Online ammo retailers targeted in lawsuit by anti-gun violence group

**bigandy1966** · September 16th, 2014, 07:55 AM

And the retailer has to eat the cost of legal representation and time lost from work to fight it. I would counter sue for harassment and civil rights violations.
You could argue that frivolous lawsuits like this one, where a business is following the letter of the law, and a group or individual is using the legal system as a type of harassment or punishment meant to damage the business by depleting its financial resources and driving it under.
And Jen, sadly yeah the odds are in their favor:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/us...l?src=twr&_r=1

Again, I cant stress this strongly enough, its not the candidate that you elect that is the issue, its the judges that the elected official appoints that is the legacy that lasts for decades after they're out of office.

**staylo** · September 16th, 2014, 08:34 AM

The courts are no longer administrators of the law. They are now policy makers. A second legislative branch. A branch which has only 9 unelected people as a check on its power. And since SCOTUS, too, is politicized there is actually fewer than 9 people left to stop any policy making by the lower courts because no matter what issue comes before them there will always be allies for it on the bench. Our system of a representative republic has broken down an been replaced by a ruling class of judges who hand down decrees that can't be overturned. We saw that in CA. The judges legalized gay marriage, the people passed a referendum to overrule them, the courts threw it out. The courts have the ultimate say. Regardless of how you feel on that issue it is scary that the courts have stripped the people of their right to govern. Courts are even ruling constitutional amendments as 'unconstitutional' so the people don't even have that avenue left to excercise governance. At this point we might as well throw out the legislative duties of the congress and have them simply sit there and confirm judges. All these fights are occurring in, and being decided by, the courts anyway. This is a genie that will never be put back into the bottle. It's only going to get worse as both sides push harder and harder to get their people in place to 'win' in the courts.

**t1066** · September 16th, 2014, 09:44 AM

Vexatious Litigant:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vexatious_litigation

The bar is high to get someone/some group declared a vexatious litigant, but cases like this scream out for it.

**c45man** · September 16th, 2014, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by ForeverPA

What did Holmes buy from them? Just ammo? What law did they break?

They did not break any law., unless the buyer was something like 9 years old. The premise of the suit is that the ammo supplier should of been able to read minds, and therefore, should of realized the buyer's intent. This suit will take years to settle unless the insurance company gives the plaintiff(s) an out of court settlement for a small fraction of the original claim.

On the other hand, the antis had a pretty poor track record in suing firearm companies prompting the legislature to pass protection from frivolous law suits. The same type of protection should be given to stores and online suppliers unless a crime is committed or unless the product is flawed. If it wasn't so difficult to do, the antis would be suing the Federal Government for the issuance of the license which condones the method of business within the law.

**crlovel** · September 17th, 2014, 08:37 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/17/justic...html?hpt=hp_t2

And once again, this is fueled by the Brady folks, may they all burn in Hell.

Originally Posted by CNN

(CNN) -- The parents of a woman killed during the Colorado theater shooting two years ago are suing four online retailers for negligence.

The websites sold James Holmes the ammunition, body armor, tear gas and other equipment used when he opened fired in a packed Aurora movie theater during a July 2012 midnight showing of the Batman film "The Dark Knight Rises."

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence filed the lawsuit on behalf of Sandy and Lonnie Phillips, whose daughter Jessica Ghawi was shot and killed in the attack that left 12 dead and dozens wounded.