Log in

View Full Version : Parents of Aurora Theater shooting victim owe Lucky Gunner $203,000



kidicarus13
09-25-2015, 15:02
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lonnie-and-sandy-phillips/lucky-gunner-lawsuit_b_8197804.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

We have been getting a lot of questions about our lawsuit against Lucky Gunner, the online company that sold ammunition to the man who murdered our daughter Jessica along with 11 others in an Aurora, Colorado, theater. Especially after theRachel Maddow Show covered us twice, people ask us about the judge's order that we pay Lucky Gunner's attorneys' fees, since our lawsuit was unsuccessful.
We brought our lawsuit because we thought it was outrageous that companies could sell a dangerous man an arsenal without getting any information about him, and without making any effort to see if he was a dangerous killer -- which he was. When the killer had left a voicemail with a shooting range, the range operator knew that he was bad news and shouldn't be given access to guns. But these companies set up their business so people just like this killer can arm themselves at the click of a mouse. We wanted to change that. And we still do.
Attorneys at Arnold and Porter and the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence brought the lawsuit for us, pro bono. We knew the risks of bringing the case. We knew that Colorado and Congress have given special protection of the gun industry, and we knew that under Colorado law we could even be ordered to pay attorneys' fees because of those special protections.
But we thought it was important to take a stand, to fight to prevent other families from suffering as we have. We did not seek any money in our case. We just wanted injunctive relief -- to have these companies act reasonably when they sold dangerous materiel, like 100-round ammunition magazines, ammunition, body armor, and tear gas.
The judge dismissed our case because, he said, these online sellers had special immunity from the general duty to use reasonable care under the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and a Colorado immunity law. If you couple the PLCAA law with Colorado's law HB 000-208, (which says in essence: If you bring a civil case against a gun or ammunition seller and the case is dismissed then the plaintiff must pay all the defendant's costs), you have an impenetrable barrier to using the judicial system to effect change in gun legislation in Colorado.
Everyone else in society has a duty to use reasonable care to not injure others -- except gun and ammunition sellers.
To make matters worse, the judge ordered that we pay $203,000. This is an outrageous amount, especially given that this case was decided after one single motion! Lucky Gunner has said that it is going to donate all these fees to "gun rights" groups. The thought is disgusting to us that Lucky Gunner does not even plan to use this money to pay for their attorney's fees.
Lucky Gunner wants to use blood money to fund the NRA and like-minded groups. See for yourself. Check out Lucky Gunner's self-serving description (http://www.luckygunner.com/brady-v-lucky-gunner) of our case then click on "Head Here (http://www.luckygunner.com/results)" (the green words at the end of Lucky Gunner's last sentence) to find out how the money is to be distributed.
The law says we are responsible for these fees, which we recognize. We do not have the money to pay this amount. The Judge insinuated in his order that Brady should pay since he said they were the instigators. If this was a ploy designed to give the appearance that Brady was responsible and turn us against each other, it did not work.
Brady is still fighting for us pro bono and we see no evidence that the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence will not help us raise funds if and when that time comes.
We believe that the judge's decision was wrong, and that it is unconstitutional to financially punish people for bringing a lawsuit, especially a public interest case that did not seek a dime. But rather than risk possibly being ordered to pay even more fees, we are changing our focus from going after these laws in the judicial branch (we have dropped our appeal) to getting them overturned on the legislative level.
We have brought attorney Dan Wartell with the law firm Jones & Keller into our team who is also helping us.
We hope that we are spearheading a movement to expose these egregious and unconstitutional laws for what they really are. They are an attack on our civil liberties. With these laws in place ordinary citizens are effectively barred by the exorbitant cost from bringing any civil action against sellers of firearms and ammunition.
It is un-American and outrageous that these special laws can deny us our day in court simply because we were victimized by the gun industry. Our lawsuit was not frivolous. Our Jessi was shot multiple times with high-velocity, armor-piercing bullets that were designed by our military to inflict maximum damage on enemy combatants.
One of the six, steel-jacketed bullets that killed her slammed through a theater seat, entered her left eye and left a five-inch hole in her face as it blew her brains out on to the theater floor. The other five specially designed bullets tumbled when they tore through her flesh and did devastating damage to both legs, arms and intestines.
Those bullets were six of 4,000 that Lucky Gunner sold to a mass murderer in one sale without even checking his driver's license.
Why is there a law that says you cannot sue an ammunitions dealer that allowed 4,000 rounds of armor-piercing bullets into the wrong hands?
How else are we as citizens going to get them to stop doing that?
No other industry has this immunity.
The horrific and public execution of our daughter Jessi and 11 other beautiful young lives has given us a brief window of opportunity to bring awareness to the number one public health crisis facing this nation today which is rampant gun violence. It is unfathomable to me that the billion dollar gun lobby can intimidate our Congress and some state legislatures into passing laws that give the gun industry immunity against irresponsible acts that enables them to arm, and profit from, domestic terrorists, and other killers.
It is abhorrent to us as the parents of a child who has been killed by a person with outwardly obvious mental issues who was able to easily access a one hundred round magazine and 4,000 rounds of armor-piercing bullets online without a valid ID.
Who is our last line of defense that makes that conscious decision to not ask for ID before selling large orders of lethal, military-grade armament? Online sellers, knowing they are shielded by immunity laws, refuse to put into place even minimal safeguards that would save lives. That is abhorrent to us.
One of the ways that we can level the playing field is to create precedents in our court rooms that make gun and ammunition dealers pay a price for conduct that contributes to gun violence. Another way is to lobby our state and federal legislators to repeal these laws. That is our objective.
We are calling on the citizens of this country and the gun violence prevention community to stand ready to help us get in the face of state and national legislators. Join us in helping to get the word out to the American citizens who are not aware of how these laws take away the rights of victims of gun violence.

