crosspost Two cases that may make dents in the PLCAA and the gun industry.

[flamin lib]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/126210472

[JonathanRackham]

1. Gander sells fishing equipment as well

"The plaintiffs are represented by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence"

The above is the problem with the case. Nguyen will probably say anything in court to get the sentence reduced.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

2. I don't know if I'm eligible to comment in that other group, so I won't ....

... but, the Gander Mountain case looks very weak. Many times, if my wife buys something, I'm the one who ends up carrying it to the car. Especially something as heavy as a rifle, or a ceramic casserole dish, or a lamp.

The other case, involving a pawn shop, might be stronger, but the scope is limited to that shop and its policies. I doubt it will have any industry-wide impact.

[Eleanors38]

3. I was unaware that industry recommendations had the force of law...

Still unaware.

[friendly_iconoclast]

4. "Courts have yet to sort out whether the NSSF protocols, which are voluntary...

...amount to an accepeted industry standard"

[friendly_iconoclast]

5. It's not a 'dent' in the PLCAA- negligent entrustment was already exempted from it

[tortoise1956]

6. Tough case

It will most likely hinge on whether or not the gun shop personnel can reasonably claim that Spengler was merely there to assist due to, say, Nguyen's inexperience with guns. This becomes very plausible, since Nguyen is a woman.

(Before you go after me for being sexist, consider out of the women you know, the percentage who are knowledgeable about guns. If that number is as high as 1 in 3, I would be surprised. Hell, I don't think that 1 in 3 of the MEN that I know are knowledgeable about guns.)

Also, bear in mind that unless the clerk knew Spengler personally, he had no way of knowing that Spengler couldn't own a gun, so it wouldn't have necessarily rung alarm bells. You also have the situation that they were neighbors, so there is a valid personal connection that could explain his presence. His age compared to hers would also support the idea that he was merely there to help her be informed. Not buying ammunition doesn't mean much either. I rarely buy ammo at the gun shops - they are usually way more expensive than going to Walmart, or (in my case) Ventura Munitions, a local store.

Having said all that, I don't think they can prove that Gander Mountain personnel should have known it was a straw purchase. I have gone along with others when they bought weapons, in order to help them with their decision, and it wasn't a straw purchase. Also, the Don't Lie program is NOT an industry standard, it is a suggestion. That means it has no force in law or regulation, so not using it doesn't automatically cause liability to devolve onto the Gun shop.

Based on the facts in evidence, I don't know if I would have made the sale. It would have depended a lot on what was said, who said it, and how it was said. In other words, the type of evidence that isn't available to the jury unless there is a recording of the purchase.

[jmg257]

7. "90% of crime guns traced back to a dealer come from 5% of dealers."

In the original cases that led to the PLCAA, there was much mention of the ATF giving manufacturers/distributers information with the seeming intent to have them self-police.

Doesn't the ATF issue federal firearm licenses? Why can't/don't they intervene?

[gejohnston]

8. They do intervine

and yes they do issue the licenses. Chances are, the ATF investigated and found no evidence of wrong doing. Under the Gun Control Act, the ATF, then the IRS, conducts regular inspections of inventory and records. The GCA mandates the inventory control system dealers and manufactures must have in place and keep the records for something like twenty years. Chances are, the ATF found that those individual guns were sold to someone else a decade or more before the crime and, in some cases, were reported as stolen in NCIC.
Simply because it traced to some of the largest FFLs, doesn't mean those FFLs sold the guns to the perp. The ATF has a term called "time to crime". That means from the time sold, if it was ever legally sold to begin with, from an FFL to the time the police ask the ATF to trace it for whatever reason, not all of them for criminal cases.

In these cases before PLCAA, the plaintiffs always lost, or the manufactures and dealers settled simply because it was cheaper than going to court. In loser pays, Brady left the plaintiff holding the bag.
https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/record-required-licensees
https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/record-required-licensees

[DonP]

9. Correct, it's the timing on those sales

With Chuck's Gun Shop here in Cook County they (Jesse Sr. and Father Pflaky Pfeleger & Co.), keep pointing out that; "Over 100 crime guns were sold by Chuck's". Then they demand that Chuck's be closed, as if that would have any impact on the violence in Englewood and other neighborhoods, but they desperately need a "scalp" to justify all their ranting.

What they always neglect to mention, is that they were sold an average of 8 to 9 years prior to the crime and have probably changed hands multiple times since originally sold.

Chucks, like most every other FFL, has scrupulous records of every sale going back decades. So the BATFE has nothing to charge them with or reason to shut them down.

[jmg257]

12. Thanks to both for the added info, and the timeline heads-up! Cheers. nt

[hack89]

10. Both cases fit within the six specific exceptions that allow gun manufacturers to be sued.

despite what you want to believe, suits against dealers are not uncommon.

[friendly_iconoclast]

13. We weren't supposed to notice that, or have the poor taste to point it out...

[sarisataka]

11. Don't these case rather prove

the validity of the PLCAA?

The gun industry does not have blanket immunity as is often claimed but legitimate suits may proceed. The law only blocks organized attempts of filing frivolous suits designed to do nothing more than tie up companies in court and drain cash.