RE: Dicks had a meltdown, for good reason.
October 9, 2019 at 12:22 pm
(This post was last modified: October 9, 2019 at 12:25 pm by Anomalocaris.)
(October 9, 2019 at 8:58 am)Brian37 Wrote: Kudos to Dicks Sporting Goods for doing the right thing despite losing money. Instead of sending spray weapons back to the makers, they sold them to scrap metal companies to be destroyed rather than risk them ending up on the streets.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/08/busin...ifles.html
And while they took a short term hit, they are not hurting now, and they've gotten lots of support for doing the right thing.
You understand sending them back to the makers will have largely the same effect as selling them to scrap metal, right?
When they sell them to scrap dealer, the makers of the guns still realizes the profit, and it would not affect their future gun production.
If they go back to the maker, the makers will have to credit Dicks for their value, which will leave a hole in their balance sheet, which they will have to fill by putting these guns on the market again where they will take the place of the maker's own future production?
(October 9, 2019 at 12:20 pm)Brian37 Wrote:(October 9, 2019 at 12:12 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: They didn't destroy any 'spray weapons'.
Boru
Yes they did. The products they sold to scrap metal companies were specifically designed for high and rapid output with a hair trigger pull on a trigger.
Typically spray means automatic.
If rapid repeat of trigger pull constitute "spray" than everything that does not require manual operation of the bolt would be a spray weapon.
Hair trigger has nothing to do with rate of fire. It has to do with accuracy of the gun and how much the act of pulling the trigger upsets the aim. Mass shooting doesn't involve precision aiming.