[POLL] Gun Maker Found Not Liable in Shooting

[Amused]

Gun Maker Found Not Liable in Shooting

CHARLESTON, W.Va. (Oct. 1) - The country's largest firearms maker is not liable for the shooting of two police officers by a felon, a judge ruled.

Former Orange, N.J., police officers Dave Lemongello and Kenneth McGuire are not entitled to damages from Southport, Conn.-based Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc., Kanawha County Circuit Judge Irene Berger ruled Thursday.

The officers sued the gun maker and a South Charleston pawnshop two years ago, arguing they should pay damages because a Ruger handgun sold at the shop had been used to shoot them in January 2001.

Berger said it would require "a real stretch" to make the gun maker responsible because the gun had originally been sold to an Ohio wholesaler. By the time it got to the pawnshop, it had changed hands four times.

The company was "pleased with the court's ruling," said Sturm, Ruger attorney James Vogts.

Will's Jewelry and Loan Co., the pawnshop where the gun was sold, settled with the officers for $1 million in June.

A clerk at the shop sold the gun and 11 others to taxi driver Tammi Songer even though another man, James Gray, picked out the guns and carried them out the door. Songer later said Gray - a felon who could not legally buy guns - had paid her cash to act as his purchaser.

Gray sold one of the guns to three-time felon Shuntez Everett, who shot the officers. Everett was killed in the gun battle. The officers were disabled and have retired.

Songer and Gray spent time in federal prison for their roles in the gun sale.

 

[Modeps]

"Guns dont kill people, people kill people."

 

[BW86]

Originally posted by: Modeps
"Guns dont kill people, people kill people."

 

[etalns]

Originally posted by: BW86

Originally posted by: Modeps
"Guns dont kill people, people kill people."

However, that said, I do feel it is incumbent upon the pawn shop which sold the guns to use common sense and check if the person who is predominant in the purchase of said guns is someone who can legally own a gun.

 

[Kelemvor]

Exactly. Otherwise any time someone gets hit by a car, you could sue the car maker. Someone gets stabbed you sue the knife maker. Someone hits you with a pipe, you sue whoever made it. So freaking rediculous. Glad to know the police are wasting the tax payer's money just like everyone else is.

 

Originally posted by: Qosis

Originally posted by: BW86

Originally posted by: Modeps
"Guns dont kill people, people kill people."

However, that said, I do feel it is incumbent upon the pawn shop which sold the guns to use common sense and check if the person who is predominant in the purchase of said guns is someone who can legally own a gun.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: FallenHero

Originally posted by: Qosis

Originally posted by: BW86

Originally posted by: Modeps
"Guns dont kill people, people kill people."

However, that said, I do feel it is incumbent upon the pawn shop which sold the guns to use common sense and check if the person who is predominant in the purchase of said guns is someone who can legally own a gun.

Will's Jewelry and Loan Co., the pawnshop where the gun was sold, settled with the officers for $1 million in June.

They were (rightly) held liable.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: Modeps
"Guns dont kill people, people kill people."

& it looks like the real bad guys went to prison already, the suit was a stretch for deep pockets in a civil suit, the other actors were prob judgment proof by virtue of their net wealth (or lack of)

Songer and Gray spent time in federal prison for their roles in the gun sale.

 

[K1052]

Good.

It was clearly the shop's fault for allowing such a clear straw purchase.

 

[Kyteland]

I can imagine instances where the gun manufacturer should be held liable, but this sure isn't one of them.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Kyteland
I can imagine instances where the gun manufacturer should be held liable, but this sure isn't one of them.

Those instances would be? (out of curiosity)

 

[Bulk Beef]

That pawnshop apparently sold ten other guns to the same couple that month. I'm glad to see shady dealers like this get screwed over by their own idiocy.

On the other hand, you have cases like this one, in which a pawn shop legally sold a gun in 1987. Sometime over the next decade or so, the gun was sold or given to another individual, and that person's grandson stole it and used it to shoot his high school teacher - in 2000. The person that the pawn shop originally sold the gun to was deceased at that point.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: sward666
That pawnshop apparently sold ten other guns to the same couple that month. I'm glad to see shady dealers like this get screwed over by their own idiocy.

On the other hand, you have cases like this one, in which a pawn shop legally sold a gun in 1987. Sometime over the next decade or so, the gun was sold or given to another individual, and that person's grandson stole it and used it to shoot his high school teacher - in 2000. The person that the pawn shop originally sold the gun to was deceased at that point.

