Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumBrady Center Leads Challenge to Arms Act that Protects Firearms Industry
http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/gun-shots/2012/08/brady-center-leads-challenge-arms-act-protects-firearms-manufacturersThe federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, a 2005 law that protects the gun industry from liability lawsuits by gun-grabbers, has been challenged in Alaska in a case that may give gun-control activists a chance to test the law before the U.S. Supreme Court, according to an analysis by Andrew Longstreth published by Reuters on August 9.
At issue is whether a Juneau gun dealer is liable for letting a homeless felon leave his store with a rifle, which he used to murder a total stranger two days later. The family of the murder victim, Anchorage contractor Simone Kim -- and the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence -- filed a wrongful death lawsuit that has made it to the Alaska Supreme Court.
The Kims are challenging the constitutionality of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which protects the gun industry from most lawsuits. "It's a very important case. This is the first state Supreme Court that will be deciding the breadth of the law as it applies to gun dealers who supply criminals with guns and profit from that," said Jonathan Lowy, an attorney with the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in Washington, D.C., who is co-counsel for the Kims.
On August 2, 2006, Jason Coday, a drifter originally from Vernal, Utah, with a lengthy arrest record, left a Juneau gun store carrying a Ruger .22 rifle. Two days later, he used the gun to kill Simone Kim, a 26-year-old contract painter in downtown Juneau. Coday was convicted of first-degree murder and other charges and sentenced to 101 years in prison.
<more>
xchrom
(108,903 posts)gejohnston
(17,502 posts)if the dealer violated federal law and the terms of his license, he won't be protected. If that is the case, the Brady Campaign is wasting their time.
It's a strange argument to make if the intent is to challenge the law because, by virtue of the Brady Center's own investigation, it appears the law was not followed. The bottom line: either Coday slipped out of the store with a gun or Coxe illegally sold Coday the rifle.
SecularMotion
(7,981 posts)gejohnston
(17,502 posts)IIRC, Coxe's story is that the clerk left Coday alone with the weapon unsecure. Coday walked left $200 on the counter and walked out with the gun. If true, that clerk should not still be there.
Ripping off a gun store is like robbing a bank, both federal crimes. Was Coday charged or convicted of stealing the gun?
Did the ATF sanction Coxe lack luster inventory control? I heard of FFLs losing their license for less.
If the answers are yes/no, then the judge was correct
If the answers are no/yes, then his decision was not correct.
SecularMotion
(7,981 posts)but true or false I think it would fall under " other actions for which they are directly responsible."
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)most gun stores I have been in, there was at least two clerks near by all of the times. The other ones was just the owner and they never left you alone with anything.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,482 posts)NO!!! Say it ain't so.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)That's always how it's done. The customer chooses a firearm, then pays for it, then comes the background check. If the background check comes back clean, the dealer is authorized to deliver the firearm to the customer.
If the dealer has followed the law, regulations, and procedures to the letter, why should he or she be held liable for a failure of the system to stop a sale to a known felon?
BigAlanMac
(59 posts)that certainly is not true anywhere I've bought guns from stores. (Ohio and Virginia)
No money changed hands or guns passed over until I filled out a 4473, it was phoned in, and a "go ahead" was received from NICS. I know this to be true for everyone else I know who has bought a firearm from an FFL in the last couple of decades.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)Dealers want to make sure they get paid for their time whether or not the transfer is successful.
In any case, it really doesn't make any difference as long as a firearm doesn't get delivered to a non-licensee until the background check is complete. I don't see anything in this case that suggests the dealer who sold the rifle did anything wrong.
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)of a firearm.
1. Choose the one you want. This can well be the hardest part of the transaction.
2. Fill out the required Federal Form,re 4473. About 5 minutes.
3. Show them your Texas CHL.
4. Pay for purchase.
5. ENJOY!
No phone call, no waiting.
Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas
Missycim
(950 posts)how can the gun maker be held responsible for the actions of the dealer?
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,482 posts)...it's called a miscarriage of justice.
aikoaiko
(34,183 posts)This dealer may be a bad dealer, but that needs to be proven.
Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act doesn't protect dealers who commit crimes when transferring firearms.