Guilty verdict in stray bullet death

Would a responsible shooter regardless of experience fire without checking what might be in the line of fire? Bottom line, when the weapon is fired the shooter takes responsibility for where the ball lands. Good, bad or indifferent.


and there is the bottom line

Now to both of the last two posters, answer my question at the end of my previous post.

What was in the line of fire was a residence that fact has been established. The question I have is whether the person who fired the round that killed the victim KNEW there was a residence there or not.

If he knew there was a residence and fired anyway, negligent, if he did not know there was a residence in the line of fire the negligence rests with the builder of the range.

i know for me the burden rests on me when i pull the trigger. i HAVE to know where every bullet ends up. i'm sorry wont cut it

i know for me the burden rests on me when i pull the trigger. i HAVE to know where every bullet ends up. i'm sorry wont cut it

Click to expand...

cassandasdaddy, I certainly understand and mostly agree with that sentiment. I do not think it as black and white all the time. Let's say you go to an indoor range. You have been there before. You are firing a weapon well within the ranges posted caliber restrictions on an open lane. Let's say that the owner of the range failed to maintain the backstops properly. You fire a shot down the range, the backstop fails and your round goes through it, out the back of the building and strikes a person in the parking lot outside. Who bears responsibility? As a gun owner you have gone to a licensed range, you have fired with a backstop clearly visible. I just do not see how, in that specific instance, you can hold the shooter liable. Certainly you could not expect to examine the backstop each and every time. Even if you could, I would bet a good number of shooters (myself included) do not have the engineering background to know for certain whether a design of the backstop is sufficient to stop their rounds. If i was to build my own range, you'd better believe I would KNOW before the first shot was fired.

Switching gears, if I were to go to a neighborhood range, open air, with an obviously defective/insufficient backstop, with a neighborhood behind it, then I would not be so quick to deny my responsibility for folks getting injured.

commercial range i would presume i was ok if i obeyed their restrictions

I have a shooting range on my property.
Had I constructed it with a neighbors house 200 yards directly behind it, invited friends over for some target practice and an errant bullet ends up killing the neighbor I would certainly feel responsible.

We have a reasonable assumption when we shoot at a firing range (public or private) that there are not people directly behind the backstop.

I wholeheartedly agree that we are responsible for every round when we pull the trigger.
This situation sounds somewhat akin to a father telling his son it's okay to take the family car for a spin even though the father knows the brakes are bad.

Determining that isn't always possible. Tie the bullet to a specific weapon? Sure. But when's the last time you went shooting with a group of friends and didn't pass stuff around?

Click to expand...

If it's not possible, then no one should get charged. You can't simply charge a property owner in criminal court because you have insufficient evidence to prove the guilty party. Criminal investigations do end every day, without successful cases going to prosecution. It is unfortunate, but the simple fact is, there are incidences in which sufficient evidence simply does not exist, and in that case, it is not just to simply charge the next most convenient person who can be loosely connected to the action.

A misfortunate event, definitely.


A Criminal matter?


No.


Good Law is not about jesuitry for electing scape goats so deputy DAs can do the chest puffing Rooster Walk in their way to a pay raise.


"Well, we could not solve this case far as there even being a reason to prosecute anyone for anything, so, lets just blame someone who we feel can be associated circumstantially, and get on with it, prosecute them..."


Smells bad...is bad...


Maybe - if a reasonable investigation would seem to support it - charges for some order of Negligence, being brought to bear upon all those present at the Range who were shooting Arms which fire the offending Bullet-type-example, during that time slot of the sad misfortune of the stray Bullet...maybe...


...but to charge the property owner for some sort of responsibilty criminally, suggests one bad smelling DA running things around there, to me...to do that, or conceed to a subordinate doing it.

Bad smell, bad taste.

The question I have is whether the person who fired the round that killed the victim KNEW there was a residence there or not.

Click to expand...

Irrelevant, even though the person who built the range is partially responsible the duty exists to check before you fire. And before you even start to say it, every county surveyor's office in every state of the Republic has a publication called a plat book for public inspection.

"A man killed while sitting down to eat Dinner."

What if you were that Man, what if it had been your Wife or Child? How would you feel then about this?

"A house downrange 200 yards through sparce trees."

Makes me wonder if the house could be seen or not, or if these guys were blind or too stupid to care.

"A berm consisting of a rock wall one to two feet high and foam targets placed in front of trees and apparently in town not in the open countryside with a hill behind to act as a berm or backstop."

Only an idiot would shoot at such a range.

Makes me wonder if no one should be able to purchase a gun without proof of attending a hunter safety or gun safety class.

I think all of these guys should be either prosecuted in court for involuntary manslaughter or at the very least a wrongful death lawsuit.

MORONS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO HAVE GUNS.

I have a real hard time with the idea that criminal liability should extend beyond the person who shot the bullet. Unless this was an actual conspiracy to murder someone, there's no sound basis to extend criminal liability to everyone who happens to be around at the time. That sort of broad net prosecution is a good way to create injustice. That's one reason for the civil system. So the shooter himself may do time, but it's the negligent range owner who pays the bill for the death.

Think about it this way. If you build a good range with a very high berm looking out over the ocean with no houses behind it, and some idiot sprays rounds over the berm and one of them hits someone on a boat--should you face potential CRIMINAL liability for that? Become a felon? Negligence is just a sliding scale, not a firm line. And if the owner who builds a 2' berm can be liable, so can the owner who builds a 20' berm. There should be no manslaughter liability unless you pulled the trigger or acted in criminal conspiracy to set up the killing. This case goes too far.

Think about it this way. If you build a good range with a very high berm looking out over the ocean with no houses behind it, and some idiot sprays rounds over the berm and one of them hits someone on a boat--should you face potential CRIMINAL liability for that? Become a felon?

Click to expand...

Lets see, its your range. You built it, you let some idiot shoot on it. And someone got killed, and in your opinion, that is just their tough luck?

I don't think most people are going to agree with that.

Guess what, when you become too dangerous or too much of a nuisance, society will find a way to erase you from the body politic.