Parents leave a loaded gun laying around for their untrained children to find. The ignorant babysitter shoots one of the kids while trying to unload it, that is, not knowing what he was doing, and instead of just carefully putting it out of reach until the parents returned, HE PULLED THE TRIGGER.
The solution?
Steal the gun maker's property.
I guess he figured paying a ransom was the cheapest way to replace it.
If there is one urgent message that needs to get out to our countrymen, the majority of whom prove time and again to be libertards, it is that juries have a right to judge not just the facts, but also the law. And if they do it discreetly, there's not a damned thing the state can do about it.
Tags: gun control, lawsuit
Friday, January 20, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
"...paralyzed by one of his guns."
"...when he was shot by a .38-caliber gun..."
It simply amazes me how carefully the article is worded to project all the blame on the "gun". Are we 2A supporters the only ones to notice this blatant bias? Can you imagine how ridiculous this article would sound if you substituted "gun" with "car"?
There's not one mention of the negligence of the parents or babysitter. Did the barrel of the gun some how magically point (on its own) toward the kid while the brain-dead babysitter was attempting to unload it?
The parents were the primary responsible parties (they chose to own that particular gun, then left it available to minors) and the babysitter was just..well...stupid.
How much prison time did the parents serve?
It really is too bad that this case seems to have occured prior to the defense of lawful commerce law being enacted.
I can't imagine based on the article how the gun maker was at fault.
Judging by the story, the baby sitter had to point the loaded weapon at the child.
She violated 3 out of the 4 gun safety rules.
Rule # 1
All guns are loaded.
She seemed OK on this one.
Rule # 2
Never let the muzzle of a gun point at anything you do not want to destroy or kill.
Clearly She blew this one BIG TIME!
Rule # 3
Keep your finger straight and off the trigger.
I'm pretty sure she screwed up on this one, cosidering it was a revolver.
Rule # 4
Be absolutely sure
of your target, and
what is behind it.
And she blew it on this one too.
Goes to show you violate 3 of the 4 Col.'s rules and bad things happen.
I wrote an e-mail to the writer at the Orlando-Sentinel. Here's the original e-mail and the response:
Ms. Lelis-
I found your article very disturbing.
I discovered two sentences that are worded such that the gun is no longer an
inanimate object. The gun, in fact, receives all the blame as if it were a
person responsible for his/her actions.
"...paralyzed by one of his guns."
"...when he was shot by a .38-caliber gun..."
Can you imagine how ridiculous this article would sound if you substituted
"gun" with "car"? How often do we read about cars killing or injuring people
in accidents involving drunk drivers?
At no point in your article did I see any mention of complete negligence on
the part of the parents or the babysitter. I blame the babysitter for
injuring Brandon Maxfield. In order for Maxfield to have been shot, the
barrel of the gun had to have been pointed at him! The braindead babysitter
broke all the rules of handling a loaded gun properly. He should of simply
picked it up and placed it in a safe location until the parents returned
home.
The other part of the article that confuses me is how the gun went off. Even
with a "Saturday night speical" I find it difficult to believe that the gun
fired simply by manipulating the safety. The trigger must have been pulled.
Again, the clueless babysitter broke another cardinal rule of gun safety and
Brandon Maxfield paid the price for the babysitter's negligence.
Thank you.
*************
Dear Mr. ...,
I did not cover the California lawsuit, but from reading the court records,
the jury did find liability against the babysitter and the parents, the gun
distribution company and even the pawnshop that sold the gun to the parents.
The whole verdict was $51 million. However, the way the verdict was
apportioned, $24 million was assigned to Jennings and his companies (as
designer, manufacturer and distributor). I do not know why it was
apportioned that way, but that was a decision by the jury, who heard all the
evidence and the details. The trial took 36 days and the jury deliberated
for 8 days.
My understanding is that the jury verdict has been upheld by an appellate
court.
From what I read in the court records, Brandon was sitting across the room
from the babysitter when the babysitter tried to unload the weapon and the
shooting happened.
This is direct from a court summary ('He' and Morford in this section refer
to the babysitter): "Due to the redesign, he was forced to move the safety
from the "safe" to the "fire" position. With the safety now set to "fire",
the pistol discharged when the slide slipped from Morford's hand, injecting
a cartridges into the empty chamber and he accidentally grasped the
trigger."
I hope this answers your questions. If you have any further questions,
please feel free to email me.
Ludmilla Lelis
Staff writer/Daytona Beach bureau
Orlando Sentinel
501 N. Grandview Ave., Ste. 302
Daytona Beach, FL 32118
Post a Comment