United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Gun Shop Forced to Pay $6m to Two Cops Because they Sold the Gun that was Used to Shoot Them
Source:
Free Thought Project
URL Source: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/gu ... gun-shoot/#GKvY8FiSQdfJpiVO.99
Published: Oct 14, 2015
Author: William Norman Grigg
Post Date: 2015-10-16 05:58:06 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1316
Comments: 16
In a verdict that could prefigure a political alliance between police unions and advocates of new restrictions on private firearms ownership, a federal jury in Wisconsin has ordered Milwaukee-based Badger Guns to pay nearly $6 million to two police officers who suffered severe injuries after being shot with a gun purchased at the store. This unprecedented civil award will encourage efforts to hold gun retailers – and, perhaps, firearms manufacturers – civilly liable for crimes committed by other people. It also reinforces the prevailing (and factually impoverished) narrative of an ever-escalating “war on cops.” Ten additional lawsuits similar to the one filed against Badger Guns are working their way through the courts. Officers Bryan Norberg and Graham Kunich were both shot in the face by Julius Burton during an altercation in the Summer of 2009. The officers, who arrived in a police van, detained the 18-year-old Burton for riding a bicycle on the sidewalk. A struggle broke out during which Burton was slammed into a wall. He then pulled a .40 caliber Taurus pistol and shot both officers in the face. Norberg, who suffered several shattered teeth and an injury to his shoulder, remains on the force. Kunisch lost his left eye and part of the left frontal lobe of his brain and was forced to retire. Burton, who pleaded guilty to first degree attempted homicide while armed, was sentenced to eighty years plus twenty years of “extended supervision.” Jacob Collins, who acted as the “straw buyer” by purchasing the handgun with $40 provided by Burton, was sentenced to two years in prison. Although he had received mental health treatment since the age of seven, and had a “diagnostic history” of schizophrenia, Burton was not taking his medication at the time of his encounter with the officers. During his sentencing hearing, Burton – who was chained to a wheelchair — said that he had bought the gun for self-protection, and that he shot the officers out of fear for his life. For a police officer endowed with “qualified immunity,” that claim is generally enough to justify the use of deadly force. In this case, the best Burton could do was a proposed deal in which he would plead guilty in exchange for a fifty-year prison sentence. Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Patricia McMahon, unsatisfied with the deal, imposed an additional thirty years, making the punishment an effective life sentence. Her ruling prompted cheers from dozens of uniformed police officers in the audience, including Chief Ed Flynn. Stringent limits on liability are imposed by the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). In the Milwaukee trial, however, the jury apparently set aside those limits. Instead, they accepted the argument made by the plaintiffs’ attorney, Patrick Dunphy, that it was not necessary to prove that the clerk “willfully” sold the gun to a straw buyer. All that was required was that ten of the twelve jurors to conclude that he was “negligent” in not discerning what were supposedly “tell-tale signs” that the transaction was illegal. Norberg was $1.5 million in damages, and Kunisch $3.5 million. Badger Guns was also ordered to pay $730,000 in punitive damages. Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton has called for the repeal of the PLCAA as part of a comprehensive plan for new restrictions on firearms sales and ownership. Her long-time political ally Rahm Emanuel, currently the embattled Mayor of Chicago, presides over a city that has some of the most restrictive firearms laws in the country – and one of the highest rates of gun-related violent crime, as well. Not having the luxury of blaming guns for his city’s violent crime rate, Mayor Emanuel has placed the blame on a different inanimate object: the cellphone camera. According to the Chicago Tribune, Emanuel blames what he has called the “YouTube Effect” – independent journalism that chronicles and publicizes police abuse through social media – for turning his once-fearsome police force into a timid, “fetal” creature. “We have allowed our Police Department to get fetal, and it is having a direct consequence. They have pulled back from the ability to interdict … they don’t want to be a news story themselves, they don’t want their career ended early, and it’s having an impact,” Emanuel said during a meeting with Attorney General Loretta Lynch.Alluding to unrest that has convulsed Ferguson and Baltimore in the wake of controversial episodes of lethal force by police, Emanuel claimed that police have grown tentative and leery of having their actions put “under the microscope.” “Officers themselves are telling me about how the news over the last 15 months impacted their instincts: Do they stop or do they keep driving?” Emanuel declared in a separate press conference. “When I stop here, is it going to be my career on the line? And that’s an honest conversation.” Despite his impeccable credentials as a liberal Democrat, Emanuel in this instance recited talking points favored by “law-and-order conservatives,” who condemn police accountability activists as the propaganda arm of the purported “war on police.” Burton’s criminal conviction would be applauded by the same conservative cohort who would regard Officers Norberg and Kunisch as wounded heroes. But would those conservatives, who are for the most part fiercely devoted to the right to keep and bear arms, also applaud the civil judgment against Badger Guns? The verdict in the Badger Guns lawsuit creates a real predicament for “law and order conservatives” – one that may possibly deepen. Police unions and related pressure groups who regard “officer safety” as the highest public priority – what could be referred to as the “Blue Privilege Lobby” – could find themselves allied with advocates of new restrictions on individual firearms ownership.