this state. You'll be right at home.


Hey, I live in California and...

Oh. Right.
 
2012-12-30 08:25:55 PM

dahmers love zombie: I got my Mossberg 715t about an hour before they took them off the shelves.  Went back a few days later to get a Rem 597, and they'd not only removed all of their "scary-looking" guns, they took all of the mags off of the shelves and even removed the pages from their catalog that listed them.  I was trying to see if I could special order a target gun, but since the listing was on the same catalog PAGE as an AR-frame rifle, they couldn't order it at all.


I already had the 708 and was forced to get the 715t because they were out of stock. I needed something to deal with the the strays people have been dropping off out here. They have the same mechanism, but the 708 isn't as cheap feeling. reliable as hell, though.
 
2012-12-30 08:26:16 PM

jake_lex: Some grade A derp from the comments:

It sickens me that a corporation would shirk from our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. This knee jerk reaction to a deranged killer is senseless and guns were never the problem!


How does one shirk a right?
 
2012-12-30 08:26:25 PM

Ed_Severson: I can understand being frustrated that the sale didn't go through, but what in the world could you possibly sue them for?


breach of contract. and the mfg could too probably. especially so if that bit about dick's being an exclusive dealer is right.

even if they don't get the gun they should get what the current price is. this was truly a dick move.
 
2012-12-30 08:27:11 PM

StinkyFiddlewinks: You don't need 3 carbines you piece of shiat.


And you don't need a computer with internet access. So what's your farking point?
 
2012-12-30 08:28:13 PM

snorkblaster: Dear internet lawyers: The customer has no damages in the eyes of the law, so there can be no successful suit.


dear guy with GED in law don't count on that. breach of contract comes to mind.
 
2012-12-30 08:28:52 PM

Insatiable Jesus: twiztedjustin: What a bunch of Dick's


Out of respect of the victims of Sandy Hook I went out and cranked off a few hundred rounds. Being legally able to defend oneself is AWESOME.


Kindergartners defending themselves from gun nuts?

That's a beautiful world you have planned for us.


Better than your world, where people just happily line up along a trench. No use fighting it, because they got Tanks and shiat. Go forth and die.
 
2012-12-30 08:29:22 PM

IrateShadow: All this arguing going on in the thread and no one has touched on the fact that every complained ordered multiple guns? I understand collecting, but what the fark do you need 3 of the same rifle for?


Because as of now in this country, at least for now anyway, one can buy as much of anything that they want. And if a byproduct of such purchases happens to be the pleasure of pissing people like you off, even better.
 
2012-12-30 08:29:44 PM
I can understand the situation but if you sold the guns deliver the ones that have been paid for and stop selling them in store.
 
2012-12-30 08:29:45 PM

Farker Soze: IlGreven: fusillade762: Krieghund: fusillade762: A week before Christmas, Dick's announced it was suspending sales of modern sporting rifles in all stores, out of respect for the victims of the Connecticut massacre.

Riiiight. I'll bet they just ran out of stock. Or they're waiting to jack up the price to milk more money out of panicked nitwits.

Because Dick's in the only place you can buy a gun in Texas.

Assault rifles are sold out across the country. Rounds of .223 bullets, like those used in the AR-15 type Bushmaster rifle used in Newtown, are scarce. Stores are struggling to restock their shelves. Gun and ammunition makers are telling retailers they will have to wait months to get more.

...and this is Dick's fault how?

Antagonism: Wow. Just wow. You got a free $100 you didn't have before, your full refund, and you still think they need to "make it right"?

Sounds like the only dicks are the ones that shop there.


Troy Industries has some nice but inexpensive rifles they sold through Dick's (exclusive distributor). Troy has the rifles ready to ship, but Dick's isn't taking them, even to fulfill backorders. Sure, they're giving the customers refunds plus $100, but these rifles are worth a lot more than that $100 now everyone's in panic mode. I'd be pissed too. Picture placing a bid for a futures commodity, and the price unexpectedly shoots way up, then the contractee refuses to ship, but here's your capital back and a few extra bucks. Hey, why the biatching? It's sort of like that.


But it's not a commodity. It's a good. The original purchaser was made whole. There are no damages. The whole of contract law is on the side of Dicks.

Now can Troy sue Dick's for breach of contract? More than likely. Can this schmoe get damages for not receiving his firearm? Nope. Because he was not harmed. He gave Dick's 700 per fire arm and received that money back and then on top was given additional compensation by Dick's for his trouble.

He has been made whole. You only need to take an introductory course in Contract Law to cover a case example like this.
 
2012-12-30 08:29:57 PM

ISO15693: Somehow i can't find it in me to have any sympathy for the people complaining about their inability to make re-sale profit off of weapons like that. Besides,

" IN THE EVENT OF ANY PROBLEM WITH THE SITE OR ANY CONTENT, YOU AGREE THAT YOUR SOLE REMEDY IS TO CEASE USING THE SITE IN THE EVENT OF ANY PROBLEM WITH THE PRODUCTS OR SERVICES THAT YOU HAVE PURCHASED ON OR THROUGH THE SITE, YOU AGREE THAT YOUR SOLE REMEDY, IF ANY, IS FROM THE MANUFACTURER OF SUCH PRODUCTS OR SUPPLIER OF SUCH SERVICES, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUCH MANUFACTURER'S OR SUPPLIER'S WARRANTY, OR TO SEEK A RETURN AND REFUND FOR SUCH PRODUCT OR SERVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RETURNS AND REFUNDS POLICIES POSTED ON THE SITE. "

They got a refund. That is all they were entitled too. It sounds like DSG even went beyond their obligation and gave them a $100 gift - and yet they still whined and derped.


that's boilerplate meant to fool folks like you into not suing.
 
2012-12-30 08:30:02 PM
What have we learned here?

Dick's is aptly named.

IANAL. Maybe what they did is legal, but it's still a (here it comes) dick move.
 
Displayed 50 of 215 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report