Was at the bank during lunch, parked next to a large jeep with 2AMDMNT as the license plate.
- Status
Was at the bank during lunch, parked next to a large jeep with 2AMDMNT as the license plate.
roydo
in memoriam - 1965-2024
Mericans and their spelling ffs.
neil999
Player Valuation: £80m
Amazed this happened
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/14/u...or-purchase-linked-to-shooting-of-police.html
MILWAUKEE — A jury late Tuesday awarded more than $5 million in damages to two police officers who were severely wounded with a pistol that a local gun shop sold to a straw buyer in 2009.
Deliberating only nine hours after a two-week trial in Milwaukee County Circuit Court, the jury of eight women and four men decided the unusual lawsuit here in favor of the plaintiffs. Gun-control advocates hoped the verdict would encourage more victims and lawyers to sue what they say is a small minority of gun stores that make questionable sales.
The jury found that the store had been seriously negligent in selling the gun when there were signs that the ostensible purchaser was fronting for an 18-year-old who accompanied him to the store.
One month after the purchase, the 18-year-old, Julius Burton, shot Officer Bryan Norberg in the face and Officer Graham Kunisch in the head and body, leaving him with brain damage and a destroyed eye.
Officer Norberg was emotional and felt vindicated by the verdict, said the chief lawyer for the officers, Patrick O. Dunphy. Mr. Kunisch, who has retired, was pleased but barely showed it, Mr. Dunphy said, a result of his brain injury.
James Vogts, the chief lawyer for Badger Guns, the former gun store in West Milwaukee that sold the weapon, said in a statement that the shop owners would appeal the decision. He said that questions might be raised about the evidence the jury was permitted to hear and some of the legal standards it was told to apply.
The suit was closely watched by gun-control advocates, the firearms industry and legal scholars because it involved a rare test before a jury of the responsibility of gun sellers for the criminal use of their products.
The case arose in May 2009 when Jacob Collins, 21, bought a Taurus semiautomatic pistol at Badger Guns on behalf of Mr. Burton, who was too young to legally purchase a gun. Mr. Burton helped select the weapon.
Weeks later, Mr. Burton used the gun to shoot the two Milwaukee police officers. He is serving 80 years for attempted murder, and Mr. Collins served two years for the illegal purchase.
The two officers and the City of Milwaukee sued Badger Guns, arguing that its employees either knew the sale was illegal or were grossly negligent in allowing it to proceed.
It was only the second time in the last decade that a civil lawsuit alleging negligent sales by a gun shop reached a jury. Victims and city governments tried to sue the gun industry dozens of times in the 1980s and after, but more than 30 states — and Congress, in 2005 — passed laws barring most lawsuits against gun makers and sellers for the way that buyers use their products.
The federal law, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, provides for exceptions that were cited in the Milwaukee case: Victims wounded with a weapon can pursue civil damages if the seller of a firearm knew, or should have known, that the transaction was illegal, or that it would very likely pose a danger.
In instructions to jurors, Judge John J. DiMotto said they must decide whether a “preponderance of evidence” indicated that store employees “believed or had reasonable cause to believe” that Mr. Collins was not buying the weapon for his own use.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs argued that many red flags on the day of the purchase should have aroused suspicion and led the store clerk to question Mr. Collins and his hovering friend more aggressively and to refuse the sale.
Mr. Burton was seen in a security videotape helping Mr. Collins choose the Taurus handgun. The two walked outside together briefly when Mr. Collins did not have enough money in his pocket to cover the $414 transaction.
As Mr. Collins struggled with paperwork, he checked on a federal form that he was not buying the gun for himself, then altered the answer when the clerk noted that it was inconsistent with what he had said on the state form.
“Badger Guns was supposed to be the public’s gatekeeper,” Mr. Dunphy told the jury in his closing argument Monday.
“This is your opportunity to send a message to other gun dealers,” he said as he asked for millions in personal and punitive damages.
But Mr. Vogts, the defense lawyer, in recounting the sequence of events, said that it had been far from obvious that Mr. Collins was buying the gun for Mr. Burton, and that the clerk and the store would never have intentionally made a criminal sale.
According to the law, Mr. Vogts told the jury, it is not enough to show that the clerk “should have been more careful.” Rather, the plaintiffs had to show that he had “real reason to believe that a crime was being committed in his presence.”
Badger Guns’ federal firearms license was revoked in 2011 because of repeated violations. But the 2009 sale to Mr. Collins was not one of those violations, and Judge DiMotto did not allow the jury to hear about the revocation.
Named in the suit were Adam J. Allan, who owned Badger Guns at the time of the sale; his father, Walter J. Allan; and Milton E. Beatovic, who had co-owned a previous gun store in the same location called Badger Outdoors. But the verdict applies only to Badger Guns as a corporate entity, Mr. Dunphy said.
The jury awarded about $1.2 million in damages for past and future medical expenses, lost wages and pain and suffering to Officer Norberg and about $3.2 million in damages to Mr. Kunisch, Mr. Dunphy said. It also awarded them $730,000 in punitive damages.
The City of Milwaukee will collect a share of the awards in compensation for medical expenses and disability costs as a result of the shooting, Mr. Dunphy said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/14/u...or-purchase-linked-to-shooting-of-police.html
MILWAUKEE — A jury late Tuesday awarded more than $5 million in damages to two police officers who were severely wounded with a pistol that a local gun shop sold to a straw buyer in 2009.
