gun shop employee shoots customer in the back

aarondhgraham said:
This is a great post,,,
I can't believe the vehemence towards the employee,,,
You guys are treating him as if he came in off the street shooting on purpose.
Click to expand...

Quirk of human nature.

Studies of real juries have found that punishment for an act is strongly correlated with results rather than intent.

Seems almost like a "Well, duh!" statement until you think deeper.

Scenario borrowed from a study:

What if someone tried to kill a "friend" who they believe is allergic to peanuts by putting peanut dust in their salad but it turns out that the friend is NOT allergic to peanuts but IS allergic to poppy seeds, which were not part of the recipe but put there put there by the restaurant employee who thought they were, and the person dies.

Which person should be punished and how much?

What about a person who drive with a BAC of .40 and makes it home (by sheer "luck") without incident but another who drives with a BAC .09 causes a wreck and kills a mom and her child?

Mr Plastered gets lucky and no charge at all. Mr Barely Illegal gets 20 years. Both by pure "luck".

Mr Gun Shop employee just ruined his life, doing something that's been done 1,000,000 times before by untold thousands of people, who just by pure luck, didn't happen to kill/shoot anyone.
 
Mr Gun Shop employee just ruined his life, doing something that's been done 1,000,000 times before by untold thousands of people, who just by pure luck, didn't happen to kill/shoot anyone.
Click to expand...

One could argue that it is not just by "pure luck". "Bummer dude, who knew that there was a shark in the water. Sorry about your foot... Hang five dude!"

For some reason, maybe just "pure luck", I haven't managed to kill/injure anyone with either: peanuts, poppy seeds, an automobile when drunk, or a firearm while attempting to unload same.

Or then again...

Perhaps it has to do with something other than "pure luck"...
 
Point being that many others have done the same stupid things and not killed someone "by pure luck".

I'm not talking about NOT doing those things, I'm talking about the people who have done the same exact things and simply not shot someone. No one seems to want them drawn and quartered, yet they did the exact same things, there just wasn't someone standing in the way of their bullet.
 
yet they did the exact same things, there just wasn't someone standing in the way of their bullet.
Click to expand...

That really is the crux of the problem now, isn't it?

Not that I am advocating irresponsibility in any way shape or form, actually exactly the opposite; however, it is when "the damage is done" that does seem to "practically matter".

I will continue to promote and practice safe gun handling, and will also continue to be thankful for not being shot in the back at my local gun shop. (But, even there I generally don't turn my back on anyone handling a gun just brought into the store or handling a firearm in an unsafe manner; I have walked out of a number of such situations, after mentioning muzzle direction.)

"Bad Luck" is just the timing of when it happens, the bad choices/behaviors allow luck the opportunity to do so.
 
Azak said:
"Bad Luck" is just the timing of when it happens, the bad choices/behaviors allow luck the opportunity to do so.
Click to expand...

Exactly, yet we promote dramatically different punishments for the exact same behavior based on nothing more than the "timing" or "bad luck" of when it took place.

I'm not condoning or suggesting anything, I just find it thought provoking, how the guy who engaged in the identical "stupidness" but who was lucky enough that there was only wall in the way of his bullet, gets off scot-free while the guy who was UNLucky enough to have someone standing where his bullet went, gets drawn and quartered.

Both were stupid, neither missed or hit someone on purpose. Both could have killed someone, one does, one does not. One goes to jail, the other does not.
 
Exactly, yet we promote dramatically different punishments for the exact same behavior
Click to expand...

Is it possible that the gun store employee/"professional" should be held to a higher standard?

Even in the same breath stating that "everyone" should follow the 4 rules.

My dad taught me at an early age that, "life is not fair." But, he also told me that, "you do pretty much see what you look for."

Sometimes we get to learn from our mistakes, sometimes the consequences are far too severe for a "do over".
 
Is it possible that the gun store employee/"professional" should be held to a higher standard?
Click to expand...
I think it's necessary. I trust my mechanic not to drive my car into a raised lift or smoke a cigar while he's cleaning the fuel injectors. Likewise, I'd expect someone who handles firearms to be able to do so competently and safely.
 
I'd proffer a judge and jury would agree with you. While we don't have a lot of the fact pattern here, a civil action for negligence would have a high chance of success.

If I were on the jury, depending on that fact pattern I'm going to default to a high percentage of fault to the employee/store (store for not properly training and overssing their employees).
 
Azak said:
Is it possible that the gun store employee/"professional" should be held to a higher standard?
Click to expand...

Maybe so.

Still begs the question of what to do when two John Q Public do the same thing though.

Azak said:
Sometimes we get to learn from our mistakes, sometimes the consequences are far too severe for a "do over".
Click to expand...

Yes indeed.

I suppose that's where "common sense" is supposed to come in, which I define as the ability to apply lessons learned from other unrelated or disassociated circumstances to a new circumstance.

Lack thereof creating these "too severe for a do-over" situations.
 
and getting to your last part...not real sure why this keeps being compared to cars but since you asked....if it is an accident, no I don't expect to be charged unless I was texting, drunk, etc.
 
ypungunz4life said:
and getting to your last part...not real sure why this keeps being compared to cars but since you asked....if it is an accident, no I don't expect to be charged unless I was texting, drunk, etc.
Click to expand...
Which gets us back to my post.

Unless there was an unknown mechanical defect with the firearm that caused the discharge, this was not an "accidental" discharge, it was a "negligent" discharge. The fact that it undoubtedly wasn't intentional does not make it less negligent. If it were intentional, we wouldn't be debating "accidental" or "negligent," we'd be discussing assault with a deadly weapon, and possibly attempted murder.
 
it does seem the indvidual was way in the wrong BUT

Who should we blame other than the person who pulled the trigger?
Click to expand...

sometimes no one is to blame in a tragic accident. It remains to be seen how the incident is conclusively labeled. Brian made a good point about how the same exact incident could have been looked upon if the bullet missed this individual as close as it could have come to hitting him.
 
"[Unless there was an unknown mechanical defect with the firearm that caused the discharge, this was not an "accidental" discharge, it was a "negligent" discharge]"


Exactly, If the firearm is in great shape it was a ND, No and if or buts.

Not to get of track, Anyone tacking bets on the kind of gun- Black one
would be my guess ; )

Y/D
 
Well, after just having taken my M&P to a name brand sports store to get a sight installed, I have to say my opinion is even stronger. I was swept by my old gun by two employees multiple times. The first one looked at me strangely when I flinched and acting strangely when I told him why. Even though I knew it was empty and showed the first employee, the wanton waving was incredibly disturbing.

Even my youngest daughter, who believes the purpose of pistols is to annihilate old pumpkins with extreme prejudice, knows not to do that.
 
I feel your pain

Even my youngest daughter, who believes the purpose of pistols is to annihilate old pumpkins with extreme prejudice, knows not to do that.
Click to expand...

I agree with you zinc. Even persons without any firearms knowledge know not to do this. I have seen it happen at gun shops multiple times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top