The Brady Bunch is at it again

Suit Filed Against Ammo Dealers in Aurora, Colo., Theater Slayings

Wednesday, 17 Sep 2014 12:55 PM
By John Blosser


The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence has filed a lawsuit against firearms dealers they say supplied alleged shooter James Holmes with nearly 5,000 rounds of ammunition, a 100-round drum magazine and other tactical gear he allegedly used on July 20, 2012, to murder 12 people and maim at least 58 others at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado.

The suit is filed on behalf of Sandy and Lonnie Phillips, parents of Jessica Ghawi, one of those killed, against Lucky Gunner, which it claims sold the deranged Holmes more than 4,000 rounds of ammunition; the Sportsman's Guide, which allegedly sold the drum magazine and another 700 rounds of ammo; BulletProofBodyArmrHQ, where Holmes purchased body armor; and BTP Arms, which is said to have equipped Holmes with two tear gas grenades, the lawsuit states.

"A crazed, homicidal killer should not be able to amass a military arsenal, without showing his face or answering a single question, with the simple click of a mouse. If businesses choose to sell military-grade equipment online, they must screen purchasers to prevent arming people like James Holmes," the Brady Center said in a release.

Sandy Phillips said in the release, "Two years ago when our daughter Jessica was murdered, and we first heard the details of the massacre, I asked my husband: 'How can anyone order over 4,000 rounds of ammunition without raising any red flags? Why weren't any questions asked of the person who bought all of this ammunition?'

"As gun owners, parents, and citizens of this country, we hope that our lawsuit will spare other families the tragedy that we have gone through after the death of our beautiful daughter."

The lawsuit, filed in the Arapahoe County District Court in Centennial, Colorado, states, in part: "In the months leading up to the attack, James Holmes engaged in a pattern of bizarre behavior. He acted, looked, and expressed himself in a way that raised grave suspicions about his dangerousness and mental stability, so much so that during the same time period that the defendants sold Holmes thousands of rounds of ammunition and other combat supplies, a local shooting club did not admit Holmes because his behavior was so disturbing and suspicious."

While no specific monetary award amount is listed, the lawsuit asks for injunctions against the businesses, requiring them to reform their business practices; payment of court and attorney fees; trial by jury; and "any and all equitable relief that may be justified."

Holmes has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity to the 166 charges he faces, and his trial has been delayed three times while Holmes undergoes sanity evaluations, CNN reports.

Source: http://www.newsmax.com/US/Aurora-Col.../17/id/595210/

I feel for the families but placing more restrictions on our freedoms and more laws on the law abiding will accomplish nothing. If anyone believes adding another law to the already 20,000 gun laws in existence will stop a law breaker they’re simply being self-deceiving.

Red flag? I've ordered thousands of rounds of ammo online more times than I can count. I'll shoot 500 in a typical afternoon in the woods, yet 4,000 sounds preposterous. I know many, many people who shoot more than I do. Red flags would be raised hundreds of times a day! This sounds like suing auto makers for drunk driving accidents. Or more accurately, the gas station that they filled up at last.

They tried it before by suing gun manufacturers and got bitch slapped by the courts because of it. This is just a nuisance suit that the court should slap the prosecutors with an abuse of process sanction over and disbar the attorneys involved.

Personally I believe that the Brady Bunch should have a class action suit filed against them for conspiracy to deny citizens of the USA their Constitutional rights. Put their asses on the defensive for a while with some expensive litigation.

the gist of it

I don't know that the lawsuit is necessarily frivolous, or is about them trying to do an end run around the constitution. Bartenders have been held liable for serving drinks to obviously drunk people who then end up driving or in the hospital, but this is definitely a case of non gun owners misunderstanding the relative lethality.

My guns have been sitting unused since I moved up here and I'm sitting on something like 2K rounds. As a target shooter, it's easy to burn 500 rounds in an afternoon of load testing. I don't think most non gun owners understand what it is people are doing at the range. Nobody shoots 10 rounds and goes home, for instance. Besides, a spree shooter only needs 100 rounds to do something terrible. Having 4k rounds stockpiled doesn't really mean anything.

Really, the most effective gun control for limiting the effects of spree shooters would never, ever pass in the US legislature. Banning automatic rifles and semi-autos.

In Canada, it's pretty much straight up illegal to own a rifle capable of full auto or burst firing (With a few rare exceptions). Semi-autos are not covered by any specific restrictions, and I would fight like crazy should anyone try to ban them, but realistically, a bolt action would limit the death toll of a spree shooter.

That's an action I could at least understand, though I wouldn't support it. Ammo availability, though? They're barking up the wrong tree.

My belief is that such lawsuits are designed simply to engage the defendants in expensive litigation, who then will have to raise prices on their merchandise and hopefully (by the persecuting team) force the prices so far upwards as to limit it's availability merely from an economic standpoint.

Personally I believe that outfits such as the Brady Bunch need to get slammed with their own lawsuits to defend to use that same strategy on them to make their organization non-viable financially.

If they can play the game, then why use their strategy against them? The pro-gunners really need to stop being only on the defensive team all of the time.

Originally Posted by Nova_C

Really, the most effective gun control for limiting the effects of spree shooters would never, ever pass in the US legislature. Banning automatic rifles and semi-autos.

Autos have been banned in the US since 1986. Semi-autos encompass nearly every modern rifle used for hunting and sport. And even if banned, there are tens of millions in circulation. And let's just say everyone turned them in -I doubt it would have significant effect on a crazy person set to do harm. They tend to target schools and public places with dense groups of helpless people. A revolver or lever action wouldn't slow things down but so much. I personally don't want to see armed security and metal detectors at every school. The sad truth is, you simply can't account for an insane person bent on massacre. Despite the news coverage, these events aren't on the rise.

Personally, I worry more about what might happen with some crazy person intent on killing a large group of people if that person can't get a gun. It's not like bombs are hard to make! You very well might die from being shot at by a gunman but at least you have some chance of either running form one or attempting to jump one. You get blown up by a pipe bomb or something you didn't know was there and you have no control over it at all. Anyone remember Boston? Despite the media's ridiculous labeling of "weapons of mass destruction" the bombs used there weren't sophisticated or overly hard to make.

As to that, a big crowd in the right, or wrong, place depending on how you look at it, and a big heavy vehicle, with maybe a few modifications and a murderous person behind the wheel and you could also have a very high death toll on your hands too. And we let 14 year olds behind the wheel here. Stealing a car isn't hard either.

Why certain groups of people can't get it through their heads that blaming the particular tool used to kill rather than figuring out a way to eliminate the reasons why someone kills is the only way you are ever going to truly be able to prevent things like school shootings, etc. is beyond me .... Oh wait, that's because there is no clear solution to that problem, it's a completely thankless task and no one would get votes for it if they tried ... Much easier to blame an inanimate object.

Originally Posted by Rich Z

If they can play the game, then why use their strategy against them? The pro-gunners really need to stop being only on the defensive team all of the time.

They're not, really. The NRA has successfully defanged the DEA and the CDC isn't allowed to fund research into the causes of gun violence.
(Linky)

In all the other countries that do research that information, there is a positive correlation between the availability of guns, and a rise in actual violent death rates (Not just gun deaths, but homicides overall). Which means the NRA has made excellent strides in keeping that information from the American public. So I'd say they've been very proactive at keeping any kind of regulations off the books. I don't know of any other nation with a functional, non despotic government that has as few controls on firearm availability and distribution as the US. Really, the US is the best place to be if you're a gun enthusiast.