Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
-the shop owner didn't give a reason. So how do YOU know what the reason was? Some of us are logically deducing that race is the reason. Because he said "I don't need a reason" then he changed it to straw purchase. He was just making stuff up in the moment. And even the straw purchase reason is him coming to some conclusion about a future crime taking place, based on him being black.
-he didn't even know that this customer was a repeat customer, he said no as soon as they walked in. How would he know of a recent arrest of that buyer?
I don't, it says it right there in the quote, neither do you. I even said it may well be racially motivated, but it's not the only motivation, and he doesn't have to give a reason. However until you remove BATFE regs that can punish dealers for making sales to buyers that then commit certain illegal activities there's nothing you can do.
How many times have we heard that person X (who just shot up the neighborhood) shouldn't have been sold that (or those) gun (s) by the dealer that sold them to him even after a clean BGC? Then the families all get together and try to sue the dealer. Well duh, of course dealers are going to get defensive and deny sales for reasons fair and unfair.
If you don't like that, then campaign against dealers having some weird legally grey liability for what is sold by them after the new owner leaves the store. It's not like bakers hold any responsibility for mass pieings, or car dealers hold any responsibility for selling getaway cars. Dealers sell guns, they follow regs, don't like it change the regs, and limit their liability because if reduced discretion.
Me too. The current example here though appears to be a 'loop hole'. Apparently the encouragement of gun owner vigilantism has been expanded to include gun store owners.
Apparently the 'market as savior' model will work here too.
I don't, it says it right there in the quote, neither do you. I even said it may well be racially motivated, but it's not the only motivation, and he doesn't have to give a reason. However until you remove BATFE regs that can punish dealers for making sales to buyers that then commit certain illegal activities there's nothing you can do.
How many times have we heard that person X (who just shot up the neighborhood) shouldn't have been sold that (or those) gun (s) by the dealer that sold them to him even after a clean BGC? Then the families all get together and try to sue the dealer. Well duh, of course dealers are going to get defensive and deny sales for reasons fair and unfair.
If you don't like that, then campaign against dealers having some weird legally grey liability for what is sold by them after the new owner leaves the store. It's not like bakers hold any responsibility for mass pieings, or car dealers hold any responsibility for selling getaway cars. Dealers sell guns, they follow regs, don't like it change the regs, and limit their liability because if reduced discretion.
How many victims of gun violence have successfully sued either gun store owners or gun manufacturers? As far as I am aware, they're a protected class of sorts, or at the least shielded from accountability.
Have there been any successful lawsuits on behalf of victims?
Me too. The current example here though appears to be a 'loop hole'. Apparently the encouragement of gun owner vigilantism has been expanded to include gun store owners.
Apparently the 'market as savior' model will work here too.
One thing I have to be vigilant for are those who are trying so hard to defend "refuse service to whomever we please". With the evolution of race relations in America, the first thing that comes to my mind is "Let me guess, said person wants the days of Jim Crow to come back".
The thing about guns and making sure they don't end up in the hands of thugs, that is what background checks are for. This "vigilantism" is not necessary. If a criminal wants a gun, he or she will get it through illegal means. It is ironic that some of the very persons who claim "we need more guns" are siding with the gun store owner.
How many victims of gun violence have successfully sued either gun store owners or gun manufacturers? As far as I am aware, they're a protected class of sorts, or at the least shielded from accountability.
Have there been any successful lawsuits on behalf of victims?
Furthermore, how many victims of gun violence even think to blame the gun store owner for such violence? When someone gets shot, they aren't thinking about where the perp got that gun. They are thinking "this perp shot me".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
