(OH) Man sues firearm company after leg is amputated

[elrod]

While hes at it , go ahead and sue the maker of the automobile that brought him to Wymoning, the maker of the coat that snagged the weapon, and whoever owned the land he was on! Really, people, these are the risks that are part of life! This falls into the same category with the woman who sued McDonalds for serving her coffee hot enough to burn her when spilled on her lap. This can all be avoided by simply staying in bed each morn.

 

[Lashlarue]

The hammer block safety will not disengage until the hammer is fully cocked and then it won't fire unless you pull the trigger.Snap fire is literally impossible with this pistol.The lawsuit is plain unadulterated BS...Freedom Arms makes one of the finest single action revolvers available today. I have never heard of a mechanical failure with the hammer block safety on any of their models.I sold mine because it was more gun than I wanted or needed. Havent run into many grizzlies roaming the streets of Houston.For cowboy action shooting I used either a 44 Vaquero or an Uberti 1973 replica, also in 44/44mag

 

[Justin]

Unfortunately, his lawyers will probably try to claim that the weapon's design was defective, not the gun itself. Same thing as the Brady-supported lawsuit against Beretta a few years back.

 

[mbt2001]

I thought it was common knowledge to not carry a single action revolver with the hammer cocked and a live round in the cylinder.

In this case that isn't applicable. The hammer down on a live round is safe if you have a transfer bar in the design. A snap fire would have caused the cylinder to rotate, or begin rotating so that the chamber NEXT to the chamber under the hammer would need to be empty.

Take a look at a lot of the single action / cowboy holsters and they have a thong over the hammer. That ain't just to hold it in place eh. It is to keep a snap fire from occuring.

Edit - I doubt that the lawsuit is real though. Sounds like something terrible happened to this poor bastard and rather than admit that it was his fault (as so many are unwilling to do) he invented this crazy complex and is now going after the "perp".

Many people in his condition should be in therapy, but the lawyers get a hold of them instead and convince them that they are innocent and it could have happened to anyone and that jives with how this idiot feels.... So he sues... It is explotation by lawyer.

 

[johnny blaze]

This happened to a friend of mine years ago. He told everyone (his parents, etc) that the weapon discharged because he caught his coat on it.
Now, this was before the it's not my fault, we should sue someone attitude.
A witness came forward that had seen him practicing quick draw, and then limping to his car to get to the hospital. It was only a 22 thank goodness, but it did enough damage.

 

[Conju]

If the guy had enough trust in the gun to carry it around with him (which IMHO I would never carry a gun that I couldn't trust 100%) then there is no way it could have AD'ed. ND'ed yes, but AD'ed absolutely not.

2 very important facts
1)The guy put trust in a gun that he should have dissassembled, test fired and made sure that he could trust it
2)The guy had an external hammer that was cocked with one in the chamber

1+2=ND

Case closed

 

[coylh]

Some guns designs are so defective, they'll allow the user to point the gun at himself. This is pure negligence on the part of the engineer who designed such a dangerous device.

Give me money.

 

[Hawk]

Doc2005 and Google give me hope that reason may prevail:

http://definitions.uslegal.com/a/assumption-of-risk/

... In order to show the risk was assumed, the danger assumed must be obvious or the nature of the activity causing injury must be inherently dangerous....

It's a gun, fercryinoutloud. Presumably FA's attorneys have liberally sprinkled the manual with all manner of warnings.

 

[littledoc]

Let me see, he flipped back his duster and it made the hammer go back far enough to fire a cartridge, overcoming the friction of the holster squeezing the cylinder. I don't know....

Well, he won't be running with scissors anymore either.

 

[SIRVEYR666]

All of you are idiots!

Has Ms. Brady taught you nothing? It is obviously the guns fault. People do not just shoot themselves or each other. They are merely innocent bystanders that get caught in the crossfire when two handguns get pissed at each other. Duh! Idiots, you're all idiots!

 

[October]

Maybe he just wasn't professional enough to carry that firearm.

I hear that Glocks are prone to snap fires...in the hands of certain "professionals."

 

[kellyj00]

get a flippin' expert in there to see if the transfer bar is indeed faulty.

Simple solution. If a car company makes a faulty seatbelt, I'd sue the heck out of them too.

I don't shoot without safety in mind, and I don't drive recklessly. But you don't need to be reckless to get in an accident and have a seat belt that saves your butt.

