Time to Get Lawsuit Crazy!

Two Texas families have filed a $25 million lawsuit against the big box sporting goods retailer where the killer who attacked the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs purchased his rifle.
​
The Ward and Lookingbill families argue Academy Sports and Outdoors should not have sold Devin Patrick Kelley the Ruger AR-15 he later used to kill 26 people during a Sunday morning service in November, according to the San Antonio Express-News.

​Source

(Photo: Fox News)

These lawsuits always aggravate the hell out of me. Right off the bat, I'll say this: I don't think they have a leg to stand on and I can't believe a lawyer took this case. 

​I can completely understand the families that decided to sue the Air Force in this shooting. The shooter should not have been able to purchase a firearm, but was able to because the Air Force neglected to get his information into this system. So NICS was not aware that he'd served 12 months for domestic violence. So yeah, in this case, I can understand the families suing. 

But I will never understand the logic behind suing gun manufacturers and gun stores. 

In this case, the families are saying Academy Sports should not have sold the gun(s) to this guy. On what grounds? Do you have undeniable proof that they were aware before selling the guns to this guy that he had criminal intent? Gun store sales people do, in fact, keep an eye out for any red flags. But they aren't psychic. If the guy went into the store and used any words that would allude to his history or intent, those would have been red flags. And yes, people are dumb enough to tell the sales person about criminal intentions. Not all, but a lot of them do. 

Now, there are things here that the sales person could have done wrong. 

1. Did the shooter at any point admit that he'd been convicted of domestic abuse? 
2. Did the shooter at any point admit that he'd served time?
3. Did he at some point hint that he might have done either of the above?
4. Did the shooter at any point say he had an intent to commit a crime? Did he tell the sales guy he wanted to kill family members or commit a mass shooting?
5. Did he at some point express admiration or understanding with previous mass shooters?
6. Did he get antsy about the questions on the paperwork, maybe asking what would happen if he lied on it?

If any of the above happened, he should have been sent out the door empty handed. If he wasn't, the store is liable and the sales person will find themselves being questioned intensely in court (they may be either way. Gun store sales people end up in court occasionally because of this crap). 

How do you prove it? There's got to be something in writing (like he checked yes on the paperwork next to the questions about his domestic violence convictions), the conversation had to have been recorded, or there has to be a credible witness to the conversation. 

If none of those things can be produced, Academy Sports can't be found liable. Now, obviously, anything can happen in a court room. But the bottom line is, as of right now, we have no proof that Academy Sports did anything other then sell a gun legally to a guy who passed a Federal background check. They had no way of knowing his intent, nor did they have any way of knowing his history. If the background check comes back and clean and the sales person had no red flags, there was no reason to not sell the gun to the guy. 

You can't ask a gun sales person to assume everyone buying a gun is going to commit a crime or kill someone. The vast majority of legally purchased guns are not used in crimes. And if they assume every customer is a criminal... they aren't going to stay in business by denying sales to everyone who comes in. 

Real gun stores are not like movie gun stores. They aren't owned by and staffed with people who are so anti-government they'd do anything to stick it to "the man." They are usually pro-gun (I say usually because, oddly enough, we had someone who was anti-gun working in the shop I worked at. I still don't get that). They are usually conservative. You'll have a mixed batch of folks from that point on, but at the end of the day, they all know certain things. 

1. This person in front of me may commit a crime. I have to try to figure out if that is their intention or not and act accordingly.
2. If this person in front of me does commit a crime, I'm going to have to live with that the rest of my life.
3. If I sell a gun to this person, can I defend that decision in court successfully? 

That's what they're working with. They have no crystal ball. Their job is to make money for the shop, like any other business. But they also understand they are the last line of defense if this person does have ill intent. It's a heavy responsibility. 

So if the court finds against Academy Sports in this case, I will not only be disheartened about it, but angry. Academy Sports broke no laws. And, as always, we should not punish everyone in the country and remove rights from them because of a choice few. 

---