Back in December, before the gun control advocacy bonanza that consumed the first half of 2013, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence filed suit in Illinois against the online firearms marketplace Armslist. The Bradys were insane with rage to find that citizens could meet online and buy guns without going through a gun dealer. So much so that they filed a wrongful death suit on the behalf of a surviving relative of someone killed with a gun purchased through Armslist. Their assertion was that since Armslist facilitated the transaction, they should be liable. A judge, however, disagreed . . .
[UPDATED 22:07 CDT]
The document states simply that “IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed.” It’s a win for those who were biting their nails, wondering if an intermediate party like Armslist or Gunbroker could be held liable for the unknown illegal activities of its users. This was a blatant attempt by the Brady campaign to systematically shut off any means for gun owners to purchase new firearms, and it has failed.
In the longer document describing the actual action, it seems that what happened was that the defendants (Armslist) made a motion to dismiss the case that was accepted by the court. The judge ruled that Armslist could not have foreseen the illegal use of the firearm, and basically laughed the Brady Campaign’s argument out of court.
Hopefully the Bradys will now focus their advocacy efforts on encouraging prosecutors to go after actual offenders rather than third parties who made a good faith effort to provide a service to law abiding citizens. Or does the Brady Campaign believe that one should also sue the gas station attendant who sold a drunk driver his fuel?