jhood001
09-25-2015, 15:33
It is abhorrent to us as the parents of a child who has been killed by a person with outwardly obvious mental issues who was able to easily access a one hundred round magazine and 4,000 rounds of armor-piercing bullets online without a valid ID.
Who is our last line of defense that makes that conscious decision to not ask for ID before selling large orders of lethal, military-grade armament? Online sellers, knowing they are shielded by immunity laws, refuse to put into place even minimal safeguards that would save lives. That is abhorrent to us.


I kept reading to find the part where it explained how obtaining Holmes' ID when he bought ammunition would have saved lives in Aurora.

Then I ran out of article.

Ramsker
09-25-2015, 15:34
Translation:

We knew what the law was going in and what the consequences could be if we lost . . . however, having ended up on the wrong end of the right ruling based on the law (which we knew), we don't think it's fair and want progressives everywhere to rise up to prevent people from facing the consequences of their actions in the future. Because gun nuts.

sniper7
09-25-2015, 15:44
So if they checked his ID and found out he was of age to purchase the ammo...what would have happened?

and why didn't you prepare your daughter for the threats and evil of the world? Why didn't she have a concealed carry permit to combat bad guys and protect herself? Why didn't you know that such an evil person was at the theater, why werent you there checking IDs and making sure such a violent criminal with such a terrible background and horrible parents with no education was entering the same theater as your daughter?

oh wait...he was extremely smart, his parents were smart, he didn't have a background to deny him anything. So I see that it was you who failed your daughter, I see it was her who failed to at least try to protect herself. You have a victim mindset and now you want to place the blame somewhere else when the mirror is where you should look.

i feel for the parents loss but the stupidity they display from this lawsuit and even now is troubling to me.

Mercula
09-25-2015, 15:46
Ahhhh. Interesting read. Ramsker and Sniper put it well. And good for lucky gunner. Let their money work against their "cause ".

Skip
09-25-2015, 15:48
I kept reading to find the part where it explained how obtaining Holmes' ID when he bought ammunition would have saved lives in Aurora.

Then I ran out of article.

Or the part where Lucky Gunner should have known Holmes was a killer (first paragraph). Guess Lucky Gunner failed to use their time machine to find out. Lazy bastards!

Funny how there's no lawsuit against the people who did know Holmes was a problem and failed to use the existing laws to protect the public.

I think the activists who put the family up to this should pay. It's obvious why they sued the ammo retailer and not the gun manufacturer. It reeks of agenda and had exactly jack shit to do with the tragic loss of their loved ones.

funkymonkey1111
09-25-2015, 16:04
the online ammunition industry has no "immunity." instead, they brought claims on which they could not prevail, and the prevailing party was awarded their fees. unless there is a fee-shifting statute or agreement between the parties, this only happens when a party prevails on a motion to dismiss.

SuperiorDG
09-25-2015, 16:17
After reading what they had to say I can see why they sued,






They are living in a fantasy world.

Irving
09-25-2015, 16:25
The daughter, or any other victim has zero blame in this event and it is shameful to suggest otherwise. The statement written by these parents is absurd and embarrassing in its own right. No need to try and shame this family further, especially the deceased.

Monky
09-25-2015, 16:29
... wait.. so a legal action that is of public interest... seeking no $$$??

I don't believe I've ever seen such a thing..

SideShow Bob
09-25-2015, 16:32
As I look into my crystal ball, I see another ammo buying panic in the future.

funkymonkey1111
09-25-2015, 16:42
... wait.. so a legal action that is of public interest... seeking no $$$??

I don't believe I've ever seen such a thing..

they wanted the court to oversee a change to the way they did business.

From the Order:
The named plaintiffs in their opposition ask that these motions be denied on several grounds. They say that the action could have ended expeditiously by settlement if the defendants had initiated settlement discussions. That is a strange plaint to make given the allegations of the amended complaint accusing the defendants of a causal relationship with the criminal acts resulting in the deaths and injuries in the armed attack on the moviegoers at the Aurora Century16 movie theater in Aurora, Colorado on July 20, 2012. The injunctive relief requested is to stop all the defendants’ commercial activities until their business practices have been changed and

approved by the court. There is nothing in the record to indicate that the plaintiffs or the Brady Center, the apparent sponsor of this case, made any attempt to persuade the defendants to make any alterations of those practices before bringing this highly publicized lawsuit. It would be highly unlikely that the defendants would seek to emasculate their businesses to conform to an undefined standard of care that would have prevented a purchaser of their products from using them in a barbaric assault on innocent people in an entertainment venue.

The Court also stated:

It is apparent that this case was filed to pursue the political purposes of the Brady Center and, given the failure to present any cognizable legal claim, bringing these defendants into the Colorado court where the prosecution of James Holmes was proceeding appears to be more of an opportunity to propagandize the public and stigmatize the defendants than to obtain a court order which counsel should have known would be outside the authority of this court.

BushMasterBoy
09-25-2015, 16:46
I can't find James Holmes on the state inmate locator website. I guess he is out on the tennis courts.

Zundfolge
09-25-2015, 17:01
Our Jessi was shot multiple times with high-velocity, armor-piercing bullets that were designed by our military to inflict maximum damage on enemy combatants.
The same AP rounds that our soldiers complained were somewhat ineffective against unarmored "skinnys" in Somalia? No, the rounds designed to "inflict maximum damage on enemy combatants" were banned by the Hague convention (which frankly we're not beholden to but have observed anyway).


Those bullets were six of 4,000 that Lucky Gunner sold to a mass murderer in one sale without even checking his driver's license.
And had he had to show his driver's license he still would have had the "bullets" and your Jessi would still be dead.

All Jessi's parents have done is diminish my sympathy at the loss of their daughter ... that and cost themselves a lot of money just to make a political point ... and a stupid one at that.

funkymonkey1111
09-25-2015, 17:05
I can't find James Holmes on the state inmate locator website. I guess he is out on the tennis courts.

i read somewhere in all the articles about the case that he could be transferred out of state.

sroz
09-25-2015, 18:01
The daughter, or any other victim has zero blame in this event and it is shameful to suggest otherwise. The statement written by these parents is absurd and embarrassing in its own right. No need to try and shame this family further, especially the deceased.

