Anti-Second Amendment Dick’s Sporting Goods Faces a Serious Lawsuit


Dick’s Sporting Goods broke off ties to the National Rifle Association earlier this year after receiving pressure from radical leftist groups. The outfit doubled down in May and said they hired three lobbyists to ram their anti-Second Amendment mantra down the throats of lawmakers.

Dick’s won’t sell to anyone under 21. They said they will stop selling modern sporting rifles and will destroy their inventory. They won’t even sell the inventory back to the manufacturers, the Federalist reported.

What Dick’s did to the manufacturers was very wrong and it looks like they will have to face a judge over it. Maybe there is justice after all.

An ammo manufacturer is suing Dick’s Sporting Goods for breach of contract. 

Citing breach of contract and fraud, Nevada-based Battle Born Munitions filed suit in federal court against Dick’s Sporting Goods this week.

At the root of the filing is what BBM says was the failure by Dick’s to hold up their end of a contract for the ammo distributor to supply the retailer with Field & Stream-branded ammo for resale in their stores. The delay by the big box sporting goods outlet, argues the filing, resulted in BBM losing out on a multi-million dollar contract to supply helicopters to an overseas U.S. ally.

The 11-page lawsuit filed Tuesday in a Pennsylvania federal court details that the two companies entered into an agreement in January 2016 to supply ammo packaged with Dick’s trademarked Field & Stream packaging. Acting on the contract, BBM paid two ammo manufacturers — Bosnian-based Igman and Hungarian-based RUAG — a total of $4.5 million for the product and made the munitions available to Dick’s by November of the same year, a delivery timeline stipulated by the contract. However, BBM says Dick’s then left them holding the bag for almost a year, refusing to pay them or take delivery of the ammo.

The house-branded ammo, which could not be repacked and sold to another retailer due to the Field & Stream headstamp on the cartridges, was eventually accepted by Dick’s but the intervening storage, at BBM’s expense, cost the ammo distributor $200,000. Further, since BBM’s cash was tied up in the stalled deal, they could not fill a contract with Lebanon for a batch of Bell helicopters, losing out on an additional $5 million, which they are seeking to recoup from Dick’s.

The filing says the actions by Dick’s went beyond just holding up the ammo delivery.

They are also alleging market manipulation.

It sounds like they will be liable and they should be.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments