User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/15/2015 11:55:59 AM EDT
[#1]
So exactly who is being sued? The former owner of a now defunct business? The alleged incident happened in 2009, that owner lost their FFL in 2011. The business closed down. A new owner reopened a gun store under a different FFL and name.... different business entity altogether, even though it's in the same building. The former & current owners may be brothers, but that does not make the current owner responsible for the former's actions, AFAIK.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2015 12:00:12 PM EDT
[#2]
*Edit-beat me to it.
I was thinking the same thing. It's like suing a Sizzler for food poisoning after a Golden Corral moves in. Brew city has a policy where you need to pay $25 and qualify for a membership to purchase guns there. Part of the membership requires that you can operate a handgun and hit a paper target. I imagine that this weeds out a lot of trash being the closest gun shop to Milwaukee. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2015 2:08:15 PM EDT
[#3]
The whole thing is just a "throw it at the wall and see if anything sticks" exercise by the Brady Campaign as a hail-Mary punt to see if by some miracle they can generate a court precedent out of this.
Second tier motivations are make-work to be "looking like they're doing something... anything" to go back to donors with when hat-in-hand. Third are the two officers themselves, who instead of "cowboy up" have let their .gov/union mentality get the better of them, and are looking for a chance at a payout, and because all the Milwaukee political insider crowd approves. It mainly hinges on if they can prove Badger knowingly helped Collins correct the 4473. And if the Brady Lawyers and Dunphy did a good job "jury shopping" during Voir Dire. And it looks like the Brady lawyers got severed from the case through misconduct. 
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/attorney-breach-stalls-milwaukee-officers-gun-store-lawsuit-b99481327z1-299762131.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2015 2:26:59 PM EDT
[#4]
Some of the comments are fun.
It's amazing how many uninformed, unintelligent left-wing fruitcakes there are in the world blaming the NRA for everything from this incident to male pattern baldness. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2015 2:46:02 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Some of the comments are fun. It's amazing how many uninformed, unintelligent left-wing fruitcakes there are in the world blaming the NRA for everything from this incident to male pattern baldness. They are amusing... +1 V OUT |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2015 6:36:01 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The whole thing is just a "throw it at the wall and see if anything sticks" exercise by the Brady Campaign as a hail-Mary punt to see if by some miracle they can generate a court precedent out of this. Second tier motivations are make-work to be "looking like they're doing something... anything" to go back to donors with when hat-in-hand. Third are the two officers themselves, who instead of "cowboy up" have let their .gov/union mentality get the better of them, and are looking for a chance at a payout, and because all the Milwaukee political insider crowd approves. It mainly hinges on if they can prove Badger knowingly helped Collins correct the 4473. And if the Brady Lawyers and Dunphy did a good job "jury shopping" during Voir Dire. And it looks like the Brady lawyers got severed from the case through misconduct.
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/attorney-breach-stalls-milwaukee-officers-gun-store-lawsuit-b99481327z1-299762131.html Quote HistoryQuoted:
The whole thing is just a "throw it at the wall and see if anything sticks" exercise by the Brady Campaign as a hail-Mary punt to see if by some miracle they can generate a court precedent out of this. Second tier motivations are make-work to be "looking like they're doing something... anything" to go back to donors with when hat-in-hand. Third are the two officers themselves, who instead of "cowboy up" have let their .gov/union mentality get the better of them, and are looking for a chance at a payout, and because all the Milwaukee political insider crowd approves. It mainly hinges on if they can prove Badger knowingly helped Collins correct the 4473. And if the Brady Lawyers and Dunphy did a good job "jury shopping" during Voir Dire. And it looks like the Brady lawyers got severed from the case through misconduct.
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogreports/attorney-breach-stalls-milwaukee-officers-gun-store-lawsuit-b99481327z1-299762131.html Lol, came here to post this. The Brady attorneys agreed to leave the case after it was disclosed that the organization posted information over the weekend that Conen had ruled inadmissible. Brady has since taken down the information in question, and it was not disclosed in open court. Conen discussed the matter off the record with attorneys in his chambers before coming into open court and making brief comments on the record, according to a transcript. . .
James Vogts, a Chicago attorney representing the owners of Badger Guns and Badger Outdoors, said the Brady attorneys had committed a "pure violation" of Wisconsin Supreme Court rules on attorney conduct with respect to pretrial publicity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2015 10:23:01 AM EDT
[#7]
I'm wondering if the Brady lawyers threw the case like this on purpose.
