Bad News For The NRA: A Gun Store Just Lost A Lawsuit For Selling A Gun
Badger Guns in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, which is one of the largest sellers of crime-linked guns, was found liable on Tuesday and ordered to pay nearly $6 million in damages to two Milwaukee police officers who were injured when a man shot them with a so-called “straw purchase” gun.
The gun store was accused of encouraging an illegal straw purchase of the gun used in the crime. A straw purchase is when a gun is purchased in someone else’s name for another person who legally cannot own a gun.
Jurors in Milwaukee County found for the cops who filed the lawsuit, Officer Bryan Norberg and now-retired Officer Graham Kunisch, both of whom were shot in the face in the line of duty in 2009….READ MORE at LiberalAmerica
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2015 Liberaland
By: Andrew Bradford
Andrew Bradford is an author, academic, and political activist who lives in Atlanta. He is a Senior Writer for Liberal America and also has his own blog at deepleftfield.info
34 responses to Bad News For The NRA: A Gun Store Just Lost A Lawsuit For Selling A Gun
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
tracey marie October 14th, 2015 at 19:24
I wonder how they would have decided if it was a black guy shot by a ammosexual.
whatthe46 October 14th, 2015 at 19:26
well, we know the answer to that.
allison1050 October 14th, 2015 at 19:40
You know the guy wouldn’t have even been able to find an attorney that would take it on.
tracey marie October 14th, 2015 at 19:53
Sad sad and even more sad.
The Original Just Me October 14th, 2015 at 22:32
Accident
allison1050 October 14th, 2015 at 19:39
Aww shucks, maybe the NRA will help a fellow out by paying his legal bills.
Hirightnow October 14th, 2015 at 20:33
https://teamtcast.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/ricky-gervais-hysterical-laughter.gif?w=474&h=266
allison1050 October 14th, 2015 at 20:41
chuckles!
The Original Just Me October 14th, 2015 at 22:32
Chuckles Hell, I’m joining the Dude in the video.
The Original Just Me October 14th, 2015 at 22:31
Okay, I see your humor there and I like it.
Paul Kersey October 14th, 2015 at 19:45
Why is this bad news for the NRA?
arc99 October 14th, 2015 at 20:31
Protecting gun dealers from liability is a pet project of the NRA and has been for over a decade.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/21/politics/congress-passes-new-legal-shield-for-gun-industry.html?_r=1
WASHINGTON, Oct. 20 – The Republican-controlled Congress delivered a long-sought victory to the gun industry on Thursday when the House voted to shield firearms manufacturers and dealers from liability lawsuits. The bill now goes to President Bush, who has promised to sign it.
The gun liability bill has for years been the No. 1 legislative priority of the National Rifle Association, which has lobbied lawmakers intensely for it.
Robert Smithson October 14th, 2015 at 20:56
There’s a difference in fighting allowing frivolous lawsuits like the NRA does which are designed to bankrupt the gun companies, to this lawsuit which sought to hold responsible this gun store for selling guns in the egregious ways in which they were doing. The store owners had a legal trial and it seems that they were not able to prove that they were following the law as they should have, so it seems they were indeed guilty as charged.
arc99 October 14th, 2015 at 21:35
Meanwhile, the NRA is no slouch at using frivolous lawsuits to bankrupt the opposition. The NRA does not fight frivolous lawsuits. It files them.
Out of town lobbyists can now come to Pennsylvania and dictate what laws will or will not be passed, using the threat of very costly litigation. This gun owner states unequivocally that the world will be a much better place when there is no more NRA.
http://articles.philly.com/2014-10-23/news/55323526_1_firearms-laws-local-gun-laws-gun-ordinances
HARRISBURG – The Pennsylvania House’s passage Monday of a controversial bill granting legal standing to the National Rifle Association to sue over local gun laws has put dozens of municipalities on notice.
The implicit threat of the legislation, which Gov. Corbett has indicated he will sign, is: Repeal your gun ordinances or risk costly lawsuits.
Robert Smithson October 15th, 2015 at 07:59
Come on, you know all those local ordinances have been passed in defiance of the state laws on firearms issues. State law trumps city law and the NRA was rightfully given standing because they represent many Pa gun owners. I know you don’t like it when the peoples voice is heard through their elected representatives, but that is the system of government we have.
Obewon October 15th, 2015 at 20:21
“Well regulated”-2nd A requires Federal background checks for every gun sold, annual background checks, etc per SCOTUS Heller. Those Barred from guns and ammo sales, or possession are: Felons, Dishonorably discharged veterans, Mentally adjudicated mental incompetents, those under retraining orders (e.g. Disarmed Felon Perry’16~ ), Foreigners & DHS/FBI watchlisted suspects, terrorists
Supremacy Clause
Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution is commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause. It establishes that the federal constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/supremacy_clause
Paul Kersey October 17th, 2015 at 14:20
“The “Well regulated”-2nd Amendment requires Federal background checks
for every gun sold, annual background checks, etc per SCOTUS Heller.”
Wrong. “well regulated’ in the 2nd Amendment speaks to the ability for the militia to function as a body by way of proper training and organization…not to the arms they’re allowed to possess.
In Heller, Scalia merely said that the 2nd Amendment didn’t guarantee the possession of all arms but that society had a place in enacting limitations.