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Isn't that the prime political reason behind all this? BTW,if those Little Bitches in Blue are all that concerned about "Officer Safety",maybe they should just turn their badges in? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Justice would be taking a gun and blowing the head off the perps.
Can we say the new GunRunner slash fast and furious scheme?
So....you are favor of gun stores being sued because one of their guns was used to shoot cops? In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much How does the court define negligent and tell-tale signs. Is a store supposed to have psychic powers or be mind readers?
Pffft! No need to repeal it when juries can simply ignore it. Let's hear it for jury nullification, right?
How about going back to mental institutions to house the mentally ill? There has to be a simple way. While we are at it, arrest, detain and evaluate all homeless individuals. If they are addicted and unable to care for themselves in a civilized manner, put them in treatment, once they are cleaned up release them. If they ever find themselves in that situation again, house them again. Soon they will know that it is better to work or live away from people than spend time in the slam. The only way we can help those who really need and would benefit from help, is to first categorize them, and give them the help they need. I assume most of the homeless are insane or addicted. The few who truly need a hand up, can then be helped while the others are treated as they should be treated, with pity and barred windows.
Someone was buying a gun for someone who was not eligible to own a gun. In fact the perp's friend clicked the wrong box and stated the gun was not for him and the sales clerk had him erase that and fill in the box that stated it was for him. That is a straw buyer and illegal. The law protects gun sellers and manufacturers from a law suit except in such cases like straw purchases.
Two years is way too little for the guy who made this shooting possible. But $40 for a gun? I thought we did away with "Saturday Night Specials".
But.....but....but,if we did that,what excuse could the Dims and their semi-Dim allegedly Republican cronies use as an excuse to confiscate guns and other property,and how the hell are all the lawyers going to come up with the money for political contributions? For all practical purposes,we had NONE of the societal problems we have today until the Dims passed legislation to empty the asylums. There were reasons behind that move that had nothing to do with humane treatment for the mentally ill. Namely the rise in both violent and property crimes that gave the hard left the excuses they need to pass un-Constutional laws that control the honest citizens while leaving the insane and the career criminals free to do what they do. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
IF that is true and not a PC exaggeration you and other leftist PC fools,why did the judge give the actual buyer around 2 years in jail? Why not federal charges and serious time? BTW,World Famous anti-gun witch Sarah Brady violated at LEAST two gun laws that SHE strongly pushed to become laws,one federal and one local,and the legal response was "Ah,shucks! That's ok!" AND....,both offenses were committed in violation of the gun laws in Washington DC that a REQUIRE MANDATORY sentence of 1 year in prison for each offense. No probation and no parole. She bought and gave her son a "deadly sniper rifle" (using her own rhetoric) outside of DC and then took the sniper rifle to DC and gave it to her son as a gift. BOTH actions illegal. She filled out the form saying she was buying it for herself because she knew if she admitted she was buying it for her son in DC the sale would be denied because it is(was) illegal to possess a rifle in DC. It was and still is a felony violation of the federal law SHE pushed to lie on a Federal Firearms Form and state you are buying a weapon for yourself and then give it to someone else that is not legally able to be in possession of ot. BOTH she AND her son were guilty of these firearm violations,and neither even had to pay a fine. IIRC,the rifle wasn't even confiscated,but given back to her. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Two years is not enough time for someone who KNOWINGLY bought and gave a firearm to a man he KNEW PERSONALLY to be a thug with mental and emotional problems that wasn't even taking his meds. IMHO,screw the firearms violation. Arrest and charge that goober with being an accessory to murder and add "extreme disregard for human life" to the charges. NOBODY can give any sort of weapon to someone they personally know to be both violent and mentally ill,and not expect someone to die as a result. But $40 for a gun? I thought we did away with "Saturday Night Specials". The gun probably cost over 400 bucks. The 40 bucks was the fee he charged the shooter for buying the gun for him. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You know that's quite a tidbit of inconvenient information you just posted, I somehow doubt you will get a cogent response from him...
