DOCSLIB.ORG

Legal Action Project Case Docket

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Legal Action Project Case Docket BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE LEGAL ACTION PROJECT LITIGATION DOCKET January 2012 January 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS LAWSUITS CONCERNING NEGLIGENT GUN DISTRIBUTION ........................................ 5 Arce & Lopez v. Badger Guns, et al................................................................................... 5 City of Gary v. Smith & Wesson Corp.............................................................................. 6 Gilland v. Sportsmen’s Outpost, Inc................................................................................ 8 Kim v. Coxe ...................................................................................................................... 9 Kunisch & Norberg v. Badger Guns, et al......................................................................... 11 Shirley v.Glass, et al.. ..................................................................................................... 12 Tuft & Hinckley v. Rocky Mountain Enterprises, Inc. et al.......................................... 13 Williams v. Beemiller, Inc. et al....................................................................................... 15 IMPORTANT PAST CASES .................................................................................................. 17 Anderson v. Bryco........................................................................................................... 17 Arnold v. American Security et al................................................................................... 18 Conrad Johnson, et al. v. Bull’s Eye Shooter Supply, et al............................................ 19 Hernandez v. Kahr, Inc................................................................................................... 21 Hopper v. Wal-Mart Stores............................................................................................ 23 Jefferson v. Rossi............................................................................................................. 24 Johnson v. Carter’s Country .......................................................................................... 25 Lemongello & McGuire v. Will Jewelry and Loan et al.................................................. 26 Municipal Lawsuits Summary........................................................................................ 28 Oliver v. Lou's Loans, et al. ............................................................................................ 31 Tucker v. Cary Jewelry & Pawn, et al............................................................................ 32 LAWSUITS CONCERNING DEFECTIVE GUN DESIGNS........................................................... 33 Adames v. Beretta........................................................................................................... 33 IMPORTANT PAST CASES .................................................................................................. 34 Dix v. Beretta................................................................................................................... 34 Grunow v. Valor Corp.................................................................................................... 35 Maxfield v. Bryco Arms, et al. ....................................................................................... 37 Ryan v. Koehler Int’l....................................................................................................... 37 Smith v. Bryco................................................................................................................. 38 LAWSUITS CONCERNING SAFE GUN STORAGE...................................................................... 39 Commonwealth v. Runyan ............................................................................................. 39 IMPORTANT PAST CASES .................................................................................................. 40 Estate of Heck v. Stoffer................................................................................................. 40 Jupin v. Kask.................................................................................................................. 41 ii January 2012 LAWSUITS CONCERNING ASSAULT WEAPONS....................................................................... 42 Estate of Pascal Charlot v. Bushmaster Firearms, Inc.................................................... 42 IMPORTANT PAST CASES .................................................................................................. 43 Merrill v. Navegar............................................................................................................ 43 LITIGATION DEFENDING AND UPHOLDING GUN LAWS........................................................ 45 American Academy of Pediatrics, Florida Chapter, et al. v. Gov. Rick Scott.................... 45 Assoc. of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs v. The City of Jersey City......................... 46 Bateman v. Perdue........................................................................................................... 46 Benson v. City of Chicago ............................................................................................... 47 Birdt v. Beck.................................................................................................................... 47 Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence v. Kempthorne............................................ 47 City of Cleveland v. State of Ohio ................................................................................... 49 Commonwealth v. DePina ............................................................................................... 49 D’Cruz v. ATF................................................................................................................ 50 D’Cruz v. McCraw......................................................................................................... 51 Dearth v. Holder.............................................................................................................. 51 District of Columbia v. Heller......................................................................................... 51 Doe v. Wilmington Housing Authority .......................................................................... 52 GeorgiaCarry.org v. City of Atlanta................................................................................. 53 GeorgiaCarry.org v. State of Georgia................................................................................ 53 Hain v. DeLeo................................................................................................................. 54 Heller v. District of Columbia......................................................................................... 54 Jackson v. City and County of San Francisco................................................................ 55 Kachalsky v. Cacace ........................................................................................................ 55 McDonald v. City of Chicago.......................................................................................... 56 Mishaga v. Monken......................................................................................................... 56 Montana Shooting Sports Assoc. v. Holder..................................................................... 57 Moore v. Madigan........................................................................................................... 58 Muller v. Maenza............................................................................................................ 58 National Shooting Sports Foundation v. ATF.................................................................. 58 Nordyke v. King.............................................................................................................. 59 National Rifle Association v. City of Philadelphia......................................................... 60 National Rifle Association v. City of Pittsburgh.............................................................. 61 Ohio v. Tomas................................................................................................................. 62 Palmer v. District of Columbia......................................................................................... 62 Pena v. Cid....................................................................................................................... 62 Peruta v. County of San Diego......................................................................................... 63 Peterson v. LaCabe .......................................................................................................... 64 Richards v. Prieto............................................................................................................. 64 Sykes v. McGinness....................................................................................................... 64 Shepard v. Madigan. ....................................................................................................... 65 iii January 2012 State of Tennessee, et al. v. Cooper, Jr.......................................................................... 65 Students for Concealed Carry on Campus v. Regents of Univ. of Colorado..................... 66 U.S. v. Frechette ............................................................................................................. 67 U.S. v. Hayes..................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Issue Background Over the Past Several Years, Gun Violence
    Gun Violence Prevention Background NFTY Mechina 2015 Issue Background Over the past several years, gun violence prevention has once again been at the forefront of North American political discourse, spurred in large part by the movie theater shooting in Aurora, Colorado, the Navy Yard shooting in Washington, D.C., and the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut, among others. The costs of gun violence in the United States are staggering: Consider these numbers: 8: Each day, eight young Americans under age 19 die from gun violence. 12: The rate of gun deaths among America’s children is 12 times higher than those of the 25 other wealthiest nations combined. 30,000: Over 30,000 Americans die each year from gun violence. $100 Billion: The estimated medical and social cost of gun violence in America, every single year. Nearly 80% of this cost is borne by taxpayers. The vast majority of Americans, even gun owners, support common sense gun safety measures. According to the National Opinion Research Center, 75% of gun owners support mandatory registration of handguns, as does 85% of the general public. 66% of gun owners and 80% of the general public favor mandatory background checks in private handgun sales, such as gun shows. However, some Americans believe that such gun control measures are unnecessary, ineffective, and contrary to the wording and spirit of the Second Amendment of the Constitution, which states, “A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” Groups such as the National Rifle Association (NRA) argue that law-abiding citizens, like hunters and sportsmen, will suffer the most under restrictive gun control laws, while criminals will always be able to access guns no matter what restrictions or gun control measures are enacted.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Youth Gun Violence: an Overview of Programs and Initiatives
    T O EN F J TM U R ST U.S. Department of Justice A I P C E E D B O J C S F A V Office of Justice Programs F M O I N A C I J S R E BJ G O OJJ DP O F PR Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention JUSTICE Reducing Youth Gun Violence: An Overview of Programs and Initiatives PROGRAM REPORT Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) was established by the President and Con- gress through the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act of 1974, Public Law 93–415, as amended. Located within the Office of Justice Programs of the U.S. Department of Justice, OJJDP’s goal is to provide national leadership in addressing the issues of juvenile delinquency and improving juvenile justice. OJJDP sponsors a broad array of research, program, and training initiatives to improve the juvenile justice system as a whole, as well as to benefit individual youth-serving agencies. These initiatives are carried out by seven components within OJJDP, described below. Research and Program Development Division Information Dissemination Unit informs individuals develops knowledge on national trends in juvenile and organizations of OJJDP initiatives; disseminates delinquency; supports a program for data collection information on juvenile justice, delinquency preven- and information sharing that incorporates elements tion, and missing children; and coordinates program of statistical and systems development; identifies planning efforts within OJJDP. The unit’s activities how delinquency develops and the best methods include publishing research and statistical reports, for its prevention, intervention, and treatment; and bulletins, and other documents, as well as overseeing analyzes practices and trends in the juvenile justice the operations of the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse.
