The First Amendment Defense: GunFAX
Meet the legal leadership team of Arsenal Attorneys, Inc. This team includes well-known Attorneys with a strong record of winning cases for their clients and fellow lawyers in this state. Meet the board of directors. Mr. Matthew J. Bergstrom is Managing Partner. He is also the attorney representing the company. Meet Dan Shea, General Counsel.
The primary focus of Arsenal attorneys is firearms litigation.
They represent clients that brought claims against GunFAX, Inc., and GunFAX, a gun seller in Wisconsin that was licensed by the state to sell firearm licenses. Mr. Shea will be representing the company, GunFAX, as well as its owner, GunBroker. GunFAX was removed from the state registry after the U.S. Congress held hearings about the company and passed bills requiring all licensed dealers to sell registered firearms to customers in other states. The owners chose to shut down their business rather than comply with these new requirements.
GunFAX was one of the first companies to be removed from the registry and it now joins a growing list of companies that have faced intense pressure.
In fact, GunFAX was sued by the federal government for refusing to comply with the request from the NSS. Among other things, the company was ordered to remove all handguns from its premises and upgrade its database to include all firearms sales. The suit was later dropped when the US Attorney’s Office agreed to remove the handguns from the site. Arsenal attorneys were not paid for the services they provided to GunFAX and GunBroker ultimately declared bankruptcy.
The second case that will be filed by Arsenal attorneys in Washington will be against W.T. Barnard Furniture LLC, the manufacturer of the popular BabyBeaker chairs.
It is believed that the company intentionally omitted appropriate warnings about its ties to gun manufacturing from its website. According to a number of press accounts, GunFAX and Arsenal attorneys will serve clients with a notice of default regarding the company’s non-compliance with the order of the National Shooting Association.
The Second Amendment law firm will also argue that the Washtenaw County clerk improperly imposed the non-lethal weapons ban.
This is the case according to a number of recent articles in the local press. Arsenal attorneys expressed concerns that the ban placed by the public in danger due to an unforeseen future increase in suicides in schools.
GunFAX was forced into bankruptcy due to the state laws mandating a universal warning about firearms.
According to GunFAX, it was required by the Second Amendment law firm to comply with this requirement. Arsenal attorneys filed a complaint against the county clerk, arguing that the message was posted in a place that was open to the public. According to the attorneys, the county violated the rights of citizens in violation of the First and Second Amendments. The National Rifle Association and firearm owners throughout the United States are likely to join the argument that the Washtenaw County clerk acted unconstitutionally in adding the warning to the election papers.
GunFAX asserts that the new rules go against the First and Second Amendments and are part of a larger push to disincline firearms in local election areas.
Additionally, the new rules go against longstanding practice. No other local election had ever banned guns before the Washtenaw County Council added the provision to the elections. The attorneys note that there is no guarantee that the ban will not be challenged in court.
In addition, the new design has GunFAX going on its own website to interact directly with voters.
The State of Michigan is currently working on a similar interactive site for counties across the state. In the coming months, the nation will likely witness a great deal of political debate over contentious issues relating to civil liberties and traditional constitutional principles. The new design for GunFAX allows the public to request more information about the Trustee and his or her background. The state attorney general is currently reviewing the proposed changes and will determine whether or not they would violate the rights of the citizens of Michigan.
