My understanding is that the Air Force never properly filed his domestic assault conviction, so there is no violation of the Lautenberg Act, or even a lack of due diligence. This might be the only plausible cause of action they could find.See above. Why they are suing for magazines is puzzling. By the Lautenberg Act he should not have been able to buy fire arms at all in 2016.
Aren’t these stores supposed to do background checks ? If it’s illegal to own in Colorado then ...
Agree. People have sued the federal government and DoD before. This was gross negligence on the part of the Air Force.My understanding is that the Air Force never properly filed his domestic assault conviction, so there is no violation of the Lautenberg Act, or even a lack of due diligence. This might be the only plausible cause of action they could find.
Agree. But the WashPo article said he lived with his parents in Texas.
why not sue the state of texas while they're at itTexas judge says Sutherland Springs families can sue store that sold church shooter his gun, ammunition
Updated Monday, Feb. 4, 2019 at 10:35 a.m. with the judge's decision and more information about a federal lawsuit, and Friday, Feb. 1, 2019 at 5:26 p.m. with photos from the hearing.
SAN ANTONIO — A Texas judge has decided that victims and families of the Sutherland Springs church massacre can sue the sporting goods store where the shooter purchased his gun and ammunition.
In a case that could have big implications for gun laws here and across the country, Bexar County District Court Judge Karen Pozza on Monday denied Academy Sports + Outdoors request that the lawsuit be thrown out. Her decision means the lawsuit will proceed and could eventually go to a jury trial.
Pozza's order on summary judgment did not explain her decision.
The Sutherland Springs families allege the chain is liable for shooter Devin P. Kelley's carnage because employees at one of its Texas retailers sold him a high capacity magazine illegal in Colorado, his state of residence. The families are asking for millions in damages for physical and mental anguish, disfigurement and medical expenses.
The lawsuit could test the limits of state and federal gun laws and may answer some long-standing, hotly contested legal questions, like whether gun dealers must decline to sell certain items based on the buyer's place of residence and whether shooting victims can file civil suits, and get monetary damages, from these dealers in certain circumstances.
Lawyers for both sides went head-to-head in what was at times a heated debate on Thursday. During the nearly three-hour hearing, they argued over federal and state laws, and whether the store should have refused to sell Kelley the gun with which he killed and injured dozens at the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs on Nov. 5, 2017.
At the heart of the case is whether the federal definition of a firearm includes the magazine with which it is sold, and if a Colorado law banning the sale of high-capacity magazines applies to Coloradans who buy guns in Texas.
More at link: Texas judge says Sutherland Springs families can sue store that sold church shooter his gun, ammunition | Courts | Dallas News
It most certainly does not. The firearm is the component which includes the receiver.At the heart of the case is whether the federal definition of a firearm includes the magazine with which it is sold, ...
It most certainly does not.and if a Colorado law banning the sale of high-capacity magazines applies to Coloradans who buy guns in Texas.
Nor does one do a gun purchase background check for someone who isn't buying a gun.There is no such rule/background check for buying gas.
It most certainly does not. The firearm is the component which includes the receiver.
It most certainly does not.
This case is patently absurd, and the judge was an idiot for allowing it to go forward.
Nor does one do a gun purchase background check for someone who isn't buying a gun.
Texas judge says Sutherland Springs families can sue store that sold church shooter his gun, ammunition
Updated Monday, Feb. 4, 2019 at 10:35 a.m. with the judge's decision and more information about a federal lawsuit, and Friday, Feb. 1, 2019 at 5:26 p.m. with photos from the hearing.
SAN ANTONIO — A Texas judge has decided that victims and families of the Sutherland Springs church massacre can sue the sporting goods store where the shooter purchased his gun and ammunition.
In a case that could have big implications for gun laws here and across the country, Bexar County District Court Judge Karen Pozza on Monday denied Academy Sports + Outdoors request that the lawsuit be thrown out. Her decision means the lawsuit will proceed and could eventually go to a jury trial.
Pozza's order on summary judgment did not explain her decision.
The Sutherland Springs families allege the chain is liable for shooter Devin P. Kelley's carnage because employees at one of its Texas retailers sold him a high capacity magazine illegal in Colorado, his state of residence. The families are asking for millions in damages for physical and mental anguish, disfigurement and medical expenses.