There's no "there" to get money from. Badger Guns inc. is no more, Brew City is a different Inc. and a different FFL. And the Brady Campaign itself is broke, so I'm thinking these lawyers are breathing a sigh of relief that they're off a case that's going to take months... years to finally solve after appeals, and won't have a payout anyway.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2015 2:02:01 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm wondering if the Brady lawyers threw the case like this on purpose. There's no "there" to get money from. Badger Guns inc. is no more, Brew City is a different Inc. and a different FFL. And the Brady Campaign itself is broke, so I'm thinking these lawyers are breathing a sigh of relief that they're off a case that's going to take months... years to finally solve after appeals, and won't have a payout anyway. I don't think there will be a payout, even if there was someone to get money from, because it sounds like a losing case. It hinges on the word of a convicted felon who cut a deal to testify against Badger. Those type of people don't generally carry much credibility with a jury. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2015 9:31:30 AM EDT
[#9]
This case is all about setting case law, and making the way for more lawsuits if this one succeeds. Money has nothing to do with it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2015 11:19:44 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Some of the comments are fun. It's amazing how many uninformed, unintelligent left-wing fruitcakes there are in the world blaming the NRA for everything from this incident to male pattern baldness. What's scary is when you consider that they vote and potentially volunteer and donate money to politicians with whom they agree. Mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2015 1:01:40 PM EDT
[#11]
So I run a liquor store. Someone aged 24 buys some cheap whisky. Said guy gives cheap whisky to a 16 yr old, gets smashed and drives his car into a police cruiser injuring the officers inside. So now the officers turn around and sue me? Is that the world we live in?
This is how I've been explaining the situation to people and they just don't seem to get it. Every firearm purchase must go through a background check; the only person responsible here besides the shooter is the straw buyer. The Journal(  ) has made it look like Badger was doing back alley deals or something, but nothing new there.
I know a lot of people hate what was Badger now Brew City for the unadvertised background checks but I've given them a pass with the nonstop witch hunt they've been the target of. Their prices are actually rather fair (for a brick and mortar store in Milwaukee of all places) and the people working there aren't humongous jags like some other stores around here. I like their range too. Oh, and those officers can go fuck themselves. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2015 1:08:48 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I know a lot of people hate what was Badger now Brew City for the unadvertised background checks but I've given them a pass with the nonstop witch hunt they've been the target of. Their prices are actually rather fair (for a brick and mortar store in Milwaukee of all places) and the people working there aren't humongous jags like some other stores around here. I like their range too. True- Haven't been in there in a few years, but I've bought a couple things from them in the past and their prices weren't much more than what I would find on Bud's. One of the guys working behind the counter was actually one of the most helpful gun store employees I've ever encountered. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2015 1:27:23 PM EDT
[#13]
Unadvertised background check? What the hell is an Unadvertised background check? Like you don't know when you walk into a gun shop that you're going to have to do paperwork and get called in to buy a gun?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2015 1:34:01 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Unadvertised background check? What the hell is an Unadvertised background check? Like you don't know when you walk into a gun shop that you're going to have to do paperwork and get called in to buy a gun? After all the heat they were getting they started having people who were using their range fill out a simple form with their name and drivers license number. These were then handed off to the West Milwaukee PD for them to run a check on those using their range. Some were a little bit upset. That being said however the form did state that a background check was going to be done, I guess they just didn't make that clear to those filling out the forms. Me? Having bought a Title II item as an individual my info is already out there so I guess I just don't care anymore, I can see how others would be upset though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2015 5:15:54 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
After all the heat they were getting they started having people who were using their range fill out a simple form with their name and drivers license number. These were then handed off to the West Milwaukee PD for them to run a check on those using their range. Some were a little bit upset. That being said however the form did state that a background check was going to be done, I guess they just didn't make that clear to those filling out the forms. Me? Having bought a Title II item as an individual my info is already out there so I guess I just don't care anymore, I can see how others would be upset though. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Unadvertised background check? What the hell is an Unadvertised background check? Like you don't know when you walk into a gun shop that you're going to have to do paperwork and get called in to buy a gun? After all the heat they were getting they started having people who were using their range fill out a simple form with their name and drivers license number. These were then handed off to the West Milwaukee PD for them to run a check on those using their range. Some were a little bit upset. That being said however the form did state that a background check was going to be done, I guess they just didn't make that clear to those filling out the forms. Me? Having bought a Title II item as an individual my info is already out there so I guess I just don't care anymore, I can see how others would be upset though. I don't know this to be true, but it's just a guess. If the form for this range-use background check just had name & DL number, it might have been just a check for outstanding warrants. I don't think it's legal for LEO to do a full blown background check on someone unless it's part of an ongoing investigation, or some type of "legal" application (CCW license, 4473, etc). A friend of mine (former small town police chief) got in some hot water for doing some "unauthorized by law" checks... it's why he's now a "former" police chief. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2015 5:16:57 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
