Page 1 of 2

Academy Sports Lawsuit

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 12:59 am
by Jered
So, the families of some of the victims are suing the store.
At the time Kelley purchased the Ruger, he reported a Colorado Springs, Colorado address on his Firearms Transaction Record, Form 4473, a federal form. This fact alone should have disqualified Kelley from ever purchasing the assault rifle. Kelley’s identification indicated he was a resident of Colorado—not Texas. Thus, he never should have been sold the very weapon he used in the Sutherland Springs shooting as it would be illegal for Kelley to ever transport that gun to his residence. Rather, Defendant, upon Kelley purchasing the weapon, should have transferred the firearm to Colorado, for Kelley, a Colorado resident, to retrieve. The Ruger should have never been placed in Kelley’s hands in Texas. Importantly this incident is not the first incident of Academy failing to follow applicable laws—though it is, the first incident that resulted in the deaths of 26 innocent people and injuries to an additional 20 people.
The lawyer who wrote that needs to be disbarred.

Re: Academy Sports Lawsuit

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:26 pm
by Langenator
Jered wrote:So, the families of some of the victims are suing the store.
At the time Kelley purchased the Ruger, he reported a Colorado Springs, Colorado address on his Firearms Transaction Record, Form 4473, a federal form. This fact alone should have disqualified Kelley from ever purchasing the assault rifle. Kelley’s identification indicated he was a resident of Colorado—not Texas. Thus, he never should have been sold the very weapon he used in the Sutherland Springs shooting as it would be illegal for Kelley to ever transport that gun to his residence. Rather, Defendant, upon Kelley purchasing the weapon, should have transferred the firearm to Colorado, for Kelley, a Colorado resident, to retrieve. The Ruger should have never been placed in Kelley’s hands in Texas. Importantly this incident is not the first incident of Academy failing to follow applicable laws—though it is, the first incident that resulted in the deaths of 26 innocent people and injuries to an additional 20 people.
The lawyer who wrote that needs to be disbarred.
But they won't, because the ABA is as anti-gun as the rest of the liberal establishment.

Since I've never worried myslef much about CO laws, do they have any sort of AWB? I don't think so, but I could easily be wrong. I know they had a big to-do a few years ago about mag limits, which resulted in a couple of legislators getting recalled.

My understanding of federal law is that long guns can be sold to any legal firearms owner, including non-residents, as long as they are legal to own in the person's state of residence. Thus, a PRK resident can't hop over to Reno or Vegas and buy an AR-15 to take home.

Now, if said Ruger was a pistol, or if he bought his pistol(s) (Glock, IIRC, in TX, while reporting a CO address, they might have a case.

Am I correct in my recollection of the relevant statutes?

Re: Academy Sports Lawsuit

Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2017 1:08 am
by Jered
Langenator wrote:
But they won't, because the ABA is as anti-gun as the rest of the liberal establishment.
This is on the level of look at the regulatory agency's frequently asked questions incompetence because this lawyer obviously could not be bothered to do that.
A person may only acquire a firearm within the person’s own State, except that he or she may purchase or otherwise acquire a rifle or shotgun, in person, at a licensee’s premises in any State, provided the sale complies with State laws applicable in the State of sale and the State where the purchaser resides. A person may borrow or rent a firearm in any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes.
Since I've never worried myslef much about CO laws, do they have any sort of AWB? I don't think so, but I could easily be wrong. I know they had a big to-do a few years ago about mag limits, which resulted in a couple of legislators getting recalled.
Statewide, I don't think so.
My understanding of federal law is that long guns can be sold to any legal firearms owner, including non-residents, as long as they are legal to own in the person's state of residence. Thus, a PRK resident can't hop over to Reno or Vegas and buy an AR-15 to take home.
That's exactly what the ATF FAQ says, too. This lawyer couldn't even be bothered to look at that.
Now, if said Ruger was a pistol, or if he bought his pistol(s) (Glock, IIRC, in TX, while reporting a CO address, they might have a case.

Am I correct in my recollection of the relevant statutes?
You are correct.

This lawyer is an idiot.

Re: Academy Sports Lawsuit

Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2017 3:09 am
by Rich
It could just be a paperwork mixup, as just to the east of Colorado Springs is El Paso County, Colorado. Could be that the magic name of "El Paso" was seen and automatically the name Texas came to mind.

Jus' saying.

Re: Academy Sports Lawsuit

Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:08 pm
by Weetabix
Jered wrote:
Langenator wrote:
My understanding of federal law is that long guns can be sold to any legal firearms owner, including non-residents, as long as they are legal to own in the person's state of residence. Thus, a PRK resident can't hop over to Reno or Vegas and buy an AR-15 to take home.
That's exactly what the ATF FAQ says, too. This lawyer couldn't even be bothered to look at that.
Some of the stores around here limit rifle sales to this and contiguous states. But I think it's a store policy rather than a misunderstanding of the law.

Re: Academy Sports Lawsuit

Posted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:49 am
by Jered
Weetabix wrote:
Some of the stores around here limit rifle sales to this and contiguous states. But I think it's a store policy rather than a misunderstanding of the law.
Probably a store policy.

Re: Academy Sports Lawsuit

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 8:38 pm
by NVGdude
Weetabix wrote: Some of the stores around here limit rifle sales to this and contiguous states. But I think it's a store policy rather than a misunderstanding of the law.

It's an artifact.

Under the 1968 GCA as originally written one could only buy a long arm in your home state and any adjacent state. That went away in 1986, but several states had their own laws on the books that mirrored the federal law. I am uncertain how many states retain said laws. It took Texas about 2 decades to repeal theirs for example.

Re: Academy Sports Lawsuit

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 9:42 pm
by 308Mike
NVGdude wrote:Under the 1968 GCA as originally written one could only buy a long arm in your home state and any adjacent state. That went away in 1986, but several states had their own laws on the books that mirrored the federal law. I am uncertain how many states retain said laws. It took Texas about 2 decades to repeal theirs for example.
I'm pretty sure Commiefornia is one of those screwed-up states. :oops: :evil: :x :roll: :roll: :roll:

Re: Academy Sports Lawsuit

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:49 pm
by Netpackrat
308Mike wrote:I'm pretty sure Commiefornia is one of those screwed-up states. :oops: :evil: :x :roll: :roll: :roll:
Kind of doesn't matter because realistically nobody who lives outside of the PRK is going to go there to buy a firearm.

Re: Academy Sports Lawsuit

Posted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 4:29 am
by 308Mike
Netpackrat wrote:
308Mike wrote:I'm pretty sure Commiefornia is one of those screwed-up states. :oops: :evil: :x :roll: :roll: :roll:
Kind of doesn't matter because realistically nobody who lives outside of the PRK is going to go there to buy a firearm.
You're right, but LOTS of folks INSIDE the screwed-up state would LOVE to buy their long-arms out of state (and bring them home into this shiitehole)!!!