Agree. Nuff said.

ray1970
09-25-2015, 18:24
The sheer stupidity of people in general and the legal system never ceases to amaze me.

Based off of their logic shouldn't the families of people killed by a drunk driver go after the gas station that sold the drunk driver the gas for their car?

theGinsue
09-25-2015, 18:54
There is so much ignorance and flat out stupidity in this article that I could take up pages in respomding to it all. I appreciate that this man and so many others suffered a trafic, albeit unpreventable from a firearms industry standpoint, loss but I have to concur wholeheartedly with Zundfolge that my sympathy for them is near non-existant due to their ricdiculous and misdirected assignment of blame.



We hope that we are spearheading a movement to expose these egregious and unconstitutional laws for what they really are. They are an attack on our civil liberties.

Typical liberal douchebag hypocrites. This guy can't see how hypocritical his attempts to limit a lawful business from exercising their freedoms, or how their ultimate goal of banning citizens from firearms is a violation of civil liberties. While this man is well-written and obviously educated, he hasn't got the common sense of a lemming.

ray1970
09-25-2015, 18:57
While this man is well-written and obviously educated, he hasn't got the common sense of a lemming.

Why the lack of love for lemmings? What did they ever do to you?

MarkCO
09-25-2015, 18:58
... wait.. so a legal action that is of public interest... seeking no $$$??

I don't believe I've ever seen such a thing..

It happens. The suits related to elections are one such occasion. I have worked on a few cases where monetary damages were not sought.


Based off of their logic shouldn't the families of people killed by a drunk driver go after the gas station that sold the drunk driver the gas for their car? That is the logical conclusion following their flawed logic.

buffalobo
09-25-2015, 19:13
The same AP rounds that our soldiers complained were somewhat ineffective against unarmored "skinnys" in Somalia? No, the rounds designed to "inflict maximum damage on enemy combatants" were banned by the Hague convention (which frankly we're not beholden to but have observed anyway).


And had he had to show his driver's license he still would have had the "bullets" and your Jessi would still be dead.

All Jessi's parents have done is diminish my sympathy at the loss of their daughter ... that and cost themselves a lot of money just to make a political point ... and a stupid one at that.


Well said and alot more polite than my comments would be.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

XC700116
09-25-2015, 19:37
If you couple the PLCAA law with Colorado's law HB 000-208, (which says in essence: If you bring a civil case against a gun or ammunition seller and the case is dismissed then the plaintiff must pay all the defendant's costs), you have an impenetrable barrier to using the judicial system to effect change in gun legislation in Colorado.

^^^^ THIS is a huge part of the problem with our current condition in this country. The fact that the above has proven itself out time and time again is exactly why those laws are on the books, because of activist judges, and people trying to get the wrong portion of the government to make law.

brutal
09-25-2015, 20:03
lost me at armor-piercing heat-seeking incendiary exploding-tip jet-propelled military-grade ammunition.

I actually did read the whole thing but feel slightly dumber for it.

theGinsue
09-25-2015, 20:47
Why the lack of love for lemmings? What did they ever do to you?

Naw, lemmings are fine for what they are, but I couldn't think of any other creature with less common sense. Any creature that will blindly walk off of a cliff because another creature before him did it has no common sense. In the human species they are known as liberals.

Bailey Guns
09-25-2015, 21:33
I'm sorry they lost their daughter at the hands of a madman. I'm overjoyed the court did the right thing. I hope there's a lesson in this for others who think it's right to sue the wrong person.

Great-Kazoo
09-25-2015, 21:56
I'm sorry they lost their daughter at the hands of a madman. I'm overjoyed the court did the right thing. I hope there's a lesson in this for others who think it's right to sue the wrong person.

