9teenEleven
Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2009
- Messages
- 186
So if my neighbor with a drinking problem steals my car while it is warming up on a cold morning and then kills someone while driving drunk, I am liable? I think not.
Gun maker Kahr to pay record damage claim
- Thread starter al123
- Start date
- Status
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Kahr didn't say they were liable for the man's crimes.
Their insurance company settled out of court to stop the financial bleeding that would have come from further court cases. Cases which they may have lost, considering that they seem to have hired someone to work with/near and have access to firearms, who was not legally allowed to have access to them.
Undoubtedly their settlement includes terms to the effect that Khar admits no wrongdoing by paying out.
Bozwell
Member
For a case of negligence (in the hiring process) involving two deaths, settling for $600,000 doesn't seem earthshattering to me. Whether they made a mistake or not, if the case had to go all the way to a verdict, the legal expenses would probably cost them the bulk of that amount anyways and then they take the risk of losing. Settling lets them avoid an admission of guilt and cap any expenses resulting from this incident. It's a lot of money, but that's a cost of doing business. TBH I don't see anything that outrageous here.
JohnBT
Member
www.nssf.org/share/legal/litigation/pdf/private/hernandezvkahr/complaint.pdf
Read the complaint if you like, but it's long.
Kahr didn't do any background checks, not even a general one. Kahr didn't have a metal detector or do any searching of employees when they left the factory. Kahr didn't do drug screening.
And on and on.
Read the complaint if you like, but it's long.
Kahr didn't do any background checks, not even a general one. Kahr didn't have a metal detector or do any searching of employees when they left the factory. Kahr didn't do drug screening.
And on and on.
Carl N. Brown
Member
regardless of Brady Campaign crowing....
US NIJ Felon Survey of 1,874 convicts in 18 prisons in 10 different states asked felons who used guns how they got their guns. James D. Wright and Peter Rossi, "Armed and Considered Dangerous", (Aldine 1986, 2nd ed 2008, ISBN-13: 978-0202362427), is their commercial write up of their report on the felon survey for the government.
40% of the felons surveyed reported stealing firearms. Sources stolen from included: 37% stole from stores, 15% from police, 16% from truck shipments, 8% from manufacturers.
Manufacturers, transportation companies, police departments, gun stores need to do background checks on employees and exercise due diligence, reasonable steps, to avoid theft of firearms.
US NIJ Felon Survey of 1,874 convicts in 18 prisons in 10 different states asked felons who used guns how they got their guns. James D. Wright and Peter Rossi, "Armed and Considered Dangerous", (Aldine 1986, 2nd ed 2008, ISBN-13: 978-0202362427), is their commercial write up of their report on the felon survey for the government.
40% of the felons surveyed reported stealing firearms. Sources stolen from included: 37% stole from stores, 15% from police, 16% from truck shipments, 8% from manufacturers.
Manufacturers, transportation companies, police departments, gun stores need to do background checks on employees and exercise due diligence, reasonable steps, to avoid theft of firearms.
Bmont2409
Member
The sad part of this story is that everyone of us that purchases a new weapon will pay for these settlements. It is like many lawsuits involving doctors, everyone pays when they go through the door with huge malpractice premiums and extra unneeded tests just to cover their butts and make the lawyer proof. Someone needs to figure out a way to sue the Brady bunch and stay after them until they are gone.
alsaqr
Member
Kahr also neglected to report entire shipments of missing guns. The ATF found out about this one by digging.
outerlimit
Member
bigfatdave said:
jmr40 said:
What? Why??
Sorry, maybe I missed some sarcasm there..
Last edited:
Arkansas Paul
Member
They're lucky they got off so cheap.
CoRoMo
Member
I wish I could hold the deciding verdict of what I am liable for and what I am not. You have to realize that a judge/jury decides what you are liable for. It would take several thousands of dollars in legal fees through civil court for you to find out if you are liable or not. In that case, it wouldn't really matter if you were or not, would it. Ultimate vindication doesn't fix getting dragged into court and going broke to defend yourself.
See my answer above. Being liable isn't the only thing to worry about. Having to prove that you are not, can devastate your life beyond repair.
Mike1234567
member
Wouldn't it be great if this country's courts rendered verdicts based on facts and common sense deliberated by juries with high intelligence and an understanding of Constitutional Law?
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Perhaps. But this wasn't decided by a jury. It was settled, undoubtedly by Khar's insurance carrier in order to limit the costs which would have accrued through fighting this in court -- even if they won.
CourtTV (now TruTV) had a story years ago about Ruger. Some guy did the classic of dropping a single action revolver (pre '73) with a round under the hammer and shot himself.
It was shown that he had knowledge of the risk and the Ruger offer to modify such guns.
The jury found Ruger NOT liable. But guess what - Ruger still dropped about 200K on him, IIRC as to short circuit an appeal.
So paying someone off to lower financial risk is done all the time.
It was shown that he had knowledge of the risk and the Ruger offer to modify such guns.
The jury found Ruger NOT liable. But guess what - Ruger still dropped about 200K on him, IIRC as to short circuit an appeal.
So paying someone off to lower financial risk is done all the time.
bigfatdave
Member
bull
I am not responsible for the actions of a criminal.
Owen
Moderator Emeritus
I've worked for a few gun companies. AFAIK, they all do this.
wheelgunslinger
Member
I'm gonna go buy a Kahr product just because I think the fact that they have to pay hush money for something they didn't do is nonsense.
The individual stole the gun and sold it for drugs. I don't see any way that Kahr is responsible, and probably the people in charge and the ones on the production floor agree with me.
Happy to help them soak up some of this loss.
The individual stole the gun and sold it for drugs. I don't see any way that Kahr is responsible, and probably the people in charge and the ones on the production floor agree with me.
Happy to help them soak up some of this loss.
JohnBT
Member
"for something they didn't do"
They didn't control their inventory of dangerous items. They weren't making bread or Barbie dolls.
Kahr is lucky the ATF hasn't shut them down for not reporting the missing guns and all of the missing gun shipments.
Try working in wholesale diamonds or jewelry. You will be searched when you leave. Guns are valuable and Kahr just let them walk? Stupid.
They didn't control their inventory of dangerous items. They weren't making bread or Barbie dolls.
Kahr is lucky the ATF hasn't shut them down for not reporting the missing guns and all of the missing gun shipments.
Try working in wholesale diamonds or jewelry. You will be searched when you leave. Guns are valuable and Kahr just let them walk? Stupid.
bigfatdave
Member
Guns.
Are.
Not.
Dangerous.
I know the Brady campaign has been telling you that guns are special and unique, but they are just tools without motivation of their own.
It is obvious that the article has an anti-gun bias and slant particularly against The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
When will some of you people get a clue and stop helping to perpetuate the half truths and lies that the anti-gun crowd feeds us?
bigfatdave
Member
I can file for dismissal and make a public stink for free if someone steals my property, victimizes someone else, and then some idiot in that sequence decides that I'm at fault and not another victim.
How about a re-phrase?
I will not be held responsible for the actions of a criminal who has victimized me.
bigfatdave
Member
cute, but wrong.
If someone bashes in a couple skulls with a particular brick, you don't blame the owner of the building that the brick was pried off of.
rscalzo
Member
That'[s exactly what is done at SIG. No one gets into the facility unless some arraignments are made beforehand.
- Status
Similar threads
