Brady doing What They Do Best

Lying and burning money!

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence filed a lawsuit Tuesday against online retailers accused of supplying the Aurora, Colo., movie theater shooter with ammunition, body armor and tear gas used to carry out the massacre.

…The lawsuit alleges that several websites, including BulkAmmo.com, failed to screen accused killer James Holmes to determine his identity or what he planned to do with the products. Twelve people were killed and another 58 were injured.

Well except the shooter DIDN’T have tear gas or body armor…hey but the Media reported it in the “Fog of War” before the facts were known, so it should be TREATED as true, even if it wasn’t.

Also I got to love the pie-in-the-sky claim that the ammo dealer didn’t verify who he was and what he was going to do with the ammo. I assume he paid with a personal credit card, and even if the dealer had an FFL I don’t think you can run a NICS check on just an ammo sale. Further, even if they DID, he had a clean background!

Last “what he panned to do with the products”. Well he bought some smoke grenades, a load-baearing vest, and some ammo. What’s to stop him, or anybody else to say “the smoke is for my boat, or for a party, the vest is for carrying stuff, and the ammo was a good deal, so I thought I’d stock up!”

Really the ammo is the only thing particularly relevant, and I’ve certainly bought over a thousand rounds of ammo online. Why? Because it was a good deal and I thought I’d stock up, and because it was a good deal because it was sold in bulk!

I look forward to seeing this get tossed for being stupid and watching the Brady Bunch pay the legal fees.

How much longer do you think this group is going to stay afloat?

BLNN Logo

This entry was posted in Freedom, Guns, Safety. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Brady doing What They Do Best

  1. Jack/OH says:

    ” . . . [W]hat he planned to do with the products.” I’m not a lawyer, but I’ve never understood intrusive laws that burden retailers with asking customers “enforcement-type” questions that compromise the retailers’ instincts for doing business. The retailer’s job is to sell stuff.

    Second: bulk purchases of anything. What the hey is a “bulk purchase”? Is that when you fill your gas tank, but only drive six miles that day? Is the balance of the gas in your tank “presumptive intent” of something or other? Does anyone want the gas station clerk asking you to declare your driving plans for the day? How about if he asks you if you have other plans for the gasoline? Siphoning?

    The Brady lawsuit is just more back door gun prohibition, and needs to be stopped.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Great point on “intent”. I bought 1,000 rounds of 7.62×51 NATO a few years ago, and I’m just getting down to the last ammo can. What was my intent? to have cheap 7.62 ammo to shoot whenever I want for a LONG time. I have about 500 rounds of that 230 Grain HST +P carry ammo. I MAYBE shoot a box of the stuff a year, and whenever I see a good deal on it I BUY MORE! Why? Because I don’t want to run out of my good carry ammo, OR pay $2 a round for a single box when I need it.

      Same goes for food. I see non-perishable food items on sale I buy them. We have Enchiladas maybe 10 times a year, but I have enough Enchilada sauce in the pantry to eat Enchiladas until LaWeer’da is in primary school! What’s MY intent! I SHOULD BE STOPPED!

  2. Archer says:

    It’s just a cheap-shot attempt to override the PLCAA and impose restrictions on dealers via the courts, that they weren’t able to get via legislation.

    If there’s any justice left in the world, this will not only be laughed out of court, but the Bradys will have legal sanctions placed against them in whatever circuit this is, for repeated frivolous lawsuits. How many times now have they tried to override PLCAA and hold dealers accountable for purchasers’ actions, weeks, months, or even years after the sale?

    • The_Jack says:

      Well… right here for one.

      Given this is years after the sale and the murders…

      It’s also especially insane as the mutant bought his guns at an FFL and thus passed the background check.

      But again, they’re all about the chilling effect.

  3. Pingback: Will They Survive? | Weer'd World

  4. Wally says:

    “Also I got to love the pie-in-the-sky claim that the ammo dealer didn’t verify who he was and what he was going to do with the ammo. I assume he paid with a personal credit card, and even if the dealer had an FFL I don’t think you can run a NICS check on just an ammo ”

    It would be a felony for a FFL dealer to run a NICS check on ammo (including even armor piercing ammo). Or magazines, or tear gas, or body armor…

    • Geodkyt says:

      And never forget, we HAD a period of time where ammo sales were treated like gun sales, including logging EVERY purchase.

      It didn’t work, didn;t prevent crimes, and didn;t solve crimes. So, the ammo logging procedure was junked as part of the 1986 FOPA.

  5. IanK says:

    Every few weeks I find myself amongst dozens of people decked out in all manner of load bearing and tactical gear, some also have smoke grenades and as many as half over the age of 20 probably have a thousand rounds of ‘real steel’ ammo at home. This country happens to be packed with Airsofters who are a purchase or two from being as well equipped as said goblin, and I’d wager there are more than a few who are already ten fold better equipped. Yet mysteriously, none have them have killed anyone yet… all that stuff must be defective.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *