IN: Brady Bums lose another lawsuit against gun seller

[ELB]

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/04241701GS.pdf

Indiana Supreme Court decision.

Short course: convicted felon convinced an acquaintance to buy a handgun for him from a gun shop. He later used the gun to wound a cop, who returned the favor by killing the felon. The cop, with the help of the Brady Bums, then sued the gun shop as a company, one of the officers of the company personally, and the actual straw buyer for damages and for equitable relief on a public nuisance claim.

The gun shop filed motions in the trial court seeking summary judgement in their favor that under Indiana law such suits are barred. The trial court ruled that the suit could proceed, so the gun shop appealed to the appellate court, where they also lost. They then appealed to the ISC, which ruled that Indiana law does indeed bar suits against gun shops for the actions of third parties, and threw out all claims for damages. The only claim to survive was a public nuisance one, but my understanding is that this may go away later.

You can check my work at the link.

[Flightmare]

Sounds like the gun shop did nothing illegal or wrong, and should not be penalized. The "friend" who did the straw purchase? I can't think of any of my friends who would knowingly commit a crime for me, and I'm thankful for that.

[Flightmare]

Maybe it's just me, and maybe this is just plain common sense but the only one who should be sued (and THEN jailed for life, if I were king) is the straw-purchaser.

[Oldgringo]

Maybe it's just me, and maybe this is just plain common sense but the only one who should be sued (and THEN jailed for life, if I were king) is the straw-purchaser.

I agree but, if that were the case, there would be starving lawyers and their families on every corner.

[rotor]

If I remember this was a case where the gun store knew that this was a straw purchase and still went through with the sale. Not necessarily a 2ndA win here.

[Jusme]

If I remember this was a case where the gun store knew that this was a straw purchase and still went through with the sale. Not necessarily a 2ndA win here.

Were they able to prove this? I read where the BG had been in earlier, and looked at the gun, but unless they can prove that a particular clerk remembered him, and knew him to be a prohibited person, then I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt. If they were complicit, then they should be charged, and lose their FFL.

[ELB]

If I remember this was a case where the gun store knew that this was a straw purchase and still went through with the sale. Not necessarily a 2ndA win here.

This is what the Brady Bums alleged. Not clear to me that the store knew at all. Two guys talked about a gun that one liked, and AFAIK no evidence the store knew either individual. The other came back later and bought it, signing a statement that he is the lawful buyer of the gun. So the store is liable for a straw purchase despite a signed statement to the contrary because a clerk saw the two talking about it? Or should the clerk also factor in, besides the conversation, the race, tattoos if any, grooming, clothing, etc of the two individuals, which pretty much all he had to go on?

The gun store should be free to sell or not sell based on its own criteria, but shifting the legal liabilityfor not committing a crime from the purchaser to the seller when there is no collusion is not right. It's because of the anti-2A forces abuse of civil law in these matters that many legislatures have enacted the laws under which this case was dismissed.

[der Teufel]

Sounds like the gun shop did nothing illegal or wrong, and should not be penalized. The "friend" who did the straw purchase? I can't think of any of my friends who would knowingly commit a crime for me, and I'm thankful for that.

Friends help you move.

Real friends help you move bodies.

[sjfcontrol]

So, did the Brady "Bums" have to pay the legal fees for the defendants in all three trials?