The end to Badger Guns

The final chapter is unfolding for Badger Guns as the current owner is giving up his license. It appears that he's run into difficulty with the ATF in renewing it.

The Journal Sentinel gets a few more pokes with a stick mentioning that the owner can sell his personal firearm collection at a gun show without a background check. Just like anyone else is able to. The paper harps on any gun law they don't agree with as being a "loophole". They also speculate on who the next owner would be (if any) at the store location. Maybe they'll just pack up and leave as the paper and Milwaukee politicians hope for.

But in a second article the JS reports that Badger Guns' license was revoked while again complaining about the laws in place.

A spokesman with the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives made clear the license held by Adam Allan is not being surrendered.

"The federal firearms license issued to Badger Guns Inc. was revoked by ATF for a willful violation of the Gun Control Act," Robert Schmidt said late Wednesday.

Congress has passed special laws that prohibit the ATF from releasing much information about revocations.

And not to miss out on another dig, the paper implies of the wrongdoing.

But according to an ATF document, "Violations commonly cited in revocation cases include failure to account for firearms, failure to verify and document purchaser eligibility, failure to maintain records requisite for successful firearms tracing, and failure to report multiple sales of handguns."

No evidence, only speculation.

Badger Guns was never prosecuted for violating any of the current gun laws, but the store was cited as the source of guns that were used to shoot two Milwaukee police officers (current lawsuit pending). The guns were purchased legally and then obtained by the criminal(s) involved in the shooting. I've written since day one, that if the store was complicit in allowing criminals to obtain firearms, they should be prosecuted. If true, the owners should be in jail.

After reviewing the whole "Fast and Furious" debacle, it would seem the ATF doesn't care for the competition. See David Codrea and Mike Vanderboegh for more information.

Badger Guns lawsuit still going forward

Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Thomas Cooper on Thursday refused a request by Badger Guns to dismiss a lawsuit from two injured police officers, but he dismissed a pair of counts, including one that alleged the West Milwaukee gun store was a public nuisance.

Judge doesn't dismiss wounded officers' suit against Badger Guns

Read more of Badger Guns from earlier posts

Badger Guns lawsuit update, 5/18/11

Two Milwaukee police officers wounded with a gun sold by Badger Guns won a victory in court Tuesday when a Milwaukee County judge rejected a motion to dismiss their lawsuit against the West Milwaukee gun dealer.

Judge allows lawsuit against Badger Guns to proceed

Nevermind that the ATF has never brought charges against Badger Guns for selling to prohibited persons.

Check the history of Badger Guns.

Badger guns protest

Marking MLK day with protest outside gun store

No numbers were listed so my guess would be that only a few people came to hold their signs protesting "against illegal selling of guns and those second hand sales known as straw purchases."

On the list

I thought trace data was not supposed to be disclosed, but several articles have come out parroting this Washington Post article: Realco guns tied to 2,500 crimes in D.C. and Maryland

Ohio gun store No. 1 for traces; state shop No. 3

Badger Guns Makes Top Ten List For Guns Traced

Police Chief Flynn Upset At Badger Guns

But this article explains it:Badger Guns ranked sixth in national list for bad gun stores

The Brady Center to prevent gun violence listed what they call the top 10 crime gun dealers in America. Badger Guns was number six on that list with what the center called 1,700 guns traced back to crimes.

The source for this list was the Brady Center.

How did they get the data? Or did they just make it up?

As Badger Gun owner Adam Allan remarks:

Badger Gun owner Adam Allan tells TODAYSTMJ4 Reporter Charles Benson, "I dont know where they got those crooked numbers." He declined to go on camera because of pending lawsuits. But he did call back to tell us the number of traces this year was 110 not the hundreds suggested by the Post.

The people suing Badger Guns are coming up with these numbers. Again, the Bradys.

Trace data in and of itself, only means the authorities are trying to find where it came into the market. Having a trace on a gun, does not necessarily mean the firearm was used in a crime.

But several of these articles could lead the reader to equate a gun trace = illegal sale.

Another lawsuit against Badger Guns

This time by officers who had been shot.

