PDA

View Full Version : Brady Campaign Sues Gun Store


jdberger
10-28-2010, 9:10 AM
Updated with the Complaint (http://ht.ly/37C1m)
From the Brady Campaign

On Behalf of Wounded Police Officers, Brady Center Files Lawsuit Against Top Seller of Crime Guns

Oct 28, 2010


Washington, D.C. - The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence filed a lawsuit today in the Circuit Court of Milwaukee County against Badger Guns, a top seller of crime guns in the nation, on behalf of injured Milwaukee police officers Alejandro Arce and Jose Lopez III. The complaint alleges that Badger Guns negligently and unlawfully sold the gun used against the officers to a drug-using gang member days before the November 6, 2007 shooting.

“Officers Arce and Lopez put their lives on the line to protect the people of Milwaukee. We are honored to represent them in this matter” said Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Center. “We need to send a powerful message to gun dealers like Badger Guns that they will be held accountable when they knowingly funnel guns into the criminal market.”

According to the complaint filed today, Officers Arce and Lopez were shot with a Taurus 9mm pistol that was purchased by 24-year-old gang member Jose Fernandez eight days before the shooting. The complaint alleges that less than two weeks before purchasing the Taurus, Badger Guns negligently and illegally sold Fernandez a Masterpiece Arms 9 mm assault weapon, two high-capacity thirty round ammunition clips, and a flash suppressor.

Fernandez had a criminal history and was prohibited from buying guns because he was an unlawful user of illegal drugs, including heroin and marijuana. On the night of the officer’s shooting, Fernandez was in possession of marijuana, cocaine mixed with crushed pills, valium and oxycodone, along with drug trafficking paraphernalia.

Operating under the names Badger Guns, Badger Outdoors, and Badger Guns & Ammo, in previous years Badger has ranked as the number one crime gun dealer in America, selling more guns traced to crime in a year than any other dealer. Today’s filing alleges that Badger has sold an average of more than one crime gun every day of the year - an average of more than 10 a week; has sold firearms in violation of state and federal law and engaged in unlawful straw sales; has accounted for two-thirds of all the crime guns recovered in Milwaukee; and that in recent years, 90 percent of straw buyers prosecuted in Milwaukee purchased their guns at Badger. All told, Badger has sold more than 4,000 crime guns.

Patrick Dunphy of the Brookfield, Wisconsin law firm of Cannon & Dunphy is serving as co-counsel with the Brady Center in the case.


###

As the nation's largest, non-partisan, grassroots organization leading the fight to prevent gun violence, the Brady Campaign, with its dedicated network of Million Mom March Chapters, works to enact and enforce sensible gun laws, regulations and public policies. The Brady Campaign is devoted to creating an America free from gun violence, where all Americans are safe at home, at school, at work, and in our communities.

For continuing insight and comment on the gun issue, read Paul Helmke's blog at www.bradycampaign.org/blog/. Visit the Brady Campaign website at www.bradycampaign.org.



I wonder how they're gonna get past the PLCAA?

five.five-six
10-28-2010, 9:12 AM
guns kill people

Recession
10-28-2010, 9:18 AM
Triggers pull themselves

HowardW56
10-28-2010, 9:20 AM
I hope they spend a lot of money, and lose...

guns4life
10-28-2010, 9:21 AM
Crime guns, look out, they're gonna git ya!

GP3
10-28-2010, 9:22 AM
Crime guns? Hmm.

Dead*Reckoned
10-28-2010, 9:25 AM
What ever happened to holding criminals responsible for their own actions?

loather
10-28-2010, 9:26 AM
From the Brady Campaign

[..snip..] (hogwash)

I wonder how they're gonna get past the PLCAA?

They probably won't, but that won't stop them from taking it all the way to the supreme court (only to get denied again). Costing Badger a bunch of money through legal fees is a possible attempt to put them out of business. Another case is also the Brady Center's attempt at again being relevant; they're grasping at straws and hoping one has pay dirt at the end. They're floundering, if you will.

Also note that the previous PLCAA-protected cases were against manufacturers, not retailers. This may have different consequences, but I doubt it. However, if what their (mostly hogwash) press release says is true, though, about the gang member knowingly being a prohibited person, then things don't look good for Badger. If the background check came up clean, though, then the failing is that of the agencies responsible for that background check, not the retailer.

yellowfin
10-28-2010, 9:28 AM
Naturally they get all their lawyers for free via LCAV. Anyone want to shut them down yet?

Dr Rockso
10-28-2010, 9:28 AM
What an uninformative press release...are they alleging that Badger didn't perform a NICS check on the buyer? Probably not if the BATFE isn't involved. So were they just supposed to divine, via their gun store clerk omnipotence, that the guy was a dirtbag and druggie? I guess they could have refused to sell him a gun based solely on the fact that he was a young latino...is that what the Bradys are advocating now? Maybe they're in cahoots with the ACLU. Sell a gun to a minority and get sued by Brady, since you should have known he was a bad guy. Don't sell to him and get sued by the ACLU.

That said, I do think that we should be applying scrutiny towards dirty FFLs suspected of selling to the bad guys...I just don't trust the Bradys to make that determination.

Flopper
10-28-2010, 9:31 AM
. . . the nation's largest, non-partisan, grassroots organization leading the fight to prevent gun violence. . .

:rofl:

Recession
10-28-2010, 9:38 AM
The bashing shouldn't be limited to just the Brady Campaign. What about the cops that whined to them about being shot by these so called "crime guns"?

"The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence filed a lawsuit today in the Circuit Court of Milwaukee County against Badger Guns, a top seller of crime guns in the nation, on behalf of injured Milwaukee police officers Alejandro Arce and Jose Lopez III."

When you make a life decision to become an LEO, you take on the job well knowing that it involves the risk of being shot at or death. So if I work in an office cubicle and get a paper cut, that means I should sue Xerox?

putput
10-28-2010, 9:39 AM
This coincides nicely with this article from the Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/23/AR2010102302994.html

Let's hope that they did the NICS and that they prevail.

BluNorthern
10-28-2010, 9:39 AM
This doesn't add up. If Badger has been, for years according to this, not doing the background checks, paperwork, all the "jumping through hoops"...why have they not been shut down before this.

Found this, don't know the date and the link is dead....


Suburban gun shop tops list:
It leads nation in selling weapons later tied to crimes

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=429811
(subscription sometimes required – just enter a bogus e-mail addy if a window comes up)

“In 1998, Badger had the most crime guns traced to it among all gun dealers in the United States and then fell from the top spot, only to regain the spot last year. Badger has been criticized for selling cheap handguns, which were bought by "straw buyers" with clean records and then passed on to gang members. In a 1999 sweep, the majority of straw buyers bought the guns legally at Badger.”

“In 2005, there were 537 crime guns - an average of more than 10 a week - recovered and traced to Badger, the Milwaukee area's largest gun dealer. None of the others in the top five had more than 500 crime guns traced to them, according to the document from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.”
“(Co-owner) Beatovic attributed the high ranking to the low number of gun stores in Milwaukee, Badger's proximity to a high-crime area and the practice of Milwaukee police of tracing every recovered gun, something that not all departments do.

Beatovic said his store on S. 43rd St. isn't part of the problem. He said he often testifies in court cases, opens his records to detectives and frequently calls police to arrest people trying to buy guns illegally.

"We are not the bad guys, damn it. I don't care what those numbers say," he said.”

“Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett today is scheduled to meet with Beatovic, along with top police commanders and prosecutors, to talk about curbing gun violence. The meeting comes on the heels of a bloody weekend in Milwaukee in which 28 people were shot, four of them fatally. <’the powerful gun lobby’ is blamed in an editorial elsewhere in today’s Journal-Sentinel for this past weekend’s record 28 shootings>

"I want to sit down and roll up our sleeves and see that the guns they sell don't end up being used in crimes," he said.

Milwaukee County Assistant District Attorney John Chisholm, head of the gun unit, also will be at the meeting. He said that Badger helps him and other authorities, and agreed that Milwaukee's policy of tracing all guns used in crimes probably drives up Badger's numbers.”

Studies have shown that most crime guns change hands at least once after they are sold by a gun shop or other dealer. However, no background check or paperwork for sale is done after the initial purchase. That is wrong, Beatovic said.
He said he has done background checks for people who are selling guns privately and want to make sure they aren't selling to a felon. Beatovic said all gun sales should require background checks.

And my favorite line in the whole article:

"Anyone in their right mind should not be against it - and that comes from a gun owner and NRA member," he said.”


Looking at this are they going after Badgers for what happens after someone lawfully purchases a firearm from them....reselling it on the street?
And... "Crime Guns"!!??...puhlease!!!

jdberger
10-28-2010, 9:43 AM
The law firm is a nationally renowned ambulance chaser personal injury firm.

http://www.cannon-dunphy.com/Default.asp

The list of accomplishments on thier home page on their website reminds me of this guy:

3cD9x1xTSjw

nicki
10-28-2010, 9:44 AM
Did the gunshop run the "Brady check" on the buyer?

Assuming they did, the problem is the NICS, not the gun store.

Now, if it was a straw purchase and the store looked the other way, then they may have a case, but something tells me this isn't so.

If their legal work in this case is the same quality of work that they have submitted in other cases, then the case will go nowhere.

What this case will do however is enable them to hit up their donors and say, see, we are doing things.

The Brady campaign has high overhead, I read that their admin costs consume close to 90 percent of all donations raised. If they weren't getting so much free media exposure they would collapse.


Nicki

IGOTDIRT4U
10-28-2010, 9:45 AM
Also note that the previous PLCAA-protected cases were against manufacturers, not retailers. This may have different consequences, but I doubt it. However, if what their (mostly hogwash) press release says is true, though, about the gang member knowingly being a prohibited person, then things don't look good for Badger. If the background check came up clean, though, then the failing is that of the agencies responsible for that background check, not the retailer.

This /\

I thought the PLCAA was for makers, only.

jdberger
10-28-2010, 9:46 AM
Wikipedia (I know.. I know...) says it covers dealers.

To prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others.



http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-397

OleCuss
10-28-2010, 9:48 AM
I hope the gun shop is as clean as I suspect it is.

Why don't they go after the straw purchasers?

Why aren't the cops complaining about the system which let a violent criminal go back to roaming the streets?

I'm all for not selling to habitual criminals. I'm also for keeping the habitual criminals and the drug-using gang members locked up.

IGOTDIRT4U
10-28-2010, 9:49 AM
Wikipedia (I know.. I know...) says it covers dealers.



http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-397

Lol, Google "PLCAA" and get the "Professional Lawn Care Association of America".

Wherryj
10-28-2010, 9:49 AM
From the Brady Campaign



I wonder how they're gonna get past the PLCAA?

The Professional Lawn Care Association of America? (No joke, there is an organization with this name and acronym.)

http://www.yes-marketing.com/plcaa.html

I guess that they are coming at the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act by stating that the stores sales weren't "lawful commerce"?

dantodd
10-28-2010, 9:55 AM
If you read carefully the press release does not say that the gang banger has a felony arrest or was criminally prohibited. The press release says that he was prohibited because he uses illegal drugs. Not that he was convicted of it just that he used them. Unless the guy was shooting up or smoking a crack pipe at the counter of the gun store the best Brady can hope for is to get the murder on additional charges of perjury.

vladbutsky
10-28-2010, 10:14 AM
The complaint alleges that less than two weeks before purchasing the Taurus, Badger Guns negligently and illegally sold Fernandez a Masterpiece Arms 9 mm assault weapon, two high-capacity thirty round ammunition clips, and a flash suppressor.

Can they at least try study the subject before publishing their ignorance?...

Nodda Duma
10-28-2010, 10:57 AM
Let's hope the lawsuit is dismissed if the gun store is following regulations, and let's hope they get prosecuted to the full extent of the law if they are dealing in dirty business.

Likely they are the *last* LEGAL link in the chain that got that gun in the gang banger's hand. Someone's gotta be #1 on that list..I just find myself wondering why they are usually at the top. High-crime area? Shady business? I'm sure it will come out of the court case.

-Jason

wellerjohn
10-28-2010, 11:03 AM
The Brady Group needs to just die and go away.

Wherryj
10-28-2010, 11:10 AM
If you read carefully the press release does not say that the gang banger has a felony arrest or was criminally prohibited. The press release says that he was prohibited because he uses illegal drugs. Not that he was convicted of it just that he used them. Unless the guy was shooting up or smoking a crack pipe at the counter of the gun store the best Brady can hope for is to get the murder on additional charges of perjury.

I was thinking the same way when I read it first, but re-read it when you posted. It does say "criminal", but not "prohibiting" or "felony" then says "prohibited because he used drugs", but again never says "convicted of drug use".

How is the gun store supposed to know that the guy SHOULD have been prohibited? Is a merchant allowed to use "judgement" in declining to sell to an individual? If the store had, would this have been an ACLU case over "refusing to sell to an economically disadvantaged (and probably minority given the gang affiliation) person"?