    [Show full text]
  • The Blinding Rapture of Mobilization Vs. the Deep
    THE BLINDING RAPTURE OF MOBILIZATION VS. THE DEEP STATE1 By Moshe ben Asher, PhD & KhulDa bat Sarah For the millions who marched on the day after the Trump inauguration, doing so would surely have built their morale and clarified their political thinking, as evidenced by the fact that many of them have continued to resist and challenge the Trump administration’s worst initiatives. But did it do more than that? Ideally, the effect of such mobilizations would be to chasten Trump, to prompt him to restrain his worst inclinations. Or, if not that, then perhaps in a more roundabout fashion they could influence the Republican majority in Congress who, feeling pressure, would disassociate themselves from Trump, causing him to restrain his more outrageous behavior.2 But this does not appear to have happened. Why is that? Given our careers as professional community organizers, we have serious doubts about the staying power and the ultimate outcomes of mobilizations not built on long-term organizational development and seasoned leadership, which are the basis for waging extended campaigns. In their absence, even mass mobilizations can be forgotten in a matter of days. It’s no accident that few of us remember the massive anti-war demonstrations that preceded the U.S. invasion of Iraq. They did not prevent the war.3 It’s not that there’s anything wrong with marching. Every experienced community organizer has witnessed and appreciated the euphoria that accompanies such mobilizations, even those with turnouts in the hundreds (let alone in the millions). When citizens who have previously experienced themselves as powerless find themselves surrounded by others who share their resentment and their hopes and dreams, it’s no surprise they feel joyful.4 This reaction fits the definition of rapture: “a feeling of intense pleasure or joy,”5 which have positive benefits for organizing.
    [Show full text]
  • Allegheny County Sportsmen's League Legislative Committee Report
    Allegheny County Sportsmen’s League Legislative Committee Report August 2008 Issue 166 ALLEGHENY COUNTY SPORTSMEN LEAGUE ON THE INTERNET http://www.acslpa.org Contacts : Legislative Committee Chairman , Kim Stolfer (412.221.3346) - [email protected] Legislative Committee Vice-Chairman, Mike Christeson - [email protected] Registration of Guns Brings PA Mayors Association Convention TERROR to Suburbia Gun Control Takes Center Stage Report On MD State Police Gestapo "Investigation" th On July 18 the Allegheny County Sportsmen's (Source--Bruce Jackson-VCDL) League legislative committee chairman and Firearms I just wanted your organization to know what Our (Maryland) Owners against Crime chairman, Kim Stolfer, made a State Police are up too. The incident below happened to me, a presentation to the annual gathering of the Pennsylvania legal gun owner in La Plata, Maryland two nights ago (August 4, mayor's held in Gettysburg Pennsylvania. The crux of 2008 at 12:30 PM). Next time, they won't get in without a warrant. You live and you learn. this meeting was initially to discuss Representative My Wife and I were unfairly besieged late last night by the David Levdansky's controversial legislation that would Maryland State Police. Enclosed is my summation for your have made it a crime to not report a lost or stolen gun. review. We were offered the opportunity to present the opposing Last night at 12:30 pm a MD State Police "Armed Response viewpoint. Team" showed up at our door. I was dead asleep, my Wife was Once representative Levdansky discovered that we laying some ceramic tile on our basement floor when our driveway alert went off several times.