Injured Milwaukee Police Officers Join Badger Guns Lawsuit

Badger Guns lawsuit, part II

My previous look at the current lawsuit against Badger Guns of the greater Milwaukee Metro area, outlined a brief history of some of the vilification that has been waged against the gun store.

I've said since day one that if they are actually guilty of something other than following the rules, the ATF would have been all over them.

Today I'll begin my examination of the lawsuit itself. Please understand, I'm not an attorney and offer no legal expertise except that from a common cynical perspective.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel examined the lawsuit and graciously pointed out that it ain't gonna fly:

A lawsuit against Badger Guns filed Thursday by Milwaukee police officers wounded with guns from the store will face several high hurdles, the first if it is allowable under federal law, legal experts said.

Something about that lawful firearm commerce act or some such thing. As long as a dealer follows the law, they can't be held liable for criminal activity based on a purchase.

Seems straightforward to me. Except this is economic warfare we are dealing with.

As I pointed out before, the local politicians, police chief, and a congress critter, have all wanted the owner's head. All because of this:

It argues that the store employees knew or should have known that Jose M. Fernandez was a daily drug user and could not legally buy the guns. It said another red flag was that Fernandez bought the guns six days apart, avoiding a federal reporting requirement. It also alleges that Badger Guns is a public nuisance and seeks action to change that.

The first part, known or should have known: My local gun dealer would reasonably know or should know that I am a daily user of di-hydro oxide. Why? When I walk into his store, I'm fairly well kept and wear unstained clothing. Would he know or should know that I may be a daily user of a chemical substance (C12H22O11) outside of any obvious withdrawals (sugar high), I wouldn't think so.

If someone checks the No box on a 4473 form to the question asking if they use illegal pharmaceuticals, how the hell is a gun dealer supposed to know one way or the other? Is there a followup question asking who their dealer is? Make people give a urine sample as a way to prove ourselves worthy?

Next, the six days apart scenario: I've purchased a firearm from a dealer, then later I returned on the same day and purchased a second one because the price was right.

By that logic, I'm an evil straw purchaser. Just because I bought more than one gun in a arbitrary time frame.

Lastly, Badger Guns is a nuisance: A legal business, selling a legal (and highly regulated) product is a nuisance, just for existing. This article doesn't pursue that angle, but I suspect that the nuisance they are talking about is the firearm itself.

Gunning officers down with illegally obtained firearms should bring full judgment and retribution against the perpetrator who pulled the trigger. On that, I think we can all agree.

Until evidence is shown (beyond a reasonable doubt, not some civil court's "preponderance of evidence" rules) I think this has been an effort to drive gun dealers out of business. If that happens, all we will have left is the overpriced Gander Mountains. If that.

This is a drive against private sales as well. How could an individual defend themselves if they sold a firearm that ended up being used in a murder?

I really doubt that anyone from Badger Guns willingly and knowingly would sell to someone if they had a reasonable suspicion it would end up in the wrong hands. And at the same time, say "no sale" if/when the person passes the NICS check. There'd be a civil rights lawsuit there.

If Badger's if found guilty in a criminal court, they deserve what they get.

In civil court, it looks like an effort to use them as an example to the rest of us.

Badger Guns lawsuit

David Codrea first alerted us at War on Guns regarding the lawsuit against Badger Guns that was filed last week. The plaintiffs are two Milwaukee police officers and the city of Milwaukee. Read the complaint.

First off, I'm not an attorney but will only look at this through the lens of common sense. Secondly, I have no connection to the defendants, Badger Guns and its predecessor, Badger Outdoors. My only interest in this is that it appears that a FFL dealer has been accused of knowingly engaging in supplying firearms to the felons of Milwaukee and by accusation alone, should be drummed out of business.

A look at Badger Guns over the past year:

I've been posting about Badger Guns for a while now and Kurt Hofmann has done the same.

By all reports in the local Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the ATF is not actively engaged in an investigation of the current business, Badger Guns. However, the ATF had cited Badger Outdoors of numerous violations and recommended their license be revoked. The owner of Badger Outdoors voluntarily turned in his FFL license and sold the business to his son and the name changed to Badger Guns.

