Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > At Ease > General Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-09-2004, 11:08   #1
Roguish Lawyer
Consigliere
 
Roguish Lawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Free Pineland (at last)
Posts: 8,841
This really pisses me off

Yeah, like the manufacturer killed those people.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/09/09/sn....ap/index.html

Gunmaker settles sniper lawsuit
Gun dealer also settles with victims' families
Thursday, September 9, 2004 Posted: 9:59 AM EDT (1359 GMT)

SEATTLE, Washington (AP) -- Victims of the Washington, D.C.-area sniper shootings and their families have settled claims against the maker of the gun used in the spree and its dealer for $2.5 million, an agreement the plaintiffs' lawyer said would change practices in the firearms industry.

Bushmaster Firearms of Windham, Maine, agreed to pay $550,000 to eight plaintiffs. Bull's Eye Shooter Supply of Tacoma, the gun dealer where the snipers' Bushmaster rifle came from, agreed to pay $2 million.

The settlement with Bushmaster marks the first time a gun manufacturer has agreed to pay damages to settle claims of negligent distribution of weapons, said Jon Lowy, a lawyer with the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

Lowy, who helped argue the case, also said the settlement with Bull's Eye Shooter Supply is the largest against a gun dealer.

"These settlements send a loud and clear message that the gun industry cannot turn a blind eye to how criminals get their guns," Lowy said.

A judge will determine how to divide the settlement among two people who were injured in the shootings and the families of six people who were killed.

Seattle attorney Paul Luvera represented the victims' families. He called the settlement "historic" and said it should change practices in the firearms industry.

"When a manufacturer makes a large settlement like this one, it is an example to other manufacturers," Luvera said.

Kelly Corr, the attorney representing Bushmaster, said the company made "no admission of liability whatsoever" and that the settlement was an economic decision.

He said Bushmaster and its insurance company, which will pay the $550,000, decided to settle rather than continuing to run up legal fees. Corr said the settlement will not change the way Bushmaster conducts business.

"Bushmaster believes it is a responsible manufacturer," he said.

As part of the settlement, though, Bushmaster agreed to educate its dealers on gun safety.

A federal investigation determined the rifle was one of 200 or more guns missing from Bull's Eye that the owner at the time, Brian Borgelt, could not account for.

Borgelt, a former Army ranger and military sniper instructor, said he had been conducting his own internal investigation for two years. He sold Bull's Eye last year but still operates a shooting range at the store near the Tacoma Dome.

"We just decided, it being a no-win situation for us any way you sliced it, that it would be best to settle and get something in the way of relief for the victims and the victims' families, the poor people who survived this," Borgelt said.

John Allen Muhammad, 43, was convicted and sentenced to death for murder in one of the 10 fatal shootings in October 2002 in the Washington, D.C.-area. His coconspirator, 19-year-old Lee Boyd Malvo, was tried separately, convicted of murder in a different death and sentenced to life in prison without parole.

They used a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle, a civilian version of the military M-16.

The civil lawsuit alleged that at least 238 guns, including the snipers' rifle, disappeared from the gun shop in the three years before the shooting rampage. Despite audits by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms showing that Bull's Eye had dozens of missing guns, Bushmaster continued to use the shop as a dealer and provided it with as many guns as the owners wanted, the lawsuit alleged.

"It appears that 17-year-old Malvo was able to stroll into this gun store and stroll out carrying a 3-foot-long, $1,000 Bushmaster assault rifle," Lowy said. "Bull's Eye should have taken reasonable care to prevent guns from being stolen. Bushmaster should have required Bull's Eye to implement simple, reasonable security measures."

The victims' lawsuit, filed in January 2003, also names Malvo and Muhammad as defendants. Those claims are technically still pending, although they are unlikely to be resolved.

