Gun shop liable for what their product does?

[clearconscience]

So they are suing this shop because someone bought a firearm there through a strw purchase and then gave it to someone who shot two cops....... Sounds like some fast and furious business.
So if they are held liable, does that mean the ATF will be liable for the death of Brian Terry?

<broken link removed>

Read More

 

[Stomper]

They should be no more liable than the parents of a kid who plays "gangsta" and kills someone.

 

[clearconscience]

Amen!

 

[Deebow]

No more responsible than a car dealership selling someone a car who gives it to a friend, who then drives it while drunk and kills someone.

Should be a short trial, since straw purchases are illegal and the straw PURCHASER is the person that becomes liable after giving the gun to a prohibited person, not the dealer who sold it according to the law.

According to this case though, if they weren't doing their due diligence or putting themselves in line with the ATF on record keeping and BGCs, then they might end up in a world of hurt.

 

[etrain16]

These cases are frightening because there are activist judges out there that will side with the plaintiffs in cases like this. It's a complete load of BS, of course, but I won't be surprised if the case goes through. It may ultimately be tossed out in appeal, but not until they've caused financial harm to the shop, maybe even putting them out of business.

Probably time for our side to start filing lawsuits against shops that sell things that anti-gunners use that cause injury or damage to others.

I propose a lawsuit against smoke shops and stores for selling cigarettes and tobacco. Obviously they are liable for cancer deaths. We need to hold them accountable.

 

[Stomper]

I wonder if the husband of the woman just recently ran down and killed by that dumbarse who was high will sue the weed shop that sold him the weed...

 

[etrain16]

I wonder if the husband of the woman just recently ran down and killed by that dumbarse who was high will sue the weed shop that sold him the weed...

That would only be a fair, and logical extension of the lawsuit above. They can't have it both ways - if they insist on pursuing this course, then we should pursue the same against things they care about.

Or, we could use common sense and reason, and leave the blame where it belongs - on the bad people. I know that's a radical idea, but it may just work.

 

[Mark W.]

If the seller passed a BGC then the US government should be named in the suit since they OKed the sale

 

[Stomper]

If the seller passed a BGC then the US government should be named in the suit since they OKed the sale

Checkmate!

 

[etrain16]

If the seller passed a BGC then the US government should be named in the suit since they OKed the sale

Yep, 100% right there!

But then, we've already seen that the feds have messed up on background checks in a number of shootings. They will always be released of liability.

 

[bolus]

" shop had failed take necessary precautions to prevent straw purchases. "

What does the ATF consider necessary precautions? Seems to me you would need a lie detector. when I go into a gunshop and purchase a gun I say "I want that one" and I buy it. What did they do to make sure Im not a straw purchaser?

Also, both shot in the face and lived?
Also, confronting the guy for riding a bike on the side walk? where was the probable cause?

 

[slimmer13]

Held liable. bubblegumed up

http://fox6now.com/2015/10/13/break...s-civil-trial-jury-due-in-court-around-5-p-m/

 

[45alive]

Well ya, everyone knows that Gun Dealers can read the purchasers mind ! These IDIOTS suing need a thorough MENTAL EVALUATION and then be INCARCERATED for the safety of innocent people as well as Gun Owners and Gun Dealers.

 

[bnsaibum]

I remember reading about a case similar to this some months back as it began to go to trial, this may be the same one, perhaps not. What I do remember about the story I read was that the criminal who shot the victims was actually in the shop and conversing in some fashion about pistols with the straw buyer. All of the accounts I have read of this case recently have made no mention of the activities at the actual sale so his may not be the same case. If it were, it would provide some explanation of the jury's verdict.

 

[clearconscience]

It does say the gun shop ignored several red flags, but doesn't say what those were.

Again where's the lawsuit for Brian Terry's family?

If this wasn't a gun shop I don't see them winning.

I was at a local gun shop in gresham a few years back and I was watching this really shady guy with an old man. The guy looked like a meth head and was asking all kinds of questions about the remington 870 shotguns looking at them and handling them, then tells the guy behind the counter they'll take 3 of them. When told he has to fill out paperwork the crack head pointed at the old man who looked like shooting a shotgun would disenegrate him, and said he was buying all 3!
I damn near laughed out loud, and then stood in frustration when the sales guy went a long with it. I was so mad I just left the store. Never bought a gun there again.

 

[Jim Colvill]

As the resident libtard I must agree with the consensus here. The owner of the shop should not be held liable for what happens to a legally sold weapon after it leaves the shop any more than a manufacturer should be held responsible for what their product is used for by the end consumer, except in cases of obvious negligence or shoddy manufacturing. "The gun fired a bullet!" yeah, duh. It operated as it was meant to.

 

[etrain16]

As the resident libtard I must agree with the consensus here. The owner of the shop should not be held liable for what happens to a legally sold weapon after it leaves the shop any more than a manufacturer should be held responsible for what their product is used for by the end consumer, except in cases of obvious negligence or shoddy manufacturing. "The gun fired a bullet!" yeah, duh. It operated as it was meant to.

Yep, and we need to keep reminding people of that very distinct difference. We do hold manufacturers liable if they knowingly sell a defective product that causes harm. We do not hold the store that sold them liable for selling it (assuming they were completely unaware).

We also don't hold car dealers or manufacturers liable for selling a car that is used in a robbery, kidnapping or drunk driving case. Why would we? How could they be expected to know what would happen with the car?

As for gun sellers, unless they have a really clear piece of evidence that they shouldn't make the sale (such as the guy saying he needs a gun to settle a score), how can you hold them responsible? The person buying the gun passed the background check, so shouldn't liability also fall to the BGC agency as well? I mean if they expect the shop owner to know, shouldn't FICS too?

If this case holds through appeals, even up to the Supreme Court, it will set a dangerous precedent for any seller of any product that can be used in a crime. And I would then recommend everyone start suing every single seller of anything used in a crime (hammers, knives, pressure cookers, etc.) to prove the point of how ridiculous this all is. I imagine enough business owners would get pissed really quickly they would drop the hammer on their legislators to provide them the protection they should have.

One other point of note here that crossed my mind. The buyer was black. What would have happened if the shop had refused to sell him a gun? I'm guessing lawsuit as well for denying a purchase to a black person. Just a thought. In today's society, seems you can't win no matter what you do.

One more question that seem appropriate as well - if a pot seller in Oregon sells to a person who chooses to use, then, under the influence, drives and kills someone, then we should be able to sue that store, right? If the answer is no, then the answer about whether the gun store is liable should be settled.

 

[clearconscience]

I have a feeling they really played up the red flags that the dealer ignored. I wish they would publish what those were it would relieve a lot confusion and frustration over this.

I still think this opens a lawsuit to open up against the ATF, but they won't charge the gubmn't.

 

[Riot]

Anyone else catch this...

Authorities have said more than 500 firearms recovered from crime scenes had been traced back to Badger Guns and Badger Outdoors...

 

[AMT]

If the gun shop is found liable, this is going to set the precedence for MANY more "frivolous" lawsuits.

Some as mentioned previously..... auto dealers/manufacturers, smoke shops, et al.