If you're irresponsible, that's on you!

[TheCol.U.S.M.C.]

I bet he won't do that again! Pain retains

 

[Buck Kramer]

No way this will go to court, how can he explain the millions of glocks issued to law enforcement (let alone private citizens) that intelligent people can handle safely?

 

[ATBackPackin]

No way this will go to court, how can he explain the millions of glocks issued to law enforcement (let alone private citizens) that intelligent people can handle safely?

It is going to court. The court ruled 3-0 to let a jury decide and with that you never know what will happen.

 

[Centurian22]

Wow, utterly disgusting on so many levels! Nothing else I have to say is very 'high road' so I'll end my post here.

 

[essayons21]

Ugh... he should have been charged. Not sure what Cali's laws are, but here in VA, with our relatively lax gun laws, it is criminal to leave a loaded weapon accessible to a child under 13.

 

[Jeff H]

And from what I've seen the jury will see only that he is paralyzed now, and that means he gets a judgement. Were I on that jury, I'd hang it.

Unfortunately, you can't hang a civil jury with only one reasonable opinion. I think it only takes 6 of the 8 total jurors to convict in a civil case.

 

[armoredman]

Reloadron, nice allusion to Top Gun, like it.

 

[Reloadron]

Reloadron, nice allusion to Top Gun, like it.

Goose: "The defense department regrets to inform you that your sons are dead because they were stupid".

Loved it and use it frequently in tailored forms. Hell, it's true. Sadly anymore in the US we actually reward stupidity. Shove your arm in a snow blower and somehow it becomes a safety defect in the snow blower.

Ron

 

[armoredman]

I saw that movie for the second time in Navy Boot Camp - now THAT'S what's known as an "appreciative audience"!

Sorry for the temporary thread hijack, back to our regularly scheduled discussion.

 

[exiledtoIA]

ATBP: It is against the law in Kali. Word on another site is that they decided not to prosecute because it would cause the kid more mental anguish. " Bad enough that his father is crippled for life, but knowing that he was in prison because he allowed his child to shoot him".

 

[RustHunter87]

he ought to consider himself lucky the kid didn't shoot himself, what a moron

 

[john wall]

ANY QUESTIONS?

 

[PRM]

I'm in the mortgage business and see lots of income documentation and it amazes me how many people come in sporting some type of disability check. It's disheartening to see how many military members retire from service and claim (and are compensated for) "disabilities" like Irritable Bowel Syndrome (bad chow at the the mess hall?), Sleep Apneia or partial hearing loss. I have partial hearing loss and have never served in the military, it's called a-g-i-n-g. I personally know someone who will be getting a disability check from the VA for blowing out his bicep while lifting weights, not bombs or bullets but weights! Everyone "wants theirs" and think they are entitled to it. Takers verses Producers, read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand.

Bashing Vets...***. Guess the key phrase is I have never served.

VA disabilities are awarded for service connected issues. They are not automatically given. Guess that would be hard to explain to some who have never been in the military or had to deploy to a war zone. I doubt seriously that anyone explains in detail on a mortgage application as to why the VA has awarded them anything.

Service in austere areas exposes the military to a variety of things those at home rarely encounter. Health problems can come from chemicals such as agent orange, depleted uranium munitions, enemy munitions that are destroyed, to viruses and other live organisms found in certain regions.

Hearing loss may be aging - but more than likely is a result of time spent on ranges, inside armored vehicles, being around aircraft or worse. Definitely service related.

Few occupations have physical fitness standards as a part of the job. In the military, you are tested on a annual, semi-annual or more frequent basis dependent upon the branch, command and occupational specialty. Don't pass and you won't stay long. When deployed they will carry their IBA, weapons, ammunition, and a ruck. All of which can easily top 120 pounds. If the guy hurt himself trying to stay in shape - yep its service connected. I personally have three friends that were medically retired because of back problems associated with weight bearing activities. Would it be right to be-grudge them compensation? Guess how you look at that, is a personal decision.

Next time you want to slam a vet - consider thanking them that you have the right to voice your own opinion.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

Unfortunately, you can't hang a civil jury with only one reasonable opinion. I think it only takes 6 of the 8 total jurors to convict in a civil case.

When did this start? Or is it a regional thing? I was on the jury of 2 different civil cases and we ALL HAD to be in one accord.

Edit: Aha! From Wiki: The "petit jury" (or "trial jury") hears the evidence in a trial as presented by both the plaintiff (petitioner) and the defendant (respondent). After hearing the evidence and often jury instructions from the judge, the group retires for deliberation, to consider a verdict. The majority required for a verdict varies. In some cases it must be unanimous, while in other jurisdictions it may be a majority or supermajority. A jury that is unable to come to a verdict is referred to as a hung jury.
Both of the cases I was on required 12 jurors (16 heard the case, then 4 were tossed by lottery) and unanimous decision was required. (Detroit) Well, if this ever happens in the Detroit area and I am on the jury, I will hang it if necessary.

 

[Owen Sparks]

In my state a civil case only requires a majority.

 

[Texan Scott]

PRM, thank you... better and more civilly said than I could manage. (back to the topic)

 

[Trisha]

Lawsuits are the only recourse for folks who've otherwise escaped Darwinization but believe they are entitled for proving they are the idiot engineers try and defeat - unsuccessfully.

 

[fallout mike]

Sorry guys, you are all wrong. Everybody!!! If you make bad decisions and screw your life up it is Bush's fault!!

 

[jrdolall]

While this happens to be a gun related lawsuit it is actually perfectly NORMAL to see these types of frivolous suits every day in our courts. I have not seen the case but there could be portions of the lawsuit that are actually valid. As long as attorneys are rewarded for bringing these cases they will continue to bombard the system. This attorney stands to make a huge sum. The down side is the time he/she will spend on paperwork which could run into quite a bit of money if the case gets strung out for a few years.
Equation. $1million in 3 years vs. $20k over 4 years is a big enticement for the average ambulance chaser/bloodsucker.

I have 3 friends that are personal injury attorneys. None of them will touch anything like this because, in the less populous area where they practice there are a limited number of judges, generally fairly conservative, and they can't afford to have those judges tossing cases because they file too many suits. They will be glad to go after a $50 million suit against a chemical company or work related injuries. Being near Ft Benning GA and Ft Rucker AL they handle quite a few vets going up against Uncle sam. They will not advertise their services on TV or billboards but they make an insane amount of money every year.

My personal favorite was the lady that got Mcdonalds for hot coffee. They were able to convince a jury that Mcdonalds was aware of the danger but chose to continue to brew their coffee hotter than normal and that they did this for financial gain. Never underestimate the power of actual corporate documents on a jury. Mcdonalds could have settled for about $20k as I recall but instead wound up paying well over $1million after everything was settled. It was not an issue of whether or not coffee can burn you but rather did Mcdonalds know there was a danger and did they continue to subject the coffee drinking public to this danger in order to make more profit? Based on my readings of the case I have to say that Mcdonalds was actually negligent and I despise these types of suits. If I had been on that jury I would probably have made an award for the plaintiff as well.

Does Glock have any internal documents that show they are aware of the potential for accidental firing based on the lack of the safety? I don't think the seatbelt issue will be very big in this case though it certainly brings into question the plaintiff's sense of responsibility and judgement.

 

[ATBackPackin]

Jrdolall, that's not exactly comparing apples to apples. A woman spilling hot coffee on herself is the result of an accident and McDonald's knew their coffee was too hot. What this cop did goes way beyond even negligence.

 

[Skribs]

Does Glock have any internal documents that show they are aware of the potential for accidental firing based on the lack of the safety?

My guess is that they, like every manufacturer of every manual I've looked at, have included in their MOA multiple pages of "don't do this, don't do that" in their pamphlet, designed specifically to combat these lawsuits.

 

[Owen Sparks]

I own a number of power tools without safeties. They work just like a Glock in that you pull the trigger and they do exactly what they were designed to do. Of course I know better than to leave them laying around 'loaded' (pluged into the wall or with the battery in them) when children are present.

 

[jrdolall]

I just tried to point out that what appears to be a totally frivolous lawsuit with absolutely no merit can go the "wrong" way. When I first saw the Mcds suit I laughed like everyone else. How can a woman who buys coffee possibly win a suit like this? She was 70 or so years old and had probably been drinking coffee for many years. She knew that coffee is hot. Everyone on the jury knew that coffee is hot. Yet, because the lawyers were able to PROVE that a big greedy company like Mcds was risking the health of their customers in able to make a few more bucks, Mcds lost the suit.

Mcdonalds had verbiage on their coffee cups to indicate that it was hot and could cause burns. Glock certainly has warnings in their manuals about the dangers of firearms. I just glanced at one of my firearms manuals, KT, and the first three pages are devoted to warnings and safety instructions. This seemingly trivial lawsuit cost Mcds over a million dollars AND they changed to a sturdier coffee cup with a better lid and more aggressive warnings.

Please don't think that I am condoning this type of suit. I am a huge proponent of personal responsibility, just ask any of my kids, and based on the little bit of info posted by the OP, it seems this guys negligence was absolute. We all need to realize that this is how things work. If Glock has in some way acknowledged that there is the potential for a dangerous condition to occur and the fix would have been as simple as adding a safety, which plenty of other "responsible" gun manufacturers have, then there is the possibility that they will lose this suit. I certainly hope not but I will not discount the possibility. If they do lose then will they change their design?

 

[ccsniper]

Sure I feel bad for him and his family. But we're fast becoming a nation that rewards stupidity in it's courts.

I honestly feel nothing but resentment towards this man, but for his family I do feel bad. I honestly think that if you are going have a loaded gun, kids need to know DO NOT TOUCH!
I have a 5 year old nephew that comes over to my house quite often, and I have guns all over the place. But he knew from the time he was old enough to walk not to touch any of my guns without my permission. I grew up in a house filled with guns, never once did I touch them without my dad or uncle being present and having their permission.

 

[mnrivrat]

If you're irresponsible, that's on you!

Not since granny burnt her money maker with a hot cup of coffee .