We report a study examining developmental changes in perceptions of disagreements among speakers who use generics to describe contextually-restricted or unrestricted regularities. Sixty-five adults and 222 5-12-year-olds reacted to generic claims from speakers who attributed ostensibly contradictory attributes to a biological kind (“Xs are striped”; “Xs are spotted”). Crucially, we manipulated the scope of each speaker’s claim, described as restricted to a specific context, or unrestricted. Participants assessed faultless disagreement (whether the speakers could “both be right”). Adults were sensitive to contextual restriction: they allowed for faultless disagreement when contextual restrictions mis-aligned, and denied it when both speakers restricted to one context. Young children demonstrated striking partial competence in faultless disagreement judgments much earlier than prior developmental literature suggested. This is the first study to document faultless disagreement between differentially-restricted generics, both in adults and in children. We discuss the developmental trajectory, and implications for social functioning and learning.