Store Fined $6 Million For Selling Gun Used To Shoot Cop

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Xtrozero

I understand that.

You understand that.

But there are a lot of people who, even if they see it, frankly don't care because they think somehow the world will magically become a better place.

so true

originally posted by: Xtrozero
But did the dealer see it, did the dealer know anything other than the guy was helping the buyer to pick out a gun. If the two walked up to the dealer and said I'm buying a gun for my friend here who can not buy a gun and they have proof of this then the store is fully to blame too. If they do not have that then as I said it is pure assumptions based on nothing but emotions...

He cannot buy a firearm for the person even if the other party were legally able to purchase a firearm. As I said, I am not overly familiar with the case. Are they claiming they have proof that the dealer was aware the third party could not legally purchase a firearm?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

What do you do though?

There is a case here in Missouri where the mother called the dealer and provided her daughter's name a SSN# and begged them not to sell her daughter a gun claiming her daughter had mental issues. The dealer sold the daughter a gun anyhow because she passed all the checks. Daughter takes gun and kills her father with it.

Now mother is suing dealer.

What are they supposed to do? And how different is this case?

originally posted by: ketsuko
What do you do though?

There is a case here in Missouri where the mother called the dealer and provided her daughter's name a SSN# and begged them not to sell her daughter a gun claiming her daughter had mental issues. The dealer sold the daughter a gun anyhow because she passed all the checks. Daughter takes gun and kills her father with it.

Now mother is suing dealer.

What are they supposed to do? And how different is this case?

I think in that case a good defense attorney can argue that it is hearsay and that the conversation is a he said/she said situation.

I remember hearing about this case a few months ago and my opinion remains the same. I'm strictly against holding manufacturers and dealers liable for the illegal acts of the end user when the dealer/manufacturer has done their legally required due diligence regarding the process of the sale. Based on this article, and prior ones, I don't think this was the case in this particular instance and that there was likely sufficient evidence to suggest that this was actually a straw purchase and that the store decided to make the sale anyway.

Given that, I have no issue with this ruling. This is the type of thing that makes gun owners and gun dealers look bad and it shouldn't be tolerated by those of us who support 2A.

originally posted by: pcgamer11
dailycaller.com...


I think honestly this is crap. How is the Dealer supposed to know? There are many times, when a new gun owner will go into a store with an experienced one, to help coach him on his first purchase. That does not mean it is a straw purchase. I fail to see the evidence that this gun dealer was responsible. Your thoughts?


Pcg

From your source:

Prosecutors pointed out that in the last decade, the store has been among the worst in the nation for selling guns that would later be used in crimes, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

In this case, apparently not crap.

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: Klassified

Wasn't this story posted some time ago..not the judgment but the details..they screwed up the paperwork as well, a child could of figured it a straw man. In all of these threads the usual pathetic souls are crying "we don't need new laws..enforce what we have!!!..so WTF what should be done FFS. This store has a history.

Im pretty certain this story was posted and a pretty lengthy thread ensued.

Some things left out in this article: Badger Guns, the company in questions, has been linked to hundreds of firearms used in violent crime. I believe, if memory serves, that the guy that made the purchase made numerous mistakes on the paperwork, including things like his address, and that the store employee coached him through finally getting it filled out properly.

Perhaps I'm thinking of another incident in which Badger was held culpable for a straw man purchase that resulted in cops being shot, though. If that's the case, then it seems pretty apparent that Badger makes a habit out of straw man purchases. No sympathy from me.

I thought this was wrong when I heard about it at first, but when the details came out I thought of it this way. 18 and 21 year old walk in liquor store, 18 year old says I want that bottle, 21 year old buys it. They will both get carded, or they will not be sold the alcohol. If it is that way for alcohol it better be that way for guns.

This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. That's like putting someone in jail for a crime that wasn't illegal at the time it was committed.

Sounds like Aviation here in the US, small airplane crashes due to pilot error, family of pilot sues Aircraft manufacture. Over and over, GA (general aviation) becomes cost prohibitive for the general populace. Sounds like the cows are coming home for gun ownership.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

They (LEOs) have pretty much given themselves impunity, so your thought is certainly possible.

originally posted by: 38181
Sounds like Aviation here in the US, small airplane crashes due to pilot error, family of pilot sues Aircraft manufacture. Over and over, GA (general aviation) becomes cost prohibitive for the general populace. Sounds like the cows are coming home for gun ownership.

Not really. Negligence is negligence. Straw man purchases are already illegal. This won't impact people that don't break the law to obtain guns.

Something has to be done to stop all the straw buying in this crazy country.

There should be laws in place that make people who buy guns prove they still own them every month.