It seems like a Catch-22 for the gun store.

OleCuss
10-28-2010, 11:12 AM
.
.
.
Someone's gotta be #1 on that list..I just find myself wondering why they are usually at the top. High-crime area? Shady business? I'm sure it will come out of the court case.

-Jason

I think someone posted info on that.

Seems there aren't too many gun stores in the area and LEO has been tracing every gun in the possession of a criminal for a very long time. So if you're the biggest gun store in the area and your LEO's do more tracing than anyone else does - the statistics would tend to favor your being at the top.

Foulball
10-28-2010, 11:16 AM
I just find myself wondering why they are usually at the top. High-crime area? Shady business? I'm sure it will come out of the court case.

-Jason

I would guess that they are in a high crime area. It would stand to reason that guns bought at gun stores in high crime areas would be leading the pack for recovered guns used in crimes.

BTW, found this picture of Badger Guns (this could make the popo hate you):

http://urbanmilwaukee.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/racistmilwaukeepolice.jpg

wash
10-28-2010, 11:21 AM
This is laughable.

Maybe the Bradys are looking for a new revenue stream, when the donations peter out, they need to pay their salaries somehow.

It's funny that they are trying it with a case that they can't win.

Maybe it's a Jesse Jackson style shakedown strategy...

CHS
10-28-2010, 11:22 AM
Masterpiece Arms 9 mm assault weapon, two high-capacity thirty round ammunition clips, and a flash suppressor.

By God, the flash suppressor. The most dangerous firearms accessory KNOWN TO MAN.

Throw the book at these guys!

Bhobbs
10-28-2010, 11:26 AM
If the guy cleared a background check then the suit should be dropped.

RKV
10-28-2010, 11:31 AM
reasons to do away with NICS and the whole FFL nonsense. If you're a felon and caught in possession, throw the book at the felon. Meanwhile leave the rest of us alone.

CharlieK
10-28-2010, 11:32 AM
The organization known as FAEA (Fat Arse Eaters of America) is suing sellers of large spoons, claiming they are facilitating obesity.

What? Is that any more ridiculous than suing a gun store?

I don't think it is.

Rossi357
10-28-2010, 11:34 AM
They don't like selling of cheap guns, because the poor people buy them. A back door way of keeping the poor from the 2nd amendment. Something about a Saturday night special.

CharlieK
10-28-2010, 11:35 AM
By God, the flash suppressor. The most dangerous firearms accessory KNOWN TO MAN.

Oh you, that's just not true. It's a PISTOL GRIP that is the most dangerous firearm accessory known to man. I'm sure my old 30-06 with its wood stock could not possibly hurt anyone but if it had a pistol grip, look out!

Deucer
10-28-2010, 11:43 AM
With those kinds of numbers, I'm sure Badger already had a scope so far up their backside that it was looking at their teeth. Now they have a lawsuit to deal with as well. All because their local LEO stepped up tracking efforts...

I'd hate to be a gun store owner these days.

Wherryj
10-28-2010, 11:43 AM
By God, the flash suppressor. The most dangerous firearms accessory KNOWN TO MAN.

Throw the book at these guys!

The flash suppressor, often touted to make the flash of the gun invisible to others. What is more dangerous than a device that makes the shooter all but invisible-I mean other than "incendiary" ammo that is "heat seeking" or the "shoulder thing that goes up"?

junko p
10-28-2010, 11:45 AM
...
BTW, found this picture of Badger Guns (this could make the popo hate you):

http://urbanmilwaukee.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/racistmilwaukeepolice.jpg

Looks to me like the Milwaukee PD needs new management...

Wherryj
10-28-2010, 11:46 AM
The organization known as FAEA (Fat Arse Eaters of America) is suing sellers of large spoons, claiming they are facilitating obesity.

What? Is that any more ridiculous than suing a gun store?

I don't think it is.

Well, it is unless the store selling the spoon has reason to think that it might be sold to a skinny person via "straw purchase" to facilitate an obese person's overeating.

inbox485
10-28-2010, 11:47 AM
Oh you, that's just not true. It's a PISTOL GRIP that is the most dangerous firearm accessory known to man. I'm sure my old 30-06 with its wood stock could not possibly hurt anyone but if it had a pistol grip, look out!

Good grief. Where have you people been? We all know it is the shoulder thing that goes up that is what makes firearm too dangerous to even exist.

inbox485
10-28-2010, 11:50 AM
The organization known as FAEA (Fat Arse Eaters of America) is suing sellers of large spoons, claiming they are facilitating obesity.

What? Is that any more ridiculous than suing a gun store?

I don't think it is.

If the BC claims are true (that the guns were illegally sold) then they have a case (as does the ATF). But given their history of bold faced lies, I hope they get laughed out of court and counter sued with punitive damages.

BillCA
10-28-2010, 11:51 AM
The fewer gun shops you have in a region, the more likely some local "crime gun" will be traced to that store. That's one reason the trace-statistics are not always reliable in predicting the legality of gun sales.

You can follow all the restrictions and laws as an FFL and still have "the most" or be in the "top 10" dealers for crime guns.

Add another factor - location. If Badger is in a high-crime area and/or is located in/near the "low income" side of town, then they are more likely to sell inexpensive guns like Hi-Point, Cobra, Phoenix, etc. to serve their local clients. This will skew the numbers again for several reasons. That gun may change owners several times as "collateral", it's more likely to be stolen and some will certainly be obtained as a "strawman purchase".

I've seen FFL's turn down business when a couple wants to buy a gun "for her birthday" and the guy points out "That's the one you liked" or "That's the model you wanted". One FFL would not let someone purchase a gun because he'd written down the Taurus Model number on a piece of scrap paper.

The strawman is the hardest thing to prevent. The Brady Bunch will claim that just one incident is sufficient to close the shop and prosecute, no matter how well the purchase was pulled off (or what lies were used on the forms). There is no way to prevent a well executed strawman purchase. Sometimes, in a busy shop, it may be apparent if you focus on the buyers, but other demands on the clerk's attention may be enough of a diversion that he misses it. Heck, even a lack of sleep the night before can cause you to miss the clues.

Scott Connors
10-28-2010, 12:04 PM
If you read carefully the press release does not say that the gang banger has a felony arrest or was criminally prohibited. The press release says that he was prohibited because he uses illegal drugs. Not that he was convicted of it just that he used them. Unless the guy was shooting up or smoking a crack pipe at the counter of the gun store the best Brady can hope for is to get the murder on additional charges of perjury.

Maybe the Brady Bunch wants us all to pee in a cup before purchasing firearms. :rolleyes: Has the drug testing industry made any large contributions to them recently?

norcal01
10-28-2010, 12:06 PM
I sure hope this shop wasn't selling gun in violation of any laws, because I really want to see the Brady's waste their time and money just to get smacked down in court.

joeyriv
10-28-2010, 12:08 PM
Luckily for us, the roster keeps Taurus from shipping "crime guns" to our dealers. We just have regular guns. Whew!!

Afterburnt
10-28-2010, 12:10 PM
By God, the flash suppressor. The most dangerous firearms accessory KNOWN TO MAN.

Throw the book at these guys!

Yeah and throw that flash suppressor at em too, that'll show em!

Kynoch
10-28-2010, 12:11 PM
From the Brady Campaign

I wonder how they're gonna get past the PLCAA?

If Badger Guns is breaking the law they need to be shut down -- and quickly.

CharlieK
10-28-2010, 12:20 PM
Good grief. Where have you people been? We all know it is the shoulder thing that goes up that is what makes firearm too dangerous to even exist.

I stand corrected. How could I have forgotten the evil shoulder thing?

Colt-45
10-28-2010, 12:22 PM
I hope they spend a lot of money, and lose...

:iagree:

luckystrike
10-28-2010, 12:25 PM
crime guns
ammunition clips:party:

noobs

AJAX22
10-28-2010, 12:27 PM
If Badger Guns is breaking the law they need to be shut down -- and quickly.

they are not, or the batfe would have pulled their ticket a looooooong time ago

J.D.Allen
10-28-2010, 12:31 PM
Crime guns, look out, they're gonna git ya!

"crime guns" is redundant. Don't they know that all guns are "crime guns" their very existence makes criminals out of people :rolleyes:

J.D.Allen
10-28-2010, 12:34 PM
Has anyone thought of the other side of this? Maybe the Bradys WANT the NICS check to have been done and come back clean.

It would be a great boon for their cause, I'm sure (in their puny minds) to have a legally purchased weapon, sold to a buyer who legitimately passed the background checks, being used to wound police officers.

I can hear it now..."see? even with background checks and everything required for a legal purchase, these guns are used in crimes." It would just make the case that NOONNE except LE should be able to purchase any guns at all

uyoga
10-28-2010, 12:36 PM
This should not get past the Demurrer or Summary Judgment stage.

pdq_wizzard
10-28-2010, 12:41 PM
I hope the gun shop is as clean as I suspect it is.

Why don't they go after the straw purchasers?
Why aren't the cops complaining about the system which let a violent criminal go back to roaming the streets?

I'm all for not selling to habitual criminals. I'm also for keeping the habitual criminals and the drug-using gang members locked up.

Now this is a good question, I just read and watched the Realco pice linked above and it says the didn't charge the GF. :eek: So why the hell not?? with one shot and one dead she should be sitting in the big house also.

inbox485
10-28-2010, 12:44 PM
I can hear it now..."see? even with background checks and everything required for a legal purchase, these guns are used in crimes." It would just make the case that NOONNE except LE should be able to purchase any guns at all

Except the number of police officers that use their guns for crimes...

bwiese
10-28-2010, 12:46 PM
The fewer gun shops you have in a region, the more likely some local "crime gun" will be traced to that store. That's one reason the trace-statistics are not always reliable in predicting the legality of gun sales.

You can follow all the restrictions and laws as an FFL and still have "the most" or be in the "top 10" dealers for crime guns.


That's in part what happened with Trader's.

I believe it was hushed up but I heard rumors there was some litigation against Traders for their refusal (or overanalysis) of dealing with 'certain' customers from nearby neighborhoods. The last time I was there when their FFL was operational I saw all sorts of extra processing steps and signed forms way beyond the normal DROS/4473 processing that applied to everyone.

As for Badger, they should be covered under PLCAA if their books are clean and procedures followed and there's no recordings of "ill-judged, ill-timed" statements or obvious straw transactions, etc.

PLCAA has already been run up the chain in Ileto v Glock, as well as NYC's case (Bloomberg backed by judge Jack Weinstein). Bradys will try to mask PLCAA issues by raising questions about the type of gun and "no reasonable need" for a Mac.

bwiese
10-28-2010, 12:54 PM
I hope the gun shop is as clean as I suspect it is.

Why don't they go after the straw purchasers?

Why aren't the cops complaining about the system which let a violent criminal go back to roaming the streets?

I'm all for not selling to habitual criminals. I'm also for keeping the habitual criminals and the drug-using gang members locked up.


This was brought up at the Oakland City Council antigun hearing earlier in the year.

I was told by former Oakland cop that they, as well as the BATF, *know* who's doing the underground dealing. It's indeed "baby mama drama" - where young single mothers (often with children from multiple dads) with clean-enough backgrounds get the guns and sell them to their "daddy". But the local DA doesn't wanna charge or put 22yr old single moms in jail, and the US Attorney's office around here has a similar mindset - it only takes "major cases" (financial: gotta steal $250K+ or it goes back to civil - including tax fraud; narco/guns generally stay local except for big distributors/ "kingpins" that get PR for the US Attorney). And these baby mamas and their boyfriends are smart enough to not come in the shop at the same time so as to avoid any 'straw' accusation; they're not *that* dumb.

timdps
10-28-2010, 1:01 PM
Now this is a good question, I just read and watched the Realco pice linked above and it says the didn't charge the GF. :eek: So why the hell not?? with one shot and one dead she should be sitting in the big house also.

Probably needed her testimony....

Rossi357
10-28-2010, 1:02 PM
Those crime guns come with an app. It makes the gun go out and commit crimes.

jdberger
10-28-2010, 1:04 PM
If Badger Guns is breaking the law they need to be shut down -- and quickly.

If Badger Guns is breaking the law, why are they being sued in CIVIL court?

OleCuss
10-28-2010, 1:23 PM
This was brought up at the Oakland City Council antigun hearing earlier in the year.

I was told by former Oakland cop that they, as well as the BATF, *know* who's doing the underground dealing. It's indeed "baby mama drama" - where young single mothers (often with children from multiple dads) with clean-enough backgrounds get the guns and sell them to their "daddy". But the local DA doesn't wanna charge or put 22yr old single moms in jail, and the US Attorney's office around here has a similar mindset - it only takes "major cases" (financial: gotta steal $250K+ or it goes back to civil - including tax fraud; narco/guns generally stay local except for big distributors/ "kingpins" that get PR for the US Attorney). And these baby mamas and their boyfriends are smart enough to not come in the shop at the same time so as to avoid any 'straw' accusation; they're not *that* dumb.

