Because
Gun Shop Forced to Pay $6m to Two Cops Because they Sold the Gun that was Used to Shoot Them
This unprecedented civil award will encourage efforts to hold gun retailers – and, perhaps, firearms manufacturers – civilly liable for crimes committed by other people. It also reinforces the prevailing (and factually impoverished) narrative of an ever-escalating “war on cops.” Ten additional lawsuits similar to the one filed against Badger Guns are working their way through the courts.
Oh, swell. Just what, do you suppose, might be the topic of conversation at police unions all over the country now? (I'm envisioning drool buckets, and yet more futures in ambulance-chaser legal quackery.)
I know, I know, I must be fulla shite, making something of nothing, insensitive to the dangerous job, cancerous and fattening, et cetera ad nauseam.
Just don't try and tell me I don't understand about this judgment "sending a message" to those who might behave badly in the future. Make no mistake, a message was sent here. And heard, with crystal freakin' clarity.
We'll be hearing about it for years to come.
2 comments:
I don't know how far this is going to go. After all the shop owner appeared to be asking for trouble, over and over again, with the way he ran his business. Not that I think there should be any restrictions whatever on selling guns, mind you. It's just that if you kick sand in the bully's face, don't be surprised when he responds.
Most shop owners have more sense than this.
Keep some perspective. Remember when MAIG formulated the perfect technique for running all gun manufacturers out of business? Didn't go far...
Oh, I'm not arguing that it will go anywhere, as a precedent. It may well not. But we all know it certainly could, since Master demonstrably does not let trifles such as its own charter or standing rules get in its way when it wants something. And the disarmament crowd, for its part, basically wanders the earth in search of some scrap of something it can use in its relentless war against everyone. It does get tiring.
And of course I am saying nothing about the individual actors in the case. The owner(s) might be a real creep, for all I know, but that doesn't impress me if people are discussing precedent. Seems to me that most really awful, spiral-completely-out-of-control precedents begin with "society" sticking it to someone who really is a creep--so nobody questions the ink until it's long dry.
Post a Comment