Deliberating only nine hours after a two-week trial in Milwaukee County Circuit Court, the jury of eight women and four men decided the unusual lawsuit here in favor of the plaintiffs. Gun-control advocates hoped the verdict would encourage more victims and lawyers to sue what they say is a small minority of gun stores that make questionable sales.
The jury found that the store had been seriously negligent in selling the gun when there were signs that the ostensible purchaser was fronting for an 18-year-old who accompanied him to the store.
One month after the purchase, the 18-year-old, Julius Burton, shot Officer Bryan Norberg in the face and Officer Graham Kunisch in the head and body, leaving him with brain damage and a destroyed eye.
Officer Norberg was emotional and felt vindicated by the verdict, said the chief lawyer for the officers, Patrick O. Dunphy. Mr. Kunisch, who has retired, was pleased but barely showed it, Mr. Dunphy said, a result of his brain injury.
James Vogts, the chief lawyer for Badger Guns, the former gun store in West Milwaukee that sold the weapon, said in a statement that the shop owners would appeal the decision. He said that questions might be raised about the evidence the jury was permitted to hear and some of the legal standards it was told to apply.
The suit was closely watched by gun-control advocates, the firearms industry and legal scholars because it involved a rare test before a jury of the responsibility of gun sellers for the criminal use of their products.
The case arose in May 2009 when Jacob Collins, 21, bought a Taurus semiautomatic pistol at Badger Guns on behalf of Mr. Burton, who was too young to legally purchase a gun. Mr. Burton helped select the weapon.
Weeks later, Mr. Burton used the gun to shoot the two Milwaukee police officers. He is serving 80 years for attempted murder, and Mr. Collins served two years for the illegal purchase.
The two officers and the City of Milwaukee sued Badger Guns, arguing that its employees either knew the sale was illegal or were grossly negligent in allowing it to proceed.
It was only the second time in the last decade that a civil lawsuit alleging negligent sales by a gun shop reached a jury. Victims and city governments tried to sue the gun industry dozens of times in the 1980s and after, but more than 30 states — and Congress, in 2005 — passed laws barring most lawsuits against gun makers and sellers for the way that buyers use their products.
The federal law, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, provides for exceptions that were cited in the Milwaukee case: Victims wounded with a weapon can pursue civil damages if the seller of a firearm knew, or should have known, that the transaction was illegal, or that it would very likely pose a danger.
In instructions to jurors, Judge John J. DiMotto said they must decide whether a “preponderance of evidence” indicated that store employees “believed or had reasonable cause to believe” that Mr. Collins was not buying the weapon for his own use.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs argued that many red flags on the day of the purchase should have aroused suspicion and led the store clerk to question Mr. Collins and his hovering friend more aggressively and to refuse the sale.
Mr. Burton was seen in a security videotape helping Mr. Collins choose the Taurus handgun. The two walked outside together briefly when Mr. Collins did not have enough money in his pocket to cover the $414 transaction.
As Mr. Collins struggled with paperwork, he checked on a federal form that he was not buying the gun for himself, then altered the answer when the clerk noted that it was inconsistent with what he had said on the state form.
“Badger Guns was supposed to be the public’s gatekeeper,” Mr. Dunphy told the jury in his closing argument Monday.
“This is your opportunity to send a message to other gun dealers,” he said as he asked for millions in personal and punitive damages.
But Mr. Vogts, the defense lawyer, in recounting the sequence of events, said that it had been far from obvious that Mr. Collins was buying the gun for Mr. Burton, and that the clerk and the store would never have intentionally made a criminal sale.
According to the law, Mr. Vogts told the jury, it is not enough to show that the clerk “should have been more careful.” Rather, the plaintiffs had to show that he had “real reason to believe that a crime was being committed in his presence.”
Badger Guns’ federal firearms license was revoked in 2011 because of repeated violations. But the 2009 sale to Mr. Collins was not one of those violations, and Judge DiMotto did not allow the jury to hear about the revocation.
Named in the suit were Adam J. Allan, who owned Badger Guns at the time of the sale; his father, Walter J. Allan; and Milton E. Beatovic, who had co-owned a previous gun store in the same location called Badger Outdoors. But the verdict applies only to Badger Guns as a corporate entity, Mr. Dunphy said.
The jury awarded about $1.2 million in damages for past and future medical expenses, lost wages and pain and suffering to Officer Norberg and about $3.2 million in damages to Mr. Kunisch, Mr. Dunphy said. It also awarded them $730,000 in punitive damages.
The City of Milwaukee will collect a share of the awards in compensation for medical expenses and disability costs as a result of the shooting, Mr. Dunphy said.
dead_soft
Player Valuation: £35m
she's more highlighting the huge inequalities when something affects mainly women or mainly men. It's a worthwhile thing to note
Are spelling is grate
University of Texas students proposing a "Cocks not Glocks" protest on campus after new Texas law. From the Houston Chronicle:
Toffeelover
Player Valuation: £80m
Do not understand that, can you clarify what it means?
More like the aunt from hell...
N.S.N.O.
Player Valuation: £35m
neil999
Player Valuation: £80m
have some sympathy mate she nearly lost 2 vol-a-vonts..
bluemangroup
Player Valuation: £70m
Not like you to highlight her highlighting it though....
Toffeelover
Player Valuation: £80m
Thanks, seems like the owner of the was some mind boggling enthusiast of bearing and carrying firearms.
- Status