Richardc wrote:C-dub wrote:What about when a college admits someone with a lower high school GPA because they are told there is not enough diversity in their school? Or when a particular department in your company is told by HR that there is not enough women in their department and won't forward the applications of men that are more qualified?
We just heard accusations last week that Janet Napolitano has promoted women over more qualified men. There is even accusations that certain police officers were removed from a certain detail in Chicago because of the color of their skin.
Discrimination either way is wrong. I wouldn't have sued the guy, but were do you draw the line? There is a whole lot of legalized discrimination and I usually see and hear more people complaining about stuff like that. What's different about it this time?
As I do understand and agree wholly with your point of view, this is a case of someone being able to run there business how they think is best, not if it is right or wrong. The range is doing us all a favor by bringing in a demographic that does not shoot as much as we "shooters" do. If there were a range local to me I would go stand on the street corner flipping a sign for them. This guy is just raising a stink to raise a stink, and maybe even get a few bucks doing it. If he does get what he wants the range will likely be shut down and now every one looses. The bar analogy is well put, guys will show up and pay more if they know there is the possibility of a good guy/girl ratio, weather they admit it or not, and a gun range is no different. Anyone who thinks what this range is doing is wrong, then i would suggest you take a business marketing class. I run women only CHL class to drive better business and to educate women better by making them feel more comfortable. This is all the people at the range are doing.
Thanks for saving me some typing.