According to reports from retailers and vendors in the firearms trade, Nikon has discontinued rifle scopes from its line of sport optics. READ MORE
Details are not as prevalent as rumors just now, but retailers and vendors, including Midsouth, received notification from Nikon that the manufacturer will continue to produce other sport optics such as binoculars, rangefinders and spotting scopes, and that production of Nikon’s line of rifle scopes will be (or has been) discontinued — meaning that once current stocks are gone, they will not be replenished.
These reports have are said to have been confirmed by sources who contacted Nikon’s advertising agency in the United States.
The news first came courtesy of a story on Nikon Rumors. “This rumor is coming from vendors: Nikon is supposedly slashing production of some of their sport optics product lines. Apparently they’re being told that all scopes and red dots are discontinued.” Sources cite the reason as losing the marketplace battle because of competition from Vortex and Leupold.
A young woman challenged Walmart policy not to sell her a long gun. Read about how this is playing out HERE
In what might come as a shock to the legacy press, it turns out there are plenty of young people who value their Second Amendment rights and are willing to fight for them. Case in point: 18-year-old Hannah Brumbles of Deer Island, Ore. Last week, the Beaver State’s Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) ruled in the young woman’s favor after she challenged a Walmart policy that denied shotgun and rifle sales to young adults ages 18 to 20.
In the wake of the February 14 shooting in Parkland, Fla., retailers Dick’s Sporting Goods (who also owns Field & Stream stores), Kroger-owned Fred Meyer, L.L. Bean, and Wal-Mart adopted policies whereby the stores would refuse to sell shotguns and rifles to young adults ages 18-20. Existing federal law prevents Federal Firearms Licensees from selling handguns to those under 21.
At the time, UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh took to his popular blog, the Volokh Conspiracy, to explain that some state and local governments have enacted anti-discrimination laws that restrict businesses from denying lawful products and services to adults on the basis of age. Therefore, in some jurisdictions, firearms retailers would be barred from carrying out a policy that denied adults ages 18 to 20 the ability to purchase long guns in their stores.
NRA-ILA and the Willamette Week elaborated on Volokh’s point, noting that Section 659A.403(1) of the Oregon Revised Statutes made clear that: “…all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is of age, as described in this section, or older.”
The Oregon code section contains a specific exemption for the sale of alcohol and marijuana, but no exemption for the sale of firearms.
After Walmart enacted its discriminatory policy, Brumbles attempted to purchase a rifle at a Walmart store in St. Helens and was denied. In response, Brumbles filed a complaint with the BOLI, alleging that the superstore chain’s policy was illegal under the state’s anti-discrimination laws.
On August 21, the BOLI investigators issued a preliminary ruling in favor of the young woman. Characterizing the decision, the Willamette Week reported that “BOLI investigators found that Walmart had violated state nondiscrimination laws and filed formal charges against the company.” According to an account from the Oregonian, “BOLI found that Brumbles did have grounds for the discrimination complaint, and has scheduled a hearing in November where it will hear Walmart’s response and formally rule on the matter.”
Brumbles is seeking $135,000 in damages against Walmart. That figure is the same amount the BOLI fined a Gresham, Ore. bakery in 2015 after the business refused to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. Walmart reportedly rejected the $135,000 proposal and countered with and offer of $150. Discussing the megastore’s counteroffer, Hannah’s father Chris Brumbles told Willamette Week, “It was a joke, it was kind of a spit in the face to her… It’s not about money but I would like Walmart to feel a little sting, like I would if I broke the law.” The BOLI has suggested a $5,000 penalty.
The parties are set to face off again at a formal hearing in November. Walmart has made clear that it intends to defend its discriminatory practice. In a statement to the Willamette Week, the retail giant explained,
In February of this year, we reviewed our policy on firearm and ammunition sales and as a result, we raised the age restriction for the purchase of those items to 21. We stand behind our decision and plan to defend it… Settlement discussions are designed to be confidential and we won’t comment on them. We are preparing for the November hearing before the administrative law judge.
Walmart’s continued intransigence places politics over sound policy. The simple truth is that long guns are rarely used to commit murder. FBI statistics show that in 2016 there were 374 murders committed with rifles. A tragedy to be certain, but one that must be placed in context. That same year 1,604 murders were committed using “knives or cutting instruments,” 472 with “blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.),” and 659 with hands, fists, or feet.
Brumbles’s fight against discriminatory corporate anti-gun policies is an encouraging example of youth pro-gun activism and further proof that the establishment media’s attempts to paint an entire generation as anti-Second Amendment are biased, lazy, and wrong.
The payback continues after this major chain chose to ignore both the 2nd Amendment and its customer’s wishes. Here’s MORE
Dick’s Sporting Goods has admitted that Chairman and CEO Edward W. Stack’s repeated attacks on law-abiding gun owners could be having a negative effect on the company’s bottom line. According to a press release reporting the company’s second quarter earnings results, “consolidated same store sales decreased 4.0%.” The document stated, “Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to… negative reactions to our policies related to the sale of firearms and accessories.”
In February, Stack announced that Dick’s would stop selling certain configurations of semiautomatic rifles in its Field & Stream stores and stop selling standard capacity magazines entirely. The CEO also declared that Dick’s and Field & Stream stores would no longer sell shotguns and rifles to young adults ages 18 to 20. In May, Dick’s announced that it would destroy the stock of semiautomatic rifles it had chosen not to sell, rather than return the firearms to the manufacturers.
Stack’s high-profile decision to target long guns revealed his penchant for virtue-signaling, but also his ignorance on policy. Shotguns and rifles are rarely used in violent crime. A 2013 Department of Justice survey of research on semiautomatic bans determined that “a complete elimination of assault weapons would not have a large impact on gun homicides.” In a survey of gun research published earlier this year, the Rand Corporation found no conclusive evidence a ban on commonly-owned semiautomatic firearms would impact violent crime. Moreover, in some jurisdictions it is illegal for retailers to discriminate against young adults on the basis of age.
Not content to lead by example, Stack also took to the pages of USA Today to demand that federal lawmakers enact a raft of gun control measures that the American people have repeatedly rejected. Stack called for a federal ban on commonly-owned semiautomatic firearms and their magazines, prohibiting young adults from purchasing shotguns and rifles, and the criminalization of private firearm transfers. In order to impose Stack’s vision on all Americans, Dick’s hired three gun control lobbyists.
In response to Dick’s gun control efforts, in May the Board of Governors for the National Shooting Sports Foundation — the firearm industry trade group — voted to expel the company “for conduct detrimental to the best interests of the Foundation.” This was followed by firearms manufacturers Springfield Armory and O.F. Mossberg & Sons, and marketer MKS Supply announcing that they were cutting ties with the retailer.
Perhaps fearing that Dick’s’ poor sales figures might discourage other corporations from engaging in anti-gun activism at shareholders’ expense, CNN went out of their way to erect an alternative explanation. According to “the most trusted name in news,” investors should ignore Dick’s own admissions regarding the negative consequences of their gun control positions and blame stiff competition from online retailers and the store’s delicate relationship with one of its apparel brands for the inadequate performance.
Spin as CNN might, Stack predicted the negative consequences the anti-gun actions would have for his company. In a post-earnings call in March, Stack admitted, “The announcement we made two weeks ago regarding our firearms policy is not going to be positive from a traffic standpoint and a sales standpoint.”
With NSSF estimating the firearms industry’s economic impact at $51 billion, Stack’s March prediction was common sense. It’s unfortunate that Stack is unable to employ that same judgment to predict the obvious outcome of Dick’s ineffective gun control policies.
The reloading blog where you can find articles, tips, industry news, gear reviews, and more!