It isn't going to happen. The bradyvpcslpcnaacpmillionboredhousewives. Will always try to get a court case no matter how bad they get hammered.
It's about their visibility and trying to remain relevant even though they know it's a loosing prop.
HOWEVER all they need is One Sympathetic Judge and off to trial it goes. Accompanied by media coverage, sabre rattling from .gov bobbing heads who will all say THIS IS NEEDED TO STOP ANOTHER SHOOTING. again.

Gman
09-25-2015, 21:57
Based off of their logic shouldn't the families of people killed by a drunk driver go after the gas station that sold the drunk driver the gas for their car?
Gas that they bought the day before, when they were sober....but the gas station employees SHOULD HAVE KNOWN!!!! [Cry]

Big E3
09-25-2015, 23:00
It's all about the bullets? Projectiles that have no purpose by themselves or hold any harming ability without a devise to launch them. Once again the anti's going after the mechanical devise used and not the actual people that knew Holmes was a nut bag and did nothing. Or the theater for providing a gun spree zone.

TheGrey
09-25-2015, 23:08
I feel for the parents, and for anyone that lost friends/family in the shooting.

Using their logic, why didn't they sue the movie theater for selling James Holmes a ticket to the show, 12 days before?

Personally I think that the Brady Center was seeking easily-manipulated people to act as puppets for their agenda.

ZERO THEORY
09-26-2015, 07:10
"Good morrow, shopkeep. 4,000 armor piercers, please!"
"I.D. sir?"
"Here ya go."
"Ah, thank you Mr. Holmes. Now, you're not crazy are you?"
"No, sir."
"Good. 'Cause I can't sell to crazies, lunatics, and murderers."
"None of the above."
"Welp, have a good day."
"I bid you adieu."


" We knew that Colorado and Congress have given special protection of the gun industry"

Riiiiiggggghhhhtttt....

hurley842002
09-26-2015, 07:12
"Good morrow, shopkeep. 4,000 armor piercers, please!"
"I.D. sir?"
"Here ya go."
"Ah, thank you Mr. Holmes. Now, you're not crazy are you?"
"No, sir."
"Good. 'Cause I can't sell to crazies, lunatics, and murderers."
"None of the above."
"Welp, have a good day."
"I bid you adieu."


LOLOL! True story tho...

Rucker61
09-26-2015, 08:21
"Good morrow, shopkeep. 4,000 armor piercers, please!"
"I.D. sir?"
"Here ya go."
"Ah, thank you Mr. Holmes. Now, you're not crazy are you?"
"No, sir."
"Good. 'Cause I can't sell to crazies, lunatics, and murderers."
"None of the above."
"Welp, have a good day."
"I bid you adieu."



Riiiiiggggghhhhtttt....[/FONT][/COLOR]

"And let me help you out with that ammo, because your scrawny little ass can't even carry 500 rounds, much less 4k".

Great-Kazoo
09-26-2015, 09:04
I feel for the parents, and for anyone that lost friends/family in the shooting.

Using their logic, why didn't they sue the movie theater for selling James Holmes a ticket to the show, 12 days before?

Personally I think that the Brady Center was seeking easily-manipulated people to act as puppets for their agenda.

Find the weakest link, exploit their emotions, file lawsuit. SOP for them & the left.

Gman
09-26-2015, 09:32
Personally I think that the Brady Center was seeking easily-manipulated people to act as puppets for their agenda.
So did the court, fortunately.

TFOGGER
09-26-2015, 09:53
Bottom line: They knew the stakes going in, and they lost. Now they want to whine about it. Had they prevailed, they would have gone after Lucky Gunner for their attorney's fees, and felt that that was justified. Liberals only want things to be "fair and just" if it benefits them.

kidicarus13
09-26-2015, 09:54
Liberals only want things to be "fair and just" if it benefits them.

To all the young people on this forum, heed this advice.

brutal
09-26-2015, 09:56
Bottom line: They knew the stakes going in, and they lost. Now they want to whine about it. Had they prevailed, they would have gone after Lucky Gunner for their attorney's fees, and felt that that was justified. Liberals only want things to be "fair and just" if it benefits them.

Thank you for that