Glock Wins in Arizona

[RougeLeader1]

This is the kind of thinking that leads to laws like in my state that says the gun owner is responsible for what a criminal that stole the gun does with it.

If the gun owner does not report the theft to the authorities when they had knowledge of the theft and/or did not secure the firearm to the standards described in state law (which many states do expound upon), yes they can be held libel. That is how the law works in nearly every state. The owner would not be charged with murder/manslaughter/assault, but they can absolutely be charged with neglect of some description with the exact wording be state dependent. Depending on how much knowledge of the theft was proven and the timing of the crime, they could even be charged with accessory/conspiracy.

In my home state, a firearm left in a vehicle is in possession of whoever is in the vehicle

CT is that way as well.

 

[troy fairweather]

It would have been better to sue whoever let the loaded gun go unattended. That is the responsible party.

Ya but the that person is not a multi million/ billion dollar company.

 

[BigBore44]

Part of being a responsible gun owner is ensuring your firearms are safely secured or inaccessible to others. Academy, BassPro, WalMart all carry inexpensive handgun lockboxes.
So yes, the owner should have secured that handgun.



Irrelevant. Under the seat, glovebox, armrest, side pockets aren't safe places to store a firearm.

That also makes the gun inaccessible to you should you need it in a hurry. And in a car, if you need it, you need it in a hurry.

I don’t know how old you are. But let’s assume you have/had kids at some point. And at some point a teenager is at your house and your in the kitchen BS’ing with them when nature calls and you excuse yourself and walk out of the kitchen. The teen sees and grabs a knife and decides to see if they can throw it and make it stick in your wall, and as they throw it you come walking into the kitchen and it stabs you, who is to blame? It’s not the knife maker and it’s not you, unless you believe you should have secured your knives better.

 

[Howland937]

It’s not the knife maker and it’s not you, unless you believe you should have secured your knives better.

The reality is that judgement and blame when guns are involved is unlike any other type of object that can be used to cause injury/death.

Guns themselves are too often treated as living things (especially when there's the potential for a payday) while knives and such are not. Entirely ridiculous but that's the world we're living in and we should be used to it by now.

Glad the court didn't cave to the anti-gun pressure and hoping responsible parties are charged for their irresponsible behavior.

 

[Ric]

The owner lost control of a weapon

 

[danez71]

Glock shouldn't be held responsible, imo; regardless of a loaded chamber indicator.

There is a personal/moral responsibility issue and separately there is legal responsibility issues with this case. I think some here are blending the 2.

I dont understand why anyone would want to leave a loaded gun around that someone else, such as a bad guy or unknowledgable person, can easily find it / get to it before they can.

 

[robertg5322]

always blaming the gun for everything.

murf

Unless it's a cop doing the shooting. They never blame the gun when a cop does the shooting.

 

[bdickens]

yes they can be held libel.

It's liable. Libel is something entirely different.

Before you people start: it's vocabulary, not grammar. And since we're discussing legal matters, the distinction is important.

 

[dogtown tom]

We aren’t talking about a kindergarten teacher. We are talking about a teenager riding in a car that finds a gun and then decides it a good idea to pull the trigger.

Negligence is negligence. Doesn't matter if it was the victim in the OP or the kindergarten teacher in my example.

 

[dogtown tom]

That also makes the gun inaccessible to you should you need it in a hurry. And in a car, if you need it, you need it in a hurry.

Then it should be on your person, not in an armrest, glovebox, door pocket or under the seat. And btw.....there ARE rapid access handgun safes for vehicles. They arent cheap, but way cheaper than the alternative.

I don’t know how old you are. But let’s assume you have/had kids at some point.

63, and yes. And as I pointed out above I've been in teaching/coaching for 40+ years so I think I have a fair amount of experience around kids 5 and up.

And at some point a teenager is at your house and your in the kitchen BS’ing with them when nature calls and you excuse yourself and walk out of the kitchen. The teen sees and grabs a knife and decides to see if they can throw it and make it stick in your wall, and as they throw it you come walking into the kitchen and it stabs you, who is to blame? It’s not the knife maker and it’s not you, unless you believe you should have secured your knives better.

