The shooting at Santa Fe High School in Texas may have drifted out of the limelight, but not for those involved. That’s understandable, though. After all, they were there. They have to deal with that trauma for the rest of their lives. They’re not forgetting anything.
However, a new lawsuit is likely to push the shooting back into the news once again.
It seems that someone has decided to sue the online ammo retailer that allegedly sold to the shooter.
An online ammunition retailer has now been named in a civil lawsuit filed over the May 2018 shooting rampage at Santa Fe High School. Attorneys representing those who were killed or injured during the shooting claim [killer’s name redacted] started buying ammunition online two weeks after the mass shooting in Parkland, Florida.
[The shooter] was 17 at the time of the shooting and federal law prohibited him from buying ammunition. According to the Gun Control Act, rifle and shotgun ammunition cannot be sold to anyone under 18 and other types of ammunition cannot be sold to anyone under 21.
The lawsuit claims Luckygunner.com sold [him] handgun and shotgun rounds without verifying his age.
“The 17-year old did not need to produce any identification or provide proof of age to complete the purchase, and his order was approved in two minutes,” the lawsuit reads.
Neither Texas nor federal law expressly requires retailers to check IDs prior to ammunition sales.
“Instead of designing a website that allowed them to verify the purchase age for every customer, the Luckygunner Defendants made a decision not to ask for proof of age unless the shipment was destined for a small handful of states where certain proof is expressly required by state law,” court documents read.
In other words, Lucky Gunner did nothing that was illegal. While yes, it’s illegal for those under certain ages to buy certain kinds of ammo, there’s no requirement for any ammo retailer to add extra steps in selling or delivering ammunition to anyone.
And that’s important because Lucky Gunner is covered under the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. In essence, they’re protected because they did nothing illegal in the process of conducting business.
Had Lucky Gunner failed to comply with the law at it is written, that’s one thing. That isn’t what happened, though.
The parents are upset. I get that. I’d be upset as hell too. They even admit as much:
In a statement to KPRC 2, the mother of Christopher Stone, Rosie Stone, writes:
“Everybody who had a hand in our son’s murder, we will fight to hold each and every one of them accountable. Luckygunner should be shut down for the irresponsible handling of who’s buying these bullets. They sold to a minor, he was 17. Those bullets that they so carelessly handed over, killed our son. His irresponsible gun owner of a father supplied the guns and Luckygunner supplied the bullets. It’s a vicious cycle of how this killer pulled off this mass shooting. All he needed was a red carpet rollout. “
Unfortunately, they’re blaming everyone but the kid who actually did the shooting.
For the record, Lucky Gunner does require people to check that they’re over the age of 21, so it’s not like they’re ignoring the law here. As a result, Mrs. Stone is likely to find herself sorely disappointed when this goes to court.
A company not following steps you might think are better doesn’t make them complicit in mass murder. Lucky Gunner operated in compliance with ever legal requirement so far as we can tell. They’re not the villains here.
No, the villains are likely the attorneys who approached these parents just looking for someone to sue. They preyed on grieving parents just to fatten their own wallets. After all, they’re likely to get paid whether they win or lose.