They have a very cynical view of the law and violence.

It seems to me that if they went after the straw purchasers they could start getting some of the gangbanger mamas off the street and they might even get some of the mamas to start turning state's evidence and start locking up some of those criminals. In any case, reducing the breeding opportunities for gangbangers would be a good thing.

But this is a naive view. You start shutting down the violent crime and the DA's office won't need so many prosecutors and the office would get smaller and the DA wouldn't be able to argue for that high a salary. So the cops do the best they can to find them and lock 'em up - and the system just spits 'em back out on the street.

Oops, I was forgetting that if the gangbanger mamas aren't chunking out little future gangbangers there wouldn't be as many people needing welfare payments and that would also be a governmental administrative disaster.

I guess the best thing for our society is to go after the honest gun shop owner civilly and/or criminally and let the gangbangers continue to rape and pillage our communities. . .

I may be going too far, but I suspect most cops would agree with me that gangs should be declared enemy combatants and non-citizens without recourse to civil courts. Then we should truly take the battle to them. Merely being a confirmed gangbanger should be enough to be locked up for a very long time with no right to a trial put on by a society to which they truly do not belong.

OK, IANAL, and I'd bet this will horrify a lot of lawyers and Liberals. But it's also the way to fix it ethically and with the least harm to society: Police and National Guard identify the gangbangers and if they don't surrender, the cops and guardsmen use lethal force.

FWIW. Oh, and Bill, this is not aimed at you. You just triggered it. . .

tacticalcity
10-28-2010, 1:23 PM
I would guess that they are in a high crime area. It would stand to reason that guns bought at gun stores in high crime areas would be leading the pack for recovered guns used in crimes.

BTW, found this picture of Badger Guns (this could make the popo hate you):

http://urbanmilwaukee.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/racistmilwaukeepolice.jpg

Well, until I saw that photo I figured it was just more of the usual Brady Bunch FUD. After seeing it, I have my doubts about the dealer. Only a scumbag with a chip on their shoulder and an unhealthy disresepect for the rule of law would put up a sign like that infront of their place of business. I'm starting to think he is probably a target NOT because he sells guns, but because he IS breaking the rules.

I have no way to know that, but that sign says a heck of a lot about his character and how he feels about the law and law enforcement. If I were a cop, that sign would certainly caputure my attention and put him right at the top of my suspecious jerks to watch like a hawk list.

We need to becareful about who we throw our support behind. Just because he sells guns, and we like guns, does not mean he is innocent or deserves our backing. He may very well be the scumbag they claim he is. Just because we can't stand the Brady Bunch, doesn't mean they didn't actually find a guy who needs to be shut down and/or thrown in jail.

That sign just cost him my benfit of the doubt. I'm not ready to say he's guilty of the crimes he is accused of. But I am ready to say he is a real jackass. He makes us all look bad, based on the sign alone. If he is intentionally selling firearms to gangbangers and /or knowingly circumventing the rules, then he REALLY makes us look bad.

As for why BATF is not involved, perhaps he managed to stay within the law paperwork wise, but also knowingly looked the other way repeatedly on straw purchases? They just don't have enough to prove it in criminal court but do have enough to prove it in civil court where "beyond a reasonable doubt" does not apply?

I am not crazy about opening the door for legitimate dealers to be shut down over stuff they have no control over. But I am in favor of somebody who knowingly and repeatedly turns a blind eye to obvious straw purchases being shutdown. I am NOT saying that is what happened here. I am just saying that with a guy who has a sign like that infront of his store, it is not hard to imagine him bending or even breaking the rules and not caring.

Just putting that out there. Other than coming to conclusion the guy is clearly a jerk...I've formed no other opinions about him. There simply is not enough evidence being presented to know if he is guilty or not. Perhaps over time we'll get more details.

The hard part will be shifting through all the leftist retoric and uniformed statements from the Brady bunchers to figure out if Badger actually is guilty. They lay it on so thick, and dumb it down so much that it is an instant turn off. It is hard to listen to it inorder to get to the truth. Most of the time they are way off base, but with this guy they have me thinking they might actually be onto something.

Posting that sign sure was a big error in judgement.

dantodd
10-28-2010, 1:49 PM
If I were a cop, that sign would certainly caputure my attention and put him right at the top of my suspecious jerks to watch like a hawk list.


I agree that the cops probably do have them on the top of their watch list. And guess what? The cops found nothing wrong with the way they were doing business. Funny how looking at it from the other side works huh?

So, they piss off the cops, have too many "crime guns," surely raising flags at ATF and yet neither of those people, who actually can go over their books with a fine tooth comb can find any problem with their business.

And the Brady's still find a way to try and sue them.

And, by the way, I am glad that most cops actually have thicker skin that you do and wouldn't be causing extra stink just because of that sign. If you get offended by that to the point you suggested you would be it's probably a good thing you aren't a cop.

Havoc70
10-28-2010, 1:54 PM
That's in part what happened with Trader's.

I believe it was hushed up but I heard rumors there was some litigation against Traders for their refusal (or overanalysis) of dealing with 'certain' customers from nearby neighborhoods. The last time I was there when their FFL was operational I saw all sorts of extra processing steps and signed forms way beyond the normal DROS/4473 processing that applied to everyone.

I had always heard that Traders got stung doing actual known straw man purchases that's why they lost their license. I dunno. I remember when I bought my M-1 from them, they let me walk out with it that night as a C&R in 1994. I do believe that they still had to hold it, or maybe not back then.

Recession
10-28-2010, 1:54 PM
So has anyone ever figured out what the "shoulder thing that goes up" is? Anyone with common sense would guess it is a collapsible buttstock, but since it's coming from the mouth of a moron, you really can't assume anything. She could have been talking about a flip up iron site as far as we know.

tacticalcity
10-28-2010, 2:00 PM
I agree that the cops probably do have them on the top of their watch list. And guess what? The cops found nothing wrong with the way they were doing business. Funny how looking at it from the other side works huh?

So, they piss off the cops, have too many "crime guns," surely raising flags at ATF and yet neither of those people, who actually can go over their books with a fine tooth comb can find any problem with their business.

And the Brady's still find a way to try and sue them.

And, by the way, I am glad that most cops actually have thicker skin that you do and wouldn't be causing extra stink just because of that sign. If you get offended by that to the point you suggested you would be it's probably a good thing you aren't a cop.

We don't know that for sure do we? They could have an on going case building against them with all kinds of infractions. They could have a case that is just not solid enough to bring to trial in a criminal court. The FEDs may be building a case of their own and forced the locals to back off. There are all kinds of reasons no criminal charges have been filed to date. That does not mean they won't be eventually.

Just because no criminal charges are filed does NOT always mean the guy didn't do anything wrong. Life is not that black and white. It could be that what he is doing wrong can't be proven in a criminal court. He could knowingly be selling to straw purchasers and that would be next to impossible to prove. It doesn't make it right or legal.

I am not saying any of that is happening. I am saying we have NO IDEA what is happening or what happened. We don't have enough information, and we probably never will have the complete picture. You never do on things like this.

Granted, just because the Brady bunchers are suing him does not mean he did anything wrong either. 99.9999 times out a 100 I would immediately assume they are in the wrong. That sign, however, raises real questions about the store owners character. Which makes this the .0001% of the time I'm not willing to throw caution to the wind and rise to the defense of the store owner.

MY BIGGEST POINT?

If that sign is any indication of his character then the guy is a real jerk, who is making all gun owners and dealers look bad. I agree that is not a crime in itself. But it does demonstrate a character trait that opens up some doubt in mind about him. If we blindly throw our support behind him just because we like guns and are pro-2nd amendment...we risk our repuations. We need to make sure we're not lumping ourselves in with scumbags. Right up until I saw that sign, I was all behind the guy. I don't want to be associated with a guy who puts a sign like that up infront of his shop or who feels that way about law enforcement. He stopped being one of the good guys in my mind. He's on his own as far as I'm concerned.

Dr Rockso
10-28-2010, 2:07 PM
Well, until I saw that photo I figured it was just more of the usual Brady Bunch FUD. After seeing it, I have my doubts about the dealer. Only a scumbag with a chip on their shoulder and an unhealthy disresepect for the rule of law would put up a sign like that infront of their place of business. I'm starting to think he is probably a target NOT because he sells guns, but because he IS breaking the rules.

I have no way to know that, but that sign says a heck of a lot about his character and how he feels about the law and law enforcement. If I were a cop, that sign would certainly caputure my attention and put him right at the top of my suspecious jerks to watch like a hawk list.

We need to becareful about who we throw our support behind. Just because he sells guns, and we like guns, does not mean he is innocent or deserves our backing. He may very well be the scumbag they claim he is. Just because we can't stand the Brady Bunch, doesn't mean they didn't actually find a guy who needs to be shut down and/or thrown in jail.

That sign just cost him my benfit of the doubt. I'm not ready to say he's guilty of the crimes he is accused of. But I am ready to say he is a real jackass. He makes us all look bad, based on the sign alone. If he is intentionally selling firearms to gangbangers and /or knowingly circumventing the rules, then he REALLY makes us look bad.

As for why BATF is not involved, perhaps he managed to stay within the law paperwork wise, but also knowingly looked the other way repeatedly on straw purchases? They just don't have enough to prove it in criminal court but do have enough to prove it in civil court where "beyond a reasonable doubt" does not apply?

I am not crazy about opening the door for legitimate dealers to be shut down over stuff they have no control over. But I am in favor of somebody who knowingly and repeatedly turns a blind eye to obvious straw purchases being shutdown. I am NOT saying that is what happened here. I am just saying that with a guy who has a sign like that infront of his store, it is not hard to imagine him bending or even breaking the rules and not caring.

Just putting that out there. Other than coming to conclusion the guy is clearly a jerk...I've formed no other opinions about him. There simply is not enough evidence being presented to know if he is guilty or not. Perhaps over time we'll get more details.

The hard part will be shifting through all the leftist retoric and uniformed statements from the Brady bunchers to figure out if Badger actually is guilty. They lay it on so thick, and dumb it down so much that it is an instant turn off. It is hard to listen to it inorder to get to the truth. Most of the time they are way off base, but with this guy they have me thinking they might actually be onto something.

Posting that sign sure was a big error in judgement.

The really telling thing here is that they're suing for the dealer having sold a gun to a specific criminal, who ostensibly passed a NICS check. Given those facts I don't see how we can't defend the dealer, regardless of whether we think he's crooked. If he's suspected of doing things like turning a blind eye to obvious straw sales, or telling his customers how to circumvent the law (sorry, Joe Felon, I can't sell to you...but I could sell to your girlfriend as long as she's 'clean'), then those claims should be investigated. How hard would it be for Milwaukee PD to send a few undercover officers to check and see if that was the case? The fact that it's in civil court, though, tells me that if they had that sort of evidence the city would be the ones prosecuting him, and it would be criminally.


So has anyone ever figured out what the "shoulder thing that goes up" is? Anyone with common sense would guess it is a collapsible buttstock, but since it's coming from the mouth of a moron, you really can't assume anything. She could have been talking about a flip up iron site as far as we know.
Clearly she was talking about the shoulder cannon from Predator.

pdq_wizzard
10-28-2010, 2:09 PM
Probably needed her testimony....

I don't know about that, from what I read there were allot of witnesses to the shooting.

She bought the gun, he has the gun and all the stuff to go with it in his room (She never reported it stolen). That seems like an open and shut case.

Havoc70
10-28-2010, 2:09 PM
MY BIGGEST POINT?

If that sign is any indication of his character then the guy is a real jerk, who is making all gun owners look bad. If we blindly throw our support behind him just because we like guns and are pro-2nd amendment...we risk our repuations. I don't want to be associated with a guy who puts a sign like that up infront of his shop. He's on his own as far as I'm concerned.

Welcome to the First Amendment :). And really, if what he is saying is true it illustrates a fair amount of douchebaggery on the part of MPD. Though my objections would be overcome if he removed the word "racist". Regardless, he has the right to put that sign up, and if it's true, then it's a warning about racial profiling. The sign, though, really doesn't offend me all that much.

If they are breaking the law, they need to pay the piper.

Rossi357
10-28-2010, 2:10 PM
I interpret that sign as....They are trying to shut him down by harassing his customers. They prolly have sent some people in with phony ID and so on to try to catch them at something. So far they have nothing on him or they would bust him.
Just my thoughts.

putput
10-28-2010, 2:11 PM
This sums up the sign.

http://www.livinglakecountry.com/blogs/communityblogs/63963172.html

meg
10-28-2010, 2:13 PM
My pencil is responsible for all grammatical and spelling errors.

paul0660
10-28-2010, 2:21 PM
Posting that sign sure was a big error in judgement.

And pointless, since most AA already know that DWB is reason to stop a car.

tacticalcity
10-28-2010, 2:24 PM
The really telling thing here is that they're suing for the dealer having sold a gun to a specific criminal, who ostensibly passed a NICS check. Given those facts I don't see how we can't defend the dealer, regardless of whether we think he's crooked. If he's suspected of doing things like turning a blind eye to obvious straw sales, or telling his customers how to circumvent the law (sorry, Joe Felon, I can't sell to you...but I could sell to your girlfriend as long as she's 'clean'), then those claims should be investigated. How hard would it be for Milwaukee PD to send a few undercover officers to check and see if that was the case? The fact that it's in civil court, though, tells me that if they had that sort of evidence the city would be the ones prosecuting him, and it would be criminally.



Clearly she was talking about the shoulder cannon from Predator.

I am not saying we throw in with the brandy bunch. I am saying I'm not going to rush to his defense and assume he is innocent. Any other normal gunshop who is not on record bashing cops? Sure. This guy? I have my doubts.

I don't think we are getting a clear picture of what is happening from the article. The author is uninformed on a number of levels - which means we are uninformed as to what is really going on. So I'm not ready to latch on to any specifics in the article and assume they are 100% solid. It is safe to say the author is glossing over stuff and grasping onto tid bits of information they think they understand. So who knows what is really happening here beyond the fact that the Brady bunch is suing a gun dealer after a police officers where shot with a gun purchased from his store?

The sign on the other hand is much more concrete. We may not know exactly what is going on with his civil case, or whether or not law enforcement is building a case against him. But we do know he is a jerk with a chip on his shoulder.

I would think it would be pretty difficult to prove he knew a straw purchase was happening in a criminal court where reasonsable doubt is in play. You could prove the purchaser was a straw buyer, but proving the dealer knew would be really difficult. It really depends on his level of complicity. Is he just looking the other way, or is he actively participating? The later you could prove, the first one not so much.

He has demonstrated lack of respect for the law and general lack of character. I'm not ready to assume he is guilty, but I am not giving him the benfit of the doubt I would normally afford to someone in his shoes.

tacticalcity
10-28-2010, 2:30 PM
My pencil is responsible for all grammatical and spelling errors.

Yep, I can't spell/type worth a darn. For some reason when I proof read it my mind makes the corrections. So it reads correctly, even though on the screen it is all messed up. Unless I want to spend 30 minutes proof reading each post I pretty much just have to accept it and move on.

Term papers, letters to grandma, and that screenplay I have been trying to sell for years are worth the time to check a 100 times over and get others to triple check them for me as well. A forum post that nobody is going to care about in 20 minutes? Not so much.

If that makes me a terrible person, I guess I'll have to live with that.

inbox485
10-28-2010, 2:31 PM
I am not saying we throw in with the brandy bunch. I am saying I'm not going to rush to his defense and assume he is innocent. Any other normal gunshop who is not on record bashing cops? Sure. This guy? I have my doubts.

I don't think we are getting a clear picture of what is happening from the article. The author is uninformed on a number of levels - which means we are uninformed as to what is really going on. So I'm not ready to latch on to any specifics in the article and assume they are 100% solid. It is safe to say the author is glossing over stuff and grasping onto tid bits of information they think they understand. So who knows what is really happening here beyond the fact that the Brady bunch is suing a gun dealer after a police officers where shot with a gun purchased from his store?

The sign on the other hand is much more concrete. We may not know exactly what is going on with his civil case, or whether or not law enforcement is building a case against him. But we do know he is a jerk with a chip on his shoulder.

I would think it would be pretty difficult to prove he knew a straw purchase was happening in a criminal court where reasonsable doubt is in play. You could prove the purchaser was a straw buyer, but proving the dealer knew would be really difficult. It really depends on his level of complicity. Is he just looking the other way, or is he actively participating? The later you could prove, the first one not so much.

He has demonstrated lack of respect for the law and general lack of character. I'm not ready to assume he is guilty, but I am not giving him the benfit of the doubt I would normally afford to someone in his shoes.

I see where you are coming from, but it could be that their local PD really are looking for excuses to pull over any black guy leaving that shop. If that is the case, I would put that shop in the same category as Barret when they told CHP they wouldn't sell or service any firearm that the local civilians couldn't buy themselves.

Don't get me wrong, I get about as ticked off at POS's pulling the race card (or any other card) as anybody else, but if the shoe fits, that's life.

OleCuss
10-28-2010, 2:33 PM
Yep, I can't spell/type worth a darn. For some reason when I proof read it my mind makes the corrections. So it reads correctly, even though on the screen it is all messed up. Unless I want to spend 30 minutes proof reading each post I pretty much just have to accept it and move on.

Most of us don't care all that much. . .

But if you want to get picky you can type it in Word or another word processor that does some of the spelling and grammatical checking - and then copy and paste to the forum. Really not worth it, IMHO.

tacticalcity
10-28-2010, 2:36 PM
And pointless, since most AA already know that DWB is reason to stop a car.

DWB doesn't really come into play when everybody in the area is B. There simply are not enough hours in the day for that to be true in some areas. Needle in a haystack comes to mind.

Translation, put the card back in the deck there buddy! ;)

Dr Rockso
10-28-2010, 2:44 PM
I would think it would be pretty difficult to prove he knew a straw purchase was happening in a criminal court where reasonsable doubt is in play. You could prove the purchaser was a straw buyer, but proving the dealer knew would be really difficult. It really depends on his level of complicity. Is he just looking the other way, or is he actively participating? The later you could prove, the first one not so much.

I really think that the only way to prosecute FFLs for straw sales is via sting operations. If you try and do it in civil court, in cases such as this (and it doesn't appear they're alleging any sort of straw sale in this particular case) you'll just have the felon and his straw purchaser on one side saying 'they knew' and the gun store clerk and owner on the other said saying 'we didn't know'. That opens the door for anti-gun prosecutors to offer deals to criminals in exchange for testimony suggesting that the dealers were complicit in the straw sale. If that's enough to meet the burden of proof in civil court it could be disastrous to FFLs in anti-gun areas. Want to get a gun shop shut down? Find a criminal or two willing to claim that the dealer was aware of their straw purchase, then sue their pants off in civil court.

tacticalcity
10-28-2010, 2:47 PM
Most of us don't care all that much. . .

But if you want to get picky you can type it in Word or another word processor that does some of the spelling and grammatical checking - and then copy and paste to the forum. Really not worth it, IMHO.

The mistakes Word catches are not usually the mistakes I make. Most of my errors are hitting the wrong key (d instead of s for example) but on that particular word luck would have it that it turns out to be a word that passes muster with Word. I also think of the sentence faster than I type it, so if there is a similar word coming up the word I am on gets truncated to that word or something close. Really odd things that Word almost never catches. I don't really care enough on a forum like this put in the effort I would need to be error free.

You usually don't have to look hard to find the grammar nazis making similar grammatical and spelling errors as well.

For the record, I was Phi Theta Kappa (honor society) in college. So it is something I can overcome. It just requires a great deal of effort. Sorry guys, but I'm here to have fun. That's too much like work!

Havoc70
10-28-2010, 2:49 PM
Here's another great blog entry (http://www.livinglakecountry.com/blogs/communityblogs/63485842.html) from the writer posted earlier.

tacticalcity
10-28-2010, 3:00 PM
I really think that the only way to prosecute FFLs for straw sales is via sting operations. If you try and do it in civil court, in cases such as this (and it doesn't appear they're alleging any sort of straw sale in this particular case) you'll just have the felon and his straw purchaser on one side saying 'they knew' and the gun store clerk and owner on the other said saying 'we didn't know'. That opens the door for anti-gun prosecutors to offer deals to criminals in exchange for testimony suggesting that the dealers were complicit in the straw sale. If that's enough to meet the burden of proof in civil court it could be disastrous to FFLs in anti-gun areas. Want to get a gun shop shut down? Find a criminal or two willing to claim that the dealer was aware of their straw purchase, then sue their pants off in civil court.

That is the thing about civil court. The burden of proof is considerably lower. That is how they were able to find OJ guilty in civil court but could not get a conviction in criminal court. Reasonable doubt is not enough for civil court to find someone innocent. You need a preponderance of doubt (hope I using the correct term). So getting a judgement against someone in civil court is considerably easier than getting a conviction against somebody in criminal court.

So yes, it is pretty scary.

However, winning a civil case is one thing. Getting the loser to actually pay the judgment found against him is another. Suing someone is very expensive and even if you win, good luck getting paid.

For the Brady bunch, it is not about getting money from the gun shop or even punishing a criminal. It is about furthering their own agenda. They don't care if it is the right thing to do. They care about pushing public opinion futher to the left. If it were solely about the money, it wouldn't make sense to pursue it.

So again, I am not defending the Brady bunch at all. I'm just not in a hurry to rush to the gun dealers defense either, as a result of the sign he has in front of his shop. I have my doubts about his character.

spgripside
10-28-2010, 3:19 PM
How many people has Milwaukee Police detained leaving this place?

tacticalcity
10-28-2010, 3:21 PM
Here's another great blog entry (http://www.livinglakecountry.com/blogs/communityblogs/63485842.html) from the writer posted earlier.

I agree with her view point. And if you read it, the thing local officials are most upset with Badger Guns over are the large number of straw purchases happening at that shop. Liberals do blame business, rather than individuals for crimes committed by individuals. Business is treated like a scapegoat by politicians today the way religious and ethnic groups were for centuries in Europe, and for much the same reasons. That drives me nuts! The masses completely buy into it.

However, I would caution placing too much emphasis on Badger Guns being a shining beacon of how gun shops and gun owners should behave. I doubt they are the champion we want fighting our 2A fights for us. They seem pretty shady to me. Not because straw purchases happened there, but because we have at least one example of their feelings towards law enforcement and the law. If he turns out to be the scumbag he looks to be, and we all rally behind him then we all get painted with the same brush.

I would feel much more comfortable if the gun store in question didn't have that sign in front of their shop and I could trust without a doubt they were not behaving in a shady way. Think about it. Six police officers died from guns purchased at his shop, and he has the nerve to post a sign in front of his store calling them racists? This guy is definitely NOT the poster boy I want championing a 2nd Amendment fight.

Before backing him publically, I would need to know a lot more than I do right now. So far, I am not impressed with him. Not because of the accusations, but because of his lack of respect for law enforcement.

Most gun shops I know have a great relationship with local law enforcement. If not the department itself, then with the individual officers. A good number of them are former law enforcement themselves. Seeing a sign like that in front of a gun shop raises all kinds of red flags for me.

Stonewalker
10-28-2010, 3:23 PM
Well, until I saw that photo I figured it was just more of the usual Brady Bunch FUD. After seeing it, I have my doubts about the dealer. Only a scumbag with a chip on their shoulder and an unhealthy disresepect for the rule of law would put up a sign like that infront of their place of business. I'm starting to think he is probably a target NOT because he sells guns, but because he IS breaking the rules.

I have no way to know that, but that sign says a heck of a lot about his character and how he feels about the law and law enforcement. If I were a cop, that sign would certainly caputure my attention and put him right at the top of my suspecious jerks to watch like a hawk list.

We need to becareful about who we throw our support behind. Just because he sells guns, and we like guns, does not mean he is innocent or deserves our backing. He may very well be the scumbag they claim he is. Just because we can't stand the Brady Bunch, doesn't mean they didn't actually find a guy who needs to be shut down and/or thrown in jail.

That sign just cost him my benfit of the doubt. I'm not ready to say he's guilty of the crimes he is accused of. But I am ready to say he is a real jackass. He makes us all look bad, based on the sign alone. If he is intentionally selling firearms to gangbangers and /or knowingly circumventing the rules, then he REALLY makes us look bad.

As for why BATF is not involved, perhaps he managed to stay within the law paperwork wise, but also knowingly looked the other way repeatedly on straw purchases? They just don't have enough to prove it in criminal court but do have enough to prove it in civil court where "beyond a reasonable doubt" does not apply?

I am not crazy about opening the door for legitimate dealers to be shut down over stuff they have no control over. But I am in favor of somebody who knowingly and repeatedly turns a blind eye to obvious straw purchases being shutdown. I am NOT saying that is what happened here. I am just saying that with a guy who has a sign like that infront of his store, it is not hard to imagine him bending or even breaking the rules and not caring.

Just putting that out there. Other than coming to conclusion the guy is clearly a jerk...I've formed no other opinions about him. There simply is not enough evidence being presented to know if he is guilty or not. Perhaps over time we'll get more details.

The hard part will be shifting through all the leftist retoric and uniformed statements from the Brady bunchers to figure out if Badger actually is guilty. They lay it on so thick, and dumb it down so much that it is an instant turn off. It is hard to listen to it inorder to get to the truth. Most of the time they are way off base, but with this guy they have me thinking they might actually be onto something.

Posting that sign sure was a big error in judgement.

Hm, I laughed out loud when I saw the sign. Clearly the dude is layed back.

tacticalcity
10-28-2010, 3:34 PM
Hm, I laughed out loud when I saw the sign. Clearly the dude is layed back.

I don't get laid back from it, or funny. Not when six police officers have been killed by guns purchases by straw buyers.

Even if he did nothing wrong, a normal person is going to feel bad for the slain officers. Having a sign up calling them racists for the entire world to see is in extreme poor taste.

Heck, even if the officers had not been killed...that is not a normal relationship for a gun store owner to have with law enforcement. Resentment for the DOJ, sure. Resentment for the higher-ups, sure. Dislike of a particular officer, sure. Publically chastizing the beat cops and calling them racists, that is not normal.

Now, the billboard warning people a cop likes to hide behind it and use it as a speed trap...that was funny. The difference is there was nothing mean spirited about it...and nobody had died.

http://cgi.amazing.com/images/members/6/65/433_n.jpg

Wherryj
10-28-2010, 3:38 PM
The mistakes Word catches are not usually the mistakes I make. Most of my errors are hitting the wrong key (d instead of s for example) but on that particular word luck would have it that it turns out to be a word that passes muster with Word. I also think of the sentence faster than I type it, so if there is a similar word coming up the word I am on gets truncated to that word or something close. Really odd things that Word almost never catches. I don't really care enough on a forum like this put in the effort I would need to be error free.

You usually don't have to look hard to find the grammar nazis making similar grammatical and spelling errors as well.

For the record, I was Phi Theta Kappa (honor society) in college. So it is something I can overcome. It just requires a great deal of effort. Sorry guys, but I'm here to have fun. That's too much like work!

I always make the mistake as well. For example, EVERY time I type the name Rachael Madcow, one of the D's comes out as a C's. I just can't help it.

Poor spelling isn't a sign of lower education either. My residency director once told me the secret of physcian's poor penmanship. It was "so that they can't tell that I can't spell".

greasemonkey
10-28-2010, 3:42 PM
The mistakes Word catches are not usually the mistakes I make. Most of my errors are hitting the wrong key (d instead of s for example) but on that particular word luck would have it that it turns out to be a word that passes muster passes the mustard :D with Word. I also think of the sentence faster than I type it, so if there is a similar word coming up the word I am on gets truncated to that word or something close. Really odd things that Word almost never catches. I don't really care enough on a forum like this put in the effort I would need to be error free

To help combat the spelling Nazis, Google Chrome's spell check works pretty good. However, the grammar Nazis are a whole nother (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StJ-OK4jiSY) can of worms that just takes more effort than it's worth.

vantec08
10-28-2010, 4:09 PM
Was the crime gun on parole at the time?

Stonewalker
10-28-2010, 4:09 PM
I don't get laid back from it, or funny. Not when six police officers have been killed by guns purchases by straw buyers.

Even if he did nothing wrong, a normal person is going to feel bad for the slain officers. Having a sign up calling them racists for the entire world to see is in extreme poor taste.

Heck, even if the officers had not been killed...that is not a normal relationship for a gun store owner to have with law enforcement. Resentment for the DOJ, sure. Resentment for the higher-ups, sure. Dislike of a particular officer, sure. Publically chastizing the beat cops and calling them racists, that is not normal.

Now, the billboard warning people a cop likes to hide behind it and use it as a speed trap...that was funny. The difference is there was nothing mean spirited about it...and nobody had died.

If Badger Arms is innocent and if the police really are doing what he claims and if there isn't much more to the story (a lot of big if's I know) then the sign would be justified. I am giving him the benefit of the doubt. I'm just sort of wondering why you feel so strongly about it. Certainly while officers slain in the line of duty are no laughing matter, I don't see the sign going that direction at all. Yea, putting the 'R' word in there was poor taste.

We all know that the police are not always our friends. This could be a case of the local Police Chief harassing the clientele of the gun store and the owner getting fed up with it. In fact I don't see any other reason for him to pull such a stunt. I try hard to be fair and not LEO-bash, but the abuse of power sickens me and that's why I'm rooting for all the if's I stated earlier.

PS that picture is a good one!

GrizzlyGuy
10-28-2010, 4:42 PM
I may be going too far, but I suspect most cops would agree with me that gangs should be declared enemy combatants and non-citizens without recourse to civil courts. Then we should truly take the battle to them. Merely being a confirmed gangbanger should be enough to be locked up for a very long time with no right to a trial put on by a society to which they truly do not belong.

:eek:

Yes, you're going too far. Me thinks you need to grab a beer and spend some quiet time with one of my favorite reads (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html). :)

TempleKnight
10-28-2010, 4:49 PM
crime guns
ammunition clips:party:

noobs

Is Milwaukee the only place to get clips for your crime guns? I can't find any in the "for sale" section.

Stonewalker
10-28-2010, 4:56 PM
:eek:

Yes, you're going too far. Me thinks you need to grab a beer and spend some quiet time with one of my favorite reads (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html). :)

I agree, c'mon man that is so unconstitutional and dangerous. Due Process is a protection for us, the people, you and I. It also protects gangbangers, but I'd rather stay free and keep gangbangers free than send them to prison and lose some safety and freedom from .gov.

I look at it the same way I look at access to firearms. It's a risk that we as society take when we allow easy access to guns. But I'd rather have the Constitutionally protected freedom and risk bad guys getting their hands on guns as well than the other way around.

Falstaff
10-28-2010, 5:07 PM
The bashing shouldn't be limited to just the Brady Campaign. What about the cops that whined to them about being shot by these so called "crime guns"?

"The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence filed a lawsuit today in the Circuit Court of Milwaukee County against Badger Guns, a top seller of crime guns in the nation, on behalf of injured Milwaukee police officers Alejandro Arce and Jose Lopez III."

When you make a life decision to become an LEO, you take on the job well knowing that it involves the risk of being shot at or death. So if I work in an office cubicle and get a paper cut, that means I should sue Xerox?

Exactly. Just like the cop that sued GLOCK because his child got ahold of his Glock while in the backseat of his car and capped him in the back.. This is USA so of course, he sued Glock.. (he lost thank god)

blakdawg
10-28-2010, 5:44 PM
I haven't found a copy of the complaint versus Badger, but my best guess is that the plaintiffs intend to get around the PLCAA as follows:

15 USC 7902(a) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00007902----000-.html) says that a "qualified civil action" may not be brought in a state or federal court.

15 USC 7903(5)(A) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00007903----000-.html) says that a "qualified civil action" is

a civil action or proceeding or an administrative proceeding brought by any person against a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product, or a trade association, for damages, punitive damages, injunctive or declaratory relief, abatement, restitution, fines, or penalties, or other relief, resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of a qualified product by the person or a third party, but shall not include...

(iii) an action in which a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product knowingly violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product, and the violation was a proximate cause of the harm for which relief is sought, including ...

(II) any case in which the manufacturer or seller aided, abetted, or conspired with any other person to sell or otherwise dispose of a qualified product, knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe, that the actual buyer of the qualified product was prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm or ammunition under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000922----000-.html);

So, working backwards, if the plaintiffs can show that the defendant(s) knew or had reasonable cause to believe that the actual buyer of the gun ("qualified product") was prohibited from possessing/receiving a firearm .. then the PLCAA doesn't apply.

I don't know **** about Minnesota state courts, but my impression generally is that if the plaintiffs are smart enough to have alleged that knowledge (or "should have known") in their complaint, that the lawsuit will live long enough for them to get to use the discovery process to look for evidence to support their claim(s), which means this isn't going away very quickly or cheaply.

CHS
10-28-2010, 5:48 PM
Has anyone thought of the other side of this? Maybe the Bradys WANT the NICS check to have been done and come back clean.

It would be a great boon for their cause, I'm sure (in their puny minds) to have a legally purchased weapon, sold to a buyer who legitimately passed the background checks, being used to wound police officers.

I can hear it now..."see? even with background checks and everything required for a legal purchase, these guns are used in crimes." It would just make the case that NOONNE except LE should be able to purchase any guns at all

Actually, it would be a huge slap in the face since the NICS check (also called the "Brady Check") actually CAME FROM the Brady's.

It would just end up proving how useless the Brady's are.

badlandsbutch
10-28-2010, 5:53 PM
30 round clips? Ask your armorer for one.

greasemonkey
10-28-2010, 7:42 PM
It's a beautiful thing when Helmke accomplishes this every time he makes a public statement!

It would just end up proving how useless the Brady's are.

Gray Peterson
10-28-2010, 7:48 PM
I can hear it now..."see? even with background checks and everything required for a legal purchase, these guns are used in crimes." It would just make the case that NOONNE except LE should be able to purchase any guns at all

Except Heller and McDonald foreclosed such shenanigans.

N6ATF
10-28-2010, 7:58 PM
Actually, it would be a huge slap in the face since the NICS check (also called the "Brady Check") actually CAME FROM the Brady's.

It would just end up proving how useless the Brady's are.

To us, yes, to them... every criminal's life/career saved is an epic win for the Brady Campaign.

sreiter
10-28-2010, 8:12 PM
MY BIGGEST POINT?

If that sign is any indication of his character then the guy is a real jerk, who is making all gun owners and dealers look bad.

unless the owner is african american AND/OR cops ARE harassing african americans leaving his store (yeah, i know, cops would NEVER do that) and it's having a MAJOR impact on his business.

Sometimes, you gotta call a spade a spade. Hell, this morning i'm in a Dr's office and she's 1/2 hour late. 2 days ago, i was in her office and she said she could see me because i was 10 minutes late. She stressed get her at 8 am sharp (and made the appointment for 8:15, unbeknown-est to me. You dont think i gave her a piece of my mind for being a hypocrite, and how dare she think her time was more valuable then mine?

same thing here

rimfire78
10-28-2010, 8:23 PM
guns kill people

Kids who play video games kill people ;)

Joe
10-28-2010, 8:25 PM
Crime guns... They walk around at night shooting kittens/babies/leos

greasemonkey
10-28-2010, 8:36 PM
Crime guns... They walk around at night shooting kittens/babies/leos

Good thing Crime Guns aren't on our Safe roster...our Safe handguns can't kill people!!

morfeeis
10-28-2010, 8:39 PM
Fernandez was in possession of marijuana, cocaine mixed with crushed pills, valium and oxycodone,

sounds like one hell of a party...

along with drug trafficking paraphernalia.
a backpack? whats that even mean?

Dr Rockso
10-28-2010, 8:54 PM
sounds like one hell of a party...


a backpack? whats that even mean?

Condoms? Or maybe those skinny little balloons that clowns make into balloon animals?

PEBKAC
10-28-2010, 9:01 PM
sounds like one hell of a party...


a backpack? whats that even mean?
Man, given the party in a bag he was packing, I have to wonder if that flash hider was even for the gun...I think he was planning to put that on a bong personally. ;)

timdps
10-28-2010, 9:06 PM
a backpack? whats that even mean?


A sawed off, short barreled straw from McDonalds, to snort all that stuff up with...

morfeeis
10-28-2010, 10:49 PM
it's funny but all i want to know now is whats "drug trafficking paraphernalia"? that could be anything, like DrRockso said a condom or a balloon? i know it's just an added charge but come on now they're just looking for stuff to add to the BG case....

greasemonkey
10-28-2010, 11:10 PM
it's funny but all i want to know now is whats "drug trafficking paraphernalia"? that could be anything, like DrRockso said a condom or a balloon? i know it's just an added charge but come on now they're just looking for stuff to add to the BG case....

It's kinda like saying he had some bone severing devices...most of us refer to them as fingernail clippers but it's all in what social class you're from that really defines what they are called

socal2310
10-29-2010, 6:53 AM
Most of us don't care all that much. . .

But if you want to get picky you can type it in Word or another word processor that does some of the spelling and grammatical checking - and then copy and paste to the forum. Really not worth it, IMHO.

Or drop IE and go for one of the many browsers with an internal spell check. It's not like ten years ago when poorly coded websites could only be rendered by IE.

Ryan

guns4life
10-29-2010, 7:25 AM
So has anyone ever figured out what the "shoulder thing that goes up" is? Anyone with common sense would guess it is a collapsible buttstock, but since it's coming from the mouth of a moron, you really can't assume anything. She could have been talking about a flip up iron site as far as we know.

The gentlemen in my sig is in posession of the dreaded "shoulder thing that goes up"...and we all know what kind of damage it's capable of. ;)

greasemonkey
10-29-2010, 8:17 AM
My guess is an AK underfolder or *maybe* a side-folding AK/AR...you know, like a barrel shroud:rolleyes: "no, that's not what it is but..."

So has anyone ever figured out what the "shoulder thing that goes up" is? Anyone with common sense would guess it is a collapsible buttstock, but since it's coming from the mouth of a moron, you really can't assume anything. She could have been talking about a flip up iron site as far as we know.

inbox485
10-29-2010, 9:40 AM
Or drop IE and go for one of the many browsers with an internal spell check. It's not like ten years ago when poorly coded websites could only be rendered by IE.

Ryan

Mosaic for the win!

Shiboleth
10-29-2010, 10:29 AM
Except Heller and McDonald foreclosed such shenanigans.

Exactly, and being such, a situation that shows clearly that Brady gun regulation has no effect on public safety can only be a good thjng.

loather
10-29-2010, 10:45 AM
I don't know **** about Minnesota state courts, but my impression ....