 

[AndyC]

He might no longer be able to play Butch Cassidy, but Hopalong Cassidy is now possible...

Couldn't resist, sorry - tsk, my black humour. I feel for anyone with such an awful injury, but if it was self-inflicted... I'll wait to see how this turns out.

 

[benelli12]

Why cant people just assume responsibility for what they do. I cant stand these people who go through life always whining, and insisting they're always a victim.

They always have to point the finger at someone/or something else, when this guy was probably just being stupid. I agree, this is an "I'm an idiot, so pay me" lawsuit.

A tool has no prejudice against idiots...It is what the operater makes it...

But a .454 thru the leg WOULD be one nasty wound

 

[Flyboy]

So...we have a claim of a defect, whether in design or manufacturing. He's not claiming that "guns are bad, and it's FA's fault," but alleging a specific defect. Further, we've had some posts saying that such a defect is, in fact, possible, and could cause the gun to fire.

Call me crazy, but this seems like a good suit. I'm not saying he has a good case, but there appears to be a legitimate question, and that's exactly what the courts are meant to answer.

I hope justice is served, whatever it may be.

 

[metallic]

Here's a question: How do you shoot yourself in the leg if the revolver is holstered? Wouldn't the bullet travel straight down and miss you completely?

 

[Stevie-Ray]

Depends on how tight the holster is and how chunky your legs are.

I share the opinion of whomever said, Clint Eastwood.................

 

[Cosmoline]

He cocked it and shot himself, probably in some quick draw effort. Maybe he should sue the coat's maker.

 

[Dockery]

For everyone who can't understand why people cannot take the blame for their actions, have you ever had your leg amputated?

If so, then shoot me down, but if not, then neither of us should be arguing over it.

 

[gunsmith]

if I hadn't laughed so hard I would have flagged it

He fubared his own leg for sure. His new hobby can be pirate instead of cowboy.

aaaarrrrggghhh, shiver me timbers

 

[Shear_stress]

Here's a question: How do you shoot yourself in the leg if the revolver is holstered? Wouldn't the bullet travel straight down and miss you completely?

That was my question too as I read through the posts. To me, the issue is how did he shoot himself in the *back* of the leg with a holstered gun?

 

[SoCalShooter]

How do you get a single action revolver to negligent discharge itself without pulling back on the hammer?

 

[AntiqueCollector]

For everyone who can't understand why people cannot take the blame for their actions, have you ever had your leg amputated?

If so, then shoot me down, but if not, then neither of us should be arguing over it.

Well, I feel bad for someone who's had a limb amputated (unless they're a thief and then I could care less), but, emotions are not something to base a decision on. If he's got a legitimate claim and there was a flaw somewhere, sue, fine. But, one gets the impression on the facts obtained so far, that he did something stupid, and is trying to blame someone else. I imagine most people would try to convince people it was someone else's fault if they had an amputation after doing something stupid, rather than letting the injury serve as a reminder to everyone the person's an idiot...

 

[atomd]

He fubared his own leg for sure. His new hobby can be pirate instead of cowboy.

Absolutely hilarious Plex. I ALMOST feel bad about laughing so hard at that.

 

[Wheeler44]

At arecent gunshow a vendor refused to let my 14 yr old and I even handle her single actions.Except one. She said " none of these have a tranfer bar, they are too dangerous for someone as young as him. My husband shot himself in the leg with that one right there" The exception was a scoped Ruger single six painted in olive drab and black camo (gasp).
When we were a polite distance away my son looked up to me and said "Too bad that guy's dad never showed him why you should carry an SA with only five in the chamber." A little later he said "Dad do you think he was PLAYING with his revolver you know, like fast draw cowboy stuff or something?" Finally when we were out in the parking lot on our way out he said "what did that poor .22 do to deserve getting painted with zebra stripes?"
I know that some of you will say that I don't know anything, that SAs are safe to carry with six in the chamber with a transfer bar. I have had both kinds and like to just have to apply one set of rules. When on the range we load six, when we carry in a holster or whatever the rule is five because it's safer. same with the DAs, some have the firing pin on the hammer and they are getting kinda old.
Back to the original post I cannot cock any of my revolvers while they are holstered mainly because of friction on the cylinder and partly because the holster interferes with full hammer swing.