Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
American
Joined
·
3,289 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Seriously?

SAN ANTONIO — Relatives of three people killed in the November shooting rampage inside a Texas church are suing a sporting goods chain that sold two firearms to the gunman.

The lawsuit filed Wednesday seeks $25 million in damages. It alleges that Texas-based Academy Sports & Outdoors was negligent in selling an AR-556 rifle to Devin Patrick Kelley. The weapon was used in the Nov. 5 attack.

The lawsuit was filed in San Antonio by the family of Joann Ward. She and her two daughters were among the more than two dozen people killed in the attack.

The sporting goods retailer released a statement offering condolences to the victims but said it complied with all laws. The company previously confirmed Kelley purchased two firearms from two of its stores in San Antonio in 2016 and 2017.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,405 Posts
Watch day time tv
 
  • Like
Reactions: janedoedad

·
I watch the watchers
Joined
·
12,885 Posts
Now what kind of attorney would tell their client they had a case?
One that said, "We'll need XXX for a downpayment and then when the case is settled we'll take xx% of the award. The money you're paying now is really just to show your earnestness in pursuring justice."

(Of course, I'm just a lay person; I don't know if such a structure is either legal or ethical.)
 

·
Proud GCO member.
Joined
·
7,960 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: RedDawnTheMusical

·
American
Joined
·
3,289 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Some have suggested, elsewhere, that the shooter had a CO address at the time of the purchase of the long rifles and thus Academy should not have sold to him in TX. Unfortunately for them, I believe that the Texas resident issue only applies to handgun purchases. Vaild ID which can come in many forms, is all that is required for long gun purchases in TX.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,960 Posts
One paid by the anti-gun lobby, which is using the family as canon fodder.

After losing, they will be used again to show how evil gun sellers are.

Immoral and unethical, but those aren't burdens that haunt progressives.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...ents-broke-suing-gun-seller-article-1.2583138
The Brady Campaign was the driving force behind that Aurora theater shooting lawsuit. I wonder why they incurred no financial responsibility for their part in using the Phillips family the way they did?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,960 Posts
Vaild ID which can come in many forms, is all that is required for long gun purchases in TX.
That applies to every state I believe. Unless a state specifically prohibits long gun sales to non-residents, you are good to go. There's no federal restriction either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,458 Posts
That applies to every state I believe. Unless a state specifically prohibits long gun sales to non-residents, you are good to go. There's no federal restriction either.
I was thinking it only applied to handguns and then it had to be shipped to a FFL
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,600 Posts
Unless there's more to the story than we know, any lawyer putting his name on such a frivolous lawsuit should be in danger of (1) being disciplined by the State Bar, and (2) paying all of the legal fees and other incidental costs incurred by the defendant.
When the government regulates the retail sale of guns to a high degree, as we do in America, compliance with those government laws and regulations is the ONLY duty imposed on the seller of a firearm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,405 Posts
Unless there's more to the story than we know, any lawyer putting his name on such a frivolous lawsuit should be in danger of (1) being disciplined by the State Bar, and (2) paying all of the legal fees and other incidental costs incurred by the defendant.
When the government regulates the retail sale of guns to a high degree, as we do in America, compliance with those government laws and regulations is the ONLY duty imposed on the seller of a firearm.
But guns! Academy should read the mind of the people buying them and know not to sell to the crazy people that are approved by the government.
 

·
NRA Instructor
Joined
·
3,391 Posts
Unless there's more to the story than we know, any lawyer putting his name on such a frivolous lawsuit should be in danger of (1) being disciplined by the State Bar, and (2) paying all of the legal fees and other incidental costs incurred by the defendant.
When the government regulates the retail sale of guns to a high degree, as we do in America, compliance with those government laws and regulations is the ONLY duty imposed on the seller of a firearm.
I'm going out on a limb and assuming the lawyer has an escape clause for him/her self for #2 which places any financial burden on the plaintiffs if (when) the case goes south.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,960 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,222 Posts
Feature, not bug. The hoplophobes want to sacrifice a victim's family on the alter of nobility privilege to prove moral superiority. We need to extend the "loser pays" from just the named plaintiff to the sponsors of the SLAPP suits. Heck, go after the law firms if there is a pattern of failed SLAPP suits. RICO for lawyers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UtiPossidetis

·
Proud GCO member.
Joined
·
7,960 Posts
Feature, not bug. The hoplophobes want to sacrifice a victim's family on the alter of nobility privilege to prove moral superiority. We need to extend the "loser pays" from just the named plaintiff to the sponsors of the SLAPP suits. Heck, go after the law firms if there is a pattern of failed SLAPP suits. RICO for lawyers.
They system allows the family to do that. But they no doubt signed away that right in exchange for "free" legal services.

Caveat emptor
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
69,784 Posts
Texas law.

SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON BRINGING OF QUALIFIED CIVIL LIABILITY ACTIONS IN FEDERAL OR STATE COURT.

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

    (b) Dismissal of Pending Actions- A qualified civil liability action that is pending on the date of enactment of this Act shall be immediately dismissed by the court in which the action was brought or is currently pending.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/s397/text
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,600 Posts
Texas law?

You cited a federal law that trumps any Texas law on the subject.

Section 2 of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act says:

  • (b) Purposes- The purposes of this Act are as follows:

    • (1) To prohibit causes of action ...solely caused by the criminal or unlawful misuse of firearm products or ammunition products ...

      (2) To preserve a citizen's access to a supply of firearms and ammunition for all lawful purposes...

      (3) To guarantee a citizen's rights, privileges, and immunities...Fourteenth Amendment ...

      (4) To prevent the use of such lawsuits to impose unreasonable burdens on interstate and foreign commerce.

      (5) To protect the right, under the First Amendment ...

      (6) To preserve and protect the Separation of Powers doctrine and important principles of federalism, State sovereignty and comity between sister States.

      (7) To exercise congressional power under article IV, section 1 (the Full Faith and Credit Clause) of the United States Constitution.
[Emphasis added]
Why would Congress preempt state products liability laws this way and say that Congress is doing it under the authority of the Full Faith & Credit clause?

It should be the Supremacy Clause, Article VI, paragraph 2.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top