A bill was proposed in Congress earlier this year that would have given the firearms industry immunity from lawsuits such as this one. Despite strong support from President Bush, it died in the Senate.
Roguish Lawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2004, 11:54   #2
Airbornelawyer
Moderator
 
Airbornelawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,952
Didn't you learn in law school that "proximate cause lies in the deepest pockets"? If not, I claim copyright on that phrase.
Airbornelawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2004, 12:03   #3
NousDefionsDoc
Quiet Professional
 
NousDefionsDoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LA
Posts: 1,653
Coincidence this comes out now?
__________________
Somewhere a True Believer is training to kill you. He is training with minimal food or water, in austere conditions, training day and night. The only thing clean on him is his weapon and he made his web gear. He doesn't worry about what workout to do - his ruck weighs what it weighs, his runs end when the enemy stops chasing him. This True Believer is not concerned about 'how hard it is;' he knows either he wins or dies. He doesn't go home at 17:00, he is home.
He knows only The Cause.

Still want to quit?
NousDefionsDoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2004, 12:49   #4
Bravo1-3
Guerrilla Chief
 
Bravo1-3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver (Not BC), Washington (Not DC)
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airbornelawyer
Didn't you learn in law school that "proximate cause lies in the deepest pockets"? If not, I claim copyright on that phrase.
Hell, I knew that an I'm just interning!

The gun shop in question though... talk about piss poor accountability. Violation after violation of laws that actually matter, we're not talking about the silly ones, we're talking about the simple process of maintaining inventory accountability, not releasing weapons until the insta-check comes back, or even conducting an insta-check in the first place. How much of it that Bushmaster was aware of with this dealer is the question. That said, your Proximate Cause statement is right on.
Bravo1-3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2004, 12:50   #5
The Reaper
Quiet Professional
 
The Reaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Free Pineland
Posts: 24,821
So if I go on a crime spree and kill 8 people with a stolen Ford F-150 pick-up truck, the survivors can sue Ford Motor Company and the dealer it was originally sold from as negligent?

Did I miss something here? Isn't this another "McDonalds made my kids fat" sort of lawsuit?

This should have gone to trial.

TR
__________________
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat." - President Theodore Roosevelt, 1910

De Oppresso Liber 01/20/2025
The Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2004, 17:06   #6
flyboy1
Auxiliary
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Reaper
So if I go on a crime spree and kill 8 people with a stolen Ford F-150 pick-up truck, the survivors can sue Ford Motor Company and the dealer it was originally sold from as negligent?

Did I miss something here? Isn't this another "McDonalds made my kids fat" sort of lawsuit?

This should have gone to trial.

TR
Damn straight there....and the makers of DOOM3 are next when the next nutcase goes on a killing spree stating ID software made me do it.
flyboy1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2004, 17:48   #7
Airbornelawyer
Moderator
 
Airbornelawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Reaper
So if I go on a crime spree and kill 8 people with a stolen Ford F-150 pick-up truck, the survivors can sue Ford Motor Company and the dealer it was originally sold from as negligent?

Did I miss something here? Isn't this another "McDonalds made my kids fat" sort of lawsuit?

This should have gone to trial.

TR
Actually, it's the "drunk-driver-ran-over-my-wife-so-instead-of-suing-him-or-the-bar-that-let-him-drive-off-drunk-I-will-sue-the-House-of-Seagrams" sort of lawsuit.
Airbornelawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2004, 17:58   #8
Guy
Quiet Professional
 
Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: OCONUS...again
Posts: 4,702
Talking Lmao!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Reaper
So if I go on a crime spree and kill 8 people with a stolen Ford F-150 pick-up truck, the survivors can sue Ford Motor Company and the dealer it was originally sold from as negligent?

Did I miss something here? Isn't this another "McDonalds made my kids fat" sort of lawsuit?

This should have gone to trial.

TR
Come out here...they have me borderline paranoid with the crosswalks.

Looking both ways before crossing the street...does not cut it here. I almost hit several people.
__________________
“It is better to have sheep led by a lion than lions led by a sheep.”

-DE OPPRESSO LIBER-
Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2004, 18:18   #9
Kyobanim
Moderator
 
Kyobanim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy
Come out here...they have me borderline paranoid with the crosswalks.

Looking both ways before crossing the street...does not cut it here. I almost hit several people.

Guy's got a Heads Up Display on his windshield that identifies liberal targets as they move through the crosswalks. It gets confused when there's too many targets.
__________________
"Are you listening or just waiting to talk?"


Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

"Fate rarely calls upon us at a moment of our choosing."
Optimus Prime
Kyobanim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2004, 09:46   #10
Razor
Quiet Professional
 
Razor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 4,533
Crosswalk right-of-way, huh? I think my father-in-law summed it up best when he said, "Its much easier to stop 160 pounds of flesh moving at 3mph than 3000 pounds of metal moving at 40mph."
Razor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2004, 07:56   #11
rubberneck
Area Commander
 
rubberneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Buckingham, Pa.
Posts: 1,746
Bushmaster responds

Bushmaster Responds to Brady Groups False Claim of Victory
Thursday September 9, 2004 9:24AM est

Windham, Maine -- The Washington DC Brady Group would have you believe they won some kind of victory! The Brady Group brought this lawsuit not for the victims, but for their anti-gun agenda. The Brady Group asked for the settlement conference after reviewing all the evidence they knew they could not be successful in court and they wanted to stop paying lawyer fees.

The Brady Group sent a second tier lawyer to the settlement conference with nine demands on Bushmaster regarding business practices and Bushmaster denied them all. We then gave the Brady Group our statement that we support the BATF licensing requirements to be a Federal Firearms Licensed (FFL) holder and our support for the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) safety programs, and they accepted our statement. We did not agree and would not agree to change the way we do business or make any additional demands of our customers. We were emphatic that Bushmaster did not commit any wrong doings.

The attorney for our insurance company was at the settlement conference and informed us that about half of our policy limits had been spent on trial lawyers. It was the insurance company’s position that all of the limit would be spent on this case, and therefore turned the funds over to Bushmaster to use as we saw fit removing the insurance company from the case. Our choice was to continue spending it on trial lawyers or turn it over directly to the victims’ families with no funds going to the Brady Group for their legal fees.

We felt the compassionate thing to do was give it to the victims’ families, not because we had to but because we wanted to. The Washington DC Brady Group should learn what compassion is really all about!

Bushmaster strongly believes and vigorously supports the rights of citizens to own and use firearms, and the settlement of this case in no way compromises that stand. The Brady Group’s attempt at claiming a victory over firearms manufacturers is a hollow one with no substance. Their attempt to eliminate gun rights of citizens has failed legislatively and will continue to fail with these frivolous lawsuits against gun manufacturers.

Bushmaster Firearms, Inc.



On a personal note I don't think they should have given a dime to the families. They should have fought this to the bitter end for the very reason that this settlement was used against them and all gun makers. A very bad decision IMHO.

Last edited by rubberneck; 09-12-2004 at 07:59.
rubberneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2004, 08:32   #12
The Reaper
Quiet Professional
 
The Reaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Free Pineland
Posts: 24,821
RN:

Concur.

Give them nothing, and bleed them while you do.

TR
__________________
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat." - President Theodore Roosevelt, 1910

De Oppresso Liber 01/20/2025
The Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2004, 09:04   #13
Gypsy
Area Commander
 
Gypsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Midwest
Posts: 7,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubberneck
Their attempt to eliminate gun rights of citizens has failed legislatively and will continue to fail with these frivolous lawsuits against gun manufacturers.
Seems to me since they "settled" it will encourage others to come up with lawsuits such as this. Put blame where it belongs, on the shooters.
__________________
My Heroes wear camouflage.
Gypsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2004, 09:45   #14
Doc
Quiet Professional
 
Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Ohio
Posts: 982
Communism pure and simple. Look at their beliefs and goals and look at a communist state.

No God.

No weapons in the people's hands.

Socialist programs.

Really sad to see a company succumb to this litigation.

Doc
Doc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2004, 10:07   #15
Roguish Lawyer
Consigliere
 
Roguish Lawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Free Pineland (at last)
Posts: 8,841
I don't think anyone whould have paid that much unless they thought they had exposure for some reason. The fundamental problem here, as with most cases in the US, is that there are few penalties for bringing BS cases. If you sue and lose, you should pay the defendant's attorneys' fees unless it was a close case, IMO.

P.S. Doc: Nice avatar!
Roguish Lawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:53.



Copyright 2004-2022 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies