Store That Sold Gun Agrees To Pay $1 Million To Wounded West Virginia Officers

nralife

New member
http://www.officer.com/article/article.jsp?id=14190&siteSection=1


Store That Sold Gun Agrees To Pay $1 Million To Wounded West Virginia Officers

JENNIFER BUNDY Associated Press

CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) -- A judge approved a landmark $1 million settlement Wednesday between two New Jersey police officers and the store that sold the gun used to shoot them.

Police officers David Lemongello and Kenneth McGuire of Orange, N.J., were shot with a Sturm, Ruger 9mm handgun in January 2001. Both were disabled and have retired. Their attacker, Shuntez Everett, was killed in a gunbattle with them.

The settlement between the officers and the Will Co., which operated Will's Jewelry and Loan in South Charleston, was approved by Kanawha County Circuit Judge Irene Berger.

The shop sold the gun and 11 others in July 2000 in a "straw sale," in which someone without a criminal record buys guns and turns them over to someone else. The store later contacted federal agents and cooperated in an undercover sting.

"This is the first case in which a gun dealer will pay damages, has paid damages for facilitating the gun trafficking in this way," said Dennis Hanigan, an attorney for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. The center and Charleston attorney Scott Segal are co-counsel for the police officers.

Segal said the settlement "shows gun retailers they have to be careful about who they sell their guns to and under what circumstances."

Lawrence Keane, an attorney for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms industry, said there have been other settlements of cases against gun stores by people who were shot, but he did not know if any of those cases involved a "straw sale."

The gun used to shoot the officers was bought by Tammi Lea Songer of South Charleston, who turned the guns over to James Gray, a convicted felon who could not buy guns. Gray sold them to convicted felons, including Everett. Songer and Gray spent time in prison for their roles.

An attorney for the store, Michael Folio, said the shop is not admitting liability or that it did not follow industry standards, but settled because ``it was a decision we found to be in the best interest of all parties.

"It was a tragedy what happened to the officers. It was a tragedy these people bought the guns by lying and deceiving and deceiving Will Company to begin with."

The gun retail industry has voluntary standards about gun sales, including how to be wary of straw sales, Segal said.

"The message is, if you didn't follow the standards as a retailer or a wholesaler, you are going to wind up having to pay money for your conduct," Segal said.

Songer gave the store false federal gun purchase forms and paid for the 12 guns with $4,000 cash Gray gave her in the store, the officers' attorneys said.

The day after the sale, store workers became suspicious because of the number of weapons Songer bought and contacted the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. The agency and the store set up a sting operation in which ATF officers dressed as store clerks, and Songer was arrested when she returned to buy guns again, Folio said.

Folio complained the settlement means "if a company like Will Jewelry complies with the ATF laws it appeared that company can be sued and have to pay damages."

The lawsuit is still pending against Sturm, Ruger and also names Ohio gun distributor Acusport as a defendant.

Acusport sold the gun to another distributor, who sold it to a Baptist minister. He gave or sold the gun to a friend who was a firearms collector. That person pawned it at the shop where the straw sale occurred.

Keane, the National Shooting Sports Foundation attorney, said suing the manufacturer and distributor is "an attempt to extort a settlement."

"Manufacturers don't control what goes on inside the store. It's like suing Budweiser if a bartender serves an intoxicated person," Keane said.
 
TWO MULES, W. Va (UPI)-

Using the Will's Jewelry case as a precedent, the dealership that sold a man a '94 Ford Explorer in bad need of a valve job has been forced to pay $3 million to the families of the three people he ran over while likkered up the other day. Mary Jo Willis, kin to one of the deceased, said "They shoulda knew Rufus couldn't handle his Pabst, and they never shoulda sold him that truck!"
 
They just keep bringing these specious lawsuits and I'm sure they see this as a "good first step" to the bankruptcy of the industry.

It appears that this shop complied with the laws and alerted the authorities as required. For this they are punished so what is the incentive for law-abiding people to comply with laws that they are going to be puinished for that compliance? It is like someone stopping for a red light and being cited for doing so; or worse yet "You ran that green light back there".
 
IT doesnt seem fishy to anyone that someone buying 12 guns with cash would be upto no good. I wouldnt sell to that person if I owned a shop.
 
