Family of Uzi Shooter sues

[57Coastie]

Purplehood says,

"- You take risks shooting a weapon."

So true, Purplehood. A lawyer might call this "assumption of risk." But I suggest that we must take care that our readers do not willy-nilly apply this standard to an 8-year old child. I am of course not saying that you have, I know you better than that, but I don't have such confidence in the judgment of some of our other readers.

C-dub asks,

"Didn't or wouldn't the father have signed a hold harmless agreement? I can't believe that the range would have let any shoot full autos without it."

Possibly. I have fired at ranges some of which had one sign (a usually poorly drafted) hold harmless agreement, and at others which did not. I have before me at the moment one which takes a stab at my assuming liability for personal injury, but has no mention of my doing so for injury done to a child for which I am parent or guardian.

Regardless of whether or not such an agreement signed by the parent exists here I would, knowing what little I know about this case, question its efficacy. Should one signed by the minor himself be produced it would be useless. I don't even recall the state in which this happened, and of course do not know its law, but even in that case I will stand by my opinion here.

With respect,

Jim

[particle]

http://www.nraila.org/statelawpdfs/TXSL.pdf

It is unlawful to knowingly sell, rent, give or offer to sell, rent or give any firearm to a person under 18 years of age, without the written consent of his parent or guardian.

I'm no lawyer, and don't care to dig around the web to find laws relating to what "jobs" a 15 year old is allowed to do. However, if the family of the boy paid money to rent the firearm for "30 rounds", or something to that effect, then it could be argued that the 15 year old was engaged in a hazardous employment that endangered his safety, health, or well-being. In that case, the parent of the 15 year old could be held liable. But, like I said, I'm no lawyer and I don't know if this even applies in this situation.

http://www.twc.state.tx.us/ui/lablaw/cllsum.html

A child who is 14 or 15 years of age may NOT be employed in:
5) Occupations which the Secretary of Labor may, pursuant to Section 3(l) of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Reorganization Plan No. 2, issued pursuant to the Reorganization Act of 1945, find and declare to be hazardous for the employment of minors between 16 and 18 years of age or detrimental to their health or well-being;

Bottom line, in my opinion, the owners of the shooting range should not have allowed a minor to act in a supervisory role.

The owner of the Uzi should have known the dangers of recoil and taken preventative measures to protect the 8 year old - and/or ANY person they allow to handle their firearm. For example, they could have loaded one or two rounds at a time into the magazine to see how the boy handled the recoil, and also to let ANY/ALL shooters get a feel for the recoil the first time they shoot the gun. Heck, the first time I shot a 1911 I loaded one round in the magazine because I didn't know what to expect regarding recoil from the .45.

The 8yr old's dad should have played the role of Parent/Guardian and taken measures to insure the boy's safety, as well as the safety of those around him. He could have stood behind him and helped hold the gun.

In the end, the boy shot himself, and we are all responsible for our own actions. Since the boy was not enough to be legally considered responsible for his actions, his parents are tasked with that responsibility. So, it was dad's fault the boy shot himself, and if he wants to sue someone, he should sue himself.

[surprise_i'm_armed]

57coastie:

This incident happened in Western Massachusetts.

The dead boy and his doctor dad are from Connecticut.

SIA

[dsim]

From this article...http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/1 ... 51732.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The boy's family claims the gun was defective and unreasonably dangerous,

If it was so dangerous, why did dad let him fire it? I cant buy into this at all especially when another article describing the incident says dad was supporting his son from behind when it happened.

[marksiwel]

dont forget this Machine gun shoot, was organized by the local sheriff.
Dont hand short barreled Automatic weapons to Minors.
Machine guns are 18+ and up.

Really its just a freak accident, but seeing as its Mass someone will get some money. I cant believe the FAMILY is suing though. Its their darn fault they lost their child. They should be ashamed to even show their face, not suing over their stupidity

[Tha_Veteran]