Minnesota? Don't you mean Wisconsin? 'Cause after all, that's where Milwaukee is. :)

HowardW56
10-29-2010, 11:07 AM
If the gun store prevails, I wonder if they could pursue a Malicious prosecution lawsuit...

Are the Brady's on the complaint?

wash
10-29-2010, 12:03 PM
I wonder, would an FFL who's knowingly participating in straw sales and whose black customers are not being profiled put up a sign like that?

I don't think so.

It's funny that all of the solutions for stopping straw sales are unconstitutional except if they actually locked up the straw purchasers.

As Bill and others have said, it's a political problem. The politicians need the welfare mom vote to stay in office. That's the way they can win office by offering more and more social services to the poor paid for by the rich. It's a numbers problem because there are far more poor than rich.

highpowermatch
10-29-2010, 12:27 PM
Let's hope the lawsuit is dismissed if the gun store is following regulations, and let's hope they get prosecuted to the full extent of the law if they are dealing in dirty business.

Likely they are the *last* LEGAL link in the chain that got that gun in the gang banger's hand. Someone's gotta be #1 on that list..I just find myself wondering why they are usually at the top. High-crime area? Shady business? I'm sure it will come out of the court case.

-Jason

Since they are the largest in the area they probably have the best prices, criminals shop around.

loather
10-29-2010, 2:33 PM
Regarding the welfare baby mama drama:

Sorry, you commit a crime like this, you lose. You deserve to be in jail. I don't care how many gangbanger babies you shoot out - you should have thought about that before knowingly committing a felony. Hell, make an example out of a couple of them. That crap will stop *real* fast.

Dr Rockso
10-29-2010, 2:40 PM
Regarding the welfare baby mama drama:

Sorry, you commit a crime like this, you lose. You deserve to be in jail. I don't care how many gangbanger babies you shoot out - you should have thought about that before knowingly committing a felony. Hell, make an example out of a couple of them. That crap will stop *real* fast.

Yeah, selective enforcement of laws is bad stuff all around. It's not like these are laws that one can break by accident, either. They have to knowingly perjure themselves when filling out the 4473, and they have to know that they're providing a firearm to a prohibited person (who they probably also know is a gangbanger). Throw the book at 'em.

blakdawg
10-29-2010, 3:09 PM
Minnesota? Don't you mean Wisconsin? 'Cause after all, that's where Milwaukee is. :)

Whoops, good catch.

wash
10-29-2010, 4:38 PM
Regarding the welfare baby mama drama:

Sorry, you commit a crime like this, you lose. You deserve to be in jail. I don't care how many gangbanger babies you shoot out - you should have thought about that before knowingly committing a felony. Hell, make an example out of a couple of them. That crap will stop *real* fast.
Another issue is that after the baby momma gets arrested, what happens to her kids? I guarantee the fathers aren't going to step up.

It's an issue and the reason why it's so bad is because it hasn't been enforced so lots of baby mommas do it.

And if you get down to the core, the same racism that led to gun control laws also is responsible for destroying poor families by making welfare an economic reason to not marry. And descrimination in the workplace was a reason why some minorities were poor...

loather
10-29-2010, 11:34 PM
Another issue is that after the baby momma gets arrested, what happens to her kids? I guarantee the fathers aren't going to step up.

Not that, "for the children," crap again. What happens to her kids is simply not my problem. They can go into the system, and they can be taught that they're there because their parents couldn't follow laws. Why should you be handled any differently because you have children? It's no excuse, especially not so when you're trying to shirk responsibility for your actions.

It may sound harsh, but face it: it's a harsh world. My parents were law-abiding and understood that if they broke the law, the ones that would end up losing in the end were me and my siblings. If these idiots can't understand that too, then they have no business raising children in the first place. Period.

hoffmang
10-30-2010, 8:55 AM
Back to the OP, FFL's are protected by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-397). The preamble states partially:


(3) Lawsuits have been commenced against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms that operate as designed and intended, which seek money damages and other relief for the harm caused by the misuse of firearms by third parties, including criminals.

(4) The manufacture, importation, possession, sale, and use of firearms and ammunition in the United States are heavily regulated by Federal, State, and local laws. Such Federal laws include the Gun Control Act of 1968, the National Firearms Act, and the Arms Export Control Act.

(5) Businesses in the United States that are engaged in interstate and foreign commerce through the lawful design, manufacture, marketing, distribution, importation, or sale to the public of firearms or ammunition products that have been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce are not, and should not, be liable for the harm caused by those who criminally or unlawfully misuse firearm products or ammunition products that function as designed and intended.

Then in the law:


Sec 3 (a) In General- A qualified civil liability action may not be brought in any Federal or State court.

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:

(1) ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS- The term `engaged in the business' has the meaning given that term in section 921(a)(21) of title 18, United States Code, and, as applied to a seller of ammunition, means a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to the sale of ammunition as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the sale or distribution of ammunition.

And from Title 18:

(21) The term "engaged in the business" means -

(D) as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section
921(a)(11)(B), a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to
engaging in such activity as a regular course of trade or
business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit,
but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional
repairs of firearms, or who occasionally fits special barrels,
stocks, or trigger mechanisms to firearms;


-Gene

Rossi357
10-30-2010, 9:15 AM
Which is it?
The Fraidy Brady bunch are idiots for insisting on this lawsuit, or they have a lawyer that is gaming them just for the hours tab he can run up?

loather
10-30-2010, 9:35 AM
Back to the OP, FFL's are protected by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-397). The preamble states partially:

[..snip..]

Then in the law:

[..snip..]

And from Title 18:

[..snip..]


Then this case should be thrown out rather quickly. What were the Bradys thinking?

loather
10-30-2010, 9:36 AM
Which is it?
The Fraidy Brady bunch are idiots for insisting on this lawsuit, or they have a lawyer that is gaming them just for the hours tab he can run up?

I'm thinking it's a combination of the two. Although, the Bradys typically use the LCAV lawyers, which are doing most of this work as a donation, so that likely won't deplete their war chest any.

N6ATF
10-30-2010, 9:38 AM
Maybe it's Gura in disguise. If he screws with Brady Campaign cases, he can at least bankrupt them with retainer fees, since the government apparently will never pay when it loses landmark civil rights cases.

Funtimes
10-30-2010, 11:49 AM
Did they not pay him yet for Heller? I saw all the dispute over the hourly rate, but wasn't sure if it ever got decided.

hoffmang
10-30-2010, 12:08 PM
Did they not pay him yet for Heller? I saw all the dispute over the hourly rate, but wasn't sure if it ever got decided.

Still being fought by D.C.

-Gene

HalfMeltingEyes
10-30-2010, 12:18 PM
I visited the Brady website for 14 seconds, and my brain turned into mush. :ack2:

jdberger
10-30-2010, 12:52 PM
These aren't LCAV lawyers (atleast I don't think so).

So, the question remains, what are experienced ambulance chasers like these lawyers doing with this dog of a case?

What do they know that we don't?

Liberty1
10-30-2010, 6:11 PM
This smacks of a Brady Bunch fund raising gimmick. Brady is getting desperate.

HowardW56
10-30-2010, 6:13 PM
These aren't LCAV lawyers (atleast I don't think so).

So, the question remains, what are experienced ambulance chasers like these lawyers doing with this dog of a case?

What do they know that we don't?

It's what they don't know that will be the problem, for them...

wildhawker
10-30-2010, 6:25 PM
Or, what has Brady convinced them of and what is the fee agreement?


These aren't LCAV lawyers (atleast I don't think so).

So, the question remains, what are experienced ambulance chasers like these lawyers doing with this dog of a case?

What do they know that we don't?

jdberger
10-30-2010, 11:32 PM
Anyone interested in writing a letter or two to the local papers? I seriously doubt that the local journalists would know squat about PLCAA. Perhaps we could prompt them to ask a couple questions. Maybe a couple questions would help them on their way to distrusting the ... that Paul Helmke is shoveling.

campperrykid
10-31-2010, 1:47 PM
Rings true:
This smacks of a Brady Bunch fund raising gimmick. Brady is getting desperate.

Panic and desperation must be major chunks of the puzzle.

puppy8a9
10-31-2010, 8:00 PM
They probably won't, but that won't stop them from taking it all the way to the supreme court (only to get denied again). Costing Badger a bunch of money through legal fees is a possible attempt to put them out of business. Another case is also the Brady Center's attempt at again being relevant; they're grasping at straws and hoping one has pay dirt at the end. They're floundering, if you will.

Also note that the previous PLCAA-protected cases were against manufacturers, not retailers. This may have different consequences, but I doubt it. However, if what their (mostly hogwash) press release says is true, though, about the gang member knowingly being a prohibited person, then things don't look good for Badger. If the background check came up clean, though, then the failing is that of the agencies responsible for that background check, not the retailer.

This is concerning, retailers need some decent case law protecting them. Maybe the Brady Camp should sue the DOJ for not drug testing the guy before they gave the ok....... ridiculous

I hope the retailer gets correct representation and backing.

hoffmang
10-31-2010, 8:33 PM
This is concerning, retailers need some decent case law protecting them. Maybe the Brady Camp should sue the DOJ for not drug testing the guy before they gave the ok....... ridiculous

I hope the retailer gets correct representation and backing.

Retailers have already had cases dismissed. The pro-gun legal community is all over this.

-Gene

loather
11-01-2010, 2:13 PM
Retailers have already had cases dismissed. The pro-gun legal community is all over this.

I probably should have qualified my statement as, "Also note that the previous PLCAA-protected cases that I've been made aware of having gone to the Supreme Court ..." - I was unaware that retailers had already been vetted under this law.

This is a good thing. This means it's a frivolous suit - with luck the judge will punish the Brady crew for bringing such into his courtroom.

Ed_in_Sac
11-01-2010, 2:53 PM
Gonna guess that the strategy is not necessarily to win this case, but to intimidate the store owner and promote similar suits by individuals. We may see a push to change the law to permit this. And even if the cases don't win, they could bankrupt gun store owners with legal fees.

Gosh the Commies are crafty (JMO).

IrishPirate
11-01-2010, 3:04 PM
The complaint alleges that less than two weeks before purchasing the Taurus, Badger Guns negligently and illegally sold Fernandez a Masterpiece Arms 9 mm assault weapon, two high-capacity thirty round ammunition clips, and a flash suppressor.

I need some 30rd clips too, it would make loading my pre-ban MAGAZINES much easier. :D

If Badger is indeed guilty of all this, then i hope they get screwed. We don't need anyone out there giving the Brady Bunch any ammo........(yes....+1 for the pun!)

However, i hope that they can clear themselves and prove that they didn't do anything wrong so that the Brady Bunch looks like an even bigger bunch of douche bags than before.....

timdps
11-01-2010, 3:53 PM
Possibly the Bradys are suing to show that the NICS/Brady check is not tough enough and that it needs to be strengthened?

Tim


Gonna guess that the strategy is not necessarily to win this case, but to intimidate the store owner and promote similar suits by individuals. We may see a push to change the law to permit this. And even if the cases don't win, they could bankrupt gun store owners with legal fees.
(JMO).

N6ATF
11-01-2010, 4:02 PM
Possibly the Bradys are suing to show that the NICS/Brady check is not tough enough and that it needs to be strengthened?

Tim

Yep, "it needs to be strengthened so that only police can buy firearms, everyone else is guilty until proven innocent (never)"

2009_gunner
11-01-2010, 4:13 PM
Hoping Badger Guns counter sues for harassment, and takes Brady's remaining $50.

javalos
11-01-2010, 8:39 PM
Brady Campaign must first sue the government who does background checks. I am amazed that most people think that gun stores are the ones that okay the sale, fact is if a gun store balks at a sale because a customer doesn't look right or says some wrong things, the gun store can get in trouble for refusing a legal sale. That almost happened to a CA gun store owner that I knew, he had a customer that troubled him, the customer said things that raised red flags with the gun store owner, after all the paperwork was done and the weird customer left, the gun store owner called DOJ and asked them to not approve the sale and that he himself did not want to sell the guy a gun. DOJ told him to call in a couple of days, when he did, DOJ told him that the guy was clean and he had to make the sale or he would be in trouble. So there ya go!

robcoe
11-01-2010, 8:46 PM
Which is it?
The Fraidy Brady bunch are idiots for insisting on this lawsuit, or they have a lawyer that is gaming them just for the hours tab he can run up?

It cant be both?

CHS
11-01-2010, 8:50 PM
Brady Campaign must first sue the government who does background checks. I am amazed that most people think that gun stores are the ones that okay the sale, fact is if a gun store balks at a sale because a customer doesn't look right or says some wrong things, the gun store can get in trouble for refusing a legal sale. That almost happened to a CA gun store owner that I knew, he had a customer that troubled him, the customer said things that raised red flags with the gun store owner, after all the paperwork was done and the weird customer left, the gun store owner called DOJ and asked them to not approve the sale and that he himself did not want to sell the guy a gun. DOJ told him to call in a couple of days, when he did, DOJ told him that the guy was clean and he had to make the sale or he would be in trouble. So there ya go!

The ATF makes it pretty clear to gun stores (FFL holders) that if there is ANYTHING that they smell fishy, ANYTHING at all, they are to deny the sale and the ATF will back the FFL.

Who cares about the DoJ.

If the dealer didn't like the sale, then the ATF would have had his back.

The ATF likes bad gun sales even less than the Brady's.

fullrearview
11-01-2010, 9:11 PM
By God, the flash suppressor. The most dangerous firearms accessory KNOWN TO MAN.

Throw the book at these guys!

Not often do I/WE get to correct a mod.....But the shoulder thing that goes up is the most dangerous thing on EARTH!:D

timdps
11-01-2010, 9:42 PM
Here are a couple more articles:

http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/105900253.html

http://badgerherald.com/news/2010/10/31/milwaukee_cops_file_.php

My emphasis in bold.

From the first article
Milwaukee police launched an undercover investigation that revealed felons regularly frequented the store and used the range. Officers have continued to stop felons leaving the store in recent months.

Buyer's prior convictions
In the November 2007 shooting of officers Lopez and Arce, the guns were purchased just weeks earlier, according to the civil complaint.

On Oct. 16, 2007, Fernandez, 24, bought a Masterpiece Arms 9mm assault-style gun with a flash suppressor and two 30-round clips, it said. Eight days later, Fernandez returned and bought a Taurus 9mm handgun.

Fernandez previously had been convicted of marijuana and cocaine possession as well as carrying a concealed weapon, all misdemeanors that don't prohibit a gun sale under federal law.

But it is against the law to sell to a drug user, and Dunphy, the attorney, said Badger Guns employees should have seen that as a red flag.

"They are not entitled to play ostrich and stick their head in sand just because someone doesn't admit to being a drug user and sell to them," he said.

Another red flag was the short period between the sales and the kinds of guns he was buying, according to Daniel Vice, an attorney from the Brady Center. Federal law requires ATF to be notified if more than one handgun is purchases within five days.

"We have seen gun dealers involved in gun trafficking plan that to make sure the gun is sold just outside the reporting period," Vice said.

From the second article:
The suit alleges the company, Badger Outdoors, knew Jose M. Fernandez was a daily drug user who could not legally buy a gun, but the company sold two weapons to him anyway.

Fernandez also bought two guns six days apart in order to avoid federal gun sale reporting requirements, which the plaintiffs argue should have raised concern on the part of the seller, making Badger Outdoors negligent, according to the suit.

So no straw sale and he passed the NICs check. Good luck with that suit Bradys :nuts:



Tim

Stonewalker
11-02-2010, 8:10 AM
Here are a couple more articles:

http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/105900253.html

http://badgerherald.com/news/2010/10/31/milwaukee_cops_file_.php

My emphasis in bold......
Tim

Ah, so this is why the BC is leading this civil suit and not a DA or AG in criminal court - NO LAW WAS BROKEN. BC is either very clever and the goal of this action could be to bring attention to the "lacking gun control", or they are just very stupid.

Could any CGF lawyers opine about the BC's goals and the relative danger to RKBA of this suit? Since McDonald it seems we have only had wins. Could this be a lose for us, big picture?

wash
11-02-2010, 8:48 AM
This smells like an out of work actor trying to get arrested so that his name will be in the paper.

I think they just want to have a platform to vilify a gun dealer and try to make gun laws look lax because of one sad incident caused by a crook, not the dealer and not the gun.

BillCA
11-03-2010, 8:51 PM
Fernandez previously had been convicted of marijuana and cocaine possession as well as carrying a concealed weapon, all misdemeanors that don't prohibit a gun sale under federal law.
And from this, the Brady Bunch jumps to the conclusion that Fernandez was addicted to drugs. The other questions is how does the BC know that Badger knew of Fernandez's prior convictions? Did one employee know or was it "generally known" to all employees of Badger? :rolleyes:

The question on the 4473 is:

Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?
Being convicted of drug possession only implies you used those drugs.
Fernandez might not have used, but sold the drugs. But conviction is not proof of use or addition.

If a person had a herion habit two years ago and has been clean, never arrested or convicted, do he have to say "yes" to this question? I think not, because it asks if you are a user or addicted, not have you ever been.

Anchors
11-07-2010, 11:14 PM
From the Brady Campaign



I wonder how they're gonna get past the PLCAA?

Hey, is your default a shop in Old Town Scottsdale, AZ?

Haha, I grew up driving by that place several times a week.

jdberger
11-08-2010, 10:23 AM
Hey, is your default a shop in Old Town Scottsdale, AZ?

Haha, I grew up driving by that place several times a week.

It is. I used to love that store - though I rarely ever bought anything there. Marty Mandall was a character, for sure.

Here's an interesting obituary. http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2009/03/legendary-gun-dealer-passes.html

furyous68
11-08-2010, 11:16 AM
When you make a life decision to become an LEO, you take on the job well knowing that it involves the risk of being shot at or death. So if I work in an office cubicle and get a paper cut, that means I should sue Xerox?

Sue Xerox, the paper manufacturer for making the paper edge too thin & sharp, and sue your employer for unsafe work conditions! LOL :TFH:

On a more serious note, for the sake of argument, what if they sold a gun to a guy with a record? Could it be possible it was a shady deal? I hate the Brady Campaign, but it does sound like there might be a history of bad transactions with this store... just a thought.

Hold on, posted before reading the remaining 3 pages.... TBC

jdberger
11-10-2010, 11:00 PM
I updated the OP with the complaint.

Some highlights:

53. Defendants knew or should have known that certain factual scenarios indicate that a prospective purchaser may intend to supply handguns to the criminal handgun market. Those scenarios include, but are not limited to:

a. The type ofgun sold;
b. The number ofguns sold;
c. The time frame within which multiple guns are sold to a single
purchaser;
d. The type of ammunition sold;
e. The volume of ammunition sold;
f. The manner in which the guns are paid for, such as cash transactions;g. Facts suggesting a straw purchase, such as where one person is
selecting a handgun or handguns for multiple persons, or one person
appears to be selecting a handgun or handguns and another person
pays for them.

Ah - so how do I escape this particular profile? Isn't 9mm a "preferred caliber of criminals"? How about .38 Special? Isn't that the caliber of Saturday Night Specials?

How about small handguns? Easily concealed by the criminals? Big ones? Clearly those are "assault weapons"?

How should we pay? Layaway's out. Clearly the preferred method of criminals since they don't have steady sources of income. Cash? Only bad guys carry cash. Credit cards? Don't they give a credit card to just about anyone?

jdberger
11-10-2010, 11:12 PM
More fun:

72. Defendants are on notice that certain types of weapons are not sought after by collectors, hunters, or law enforcement, and are commonly used by criminals and juveniles.

Attached hereto as EXHIBIT 1 is a true and correct copy of a photograph depicting a Masterpiece Arms MPA930 9mm with a flash suppressor. This assault weapon is not sought after by collectors, hunters, or law enforcement, and is commonly used by criminals, as it was in this case. Flash suppressors are military-style features commonly used by criminals, and are not commonly used for self-defense or hunting. Thirty round ammunition magazines are high capacity magazines that are favored by criminals because they allow criminals to fire multiple times without pausing to reload, and are not commonly used for self-defense or hunting.

74. On October 24, 2007, just eight days after his previous purchase of military and common criminal weaponry, Jose M. Fernandez returned to Badger Guns, and purchased a Taurus International PT24!7 Pro 9mm handgun and two ten round magazines.

Wait!? I thought criminals liked flash suppressors and 30 round magazines? This is so confusing!

jdberger
11-10-2010, 11:14 PM
76. Fernandez's purchase of multiple handguns in a short time period, including an assault weapon; his purchase of a flash suppressor; and his purchase of high-capacity ammunition magazines were all indicators of a criminal gun purchase and an illegal straw purchase, that is, the illegal purchase' of a gun for another's use. Despite these indicators known to Badger, Defendants did not undertake any reasonable inquiry concerning the gun purchase and knowingly sold the gun to a dangerous and unlawful buyer.

Are you flippin' kidding me?

2009_gunner
11-10-2010, 11:59 PM
These Brady characters must have some kind of strange group delusional thinking going on.

It's one thing to try to pass these ideas in the blogs and soundbites, but to make these arguments in court?

inbox485
11-11-2010, 9:01 AM
These Brady characters must have some kind of strange group delusional thinking going on.

It's one thing to try to pass these ideas in the blogs and soundbites, but to make these arguments in court?

If you lie for long enough, you forget it was a lie.

CHS
11-11-2010, 9:34 AM
If you lie for long enough, you forget it was a lie.

Exactly. This is something that our side needs to TAKE TO HEART.

The Brady's say the same lies over and over and over again. As we all know, if you keep up the same lie for long enough, it becomes the truth.

Assault weapons, "large-capacity" magazines, saturday night specials. These are just some of the lies that the Brady's tell over and over again, no matter how many times we debunk them. To the average person out there, they become the truth and it makes it harder for us to show them otherwise.

We have to stay very vigilant about countering these lies as often as possible in as overwhelming numbers as possible.


Attached hereto as EXHIBIT 1 is a true and correct copy of a photograph depicting a Masterpiece Arms MPA930 9mm with a flash suppressor. This assault weapon is not sought after by collectors, hunters, or law enforcement, and is commonly used by criminals, as it was in this case. Flash suppressors are military-style features commonly used by criminals, and are not commonly used for self-defense or hunting. Thirty round ammunition magazines are high capacity magazines that are favored by criminals because they allow criminals to fire multiple times without pausing to reload, and are not commonly used for self-defense or hunting.

Sorry Brady's. That's a bunch of BS. I've got flash suppressors on most of my rifles so that I can shoot at night. Yes, I actually rather enjoy shooting at night.

As to the MPA930. It sure as hell is sought after by collectors. Like myself.

greasemonkey
11-11-2010, 9:50 AM
Every time I take someone new shooting, right about the point they have a big cheesy grin on their face after going through the first 10 rds in the AR, they try to push the button to take the magazine out and then look at me confused when the 'button' doesn't work.

That's when I get to tell them "oh no, you can't just push that with your finger, you have to push it with this(hand them bullet/chamber flag). You see, if I can push that with my finger, CA calls it an AW and says it'll make me go shoot police and children".

'That's what the assault weapon ban does? That's so ______ing stupid! Why do they have that law?:eek::confused:'

Rinse, repeat with standard/hi-cap mags in fixed/detachable configurations.

Another anti is converted, I just experience this with two friends of mine last weekend...and the girl is even a fairly liberal blogger, to boot.

Exactly. This is something that our side needs to TAKE TO HEART.

The Brady's say the same lies over and over and over again. As we all know, if you keep up the same lie for long enough, it becomes the truth.

Assault weapons, "large-capacity" magazines, saturday night specials. These are just some of the lies that the Brady's tell over and over again, no matter how many times we debunk them. To the average person out there, they become the truth and it makes it harder for us to show them otherwise.

We have to stay very vigilant about countering these lies as often as possible in as overwhelming numbers as possible.

eaglemike
11-11-2010, 10:28 AM
Is there any way these "people" (the brady bunch) can get legally "slapped upside the head" by the system? C'mon, some of that stuff is so inane it's hard to believe they (the brady bunch) would even throw it out there. (insert head banging emoticon here).

CHS
11-11-2010, 10:36 AM
Is there any way these "people" (the brady bunch) can get legally "slapped upside the head" by the system? C'mon, some of that stuff is so inane it's hard to believe they (the brady bunch) would even throw it out there. (insert head banging emoticon here).

Turns out, it's not illegal to lie and/or be a complete and utter effing moron. :)

eaglemike
11-11-2010, 10:53 AM
Turns out, it's not illegal to lie and/or be a complete and utter effing moron. :)
Got that one - maybe sig line material re: the brady bunch? :D

It's just such a waste of $$$$ and time to deal with stuff that is obviously such a stretch....... :mad:

joedogboy
11-11-2010, 10:57 AM
In item 5 of their complaint, BRADY states that "Badger illegally sold this guna nd teh Taurus gun to Fernandez without exercising any care to prevent a dangerous and illegal gun sale".

If Badger did indeed comply with BATFE requirements, especially including any sort of background check, then this statement is an out and out lie, and should provide ample cause to counter-sue the Brady campaign as well as the two idiots who signed on with Brady for the suit.

Further, since Brady and two cops are essentially bringing Badger to court on the basis of imagined criminal activity (when there is no evidence that any criminal/illegal activity actually occurred on Badger's part), there seems to be the possibility of criminal charges against them - at least against the cops.

HowardW56
11-11-2010, 10:58 AM
It's just such a waste of $$$$ and time to deal with stuff that is obviously such a stretch....... :mad:

That may be their goal... Will the stores insurance cover the defense? IF not protracted litigation can break them.

joedogboy
11-11-2010, 11:02 AM
These aren't LCAV lawyers (atleast I don't think so).