Local politicians and newspapers seem to think there is some funny business going on and there could be. But the only thing that happened was a FFL holder gave up his license and his son took over the assets of the business. My understanding of how one obtains an FFL is that background checks are performed and fingerprints taken to identify the licensee in order to conduct an investigation. The ATF granted the new license at some time in 2007.

It would seem to me that if violations were so severe during the Badger Outdoors years, they would not have granted a license to the son of an accused habitual violator. The Journal Sentinel has accused the father of still having ties with the current business, again this seems like a supposition on their part. While it could be true, their logic is that since it was owned by the father and now owned by the son and they are related so there must be a business relationship.

Badger Guns has been accused of knowingly allowing straw purchasers to purchase firearms by not preventing felons into their store through "scanning the identification of everyone coming into the store" and demanding "that anyone who comes into the store to buy a gun or shoot on the range sign a sworn affidavit saying he is not a criminal or committing a crime."

If someone is going to commit a felony by lying on a 4437 form to purchase a firearm, is it really going to be a big deal to sign a "sworn affidavit?"

If Badger Guns was such a profit driven business that it would sell any firearm to anyone, then why did they alert local police of a felon who tried to purchase a handgun at their store?

Authorities had notified the store that the suspect, Carlos Flores, might come in.

Flores did come in and the store called police. West Milwaukee Police arrested Flores.

The cynical among us would say they were trying to save their backsides.

Th vilification of Badger Guns has been ongoing for over a year. Newspapers in both Madison and Milwaukee, local politicians, police chiefs and even a congresswoman have all tried to pile it on to this local FFL holder. Please look at the previous posts by myself and Kurt. They give the history behind this witch hunt.

It has been my contention from the start that if Badger Guns was truly not following the law regarding gun sales, the ATF would have been shutting them down or hauling them off to jail.

In one of the articles by the Journal Sentinel I previously had this thought:

The article goes on about the overworked ATF investigators and the practically non-existent regulations regarding delving into a dealers operation. Something I find hard to believe after having talked to dealers I know.

"In 99.9% of the time, it doesn't need to be adversarial. We are all working toward the same goal," said Sherry Duval, an ATF spokeswoman. "Our business is not to put them out of business."

Tell that to Red's Trading Post.

Taking Ms Duval at her word, it's not the ATF's job to put dealers out of business, it's the Brady Campaign's job.

Brady and Milwaukee sue Badger Guns

In a blatant BS lawsuit against Badger Guns of Milwaukee, the City of Milwaukee (with Brady Campaign assistance) filed a lawsuit alleging the gun store didn't know a purchaser was a felon. As if passing a background check isn't enough, Brady assumes that each FFL possess a crystal ball to predict if a potential buyer will use their purchase in a future crime.

David Codrea has more and the links to Brady's filings.

(Update: corrected the link to David's site, sorry)

Straw buyer sentenced in Milwaukee

Sentenced to a year plus one day for selling guns to drug dealers and other "prohibited" persons.

"You sell the gun and you don't know nothing about the person you sell it to, and you don't want to know nothing," [Derrick] Marshall, the son of a retired Milwaukee police officer, told agents when he was arrested. "That's why I was always telling the people, 'Now don't go out and do anything crazy with this thing.' Then after, I'd be praying that nothing ever happened."

The case provides a window to the practice of straw buying in the Milwaukee area - in which a person such as Marshall who has a clean record buys a gun for a felon or someone else who is prohibited from having it.

Man gets year and a day for buying firearms and selling them on street

Could a light sentence be because of his "Only One" connection or from sympathy from the judge.

Documents indicate that in 2009 federal agents noticed a pattern of guns bought by Marshall that had been recovered in criminal investigations.

Marshall said he was only guilty of having a poor memory and not knowing the law.

"I am really not a criminal," he told Clevert.

You are a criminal. And now you're a convicted one.

And the Journal Sentinel threw out the Badger Guns connection. I'm betting there were other places this guy bought his guns from, otherwise they would have printed that all of his guns were purchased at Badgers.

Publicly they won't admit it, but Milwaukee police know that Badgers try to do the right thing (in November of 09, the store owners assisted in apprehending a felon trying to purchase a firearm at their store: Badger Guns 11/12/09) The police used this scenario in a sting operation:

He [the informant] told Golke that he had tried to buy a gun at Badger Guns but was turned down because he's a convicted felon, and that he needed guns for himself and "his guys" that were untraceable so they could "use and throw."

Two charged in illegal gun sales - One accused of selling to felon, other with bending 'gun show loophole'

The Journal Sentinel is glad to put Badgers in as bad of a light as they can, going so far as to suggest a conspiracy behind the gun store's "secret" ownership. Badger Guns conspiracy

Badger Guns conspiracy

Implying that there is a great conspiracy and an underlying congressional duplicity, a Wisconsin congresswoman presses for the ATF to crack down on Badger Guns

A Wisconsin congresswoman is demanding federal watchdogs get tougher on gun stores that sell a high number of guns used in crimes, citing a dealer in West Milwaukee that has sold firearms used to shoot six police officers in Milwaukee in less than two years.

U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Milwaukee) asked the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to explain why a recommendation to revoke the license of Badger Outdoors in West Milwaukee was never pursued - as reported by the Journal Sentinel earlier this year.

Congresswoman demands tougher gun regulations

The revocation of the license was dropped because the owner sold the store to his son and has gone on record that he has nothing to do with the business.

With the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel breaking their arms patting themselves on the back for their "investigation" of Badger Guns, they keep piling it on. Saying there are "secret owners" behind Badger's and sounding almost disappointed that a recent shooting of a Milwaukee police officer "appears to have been sold by a different dealer".

The owners of Badger Guns have cooperated with local authorities even, reporting felons at their store.

If the current owners are so bad, why hasn't the ATF come down on them - hard?

Again, with Badger Guns

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel writes another editorial blaming Badger Guns for all the evil related to firearms in Wisconsin. At least that's how it sounds. There's a loophole that needs plugging. Felons shouldn't be able to shoot at a gun range. Who can be in favor of felons becoming better marksmen? (Ha Ha - Who can be in favor of slanted editorials?)

Back in October I posted Badger Guns update: store helps police

WEST MILWAUKEE - West Milwaukee Police confirm they arrested a suspect wanted on warrants after getting help from a controversial gun store.

Authorities had notified the store that the suspect, Carlos Flores, might come in.

Flores did come in and the store called police. West Milwaukee Police arrested Flores.

But the Journal Sentinel wasn't the one to report that, it was a local radio station. No, they would rather pile it on with one-sided editorials and slanted reporting.

By singling out Badger's, they lose credibility with me. That store isn't the only one that rents firearms, and as has been reported, they've had at least one assist getting a felon.

The gun range loophole

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel piles it on Badger Guns in their latest sky-is-falling, panties-filled-with-excrement hit piece:

Juan Cardona-Marquez can't legally buy a gun. He can't shoot one. He can't even touch one without committing a crime.

So how was it that the 22-year-old Milwaukee man - who threatened his girlfriend and was later charged with armed robbery and a string of burglaries - was able to rent a .45-caliber Glock handgun from Badger Guns and practice his aim on the store's shooting range?

The answer lies in a little-known quirk of federal gun laws.

Gun stores must check the criminal background of anyone buying a gun. But no check is required if someone rents a gun to use on the store's shooting range. In fact, a background check is not even allowed for rentals.

No background check needed to fire gun on range

Via David Codrea's Newest Threat to Western Civilization!

Second Badger Guns suicide

MILWAUKEE -- Police say another man has killed himself at a shooting range in West Milwaukee, the second suicide at Badger Guns in less than a week.

Police told the Journal Sentinel that in both cases the victims shot themselves with firearms they rented at the range.

In the latest case, West Milwaukee police Lt. Robert Bennett said police were called to the range at 4:30 p.m. Saturday and found a 50-year-old man dead of a self-inflicted wound.

The first man shot himself on the Badger Guns range on Tuesday.

A call to the business Sunday indicated that it was closed.

Shooting range reports 2nd suicide

What's going on up there?

Previous post: Badger Guns suicide

More details on both suicides at Second suicide in a week occurs at Badger Guns

Badger Guns suicide

I've been following Badger Guns for a while now and caught this from a few days ago:

WITI-TV, WEST MILWAUKEE - The West Milwaukee Police Department is investigating a shooting death at Badger Gun. Investigators say a man was using the gun range when he was shot.