After all the heat they were getting they started having people who were using their range fill out a simple form with their name and drivers license number. These were then handed off to the West Milwaukee PD for them to run a check on those using their range. Some were a little bit upset. That being said however the form did state that a background check was going to be done, I guess they just didn't make that clear to those filling out the forms. Me? Having bought a Title II item as an individual my info is already out there so I guess I just don't care anymore, I can see how others would be upset though. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Unadvertised background check? What the hell is an Unadvertised background check? Like you don't know when you walk into a gun shop that you're going to have to do paperwork and get called in to buy a gun? After all the heat they were getting they started having people who were using their range fill out a simple form with their name and drivers license number. These were then handed off to the West Milwaukee PD for them to run a check on those using their range. Some were a little bit upset. That being said however the form did state that a background check was going to be done, I guess they just didn't make that clear to those filling out the forms. Me? Having bought a Title II item as an individual my info is already out there so I guess I just don't care anymore, I can see how others would be upset though. Wow, people are mad at somebody because they didn't take the responsibility to read what they were signing.
I never got the butthurt and whining over that. It's not like they hid it or anything. Read what you're signing- it's not a hard concept to grasp. Mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2015 12:29:05 PM EDT
[#17]
IMO, Badger could have avoided the whole mess, if they'd realized back in the 90's to ditch the Lorcin/Jennings/Bryco suff a few years earlier, and blast country music in the store...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2015 11:45:07 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't know this to be true, but it's just a guess. If the form for this range-use background check just had name & DL number, it might have been just a check for outstanding warrants. I don't think it's legal for LEO to do a full blown background check on someone unless it's part of an ongoing investigation, or some type of "legal" application (CCW license, 4473, etc). A friend of mine (former small town police chief) got in some hot water for doing some "unauthorized by law" checks... it's why he's now a "former" police chief. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2015 11:46:08 AM EDT
[#19]
Milwaukee: Shithole run by white liberals who encourage black liberals to kill other black liberals so the white liberals can use the tragedy to take guns away from white conservatives in other parts of the state who had nothing to do with what caused Milwaukee to be a shithole in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2015 1:07:57 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How does knowing where someone who has warrants was last week help the cops any? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I don't know this to be true, but it's just a guess. If the form for this range-use background check just had name & DL number, it might have been just a check for outstanding warrants. I don't think it's legal for LEO to do a full blown background check on someone unless it's part of an ongoing investigation, or some type of "legal" application (CCW license, 4473, etc). A friend of mine (former small town police chief) got in some hot water for doing some "unauthorized by law" checks... it's why he's now a "former" police chief. How would a background check help, if these were not called in to Milw PD immediately either? If you cannot apprehend them while still there, what's the point of either? My point was LEO running random background checks is not legal. Don't believe me? Go to your local cop-shop with the name of a prospective buyer of a gun you are selling, and ask for a background check on that person, and see what they tell you. Probably the same thing they told me. It's against the law for them to do so. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2015 1:55:24 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Milwaukee: Shithole run by white liberals who encourage black liberals to kill other black liberals so the white liberals can use the tragedy to take guns away from white conservatives in other parts of the state who had nothing to do with what caused Milwaukee to be a shithole in the first place. Excellent summary.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2015 8:39:47 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Excellent summary. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Milwaukee: Shithole run by white liberals who encourage black liberals to kill other black liberals so the white liberals can use the tragedy to take guns away from white conservatives in other parts of the state who had nothing to do with what caused Milwaukee to be a shithole in the first place. Excellent summary. Wi doesn't have a gun-violence problem. Milwaukee has a gun-violence problem. We can start there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2015 9:11:53 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How would a background check help, if these were not called in to Milw PD immediately either? If you cannot apprehend them while still there, what's the point of either? My point was LEO running random background checks is not legal. Don't believe me? Go to your local cop-shop with the name of a prospective buyer of a gun you are selling, and ask for a background check on that person, and see what they tell you. Probably the same thing they told me. It's against the law for them to do so. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I don't know this to be true, but it's just a guess. If the form for this range-use background check just had name & DL number, it might have been just a check for outstanding warrants. I don't think it's legal for LEO to do a full blown background check on someone unless it's part of an ongoing investigation, or some type of "legal" application (CCW license, 4473, etc). A friend of mine (former small town police chief) got in some hot water for doing some "unauthorized by law" checks... it's why he's now a "former" police chief. How would a background check help, if these were not called in to Milw PD immediately either? If you cannot apprehend them while still there, what's the point of either? My point was LEO running random background checks is not legal. Don't believe me? Go to your local cop-shop with the name of a prospective buyer of a gun you are selling, and ask for a background check on that person, and see what they tell you. Probably the same thing they told me. It's against the law for them to do so. IF, the case was, that they were doing a warrant check, THEN the it is that they aren't helping. Therefore, if the case is they are doing warrant check only, then, I don't believe the warrant check is the only thing. I agree, running random (or systematic) background checks is not legal or ethical. My point is, I don't believe the assertion "checking for warrants" is true. It's not true. Especially since Obama's DOJ doesn't seem to give a shit about actual felons trying to buy guns (a crime) getting rejected for trying to buy guns. Summary: I believe "we are only doing warrant checks" is a lie. You and I don't disagree, but are thinking of different things.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2015 9:14:23 PM EDT
[#24]
#blacklivesmatter
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2015 11:35:43 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
#blacklivesmatter If only the black people themselves believed it. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2015 5:07:21 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Let me be more specific. IF, the case was, that they were doing a warrant check, THEN the it is that they aren't helping. Therefore, if the case is they are doing warrant check only, then, I don't believe the warrant check is the only thing. I agree, running random (or systematic) background checks is not legal or ethical. My point is, I don't believe the assertion "checking for warrants" is true. It's not true. Especially since Obama's DOJ doesn't seem to give a shit about actual felons trying to buy guns (a crime) getting rejected for trying to buy guns. Summary: I believe "we are only doing warrant checks" is a lie. You and I don't disagree, but are thinking of different things.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't know this to be true, but it's just a guess. If the form for this range-use background check just had name & DL number, it might have been just a check for outstanding warrants. I don't think it's legal for LEO to do a full blown background check on someone unless it's part of an ongoing investigation, or some type of "legal" application (CCW license, 4473, etc). A friend of mine (former small town police chief) got in some hot water for doing some "unauthorized by law" checks... it's why he's now a "former" police chief. How would a background check help, if these were not called in to Milw PD immediately either? If you cannot apprehend them while still there, what's the point of either? My point was LEO running random background checks is not legal. Don't believe me? Go to your local cop-shop with the name of a prospective buyer of a gun you are selling, and ask for a background check on that person, and see what they tell you. Probably the same thing they told me. It's against the law for them to do so.
IF, the case was, that they were doing a warrant check, THEN the it is that they aren't helping. Therefore, if the case is they are doing warrant check only, then, I don't believe the warrant check is the only thing. I agree, running random (or systematic) background checks is not legal or ethical. My point is, I don't believe the assertion "checking for warrants" is true. It's not true. Especially since Obama's DOJ doesn't seem to give a shit about actual felons trying to buy guns (a crime) getting rejected for trying to buy guns. Summary: I believe "we are only doing warrant checks" is a lie. You and I don't disagree, but are thinking of different things.
Checking for outstanding warrants was just a guess on my part, based on 2 things. 1st) It is legal for a LEO to run a check for outstanding warrants on any person they have contact with. 2nd) It is illegal for LE to run background checks on random people unless those particular individuals are part of an ongoing investigation. All customers to a shooting range fit more into the random category than the particular individuals category. Based on those two items above, and we all know Milw PD Chief Flynn would not do anything illegal, it was my own hypothesis that the alleged (illegal) "background checks" on all customers were, in reality, (legal) warrant checks. If I'm wrong, then someone is breaking a law. 
I also logically assumed (I know... "ass of u & me") that the names were called in while the customers were still using the range, as shooting ranges are typically rented by the hour... and as you said, it's useless to know, after the fact, that they were there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2015 6:27:49 PM EDT
[#27]
Back to the OP: As the manager of a gunshop in Las Vegas - When I did "checks" for gun purchases on the 4473s, some people came back denied.
I was not told why they were denied. I did ask if they were a felon, why would you not have me notified and then direct me to call the police? The operator stated it was not illegal for a felon to try and purchase a gun, it was illegal for him/her to possess it. V OUT |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
