The parents of a woman killed during a shooting rampage in a Utah mall are asking a federal judge to impose a 99-month sentence on the gun-seller that provided the weapon.As long as they're going for legal remedies, I hope they don't forget to sue Trolley Square for ensuring a target-rich environment.
Maybe the parents should blame themselves for raising a victim who was unprepared to defend her own life. This is ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteIf it is provable in a court of law that the seller planned and supplied the weapon for the purposes the crime, then he deserves it. However, the seller is already presumed to be in violation of some transfer law. I'd probably be a waste of keystrokes to discuss the meaning of "infringement".
ReplyDeleteVictimhood does not grant special powers, nor is revenge a substitute for restitution -- which is impossible in this case. If the seller was not a co-conspirator, then the courts would in effect be punishing him based on the presumption that he could accurately predict the future. That makes about as much sense as punishing the victim's parents for not warning their daughter of the danger beforehand.
I see this and wonder, did they come up with this themselves?
ReplyDelete