Negligence is not necessarily the same as blame or at fault and I sincerely believe you know that. If you don't, you need to read this: https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nol...erms, fault is,losses stemming from that harm.

 

[BigBore44]

Then it should be on your person, not in an armrest, glovebox, door pocket or under the seat. And btw.....there ARE rapid access handgun safes for vehicles. They arent cheap, but way cheaper than the alternative.

And those safes fail. We had a thread a month or so ago where a guy had a digital keypad fail. In the responses, others shared their distance for electronic locking mechanisms. It was his second one and the batteries were new.

Yes, I know the difference between fault/blame and negligence, as you pointed out. But negligence is also a crime and can come with criminal or civil action. Like I said, if this was a little kid, I’d agree. My kids are different and I know that. But this was a teenager. She should have known better. Every teenager should know that you don’t play with guns. Every teenager should know that if it’s not yours, leave it alone, or ask the owner if you can use it (whatever “it” is), before you use it. It’s not a difficult concept.

You could say the parents were negligent for allowing their teenager to ride in a car without knowing if the driver carried a gun. You could blame the parents for not teaching their teenager to leave things that aren’t theirs, alone. Doesn’t mean the teen will listen. But at least the lesson was given. But at the end of the day, the teen is the one who found the gun, meaning she was searching in a car that wasn’t hers. She’s the one who then removed it from its location. And she’s the one who pulled the trigger. It wasn’t an accidental discharge or failure of the weapon. She. Pulled. The. Trigger. That’s not an accident. Nothing would have happened if she hadn’t pulled the trigger. Nothing would have happened if she’d left property, that wasn’t hers, alone.

 

[rust collector]

I think we can all agree that there was negligence on the part of the adolescent and that we dare not rely on humans young or old to behave rationally or to follow rules. The topic of this thread, however, was that the law that was enacted to protect manufacturers from abuses of the legal system did its job, and that the court went to great lengths to issue a solid opinion that is likely to withstand appeal. That is a win not just for Glock, but for 2A proponents generally.

 

[danez71]

Nothing would have happened if she hadn’t pulled the trigger. Nothing would have happened if she’d left property, that wasn’t hers, alone.

Thats all true.

It's also true that nothing would have happened if the person that was responsible for the gun (gun owner?), was in fact, responsible with the gun.

Personally, I don't think there is only 1 person negligent in this story.

Glock got sued because they have the money and, presumably, eveyone in the car were friends.


Side question for anyone familiar with Glocks, do that all Glocks have a LCI and if so, is it a witness hole type? I'm not that familiar with them.

 

[rust collector]

Not a Glock guy, but I understand that the extractor sticks out to indicate loaded chamber since gen 3.

 

[.308 Norma]

Not a Glock guy, but I understand that the extractor sticks out to indicate loaded chamber since gen 3.

It barely sticks out on my Glock 19 Gen 5 - hardly enough to be noticeable. In fact, I hadn't noticed it myself until after I saw your post and checked, rust collector.

 

[Trey Veston]

Fourteen year old girl finds a Glock under the seat of a vehicle she's riding in, picks it up, then pulls the trigger and shoots someone in the back. Most here blame the gun owner and not a teen girl being stupid. This place is weird.

 

[luzyfuerza]

I blame the public schools. Public school administrators run for their safe spaces at the mere mention of the word "GUN" and refuse to teach the simple and effective principles of NRA's Eddie Eagle program:

If you see a gun, STOP. Don't touch. Tell an adult.

 

[dogtown tom]

I blame the public schools.

Of course its the fault of public schools.
Public schools should teach everything, be it ethics, sportsmanship, morals, gun safety, how to make a PB&J sandwich, how to drive, how to swim, how to get a job, entrepreneurship, how to behave when stopped by the police, how to not get pregnant. We do that while feeding your child breakfast, lunch and a snack and sending home clean clothing. When parents lose their job we send home food for the family. It's the responsibility of "the public schools" to raise YOUR CHILD. NOT.

