Should WalMart be sued for selling ammo that was later used for MURDER?
 

Lawsuit: Wal-Mart sold ammo used in 3 killings

The victims' families are saying Walmart sold ammo to a guy who was a) underaged and b) drunk.

What do you guys think?

Underage and drunk? Somebody should be sued.

No </thread>

Of course not. Attorney's just looking for a deep pocket.


.

How is Walmart supposed to know the intent of a purchaser or control them?

It's a stupid question.

Hell no...

Yes and yes.

No more than car manufactures should be sued when cars are in accidents, or alcohol companies when people do something drunk and stupid.

Gee I wonder why the victim's families legal counsel are looking at suing Walmart...

should artificial sweetner companies be sued when you get cancer?? :2 cents::2 cents:
sued when you have a goose egg head child? cause you bought a house with lead paint. nuff said

If they were underage then that should fall on Walmart for not checking their I.D.

Yes, and then they should be sued for selling candy and sugar too under the same logic. And ladders. And nails. Et al

Absolutely not. Slippery slope. What next? Suing car dealers for selling cars to people with suspended licenses?

Absurd...

I don't recally care.

On one hand, even if there are age restrictions on buying ammo, the most they are guilty of is breaking the law by selling ammo to a minor. They didn't sell him ammo knowing he was going to shoot and kill someone.

On the other hand, fuck it - Wal Mart has some deep pockets and can afford it.

If Walmart was negligent by selling to a.minor then sure they have a case. :2 cents:

If he was under age then yes they have a liability there.. If a adult buys it and shoots people, then no..

Wal-Mart employees in Easton were negligent in selling .38-caliber ammunition to 20-year-old Robert Jordain, failing to ensure he was at least 21 as required by law, the suit said.

The ammunition that Jordain bought could have been used in either a handgun or a rifle, and "the law allows for rifle ammunition to be purchased by someone 18 years of age," Randy Hargrove, the chain's director of national media relations, said in a statement.

Good call:thumbsup
Marlin Model 1894C

No call, I quoted from article.

If they were drunk and underage (didn't check ID) that sounds pretty negligent to me.

Ok.. Fuck that he was 20 years old.. I do not now nor did I ever agree with age limits for shit after you are 18. IMO if you are old enough to go die for your country, then you are old enough to drink or do anything that currently requires you to be 21.

You are either a adult or you aren't.. IMO not letting people drink or do what ever until they are 21 is a violation of their rights and age discrimation.. Yet not a single elected offical will ever try to change that..

When they said under age I thought they meant like 16 or 17..

idiotic thread

It really has nothing to do with Walmart, or Walmart's "deep pockets". It's about legal precedent, and how it could leave a clusterfuck in its wake. There will be so many new lawsuits citing Dumbass V. Walmart as case precedent. We already live in a litigious society, and this would have piece of shit civil attorney's licking their greedy little chops. :disgust

Most likely not.

Foreseeability is one key factor in tort law.

I am 54 and when I buy beer in a Tennessee Walmart they card me. The must card everyone. In Florida if you appear to be less than 40.

Seems that they can program ammo into the system the same way BUT iof you think the NRA would put up with IDing everyone with ammo you don't know the craziness of the NRA.

As for drunk. They are not trained for that and what of they sold a tire iron, axe or knife to a drunk person?

Walmart should start IDing ammo buyers buyt then again, what if you reload your own ammo? ID for the machine? Mold? Lead?

I think the underage and impaired judgement portion is what could make them civilly and criminally screwed. Under normal circumstances, I'd say no way. But I'm betting that at the very least, selling ammunition to a minor opens them up to a lawsuit.

god knows who is guilty here

The shooter is the only guilty one here.


.

Should OP be sued for selling writing that gives every man erectile dysfunction?

nawwwwwwwww, its America :2 cents:

Libtards don't believe in personal responsibility.

I get ID'd every time I buy ammo. I should sue for that.

so a cam girl gets raped and murdered.. you should be sued because you run the cam platform... good enough for Walmart, good enough for you. :2 cents:

When they sue for making cars, knives, pens and axes.. these items kil a hell of a lot of people too..


Dont even get me started about alcohol.

If a bar sell alcohol to someone 20 years old and they crash and kill someone,,,,,

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Should Mc Donalds be sued for selling a Big Mac combo to an obese teen who later dies of a stroke?

No...........

Walmart shouldn't be liable at all...but that's one hell of a false equivalency. A bullet can kill you in an instant. If you throw a Big Mac at someone's head, the worst case scenario is cleaning up the lettuce and mayo.

That is like saying car dealers should be liable when a drunk driver kills someone.

people need cars to get from place to place. You can try to drive to work on an AR15, but you won't get out of the driveway.

Public transportation.

Good point.

If that's the truth then yes

no 2345678