Brady Victim Exploitation Reaching New Lows

Court Gavel

Several weeks ago, John Richardson reported that Brady had lost their lawsuit against Lucky Gunner and Sportsman’s Guide for selling ammunition to the Aurora mass murderer, and were ordered to pay legal fees for the defendants. Apparently those fees amounted to some $280,000 dollars. Dave Hardy notes that the PLCAA doesn’t seem to specifically call for attorneys fees to be paid , “I wonder if the judge might have awarded the fees as sanctions for bringing an utterly frivolous suit. That’s a rare action for a court to take, the suit has to be utterly beyond the pale, and in awarding them the judge could assess them directly against the attorneys.”

Dave notes that the judgement is a significant part of Bradys’ income and assets. Are we witnessing the dying gasp of the Brady Center? Let’s hope so. Preying on the families of victims to raise their profile by filing frivolous lawsuits is beyond the pale. Recall they recently withdrew from another suit for ethical lapses. Depending on how the judgement is structured, it might be possible for Brady to leave the victims holding the bag; on the hook for the 280 grand. If they do scurry off and leave the judgement to the family, it’s beyond the pale to exploit victims like that.

I think it’s time for the Brady Center to quietly disband. Even looking at the situation from the perspective of a person who supports gun control, the Brady organization no longer serve any useful purpose. How the mighty have fallen.

19 thoughts on “Brady Victim Exploitation Reaching New Lows”

  1. If the judge wanted to aim sanctions at the Brady bunch specifically, rather than as a normal part of the law’s actions, he can probably order whoever he likes to foot the bill, not just the nominal plaintiffs. Like you said, we have to see what the specifics are

  2. Another potential option would be for Lucky Gunner et al to settle with the plaintiff for an assignment of their rights against Brady and/or their attorneys for malpractice. Then Lucky Gunner could pursue them directly. I am sure they would take no joy in getting legal fees paid by grieving parents that were being exploited by Brady. Going after Brady directly would be quite sporting though.

    1. MediaMatters headline: Gun store Sues Grieving Parents for Trying to Prevent Mass Murders

    1. How about the GOA, NRA, or SAF anonymously buying them out if the price is low emough? I bet there is a treasure trove of interesting information in their historical records.

  3. In Canada, the losers almost always pay costs, not full costs, but some. This tends to temper fools a little bit.

  4. If the Brady’s leave the parents holding the bag, NRA members should crowd fund the bill. It would be a nice thing to do for grieving parents who have been swindled by the Bradys. And it could be used in a low key way to gain some good press.

    The money shouldn’t come from NRA or NSSF proper. It should come directly from members.

    1. The media would spin it as NRA blood money being used to silence grieving parents, or some other outrageous lie. The legacy media organizations will never give the NRA good press. Ever. To paraphrase the old joke, Wayne la Pierre could walk on water and the headlines would say “Gun Lobbyist Can’t Swim.”

      1. Remember all the news coverage that happened when NJ gun owners and gun groups crowdfunded billboards and held fundraisers for Shaneen Allen’s defense? Yeah, me too.

  5. Cynical here, but I’m betting Brady Bunch will run away leaving the family to cover it… Hopefully the Judge steps in.

    1. As awful as the possibility may be, if the Brady Campaign doesn’t cover the costs, then in the long run, it will hurt the Brady Campaign from doing this in the future. If the Brady Campaign says to a grieving family “We could help you sue!” and the family points to the last time the Brady Campaign “helped” a grieving family, the likely answer will likely not be “No” so much as “Heck No!”

      If the Brady Campaign wants to continue to try to pursue such cases, they had better cover the costs of any family that they try to sue for.

      (Assuming the Campaign has the money for such things, of course…but if they don’t, then this point is somewhat moot anyway, one way or the other…)

  6. The attorney fees award was based on a mandatory provision of state law, not the federal PLCAA.

    Under Colorado’s state analog of the PLCAA, the plaintiff has to pay defendant’s atty fees whenever a tort lawsuit against a gun or ammo dealer is dismissed on the ground that it is barred by the immunities in the statute. Colo. R.S. 13-21-504.5.

  7. Bloomberg could cover this with yesterday’s lunch money – then add the Brady Bunch to his network of teeming minions.

Comments are closed.