# Is it legal for stores to raise the age for buying guns? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 1, 2018, 10:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808 "2018-03-01T10:01:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2018, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808/61 "2018-09-02T22:17:51Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So far as I can determine, Walmart is not claiming that their exercise of religion is the reason they don’t want to sell firearms to 18, 19, or 20 year old customers. This is a factor that makes their grounds different from bakeries seeking to avoid designing cakes for same-sex weddings. Is age discrimination of people under 40 actually illegal? ---
**Author:** ![Alley\_Dweller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alley_dweller/32/430_2.png) [@Alley\_Dweller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alley_Dweller)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2018, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808/62 "2018-09-02T22:30:04Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Is age discrimination of people under 40 actually illegal? Federal employment law does not prohibit age discrimination of people under 40 (unless it is a pretense for some other prohibited form of discrimination). But there are other laws. According to the article, the BOLI ruled that lowering the purchase age violated the Oregon state constitution. Clearly this ruling would have no effect in any other state. I don’t know what the Oregon constitution specifically says about firearms sales to people under 21. Addendum: [This article](https://www.wweek.com/news/business/2018/08/21/oregon-labor-commissioner-says-walmart-broke-law-by-refusing-gun-sale-to-teen/) says the restrictions violate Oregon non-discrimination laws, not the constitution ---
**Author:** ![Alley\_Dweller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alley_dweller/32/430_2.png) [@Alley\_Dweller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alley_Dweller)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2018, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808/63 "2018-09-02T22:42:45Z")
I found the Oregon law that was allegedly violated. [ORS 659A.403](https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/659A.403) It does specifically prohibit discrimination by age in providing public accommodation as long as the person is of legal age. It is not limited to people over 40. Again, this law applies only in Oregon. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2018, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808/64 "2018-09-02T22:49:50Z")
> [@Alley\_Dweller](#): > > I found the Oregon law that was allegedly violated. [ORS 659A.403](https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/659A.403) > > It does specifically prohibit discrimination by age in providing public accommodation as long as the person is of legal age. It is not limited to people over 40. > > Again, this law applies only in Oregon. So, it would only take an act of Oregon legislature to change the law, no hoops in challenging federal law or worse, amendments. They could either allow shops to raise the age, or raise the age themselves and enforce that. Just amend the code with “2(a) The refusal of sale of firearms to individuals under 21”. Or would that end up running afoul of 2A? As a side note, I guess that means that people under 25 in Oregon can rent cars, and also that an 18 year old would have the same insurance premium as a 25 year old (assuming same other stats). ---
**Author:** ![Alley\_Dweller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alley_dweller/32/430_2.png) [@Alley\_Dweller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alley_Dweller)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2018, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808/65 "2018-09-02T23:07:21Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > As a side note, I guess that means that people under 25 in Oregon can rent cars, and also that an 18 year old would have the same insurance premium as a 25 year old (assuming same other stats). That’s a very good question. Note the law applies only to a “place of public accommodation.” Is an insurance policy a place of public accommodation under Oregon law? [Here is the statutory definition.](https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/659A.400) I don’t personally find it very helpful. ---
**Author:** ![sbunny8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@sbunny8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sbunny8)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2018, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808/66 "2018-09-03T00:55:48Z")
Huh. I wouldn’t have thought that purchasing ammunition counted as “accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges”. Seems like, if they meant to include purchases, they would have said so. Although, they specifically mentioned alcohol, so I guess purchasing alcohol fits into “accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges” somewhere. But I’m damned if I know where. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2018, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808/67 "2018-09-03T05:19:10Z")
> [@sbunny8](#): > > Huh. I wouldn’t have thought that purchasing ammunition counted as “accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges”. IMO “accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges whether **in the nature of goods** , services, lodgings, amusements, transportation or otherwise.” makes it pretty clear that it applies to buying stuff. What would be the point of applying it to sellers of goods if it didn’t apply to the actual sale? ---