The lawsuit could test the limits of state and federal gun laws and may answer some long-standing, hotly contested legal questions, like whether gun dealers must decline to sell certain items based on the buyer's place of residence and whether shooting victims can file civil suits, and get monetary damages, from these dealers in certain circumstances.
Lawyers for both sides went head-to-head in what was at times a heated debate on Thursday. During the nearly three-hour hearing, they argued over federal and state laws, and whether the store should have refused to sell Kelley the gun with which he killed and injured dozens at the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs on Nov. 5, 2017.
At the heart of the case is whether the federal definition of a firearm includes the magazine with which it is sold, and if a Colorado law banning the sale of high-capacity magazines applies to Coloradans who buy guns in Texas.
More at link: Texas judge says Sutherland Springs families can sue store that sold church shooter his gun, ammunition | Courts | Dallas News
Not the same thing.
There were rules in place here, and those rules, in order to protect the people they were made for, need to be followed....they were not.
There is no such rule/background check for buying gas.
The real issue is this guy was a bad Airman was court-martialed for a violent offense. That should have disqualified him. The Lautenberg Act.
NEW BRAUNFELS, Texas — The gunman suspected of opening fire at this town’s First Baptist Church Sunday was a former U.S. Air Force airman who had a string of legal troubles beginning in at least 2012, when he was court-martialed and sentenced to a year in military prison for assaulting his wife and child.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph...say-killed-churchgoers-in-sutherland-springs/
More on Lautenberg Act:
Domestic Abusers Are Barred From Gun Ownership, but Often Escape the Law
Excerpt:
WASHINGTON — In 1996, after a concerted push from Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, Congress made it illegal for anyone convicted of domestic abuse — even a misdemeanor — to buy a firearm. Mr. Lautenberg, who died in 2013, liked to say the law was “dedicated to the simple principle that wife-beaters and child abusers should not have guns.”
Yet in the two decades since, a large percentage of the perpetrators of mass shootings and other violent crimes have had run-ins with the law over spousal abuse — and have had little problem acquiring deadly arsenals. On Sunday, Devin P. Kelley joined that fraternity, gunning down 26 people at a church in Texas with an AR-15 military-style rifle that he bought two years after the Air Force convicted him of beating his wife and breaking his young stepson’s skull.
The Air Force on Monday acknowledged that Mr. Kelley’s domestic violence offense, clearly one that should have made him ineligible for a firearm, had not been entered into the National Criminal Information Center database. It pledged to conduct a sweeping review of all cases to determine if they had been properly reported.
[and if a Colorado law banning the sale of high-capacity magazines applies to Coloradans who buy guns in Texas.]It most certainly does not.
What law wasn't followed?Not the same thing.
There were rules in place here, and those rules, in order to protect the people they were made for, need to be followed....they were not.
There is no such rule/background check for buying gas.
You don't have to be licensed to own a gun in Colorado, except for concealed carry.No reason to believe he was licensed in any other state than the one he resided in...none that I know of anyway.
This case is patently absurd, and the judge was an idiot for allowing it to go forward.
I really wish people would stop bringing up Chicago, because it completely ignores the fact that Indiana borders the city. Most of the guns used in crimes in Chicago come from other states.This is really ridiculous. Tighter guns laws have done nothing to stop gun violence, Chicago and D.C. are proof of this. Gun homicides in Chicago rose by 61 percent between 2015 and 2016. That helped make the gun homicide rate in Chicago particularly huge compared to other similar cities. The rate was 25.1 per 100,000 residents in 2016, compared to 14.7 in Philadelphia and just 2.3 in New York. This is just another judge pushing the agenda from the bench. If the store followed all laws then they did nothing wrong. If they didn't then the ATF should be involved, not families looking for money.
I agree, or are illegally purchased on the street.I really wish people would stop bringing up Chicago, because it completely ignores the fact that Indiana borders the city. Most of the guns used in crimes in Chicago come from other states.
What law wasn't followed?
But the laws in Chicago should stop those guns, yes? My point is they don't. The statistics don't lie. You can pass 100 new laws and...news flash, criminals don't follow laws currently on the books, so there is no evidentiary data to show they will follow new ones. But to the OP point, this judge isn't basing a decision based in law but rather emotion.I really wish people would stop bringing up Chicago, because it completely ignores the fact that Indiana borders the city. Most of the guns used in crimes in Chicago come from other states.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?