So, the question remains, what are experienced ambulance chasers like these lawyers doing with this dog of a case?

What do they know that we don't?

That innocent people will sometimes not be able to afford to stick out a court case, and that they can often get their way just by pushing other people around.

joedogboy
11-11-2010, 11:14 AM
Here are a couple more articles:

http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/105900253.html

http://badgerherald.com/news/2010/10/31/milwaukee_cops_file_.php

My emphasis in bold.

From the first article
Milwaukee police launched an undercover investigation that revealed felons regularly frequented the store and used the range. Officers have continued to stop felons leaving the store in recent months.

Buyer's prior convictions
In the November 2007 shooting of officers Lopez and Arce, the guns were purchased just weeks earlier, according to the civil complaint.

On Oct. 16, 2007, Fernandez, 24, bought a Masterpiece Arms 9mm assault-style gun with a flash suppressor and two 30-round clips, it said. Eight days later, Fernandez returned and bought a Taurus 9mm handgun.

Fernandez previously had been convicted of marijuana and cocaine possession as well as carrying a concealed weapon, all misdemeanors that don't prohibit a gun sale under federal law.

But it is against the law to sell to a drug user, and Dunphy, the attorney, said Badger Guns employees should have seen that as a red flag.

"They are not entitled to play ostrich and stick their head in sand just because someone doesn't admit to being a drug user and sell to them," he said.

Another red flag was the short period between the sales and the kinds of guns he was buying, according to Daniel Vice, an attorney from the Brady Center. Federal law requires ATF to be notified if more than one handgun is purchases within five days.

"We have seen gun dealers involved in gun trafficking plan that to make sure the gun is sold just outside the reporting period," Vice said.




Fernandez previously had been convicted of marijuana and cocaine possession as well as carrying a concealed weapon, all misdemeanors that don't prohibit a gun sale under federal law.

But it is against the law to sell to a drug user, and Dunphy, the attorney, said Badger Guns employees should have seen that as a red flag.
How are they supposed to know about these misdemeanor drug convictions, unless the LEA that performs the background check reports back to them that they occurred, and that the customer is ineligible?


"They are not entitled to play ostrich and stick their head in sand just because someone doesn't admit to being a drug user and sell to them," he said.
Isn't that what the background check is for? And if the customer lied on the BATFE paperwork, isn't it the job of the BATFE to run them down and prosecute them?

Another red flag was the short period between the sales and the kinds of guns he was buying, according to Daniel Vice, an attorney from the Brady Center. Federal law requires ATF to be notified if more than one handgun is purchases within five days.

"We have seen gun dealers involved in gun trafficking plan that to make sure the gun is sold just outside the reporting period," Vice said.

So ATF defines five days as a short period, and these idiots want to redefine that period as eight days. This would be like saying that someone who purchased a handgun and then purchased another one 35 days later in a state with a "one handgun per 30 days" law is somehow behaving suspiciously and trying to circumvent the law.

What we have here are the Brady people essentially suing a gun store because the laws that they demanded aren't working the way they were supposed to.

Maybe the Bradys should take a hint and realize that the legislation that they back isn't effective at stopping criminals, and only serves to deter and harrass law abiding citizens - but I suspect that their legislation is working exactly the way they intended it to.

joedogboy
11-11-2010, 11:29 AM
I agree with her view point. And if you read it, the thing local officials are most upset with Badger Guns over are the large number of straw purchases happening at that shop. Liberals do blame business, rather than individuals for crimes committed by individuals. Business is treated like a scapegoat by politicians today the way religious and ethnic groups were for centuries in Europe, and for much the same reasons. That drives me nuts! The masses completely buy into it.

However, I would caution placing too much emphasis on Badger Guns being a shining beacon of how gun shops and gun owners should behave. I doubt they are the champion we want fighting our 2A fights for us. They seem pretty shady to me. Not because straw purchases happened there, but because we have at least one example of their feelings towards law enforcement and the law. If he turns out to be the scumbag he looks to be, and we all rally behind him then we all get painted with the same brush.

I would feel much more comfortable if the gun store in question didn't have that sign in front of their shop and I could trust without a doubt they were not behaving in a shady way. Think about it. Six police officers died from guns purchased at his shop, and he has the nerve to post a sign in front of his store calling them racists? This guy is definitely NOT the poster boy I want championing a 2nd Amendment fight.

Before backing him publically, I would need to know a lot more than I do right now. So far, I am not impressed with him. Not because of the accusations, but because of his lack of respect for law enforcement.

Most gun shops I know have a great relationship with local law enforcement. If not the department itself, then with the individual officers. A good number of them are former law enforcement themselves. Seeing a sign like that in front of a gun shop raises all kinds of red flags for me.

So you are saying that if the local PD decided to start harassing your minority customers, you would support that behavior as professional and proper?

When your minority customers started talking about how you were probably calling the cops on them, to harass them because you are a racist, you would support the behavior of the local cops as professional and proper?

When your business suffers, and you are subject to threats, vandalism, or other personal attacks by disgruntled people due to the racist and improper actions of the local PD, you would continue to support their behavior?

The sign was a way for the businessman to achieve several goals:

1) It called out improper behavior of the police, and subjected the police to public scrutiny for their actions and policies (rather than making him and his employees take the heat for the cops).

2) It establishes his business as being open and fair to minority customers.

3) It establishes his business as a place where you will be treated honestly, and where people will be "straight up" in their dealings with you.

4) It establishes his business as being part of the local community, and aware of the local community.

joedogboy
11-11-2010, 11:39 AM
I am not saying we throw in with the brandy bunch. I am saying I'm not going to rush to his defense and assume he is innocent. Any other normal gunshop who is not on record bashing cops?

If the MPD was actually targeting black customers for harassment, then the sign is much more of a simple statement of fact than "bashing".

Of course, some here probably think that IA at any given department are "LEO bashers".

inbox485
11-11-2010, 11:41 AM
Exactly. This is something that our side needs to TAKE TO HEART.

The Brady's say the same lies over and over and over again. As we all know, if you keep up the same lie for long enough, it becomes the truth.

Assault weapons, "large-capacity" magazines, saturday night specials. These are just some of the lies that the Brady's tell over and over again, no matter how many times we debunk them. To the average person out there, they become the truth and it makes it harder for us to show them otherwise.

We have to stay very vigilant about countering these lies as often as possible in as overwhelming numbers as possible.

That is one side of the sword. The other is when they overestimate how much brainwashing has taken effect and get laughed out of the room

Wherryj
11-11-2010, 11:43 AM
These Brady characters must have some kind of strange group delusional thinking going on.

It's one thing to try to pass these ideas in the blogs and soundbites, but to make these arguments in court?

Well there's always the problem with judges who don't know their job-the so called "activist" or "living" judges.

I've heard that in order to file a case, it is best if you can "judge proof" it. That probably wasn't made up because all judges uniformly rule based only on the true meaning of the present laws.

joedogboy
11-11-2010, 11:46 AM
The fewer gun shops you have in a region, the more likely some local "crime gun" will be traced to that store. That's one reason the trace-statistics are not always reliable in predicting the legality of gun sales.

You can follow all the restrictions and laws as an FFL and still have "the most" or be in the "top 10" dealers for crime guns.

Add another factor - location. If Badger is in a high-crime area and/or is located in/near the "low income" side of town, then they are more likely to sell inexpensive guns like Hi-Point, Cobra, Phoenix, etc. to serve their local clients. This will skew the numbers again for several reasons. That gun may change owners several times as "collateral", it's more likely to be stolen and some will certainly be obtained as a "strawman purchase".

I've seen FFL's turn down business when a couple wants to buy a gun "for her birthday" and the guy points out "That's the one you liked" or "That's the model you wanted". One FFL would not let someone purchase a gun because he'd written down the Taurus Model number on a piece of scrap paper.

The strawman is the hardest thing to prevent. The Brady Bunch will claim that just one incident is sufficient to close the shop and prosecute, no matter how well the purchase was pulled off (or what lies were used on the forms). There is no way to prevent a well executed strawman purchase. Sometimes, in a busy shop, it may be apparent if you focus on the buyers, but other demands on the clerk's attention may be enough of a diversion that he misses it. Heck, even a lack of sleep the night before can cause you to miss the clues.

Another factor would be volume of sales. It seems natural that a store that does twice the volume of sales would have twice the number of guns used in crimes.
The statistics don't cite percentages of guns sold that are used in crimes, just total number of guns sold that end up int he hands of criminals.

Trader Sports might be an example many of us (at least in the Bay Area) are familiar with. They weren't in a great neighborhood, had little local competition, and priced guns for volume sales. It is not surprising that they had more problems than other gun stores - since they sold several times as many guns as any of their nearby competitors.

Add volume to location and the different policies for reporting/tracing guns used in crime, and the statistics become largely meaningless.

CHS
11-11-2010, 12:40 PM
That is one side of the sword. The other is when they overestimate how much brainwashing has taken effect and get laughed out of the room

I've talked to a LOT of people that are not gun owners, but are pretty pro gun that say things like 'but I do think maybe people shouldn't have assault weapons'. Then I ask "Well what do you mean? What's an assault weapon". That's when they start spewing some of the crap that the Brady's say, or they call them "full auto's". I then have to tell them the truth.

Bottom line is, don't disregard the Brady's that quickly. Their lies have become the truth to MANY rational thinking people out there.

inbox485
11-11-2010, 12:56 PM
I've talked to a LOT of people that are not gun owners, but are pretty pro gun that say things like 'but I do think maybe people shouldn't have assault weapons'. Then I ask "Well what do you mean? What's an assault weapon". That's when they start spewing some of the crap that the Brady's say, or they call them "full auto's". I then have to tell them the truth.

Bottom line is, don't disregard the Brady's that quickly. Their lies have become the truth to MANY rational thinking people out there.

Unfortunately true...

N6ATF
11-12-2010, 10:59 PM
Turns out, it's not illegal to lie and/or be a complete and utter effing moron. :)

Only if you're a victim disarmer. Then you can get away with almost anything.

oni.dori
11-13-2010, 12:06 AM
These idiots haven't lost yet!? Sheesh, what a waste of time, and taxpayer money. They should be arrested for simply EMBEZZLING taxpayer money for even making them use it to fund court cases to listen to this tripe!

Assault weapons, "large-capacity" magazines, saturday night specials.

These are nothing more than hotbutton buzzwords they created to stir up fear and support of their moronic lunacy, similar to the whole "hope" and "change" horse crap we saw a couple years ago.

Turns out, it's not illegal to lie and/or be a complete and utter effing moron. :)

It is, when you are under oath...:eek:

jdberger
12-09-2010, 2:49 PM
From The Journal-Sentinel: http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/111331174.html

2 more Milwaukee officers expected to sue Badger Guns


Lawsuit to allege shop and owners were negligent, store is a nuisance
By John Diedrich of the Journal Sentinel

Dec. 4, 2010



Two Milwaukee police officers, wounded with a gun sold by Badger Guns, are expected to sue the West Milwaukee gun dealer Monday, joining two other wounded officers who earlier filed suit against the store.

Bryan Norberg and Graham Kunisch, who both have life-long disabilities as a result of the June 2009 shooting, allege in the latest suit that Badger Guns and its owners were negligent when selling the gun used to shoot them, and that the store has become a public nuisance, according to a copy of the complaint provided to the Journal Sentinel.

Norberg and Kunisch are two of six Milwaukee police officers injured over a 20-month period with guns sold by Badger Guns or its predecessor, Badger Outdoors.

<snip>

Glock22Fan
12-09-2010, 3:27 PM
I think that they should due BATF for not closing the gunshop down, if it is doing such blatent and obvious dealings with bad guys.

wash
12-09-2010, 4:03 PM
The part about correcting the straw purchaser when he said he was not buying the gun for himself sounds bad.

Except that the 4473 form requires a "yes" answer for question 11a: "Are you the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm(s) listed on this form?" and "no" answers for everything else (unless you are a nonimmigrant alien).

It's not uncommon for there to be a little confusion while filling out that form, especially for the first yes/no question which is 11a.

If that is what happened, a little confusion when filling out the form, that video evidence is just about meaningless but it might be enough to screw Badger in court. If it is not confusion and Badger knowingly participated in a straw purchase, that's bad. FFL's should know better than to complete that sale.

I have no problem with an FFL being held civilly liable for a criminal act but they better convict them of the crime first and then it stops there, where the crime happened, not somewhere else.

stix213
12-09-2010, 4:51 PM
Collins and Burton went to Badger Guns together in May 2009. Burton picked out the gun, saying, "That's the one I want," according to federal court documents.

Collins told the clerk he wanted the Taurus, but messed up on the federal background form, according to court records. The form asked if Collins was buying the gun for himself. He answered "no." The clerk at Badger Guns allowed him to change his answer to "yes," according to court documents. The sale was captured on the store's video camera.

Ouch