Some of you are real pieces of work.  Unless they ran a different ad downstate than they did upstate... which is possible, but from 10 years of retail managment experience is HIGHLY unlikely... the ad was not deceptive.  I picked it up after reading here that it was buy one get one free, read it and said... what are they talking about?  It states clearly buy one, get one at 50% off... limit 6.  I think the problem is many flks came here and read the same thing I did - which was somebody else's misreading of the ad - and got all pissy when it wasn't the deal you thought it was.  Furthermore, some folks convinved the check out staff that the deal was buy one get one free... when they knew it wasn't as it was hashed out here... and scored far more than six units (we're talking CASES) at ridiculously low prices.  Yes, the store bears some responsibility... but if you KNEW that was not the offer but took advantage of it anyway... well, some folks might consider that to be dishonest at the least and perhaps theft at the worst.

As for EDP.  You really have some issues pal, your posts are starting to concern me greatly.  They are overly violent and belligerent.  A lot of that is likely internet tough guy talk, but its going to get you in trouble some day.  If somebody acted like you did in my old retail establishment, security would have called the police and you would have been told not to step foot on the property again or risk being arrested for trespassing.  Along with that would hav gone a restraining order and likely today loss of your firearms if a judge had a burr up his ass.  So if you really did start screaming mother fucker and shove it up your ass in a store full of customers, I would advise a different tact in the future.

As for suing for false or deceptive advertising.  Good luck, with that.  First, they have the money to fight you indefinitely.  Second, every retail ad I've EVER seen has a disclaimer for misprints.  They would simply argue the intended deal was buy one get one at 50% off and the way it was laid out might have led to some confusion, but no deception was intended.  Furthermore, you think Elliot and his consumer protection board will give two shits over cheap ammo?  LOL

Very true, not all disclaimers work... my favorites are the ones at staffed coat checks claiming they are not responsible for stolen items under their control and ski facilities disclaiming any injury.

The fact that there was seperation and different type styles works very much against you if you are saying that the buy one get one free item was in one style and the buy one get one at 50% off was another style.  That is an honest effort on their part to draw a distinction.  Usually when retailers get in trouble for deceptive advertising is when they say offer a Sony 42 LCD for $999 and when you get there it is some off brand for $999... in other words bait and switch, or if they advertise items they never have to get you into the store to see you something else.

I'll conceed NJ laws are not the same as NY laws, so I can't say what will and will not fly there.  If the ads are identical, the one you had and the one I had, I can tell you with full confidence your claim would get nowhere in NY.  If you can get something out of it in NJ... more power to you.

This kind of action will only push Dick's and others not to deal in ammo.  The profit made is pretty neglibible compared to the amount of regulation and oversight it brings from the various layers of government, add to the hassle and they may well just likely stop.  Can you remember when K-mart had a decent selection of guns and ammo?  What do they have now?

Can you post a copy of this "deceptive" ad please?

I tried to zoom in and read all the text, but I can't at that photo resolution.

Without all the text I can't say one way or the other.  From what I recall, that is a different ad than ran in upstate, NY.