Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Discussions > Off-Topic Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-28-2003, 10:51 AM
mikemover's Avatar
All-seeing, all-knowing.
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 5,514
A Common Sense Judge

A 13 year-old kid in Florida took a gun to school and killed his teacher. The teacherís widow sued the gun manufacturer and won an award of $1.2 million. Now a judge in West Palm Beach, Florida has thrown that ruling out. The jury determined that the gun was not defective. If it wasnít defective, where is the gun makerís liability? A manufacturer cannot be held liable for thier product performing exactly as it was designed to perform. The manufacturer of a given product cannot be held liable for the actions, morals, errors, or intentions of a consumer/end user.

Itís nice to see common sense instead of activism from the bench once in a while.

Mike

__________________
_____
1979 300 SD
350,000 miles
_____
1982 300D-gone---sold to a buddy
_____
1985 300TD
270,000 miles
_____
1994 E320
not my favorite, but the wife wanted it

www.myspace.com/mikemover
www.myspace.com/openskystudio
www.myspace.com/speedxband
www.myspace.com/openskyseparators
www.myspace.com/doubledrivemusic
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-28-2003, 12:21 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: central Texas
Posts: 17,277
It should not have gotten to the judge.. what was wrong with those people in the jury box in the first place ?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-28-2003, 12:56 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Saugus, CA USA
Posts: 2,033
Are you saying if the gun had NOT gone off she would have gotten $1.2 million.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-28-2003, 02:14 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: central Texas
Posts: 17,277
" Brazill stole the gun from a dresser drawer at his grandfather's house.
"
While this is not exactly like some of the other suits which are concealed attempts to put gun manufacturers out of business because some hate all guns no matter what their use...

It still is hard to hold a shop responsible for a gun which is stolen from a persons house...

Seems that the suit should have been against the grandfather for failure to secure the weapon...
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-28-2003, 03:13 PM
Kuan's Avatar
unband
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: At the Birkebeiner
Posts: 3,811
Have you ever seen one of these guns? We used to see it in school a lot before we put in metal detectors. It's such a piece of junk I'm surprised it was even allowed to be sold in the US.

Remember this was a civil case, hence the burden of proof is not held to as high a standard as in a criminal case. I caught a bit of this on Court TV. The gun manufacturer was only held 5% liable. In a sense, it was a small victory for the gun manufacturers. The jury's decision affirms our collective wisdom that it's not the gun which kills, it's the person who pulls the trigger. Nonetheless, the jury's decision also reflects that little bit of doubt in the back of our minds that if we could only enforce the laws we have, this would not have happened.

Kuan
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-28-2003, 06:46 PM
blackmercedes's Avatar
Just a guy
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: St. Albert, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 3,492
Quote:
Originally posted by leathermang
Seems that the suit should have been against the grandfather for failure to secure the weapon...
Yup.
__________________
John Shellenberg
1998 C230 "Black Betty" 240K

http://img31.exs.cx/img31/4050/tophat6.gif
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-28-2003, 07:11 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: central Texas
Posts: 17,277
Kuan, I do agree that people should only be killed with high quality weapons...shooting someone with a piece of junk is only adding insult to injury...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-28-2003, 08:05 PM
MTI's Avatar
MTI MTI is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Posts: 10,626
In a jursidiction with Joint and Several Liability . . . even if the gun maker was only .000001% at fault, it (or it's insurance company) would have to pay 100% of any award and then get a refund from grandpa, the kid, the school, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-28-2003, 10:17 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: central Texas
Posts: 17,277
MTI, are most jurisdictions that way ?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-29-2003, 12:57 AM
MTI's Avatar
MTI MTI is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Posts: 10,626
Since laws change all the time, I'm not sure if this is still current, but numerous state legislatures and courts have abolished joint and several liability in certain circumstances.

31 states have modified it in some way. 13 have abolished it in many circumstances for both economic and non-economic damages.

Four states, California, Florida, Ohio (if the Plaintiff is contributorily negligent) and Oregon have adopted reforms much like these. Others have abolished it if a defendant's fault falls below a certain threshold.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-29-2003, 06:39 AM
Kuan's Avatar
unband
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: At the Birkebeiner
Posts: 3,811
Quote:
Originally posted by leathermang

Seems that the suit should have been against the grandfather for failure to secure the weapon...
I was! It was also against the school district.

Kuan
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-29-2003, 08:58 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: central Texas
Posts: 17,277
"The jury's decision affirms our collective wisdom that it's not the gun which kills, it's the person who pulls the trigger.".... by Kuan

Kuan, I am not sure how this statement conforms to my notion of a business or person not being held responsible for something which he has NO ability to stop... except to not sell the gun.. but if the product does function as it was supposed to physically then the blame should be entirely on the person who takes the action..
I was saying the grandfather, due to lack of effective control of the gun should be sued while the gun manufacturer or seller should not be included AT ALL due to their lack of ability to control the grandfather's or the boy's actions.
That way the judge would not have to remove those people after a jury ruled them (whatever percent) co liable....
Of course, like another thread on this forum , the boy might have used a machete if the gun was not available...
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-29-2003, 10:58 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Saugus, CA USA
Posts: 2,033
Guns don't kill

Bullets do!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-29-2003, 11:05 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: central Texas
Posts: 17,277
It is really hard to throw a bullet hard enough to kill someone.. so I think we can "round" off the description to " guns ".....
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-29-2003, 02:14 PM
Kuan's Avatar
unband
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: At the Birkebeiner
Posts: 3,811
Quote:
Originally posted by leathermang
I was saying the grandfather, due to lack of effective control of the gun should be sued while the gun manufacturer or seller
Which is what essentially happened. The jury split the blame something like 45-50-5, with the 5% being assigned to the gun manufacturer, the grandfather carrying either 45 or 50% of the blame. I don't remember. I should have edited my post, "I" should have been "It." I don't remember who else was involved in the suit.

Kuan

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page