    [Show full text]
  • We Are Members of the Campaign Against
    February 5, 2021 Dear Members of the Florida Legislature: We are members of the Campaign Against Assault Weapons in support of F​lorida Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence, LWV of Florida, The Campaign to Keep Guns Off Campus, and Ban Assault Weapons Now efforts t​o pass SB 370 & HB 653 to ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines in Florida. Too many Americans have been senselessly gunned down in public spaces in towns and cities in Florida. With easy access to military-style semi-automatic assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines, too many individuals have turned our schools, malls, concerts, movie theaters, stores, restaurants, nightclubs, food festivals, streets, workplaces, and places of worship into war zones filled with terror, devastation, and terrible loss. Military-style semi-automatic assault weapons are designed to efficiently kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time available. ● On July 20, 2012, a 24-year-old white male killed 12 people and injured 70 others (58 from gunfire) with assault weapons and high capacity magazines inside a Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, Colorado. ● On December 14, 2012, a 20-year-old white male killed 26 children and educators with an AR-15 and high capacity magazines in less than five minutes at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. ● On December 2, 2015, a homegrown extremist couple killed 14 people and 22 others with assault weapons and high capacity magazines in an attack at the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California. ● On June 12, 2016, a 29-year-old security guard, killed 49 people and injured 53 others with an assault weapon and high capacity magazines in an attack targeting LGBTQI community inside the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Florida.
    [Show full text]
  • App. 1 United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
    App. 1 United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit ----------------------------------------------------------------------- No. 18-1545 DAVID SETH WORMAN; ANTHONY LINDEN; JASON WILLIAM SAWYER; PAUL NELSON CHAMBERLAIN; GUN OWNERS’ ACTION LEAGUE, INC.; ON TARGET TRAINING, INC.; OVERWATCH OUTPOST, Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. MAURA T. HEALEY, in her official capacity as Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; DANIEL BENNETT, in his official capacity as the Secretary of the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security; KERRY GILPIN, in her official capacity as Superintendent of the Massachusetts State Police, Defendants, Appellees. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- App. 2 Before Barron, Circuit Judge, Souter,* Associate Justice, and Selya, Circuit Judge. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- John Parker Sweeney, with whom James Michael Campbell, Richard Paul Campbell, Campbell Camp- bell Edwards & Conroy PC, T. Sky Woodward, James W. Porter, III, Marc A. Nardone, and Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, were on brief, for appellants. Ilya Shapiro, Trevor Burrus, Matthew Larosiere, Joseph G.S. Greenlee, and David B. Kopel on brief for Professors of Second Amendment Law, Cato Institute, Second Amendment Foundation, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and
    [Show full text]
  • Gun Violence Epidemic
    Gun Violence and Public Health Resource Pack 2018 Overview This resource pack was curated by the Global Health Education and Learning Incubator at Harvard University (GHELI) to support an upcoming Forum at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, “The Gun Violence Epidemic: Protecting the Public’s Health.” The multidisciplinary materials are suitable for educators, students, researchers, and policy makers wanting to learn about firearm violence in the United States and possible policy responses to regulate guns or improve public safety. The Forum event is described as follows: Inspired by students across the country, the gun violence prevention movement has gained new momentum. But can it last or lead to substantive change on the Congressional level? This Forum brings together experts in mental health, violence, and gun policy to discuss a variety of proposed gun violence and school safety measures. What is the status of background check laws? What is an appropriate way to discuss mental health in the conversation — without creating stigma or a chilling effect on people seeking care? What skills and training should educators have to spot warning signs and respond in crises? And, in light of restrictions around federally funded gun-related research, do policymakers have the information that they need to study these questions effectively? In this time of turbulence, our panelists will look at the evidence for — and possible unintended consequences of — today's hotly debated measures to stop gun violence. The Forum at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health is a live webcasting series that provides decision-makers with a global platform to discuss policy choices and scientific controversies across the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Opposing Viewpoints® Gun Violence Frontmatter 2/27/04 3:03 PM Page 2