Yes, that case was a tavesty of justice. Are/were there appeals?

 

[Bulk Beef]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: sward666
That pawnshop apparently sold ten other guns to the same couple that month. I'm glad to see shady dealers like this get screwed over by their own idiocy.

On the other hand, you have cases like this one, in which a pawn shop legally sold a gun in 1987. Sometime over the next decade or so, the gun was sold or given to another individual, and that person's grandson stole it and used it to shoot his high school teacher - in 2000. The person that the pawn shop originally sold the gun to was deceased at that point.

Yes, that case was a tavesty of justice. Are/were there appeals?

The pawn shop settled, so nothing to appeal. $275,000. I thought I remembered reading that they went out of business shortly thereafter.

The liability bill that was looking pretty good in the House and Senate earlier this year would have gone a long way to prevent this kind of crap from being brought. What was really astounding was that certain members of Congress and the news media were up in arms over the "fact" that the bill would exempt manufacturers from liability in cases of defective guns that blew up in people's hands, when the truth was that the bill specifically excluded such cases. I had to wonder if Barbara Mikulski or Dan Abrams even bothered to read the bill.

 

[furie27]

The only people who should be held responsible are the shooter, and anyone (manufacturer, retailer, pawnshop, etc) who sells to people without going through proper channels.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: sward666

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: sward666
That pawnshop apparently sold ten other guns to the same couple that month. I'm glad to see shady dealers like this get screwed over by their own idiocy.

On the other hand, you have cases like this one, in which a pawn shop legally sold a gun in 1987. Sometime over the next decade or so, the gun was sold or given to another individual, and that person's grandson stole it and used it to shoot his high school teacher - in 2000. The person that the pawn shop originally sold the gun to was deceased at that point.

Yes, that case was a tavesty of justice. Are/were there appeals?

The pawn shop settled, so nothing to appeal. $275,000. I thought I remembered reading that they went out of business shortly thereafter.

The liability bill that was looking pretty good in the House and Senate earlier this year would have gone a long way to prevent this kind of crap from being brought. What was really astounding was that certain members of Congress and the news media were up in arms over the "fact" that the bill would exempt manufacturers from liability in cases of defective guns that blew up in people's hands, when the truth was that the bill specifically excluded such cases. I had to wonder if Barbara Mikulski or Dan Abrams even bothered to read the bill.

Yes, it was quite nice of certain lawmakers to scuttle that bill.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Gotta love the poll results

 

[Viper GTS]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Gotta love the poll results

I think I'm on the wrong forums, common sense isn't normally found in such concentrations.

Viper GTS

 

[furie27]

Gotta love the poll results

I think I'm on the wrong forums, common sense isn't normally found in such concentrations.

Viper GTS[/quote]

It is pretty refreshing.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: furie27

Gotta love the poll results

I think I'm on the wrong forums, common sense isn't normally found in such concentrations.

Viper GTS

It is pretty refreshing.

[/quote]


The antis are all asleep from the multiple orgasms they had last night during the debate

 

[Gurck]

That this even made it to trial is sad.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: FrankyJunior
Exactly. Otherwise any time someone gets hit by a car, you could sue the car maker. Someone gets stabbed you sue the knife maker. Someone hits you with a pipe, you sue whoever made it. So freaking rediculous. Glad to know the police are wasting the tax payer's money just like everyone else is.

i voted that the manufacturer was NOT responsible, but your logic sucks.

guns have one purpose, to shoot things or people, cars have one purpose to transport people from point a to point b.

if a gun is used to kill someone, it is serving it's one purpose, if a car is used to kill someone it is NOT serving it's one purpose.

 

[thirdlegstump]

dem 5-0's shud no bettah son.

 

[Glitchny]

well im glad everyone agrees on this

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
guns have one purpose, to shoot things or people, cars have one purpose to transport people from point a to point b.

if a gun is used to kill someone, it is serving it's one purpose, if a car is used to kill someone it is NOT serving it's one purpose.

If you feel this way, you should take issue with laws allowing gun manufacture, not with manufacturers legally producing guns. Personally though, I think it's a sign of confrontation issues to always blame "the Man"; government, faceless corporations, etc. for the world's troubles... and unfortunately it's becoming the norm