it’s outrageous that the appeals court would overturn the trial court. sounds liike the gunshop followed the letter of the law. where is their negligence? let’s hope the suprme court sees it correctly: no liability.
Sadly, these things aren’t about liability anymore. They seem, more & more, to be about innocent families who suffer loss, needing compensation and finding anyone with a pocket to provide it.
I’m getting tired of hearing how insurance companies are liable committed torts. Insurance companies are not liable, the insured’s are, the comapanies merely pay on behalf under contract.
If he used a shotgun purchased by his grandmother, where is the liability of the gun shop. It looked like this guy was denied a gun by 2 other gun shops. He didn’t buy the one he used, the grandmother did.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
it’s outrageous that the appeals court would overturn the trial court. sounds liike the gunshop followed the letter of the law. where is their negligence? let’s hope the suprme court sees it correctly: no liability.
Sadly, these things aren’t about liability anymore. They seem, more & more, to be about innocent families who suffer loss, needing compensation and finding anyone with a pocket to provide it.
I’m getting tired of hearing how insurance companies are liable committed torts. Insurance companies are not liable, the insured’s are, the comapanies merely pay on behalf under contract.
If he used a shotgun purchased by his grandmother, where is the liability of the gun shop. It looked like this guy was denied a gun by 2 other gun shops. He didn’t buy the one he used, the grandmother did.