    Gun Violence Frontmatter 2/27/04 3:03 PM Page 1 GunGun ViolenceViolence Opposing Viewpoints® Gun Violence Frontmatter 2/27/04 3:03 PM Page 2 Other Books of Related Interest OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS SERIES America’s Prisons Civil Liberties Crime and Criminals Domestic Violence Extremist Groups Gangs Gun Control Hate Groups Juvenile Crime Media Violence Opposing Viewpoints in Social Issues Police Brutality Sexual Violence Suicide Teens at Risk Te rrorism Violence CURRENT CONTROVERSIES SERIES Crime Family Violence Guns and Violence Police Brutality Urban Terrorism Violence Against Women Violence in the Media Youth Violence AT ISSUE SERIES Domestic Violence Guns and Crime The Militia Movement School Shootings Violent Children Gun Violence Frontmatter 2/27/04 3:03 PM Page 3 GunGun ViolenceViolence Opposing Viewpoints® James D. Torr, Book Editor Daniel Leone, Publisher Bonnie Szumski, Editorial Director Scott Barbour, Managing Editor Greenhaven Press, Inc., San Diego, California Gun Violence Frontmatter 2/27/04 3:03 PM Page 4 Cover photo: Corbis Images, Inc. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Gun violence : opposing viewpoints / James D. Torr, book editor. p. cm. — (Opposing viewpoints series) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-7377-0712-7 (pbk. : alk. paper) — ISBN 0-7377-0713-5 (lib. : alk. paper) 1. Gun control—United States. 2. Violent crimes—United States. 3. Firearms ownership—Government policy—United States. I. Torr, James D., 1974– II. Opposing viewpoints series (Unnumbered) HV7436 .G876 2002 363.3'3'0973—dc21 00-069172 CIP Copyright © 2002 by Greenhaven Press, Inc. Printed in the U.S.A. No part of this book may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means, electrical, mechanical, or otherwise, including, but not limited to, photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without prior written permission from the publisher.
    [Show full text]
  • Katieatherton.Pdf (512.3Kb)
    WOMEN'S STUDIES CELEBRATION Women's History Month 2005 NOMINATION: Papers and projects done in completion of course work for Spring, Summer and Fall 2004 eligible for nomination. Students do not need to be enrolled Fall 2004 or Spring 2005 to be eligible. (Students are encouraged to identify works they would like nominated and approach their professor to initiate the process.) Instructor: Patti See Dept: ASC and WMNS Course Number and Name: WMNS 210: Culture of the Third Wave Semester completed: Summer, 2004 Title of Nominated Work: "Where are the Damsels in Distress? Guns and Women" CATEGORY: Sampson: Undergraduate Research Paper See - Undergraduate Project Olson Graduate - Kessler Turell Belter STUDENT INFORMATION: Name Katie Atherton Email athertkl Yearmajor: Senior 1 CHEMISTRY Local Address: 425 NIAGARA ST I EAU CLAIRE WI 54703 Local Phone: 262 I 617-3 146 **WHY DO YOU, THE INSTRUCTOR, RECOMMEND THIS AS AN EXEMPLARY STUDENT PAPEIUPROJECT? (Attach a separate sheet.) As the nominating instructor, please notify the student and ask them to turn in the paper, or attach to your nomination form. ................................................................................................................................................................. Awards are sponsored by the UW-Eau Claire Foundation, Helen X. Sampson Fund, and by private individuals. Research involving human subjects must conform to the guidelines given by the Institutional Research Board. Contact Research Services, 836-3405, with questions. Submission deadline is February 11,2005. University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire 105 Garfield Avenue P.O. Box 4004 Eau Claire, WI 54702-4004 February 10, 2005 0 P To: Women's History Month Awards Committee qp From: Patti See RE: Nomination of Katie Atherton's Undergraduate Research paper \~b 'u 'u I am pleased to nominate Katie Atherton's paper "Where are the Damsels in Distress? Guns and Women" in which she explores issues and stereotypes surrounding women's firearm use.