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
He isn't an American and doesn't live here,so he really doesn't have the knowledge and experience to comment on US gun laws. ALL of his info on life in America comes from leftist sources. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Oh, I live in the states as an American citizen and an arch traitor but what Pete posted has zero to do with this case. The two cases have zero to do with each other and Pete is not a lawyer nor smart enough to be one. This shop knowingly sold a gun under a strawman deal - so visible that the store had to have the straw buyer's correct response changed to make the sale go through. That store employee should also be doing time if you ask me. http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/despite-verdict-badger- guns-lawsuit-still-faces-long-road-b99596802z1-332966071.html The straw buyer, Jacob Collins, and the shooter, Julius Burton, came to the store together, video showed. Burton stayed in the store the whole time and pointed out the gun he wanted. Collins initially marked on a form that he was not the buyer but was allowed to change that. Collins and Burton also left the store to get more cash to pay for the gun. Those are all obvious signs of straw buying, experts said, yet the Badger Guns clerk did not question Collins or refuse the sale.
OK,so you are stupid,not ignorant. My apologies. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Police unions and related pressure groups who regard “officer safety” as the highest public priority – what could be referred to as the “Blue Privilege Lobby” – could find themselves allied with advocates of new restrictions on individual firearms ownership.
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
(Edited)
#3. To: Deckard (#0)
#4. To: A K A Stone (#2)
Justice would be taking a gun and blowing the head off the perps.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#5. To: Deckard (#0)
(Edited)
All that was required was that ten of the twelve jurors to conclude that he was “negligent” in not discerning what were supposedly “tell-tale signs” that the transaction was illegal.
#6. To: Deckard (#0)
"Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton has called for the repeal of the PLCAA ..."
#7. To: sneakypete (#1)
#8. To: sneakypete, Deckard, Justified, rlk (#1)
How does the court define negligent and tell-tale signs. Is a store supposed to have psychic powers or be mind readers?
#9. To: Deckard (#0)
"Jacob Collins, who acted as the “straw buyer” by purchasing the handgun with $40 provided by Burton, was sentenced to two years in prison."
#10. To: jeremiad (#7)
How about going back to mental institutions to house the mentally ill?
#11. To: Pericles (#8)
Someone was buying a gun for someone who was not eligible to own a gun. In fact the perp's friend clicked the wrong box and stated the gun was not for him and the sales clerk had him erase that and fill in the box that stated it was for him.
#12. To: misterwhite (#9)
Two years is way too little for the guy who made this shooting possible.
#13. To: sneakypete (#11)
#14. To: CZ82 (#13)
I somehow doubt you will get a cogent response from him...
#15. To: sneakypete, CZ82 (#14)
(Edited)
#16. To: Pericles (#15)
Oh, I live in the states as an American citizen and an arch traitor
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]