The mention of who was barred from owning and possessing firearms is merely the result of Due Process which squares with the Constitution as a whole.
burqa October 17th, 2015 at 16:04
The reason citizen-soldiers were given the right to own the weapons they would employ in militia service was a cost-cutting measure. We were in debt coming out of the Revolution and our currency was worthless. Rather than build and maintain armories, the Founders figured it would not only be cheaper, but that individuals would keep better care of their weapons than a government employee.
It was quite a controversy because back then every able-bodied man of age was expected to not only join the militia, but to participate in drills. Since nearly everyone was poor and many could not afford firearms, this was seen as the government putting an undue financial burden on citizens.
We should not chop up the Second Amendment to fit our political positions, but take the whole thing together as it is written. The Second Amendment tells us that because we have need of a militia for national defense, citizens will keep the weapons they would use when the militia was called out.
After some rather dismal performances by the militia, the government went to a larger professional military. Unfortunately, they did not keep the Constitution up to date with this change and trouble ensued.
The Second Amendment is clear in stating that because we need citizens keep the guns they will use in the militia during wartime.
When we abolished the reliance on the militia for self defense, we abolished the reason for citizens to own firearms.
Paul Kersey November 7th, 2015 at 10:00
The 2nd Amendment does NOT make the distinction in the “people” for whom the right is affirmed. No amendment comes with an expiration date.
Paul Kersey October 17th, 2015 at 14:16
What liability might that be?
Why should the gun manufacturers be liable for what the owners of the weapons do?
Do we hold automobile manufacturers liable when people misuses their cars?
No.
Why not?
It’s hypocritical to hold gun makers liable unless it’s a proven flaw in the manufacture of the firearm.
burqa October 17th, 2015 at 15:42
Paul Kersey: “What liability might that be?Why should the gun manufacturers be liable for what the owners of the weapons do?
Do we hold automobile manufacturers liable when people misuses their cars?
No.
Why not?”
Because we hold the car owners and drivers responsible. We require them to pass a test to drive and periodically be retested.
We also require them to carry insurance.
They pay taxes on the vehicle and its fuel.
I think you’ve found a solution, Mr. Kersey!
Paul Kersey November 7th, 2015 at 10:01
Confusing the exercise of a right with the requirements for a privilege make for a shallow position.
Obewon October 14th, 2015 at 20:28
Videotape proved the 15 year old gun nut was obviously the underage buyer. The gunseller knew the 15 year old kid was hustling the older straw purchaser to illegally buy his weapon. Badger Guns in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, which is one of the largest sellers of crime-linked guns, was found liable for $6 Million! Ka-Ching~!
We need to set up a similar Sting targeting the 2% of Crooked FFL’s e.g. James O’Keefe!
whatthe46 October 14th, 2015 at 20:47
exactly. and close them down with a fat ass fine, making it hard to open another. especially under their own name.
The Original Just Me October 14th, 2015 at 22:29
Problem is that they should do Hard Time also.
Paul Kersey October 17th, 2015 at 14:25
“the 15 year old gun nut”
‘Gun nut’ – An addle-minded cliche uttered by intellectually bankrupt types when they are losing the debate. Other feckless terms that litter their lexicon include; “racist”, “homophobe”, “mean-spirited”, “extremist”, “hate”…”hater”…”hating on”, “misogynist”, etc.
They figure that by using this term, it deflects attention away from their own vapid posturing. They believe that these terms are a more intelligent way of saying, “Well, your mom wears combat boots!”, though it doesn’t make them sound any less childish.
Hirightnow October 14th, 2015 at 20:31
Countdown to claims of “See?!?! The system WORKS!”
in 3…2…
The Original Just Me October 14th, 2015 at 22:28
Big BANG ! Yippeee !
FatRat October 14th, 2015 at 21:11
Took long enough. No more straw purchases from strawmen. Sue em all into the ground.
http://home.earthlink.net/~jinxo/scarecrowgun1.jpg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSmh0wvYJEY
The Original Just Me October 14th, 2015 at 22:27
Greedy Bastards just can’t stand to make an honest living. They have to try and grab every nickel, dime, and penny they can legal or not. They got almost what they deserved. They should have permanently lost their license to sell any kind of firearm also.
William October 15th, 2015 at 01:10
http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/hahaha_statler_and_waldorf_muppets.gif
Kevin October 15th, 2015 at 01:51
In the “justice” system it’s as much a matter of having the right circumstances within a case as it is to have the facts in your favor. I can’t help but wonder if this case would have been won, or even brought, had the unfortunate victims not been law enforcement officers.
Melissa Adam October 15th, 2015 at 05:51
Almost a year ago when I quit my old job , I was very depressed in that situation than I get introduced to following job opportunity online which saved me … I feel blessed for that …. They offer online home based work. Last paycheck after being on this job for them for three months was 7,000 dollars ….
Ø Cool fact about the job is that the only requirement for being able to start is basic keyboard operating and internet facility ….
Ø To know more about it copy the site from name or open my acc0unt …
xx
CHOCOL8MILK October 15th, 2015 at 14:15
I hope the victims (or the family of the victims) who were affected by this gun stores “straw purchase” mentality sue the pants off of this gun store, Badger Guns, in a joint lawsuit. The evidence of their negligence and complete disregard of safety and the law is overwhelming.
According to Salon, “Badger Guns, then known as Badger Outdoors, was once the top seller of guns later used in crimes in the whole country — selling 537 guns that were recovered from crime scenes in 2005 alone, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.”
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/14/the_nra_is_finally_put_on_notice_gun_shop_held_liable_for_illegal_gun_sale/