**Author:** ![sbunny8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@sbunny8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sbunny8)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2018, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808/68 "2018-09-03T13:44:11Z")
Ah. I only read ORS 659A.403 and didn’t realize that ORS 659A.400 said something different. Ignorance fought. But I still wonder whether purchasing a physical object is “accommodation” or “advantage” or “facility” or “privilege”. I can’t think of any instance where I’ve ever heard any of those English words applied to buying or selling a physical object. I guess it’s Lawyerspeak. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2018, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808/69 "2018-09-03T15:29:15Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > So, it would only take an act of Oregon legislature to change the law, no hoops in challenging federal law or worse, amendments. They could either allow shops to raise the age, or raise the age themselves and enforce that. > > Just amend the code with “2(a) The refusal of sale of firearms to individuals under 21”. Or would that end up running afoul of 2A? It would seem that way, that BOLI is interpreting that the nondiscrimination provision applies to retailers generally _unless the particular good or service is explicitly excepted_ by the statute. Why firearms weren’t in the first place when evidently at times in the past alcohol and cannabis were just tells you how perceived public priorities have evolved. In any case we know that 2nd-A would be raised as the hue and cry if the legislature were to act thus, or if this ruling went for Walmart. > [@](#): > > As a side note, I guess that means that people under 25 in Oregon can rent cars, and also that an 18 year old would have the same insurance premium as a 25 year old (assuming same other stats). We’d have to then see if there is a challenge to the insurance regulations on actuarially-based differential treatmment on the basis of the nondiscrimination/accommodation law. It would have to be a different case and probably trigger legislation incorporating it explicitly everywhere it may apply. (The reason rental companies generally do not rent to under-25s is that \*their \*insurers would sock it to them if they did, and in most states the rental company may \*not \*compel a renter to buy extra insurance at check-in.) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2018, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808/70 "2018-09-03T15:48:24Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > So, it would only take an act of Oregon legislature to change the law, no hoops in challenging federal law or worse, amendments. They could either allow shops to raise the age, or raise the age themselves and enforce that. > > Just amend the code with “2(a) The refusal of sale of firearms to individuals under 21”. Or would that end up running afoul of 2A? That Oregon legislative change would moot the grounds for this finding, yes. There’s no real case law directly on point, but my best guess is that such a change would not be found to be violative of the Second Amendment. > [@](#): > > As a side note, I guess that means that people under 25 in Oregon can rent cars, and also that an 18 year old would have the same insurance premium as a 25 year old (assuming same other stats). Yes, and no. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2018, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808/71 "2018-09-04T18:23:34Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > You’re mixing terms here in a way that makes what you are saying difficult to understand. There is no “discrimination in insurance” as you state. Drivers are rated and based on the rating belong to various risk pools. People with the same characteristic in the same risk pool can’t be priced differently because that would be discrimination. Putting people in different risk pools based on approved criteria is not discrimination in the way that term is typically used. > > Sound underwriting or actuarial principles do have to do with the individual driver, to the extent they are members of the established risk pools. I disagree. Sound underwriting or actuarial principles have to do with characteristics of the individual driver. Age is one such characteristic. Another is history of accidents or infractions. Another is (often) gender. All of those characteristics are things by which the insurance company discriminates between drivers. An important thing here is that as public policy, states decide which characteristics are ok for insurance companies to use to discriminate. For example, an insurance company might find that, actuarially, it’s reasonable to charge black people a different rate, but the state says no. You can’t use race in your actuarial risk pools. Because racial discrimination is a Big Bad Idea for society. If the state lets insurance company use “age” in risk pool calculation, that clearly _is_ age discrimination. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2018, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808/72 "2018-09-05T18:27:11Z")
I think **Bone** ’s point is that there is discrimination = a difference in criteria giving a different result, and discrimination = violating people’s equal rights. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-legal-for-stores-to-raise-the-age-for-buying-guns/809808.md?page=3)