PLEASE.....come spend one day with me.

Public school administrators run for their safe spaces at the mere mention of the word "GUN" and refuse to teach the simple and effective principles of NRA's Eddie Eagle program: If you see a gun, STOP. Don't touch. Tell an adult.

Horsehockey. They run from the idea of another unfunded program that some dogooder thinks is needed.
Schools dont teach gun safety because it isn't part of the mandatory curriculum that their state education department has approved. I'm sure it is that way in most states.

Come to Plano, Texas. Eddie Eagle books are in every one of our elementary campus libraries.

 

[dogtown tom]

..... Most here blame the gun owner and not a teen girl being stupid. This place is weird.

It's really weird because "most here" didn't blame the gun owner. I didn't.
Blame or fault isn't the issue, negligence is.
Remember this story from a few years ago? https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/27/us/indiana-trigger-the-dog-shoots-owner/index.html Yup, it was the dogs fault. He wasn't properly trained in what not to step on.

Those who believe the owner was at fault are wrong.
Those that believe a teenage girl was at fault are wrong.

Both are at fault. (because both were negligent)

 

[herrwalther]

The argument could be made that magazine disconnect safeties make firearms more dangerous, not less. This girl obviously thought the firearm had one, as some makers put them in to meet requirements in states like California. Negligence brought on by a false sense a security about a magazine disconnect that wasn't there. The gun owner is to blame, the girl is to blame. Unless Glock puts a flashing sign on their firearms that says "Firearm will still fire with magazine removed" then they are not at fault.

 

[dogtown tom]

The argument could be made that magazine disconnect safeties make firearms more dangerous, not less. This girl obviously thought the firearm had one....

Really? How on earth could one come to that conclusion? If she was familiar enough with firearms to know about a magazine disconnect, then likely she was aware of how to safely handle a firearm. She wasn't. Heck, I have numerous customers that have never heard of or are totally ignorant of a magazine disconnect because their other handguns didn't have one.
Same with a loaded chamber indicator.....if'n you don't know jack squat about basic firearms safety, all the LCI's, mag disconnects, etc are useless.

Whether it was a three year old, a teenager or a sixty year old....ignorance of gun safety is ignorance of gun safety. I am totally excusing dogs.

 

[WestKentucky]

So was the lawsuit arguing that there was no loaded chamber indicator? Or that there was no magazine disconnect? Either way it’s not on Glock as those are silly features.

 

[GEM]

If you are not bloviating, you would know that adolescents have poor impulse control based on some well known neurophysiological factors of cortical development. Thus, if you let them have uncontrolled access to a loaded firearm you take part of the blame.

It's that simple. The gun owner takes part of the blame.

As far as the Glock suit, that was just for the money. Don't be surprised, if Glock has a secret cash payout to the family. They have been known to do that as other companies like Ruger. You win the case against the family and then still pay them off to stop the PR and appeals. They will deny it though. Have legal friends who know this stuff.

 

[FAS1]

I'm glad that Glock won the suit. The responsible party is the person that pulled the trigger. The gun owner shares in some liability for leaving the gun accessible to anyone there, especially minors. Either on your person or secured. The in between gray area is what gets people in trouble. Some will take the risks, but then it becomes your responsibility if things go bad because of your decisions.

 

[George Dickel]

I watched a Paul Harrell video where he was discussing an incident when he was instructing two young kids, one a 9 year old and the other a 14 year old if I remember correctly. They were shooting a semi-auto rifle and Paul instructed the kids to let the bolt slam closed instead of riding the charging handle forward with their hand. The 9 year old understood and did as told. The 14 year old was instructed numerous times to release the bolt and not ride it forward. Didn't listen so Paul ended his instruction. The 14 year old just wasn't mature enough to have access to a firearm. Being a teenager doesn't automatically convey maturity or judgement. Want proof of that? Watch a few Tic Toc videos.