    [Show full text]
  • Promising Strategies to Reduce Gun Violence Foreword
    ENT OF M JU U.S. Department of Justice T S R T A I P C E E D B O J Office of Justice Programs C S F A V M F O I N A C I J S R E BJ G O OJJ DP O F PR Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention JUSTICE Promising Strategies To Reduce Gun Violence Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) was established by the President and Con- gress through the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act of 1974, Public Law 93–415, as amended. Located within the Office of Justice Programs of the U.S. Department of Justice, OJJDP’s goal is to provide national leadership in addressing the issues of juvenile delinquency and improving juvenile justice. OJJDP sponsors a broad array of research, program, and training initiatives to improve the juvenile justice system as a whole, as well as to benefit individual youth-serving agencies. These initiatives are carried out by seven components within OJJDP, described below. Research and Program Development Division Information Dissemination Unit informs individuals develops knowledge on national trends in juvenile and organizations of OJJDP initiatives; disseminates delinquency; supports a program for data collection information on juvenile justice, delinquency preven- and information sharing that incorporates elements tion, and missing children; and coordinates program of statistical and systems development; identifies planning efforts within OJJDP. The unit’s activities how delinquency develops and the best methods include publishing research and statistical reports, for its prevention, intervention, and treatment; and bulletins, and other documents, as well as overseeing analyzes practices and trends in the juvenile justice the operations of the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse.
    [Show full text]
  • GUN POLITICS and NARRATIVE SHIFT Gun Violence in America Claims 38,000 Lives Every Year—An Average of 100 Per Day—And the Proliferation of Fire- Arms Is Astronomical
    2 CASE STUDY 5 GUN POLITICS AND NARRATIVE SHIFT Gun violence in America claims 38,000 lives every year—an average of 100 per day—and the proliferation of fire- arms is astronomical. It is estimated that there are 393 million guns in circulation in the United States.1 Americans are twenty-five times more likely to be killed in a gun homicide than people in other high-income countries. For decades, the National Rifle Association (NRA) has successfully obstructed the passage of laws restricting gun ownership in any way. So successful have its efforts been that for years the NRA has been dubbed by the media as “the most powerful lobby in America,” a mantle the organization has worn with pride. Its “scorecard,” in which the NRA grades politicians from A to F depending on their responses to a candidate questionnaire, alongside the millions of dollars it spends on federal and state election campaigns, have, until recently, effectively muzzled lawmakers. This is in spite of the fact that a majority of Americans favor stricter gun laws.2 One resulting dominant narrative has been that any politician who crosses the NRA will lose their bid for election or reelection. The power of this narrative was on display in 2013 after the Sandy Hook tragedy in which twenty young children and six adults were murdered in their elementary school. Public support for a federal law to require universal back- ground checks for all gun sales stood at 90 percent, but a modest bipartisan bill to that effect introduced by Sena- tors Manchin (D-WV) and Toomey (R-PA) failed to pass after the NRA announced its opposition and sent an e-mail to all senators warning them the organization would “score” their vote; a vote in favor of the bill would negatively affect their NRA rating and lead to retaliation in their next election from an influential and united segment of their constituency: NRA members and supporters.
    [Show full text]
  • 7 Whatever Happened to the 'Missing Movement'? Gun Control
    Kristin A. Goss Whatever happened to the ‘missing movement’? 7 Whatever happened to the ‘missing movement’? Gun control politics over two decades of change Kristin A. Goss Introduction In April 1999, a catastrophe befell the leafy suburbs of Denver. Two heavily armed teenagers went to their high school and killed 12 fellow students and a teacher while injuring two dozen others. The shooting at Columbine High School followed a string of similar mass shootings in schools and other presumptively safe spaces. The Columbine shooting horrified the nation and felt like a tipping point in American gun politics. The response was immediate and far-reaching. Families got involved. Parents of Columbine victims found their voices as advocates, and after a shooting four months later at a Jewish community center in California, mothers in particular had had enough. Taking advantage of the first generation of Internet tools, such as listservs and websites, moms mobilized hundreds of thousands of people to march on Washington and in scores of cities and towns across the country. Unfolding on Mother’s Day 2000, the Million Mom March combined images of playful maternalism and fearless womanhood to demand policy change. Wealthy donors got involved. Everyday people sent small contributions to gun control groups, but big money flowed, as well. A tech billionaire supplied millions of dollars to create a new, pragmatic gun control group (Americans for Gun Safety) that sought to break the political logjam on firearms policy. The President got involved. Bill Clinton flew to Colorado to console the families and the community. After returning to Washington, he continued advocating privately and publicly for stricter gun laws over the following year, the last of his final term.
    [Show full text]