Police don't believe there was any foul play involved in this shooting. West Milwaukee Police Chief Dennis Nasci says, "It is not a suspicious death. We're investigating it as an accident of sorts, but we can't make a call on it until we get the medical investigator on scene."

Police say they're reviewing surveillance video from inside the shooting range.

The Medical Examiners office says initial reports indicate a possible suicide.

West Milwaukee Police investigate suspected suicide at Badger Guns

And Man Shot, Killed at Badger Guns

No indication of the person and I searched for more details but came up blank. I didn't do this for morbid reasons, but Badger Guns is a news item that Kurt Hofmann at Armed and Safe - Badger Guns and I have looked at for a while.

Our thoughts and prayers are with this victim's family.

This comes on the same day that the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel gave another swipe at Badgers because the straw purchase bill died in the Wisconsin Legislature. Not every bill became state law

Wisconsin straw-purchase bill update

The day after I post about Wisconsin's Assembly bills, Wisconsin gun bill and a bonus, the Milwaukee journal Sentinel reports that they straw-purchase bill ends without action. Harboring and straw buy bills die in Madison.

So the tactic to "make a criminal even more of a criminal by making an illegal act even more illegal", isn't going to happen there. No reason for the failure is given.

I get caught up on the news and then it speeds past me and (again) they take the obligatory swipe at Badger Guns

Wisconsin gun bill, and a bonus

Wisconsin Assembly passed a bill making it a felony for a person to purchase a firearm for a felon, AKA a straw purchase. Assembly OKs bill making straw purchasing of guns a felony

Straw buying is a felony under federal law but a misdemeanor under state law. The bill would make the crime a felony under state law as well. That means that, if convicted, straw buyers could no longer legally buy guns for themselves or others.

Making something already illegal even more illegal - makes sense to me.

With a swipe at Badger Guns

Police and prosecutors in Milwaukee for more than a decade have called for a crackdown on straw buyers. In particular, Milwaukee authorities also have wanted more scrutiny on the West Milwaukee store Badger Guns and its predecessor, Badger Outdoors.

Next up is a bill to prevent the release of 911 tapes. While I can see the point that releasing tapes of a frantic call for help could traumatize a victim's family, releasing tapes like this could be a good thing:

The bill covers tapes of all 911 calls, including those made by witnesses. In recent years, news outlets have broadcast tapes of drivers who called in to report erratic driving by lawmakers who were drinking before they got behind the wheel.

I guess they have something to hide.

And for the self-defense minded:

Self-defense: The Assembly passed, 68-29, a bill that would provide added legal protection to people who use deadly force against burglars. Under the bill, residents would be entitled to added protection in criminal and civil cases if they were at home when the criminal broke in.

The person using deadly force wouldn't be entitled to the protection if they were using their home for a criminal activity or if they used the force against an identified police officer. The bill goes to the Senate.

No word on concealed carry (which was on the table at one point during the straw-buyers bill), but it's not over yet.

Badger Gun posts

Kurt posted Congresswoman from WI jumps on the Badger-bashing bandwagon of congress-critter Gwen Moore demanding the ATF to put Badger Guns out of business. Please go there, he brings up excellent points.

I found a lurker from the city of Milwaukee checking me out and I'd guess that they're snooping around Kurt's site as well.

I hope so.

Maybe they would actually come to their senses and realize the criminals in this so far are the idiots buying the guns from Badgers and then either handing them over or selling them to the felons.

One of the geniuses sold his Taurus for $40 to some felon. I would've given him that plus gas money. (Update) This bonehead was sentenced to two years yesterday Man who bought gun used to shoot officers gets 2 years in prison

I've said since day one, if Badger Guns had serious violations, the ATF would've shut them down with a SWAT team and the "eyewitness news" following right behind. They would have put them out of business right then.

But my impression is that the violations (the paper doesn't list them) are most likely for paperwork, and the newspapers are doing their best to give the impression that the past and current owners are crucified before the truth gets out.

If any other gun store owner think they are safe, they better prepare. They will be targeted next.