It was specifically mentioned that she paid cash. I don't like this either, but a 12 gun cash purchase transaction ought to at least raise eyebrows in the store. As for "what to do", I have no idea.

Gray couldn't do the deal because he was a felon, but he went into the store with her and gave her the cash.

If this wasn't an obvious 'straw sale', the term has no meaning.

...The gun retail industry has voluntary standards about gun sales, including how to be wary of straw sales, Segal said.

"The message is, if you didn't follow the standards as a retailer or a wholesaler, you are going to wind up having to pay money for your conduct," Segal said.

Songer gave the store false federal gun purchase forms and paid for the 12 guns with $4,000 cash Gray gave her in the store, the officers' attorneys said.

The day after the sale, store workers became suspicious because of the number of weapons Songer bought and contacted the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. The agency and the store set up a sting operation in which ATF officers dressed as store clerks, and Songer was arrested when she returned to buy guns again, Folio said...


db
 
Oh. Duh. :o

Thanks!


If this wasn't an obvious 'straw sale', the term has no meaning.

Yeah, I'm really impressed by the mental powers of this pawn shop staff:

The day after the sale, store workers became suspicious


Duh, ya think? :rolleyes:

I think they took the smart way out - a jury would have bankrupted them.
 
I dont agree with the settlement but stupid people are always stupid people. I mean it is like suing barteders for serving drunks. Common sense should come into play but just not through lawsuits.
 
I think common sense says the shop should be shut down. Stupid and/or dishonest people in this business just add fuel to the fire for gun control.

Bartenders shouldn't serve drunks, either.
 
I paid cash for a 12 gun purchase in March of 2003. Of course I still own all of mine. This was from a guy selling off a small collection. I did once purchase 6 at a gun shop with cash. I guess I don't find it suspicious, because I do it. It isn't so "obviously" a straw purchase to someone that has frequently made multiple gun purchases.
 
If they know you as a regular, that's one thing. But when she does all the paperwork and he does all the pointing "I want this one, and that one, and..." and then he hands her the cash....

:rolleyes:
 
If they know you as a regular, that's one thing. But when she does all the paperwork and he does all the pointing "I want this one, and that one, and..." and then he hands her the cash....
And if "he" is the husband and "she" is the wife?????

Does the shop have a duty to demand proof that they are married? Is that an invasion if they do? How far does one have to go to satisfy every "i" and "t" to keep themselves out of court?
 
Utterly irrelevant

"And if "he" is the husband and "she" is the wife?????"

Who cares? Excuse me - "Who cares?????????"

Marriage is irrelevant. Who is licensed and who is PROHIBITED are the issues. If HE wants the guns, and HE will possess them, let HIM do the paperwork. It's that simple.

This was a blatantly illegal gun sale which resulted in two police officers getting killed. Spare us specious arguments about marriage and privacy.
 
Yeah, Jim, I think you missed it on this one. We don't have to suspend common sense in order to protect privacy. This one smelled to high heaven, and these clowns didn't smell a rat until the cash had been deposited.
 
Quartus and Number 6

I posed questions. Do either of you have any answers? Don't scold me for asking. The questions were valid.

There is no law that a spouse is disallowed the possession or ownership of a firearm if they have married an ex-felon. In community property states, her money is his money and vice versa. There would be no law violated if he were an ex-felon advising his spouse on the choice of a home protection firearm and there would be no violation of law if he handed her household money with which to buy that firearm as long as he did not handle the firearm. Nor is there any violation of current -- heavy on the current -- law for having a firearm in the domicile in which an ex-felon resides with their spouse.

How deeply does a distributor have to pry into the relationship of a pair of persons buying a firearm and how deep is their duty to do so?

I AM NOT NECCESSARILY SPEAKING OF THIS PARTICULAR CASE.

Now, if you have something constructive to say in opposition to what I have just written, I would be more than happy to read and consider it. If you have nothing better than scoldng me for positing viable questions, save your prattling for someone else.
 
answerguy ...

or is that questionguy? In any case, here's your answer, guy. The words for the day are "Deep Pockets".
 
Neither the gun store, nor employees thereof, pulled the trigger. The person who bought the guns broke the law. I don't see any liability on the gun shop.

Do the Tamara (tm): substitute any other product for a gun where behavior of the end user becomes a factor in the product's misuse.
 
Back
Top