Skip to main content

Brady Campaign Backs Lawsuit Targeting Online Retailers

Lawsuit Targeting Online Retailers

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence is backing a lawsuit targeting online retailers who sold ammunition and gear to James Holmes.

In a shameless and tasteless act, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence is taking advantage of the grief of two parents over the murder of their daughter in the Aurora Theater Shooting by using them as a prop to file a frivolous lawsuit targeting several online retailers who sold ammunition and equipment to the alleged shooter, James Holmes.

This lawsuit targets Lucky Gunner of Knoxville, Tennessee, Bullet Proof Body Armor of Tempe, Arizona, BTP Arms of New Oxford, Pennsylvania, and the Sportsman’s Guide of South St. Paul, Minnesota for allegedly improperly selling ammunition and equipment to James Holmes.

As reported by the Associated Press via Yahoo, the lawsuits states that “It was highly foreseeable to (the) defendants that their potential customers included persons with criminal intent, including persons such as James Holmes.”

Mr. Holmes allegedly purchased several thousand rounds of ammunition from Lucky Gunner, several hundred rounds of ammunition and a 100-round magazine from the Sportsman’s Guide, tear gas grenades from BTP Arms, and body armor from Bullet Proof Body Armor.

RELATED: Here’s Why Beretta is Leaving Maryland for Tennessee

While I have a great deal of sympathy for everyone affected by this (and every other) shooting, I can’t see this lawsuit as anything more than a publicity stunt on part of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

Unless they can prove that those companies knew that Mr. Holmes was going to commit a crime with their products (in which case they would indeed be criminally negligent), or if they knowingly violated some other law, then this is nothing more than a frivolous lawsuit designed to generate publicity and cost the companies in question money.

RELATED: No, Gun Vending Machines Aren’t Real

If there is no evidence of negligence on part of the retailers, then they are protected under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005, which specifically bans lawsuits like this one, which accuse companies of negligence for not foreseeing that their products would be used by criminals.

Legal experts are predicting that this lawsuit will not produce any substantial results, which makes the Brady Campaign’s use of these parents as props even more shameful.

Featured Image Courtesy of Flickr.

What do you think about this lawsuit? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

you might also like

Brady Campaign Backs Lawsuit Targeting Online Retailers