Previous Posts: BTR - Badger Guns Posts

The guns from Badger Guns

Kurt Hofmann has been keeping up on the Badger Guns Saga with another insightful post at Now, they want to make it harder to sell a gun store (Thanks for the link back) and sometimes I wonder if we are the only two guys left that don't want to throw the current owners under the bus.

I've got no dog in this fight and have never met the current or previous owners. The problem is when they vilify one gun store owner when they've done nothing illegal, they will go after them all pretty soon.

I missed a really nifty Flash animation from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal Violation history at gun store and after clicking "Next" a few times I found this nugget towards the end:



The guns used to shoot the Milwaukee police officers were purchased from the previous owners. The violations of 500+ crime guns were from the previous owners.

Then on the last frame I circled the crime guns listed from the current owner in green, although one incident was "two years earlier" which may or may not have been with the current owner.



Be sure to go to the last frame and click on the interview with Milwaukee Police Chief Ed Flynn complaining that Congress is hampering ATF's efforts.

The Madison and Milwaukee politicians, police chiefs, and newspapers have been wailing for months to shut down Badger Guns, all the while the crime guns overwhelmingly were purchased from the previous owners. By this report, only two guns purchased under current ownership were used in the police shootings.

By that standard they would shut down Walmart, but then maybe that's the idea.

Previous Posts: BTR - Badger Guns Posts

Update - ATF actually follows the law... someone else is paying attention to Badger Guns.

Badger Guns ATF investigation

I've always maintained that Badger Guns' current owners should be given the benefit of the doubt regarding their business. With the vilification from Wisconsin blogs and newspapers from Madison and Milwaukee, they deserve a fair hearing in my opinion.

Now comes a comprehensive article from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Wiped Clean - Facing federal scrutiny, gun shop got new lease on life with simple ownership change dredging up a 2006 ATF investigation of the previous owners (there is some connection to the current owners)

Federal investigators recommended revoking the license of Badger Outdoors gun shop after a 2006 inspection - a rare move that could have closed the West Milwaukee business, a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel investigation has found.

But there was no revocation and the store remains open, operating as Badger Guns. Federal records show the license recommended for revocation was voluntarily relinquished, the players inside the operation took on new roles and a new license was issued, creating what one federal official called a "clean slate" for the store.

The paper complains that most of the records the ATF handed over had been redacted but they did find this:

But in an interview, a top ATF official said inspectors found "inventory discrepancies" during the November 2006 inspection and added that his agency doesn't recommend revocation for minor violations.

I'm going to repeat my skepticism regarding Badger Guns. There has been no report of when the crime guns were purchased. If the guns are recent purchases and the store was culpable in transferring the guns then yes, go after the current owners.

Since Badger Guns began operations Sept. 1, 2007, the ATF has uncovered more violations, documents show. A warning letter was issued May 30, 2008, telling Adam Allan he may face revocation if the agency finds more violations.

If these were serious violations, wouldn't the ATF had shut them down?

The article goes on about the overworked ATF investigators and the practically non-existent regulations regarding delving into a dealers operation. Something I find hard to believe after having talked to dealers I know.

"In 99.9% of the time, it doesn't need to be adversarial. We are all working toward the same goal," said Sherry Duval, an ATF spokeswoman. "Our business is not to put them out of business."

Tell that to Red's Trading Post.

Critics of the ATF said that the agency's oversight of gun dealers is lax compared to other businesses.

"I think it has been watered down to basically where there is no regulation," said Gerald Nunziato, who retired from the ATF after 29 years. "It is a perfect industry to do whatever you wish."

The National Rifle Association, which lobbies on behalf of gun owners and dealers, argues just the opposite. It says some gun shops have been harassed by the ATF.

"There are some ATF agents who do a good job, and some are overzealous in their efforts," said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam. "If firearms retailers are involved in criminal conduct, they ought to pay the price, but if not, they ought to be left alone."

The current owners have worked with local law-enforcement and has called on their help to nab some crooks. (see earlier posts) So it would appear that they are attempting to be good neighbors in the community.

Overall, it's a fairly balanced article, although I think dredging up investigations of previous owners to paint the current owners with the same brush is bad form.

(Previous posts here: BTR - Badger Guns Posts)