Mom sues Wal-Mart

[Eagle Eye]

This is a strange one. Mother sues Wal-mart because the store sold her a shot-gun, even though she had some sort of Mental Illness, and her prescription was filled at another Wal-mart store.

Wal-Mart is legaly not allowed to check prescriptions, and followd proper procedures.


http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/12/21/gu....ap/index.html

Seems strange to me that you can buy a gun at Wal-mart, I know this is Texas, it would just seem strange walking into Wal-mart to buy a gun.

[arsenal]

The american wal-marts sell everything. It is one stop shopping. I think even some of them in the northern states would sell guns as well. Hunting is a huge sport. They just don't sell them in Canadian wal-marts.


But besides that, this lawsuit is ######ed. There is no way that wal-mart can be held liable for selling someone a gun. Basically the same as suing a gas station for selling gas to someone that commits suicide by running the car in a garage.

Makes no sence, and should be thrown out of court.

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by arsenal@Dec 22 2004, 04:09 PM
The american wal-marts sell everything. It is one stop shopping. I think even some of them in the northern states would sell guns as well. Hunting is a huge sport. They just don't sell them in Canadian wal-marts.


But besides that, this lawsuit is ######ed. There is no way that wal-mart can be held liable for selling someone a gun. Basically the same as suing a gas station for selling gas to someone that commits suicide by running the car in a garage.

Makes no sence, and should be thrown out of court.

This is the old 'Do guns kill people or do people kill people' argument. While everyone is responsible for their own actions (including the mentally disabled?) if you put a gun in the hand of every person in North America, I'd surmise shooting incidents would go up. On the other hand, if you banned sales of handguns and tried to appropriate all of them, you might find shooting incidents trending downward.

The opposition that I've heard to this argument is that if one wants to kill another and guns aren't available, they'll simply use a knife, rope, pillow-case, etc. I don't really agree with this argument. A gun is an easy, impersonal way to hurt someone. A knife is bloody, hands on work. I gotta say, I'd sure pull a trigger easier than repeatedly stick a blade in some guy's stomach, but thats just me.

Seems obvious that handguns are a dumb idea, but now that they're everywhere, American's need 'protection' from other handgun wielders. Great cycle.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by arsenal@Dec 22 2004, 04:09 PM
The american wal-marts sell everything. It is one stop shopping. I think even some of them in the northern states would sell guns as well. Hunting is a huge sport. They just don't sell them in Canadian wal-marts.


But besides that, this lawsuit is ######ed. There is no way that wal-mart can be held liable for selling someone a gun. Basically the same as suing a gas station for selling gas to someone that commits suicide by running the car in a garage.

Makes no sence, and should be thrown out of court.

That is precisely why the mother will win the case. Everyone else but her and her daughter is liable for her actions, thats the way the world works now. No accountability.

[arsenal]

I just don't see how wal-mart is to blame here. Should Toyota be blamed for building a vehicle that kills someone? Or a Toyota dealership for selling the vehicle that killed someone?

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by arsenal@Dec 22 2004, 04:27 PM
I just don't see how wal-mart is to blame here. Should Toyota be blamed for building a vehicle that kills someone? Or a Toyota dealership for selling the vehicle that killed someone?

Should Nintendo be sued because some kid played it for 80 hours straight and messed up his thumb? Should Ford be sued because a dumbass left his kid in the car and suffocated because Ford doesn't make "warning devices" to let you know when you forget your child in a car? See where I'm going with this?

[Reaper]

This sounds like a case where the parents simply want someone to blame for their daughter's death.

Wal Mart followed the regulations for selling the gun. They are not at fault.

The daughter lied on the background check. You cannot blame anyone other than her for lying.

While the incident is terrible the parents will simply have to deal with it as a lawsuit will not bring their daughter back.

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by Frank the Tank@Dec 22 2004, 04:30 PM
Should Nintendo be sued because some kid played it for 80 hours straight and messed up his thumb? Should Ford be sued because a dumbass left his kid in the car and suffocated because Ford doesn't make "warning devices" to let you know when you forget your child in a car? See where I'm going with this?

I sure do. Why not sell automatic weapons and flamethrowers to the general public? Its not the weapons fault if they kill someone, its up to each of us, right? So whats the deal with not being allowed to possess tanks and bombs and stuff? Talk about restrictive legislation, right?

Pretty narrow view in my opinion to say that everyone is responsible for their own actions, all the time, completely ignoring the fact that business/media interests actively seek to mould and shape your choices on a continual basis. Assuming we all have 'free-will' outside of what we've been told by thousands of commercials, movies, tv shows, etc. might be erroneous.

Not to say we have no control at all, but to imply everyone has an equal shot at making the right or wrong decision may tend to ignore their upbringing and influences.

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by Agamemnon+Dec 22 2004, 04:36 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Agamemnon @ Dec 22 2004, 04:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Frank the Tank@Dec 22 2004, 04:30 PM
Should Nintendo be sued because some kid played it for 80 hours straight and messed up his thumb? Should Ford be sued because a dumbass left his kid in the car and suffocated because Ford doesn't make "warning devices" to let you know when you forget your child in a car? See where I'm going with this?

I sure do. Why not sell automatic weapons and flamethrowers to the general public? Its not the weapons fault if they kill someone, its up to each of us, right? So whats the deal with not being allowed to possess tanks and bombs and stuff? Talk about restrictive legislation, right?

Pretty narrow view in my opinion to say that everyone is responsible for their own actions, all the time, completely ignoring the fact that business/media interests actively seek to mould and shape your choices on a continual basis. Assuming we all have 'free-will' outside of what we've been told by thousands of commercials, movies, tv shows, etc. might be erroneous.

Not to say we have no control at all, but to imply everyone has an equal shot at making the right or wrong decision may tend to ignore their upbringing and influences. [/b][/quote]
Are you freaking joking? You're trying to say that you should be able to sue Tim Horton's because your coffee was hot? Sue McDonalds for making people fat? Sue a car company because they didn't have the vision to forsee your stupidity? Give me a frickin' break! TAKE RESPONSIBILITY! It has nothing to do with selling flame throwers or tanks, that an absurd comparison. I'm talking about common sense things here and the downfall of society due to peoples lack of morals and a spine.

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by Frank the Tank@Dec 22 2004, 04:50 PM
Are you freaking joking? You're trying to say that you should be able to sue Tim Horton's because your coffee was hot? Sue McDonalds for making people fat? Sue a car company because they didn't have the vision to forsee your stupidity? Give me a frickin' break! TAKE RESPONSIBILITY! It has nothing to do with selling flame throwers or tanks, that an absurd comparison. I'm talking about common sense things here and the downfall of society due to peoples lack of morals and a spine.

Can you believe that I'm not freaking joking?

Please explain away how a handgun is a 'common sense thing' and an automatic weapon isn't? You appear to be basically towing the (American) social line on that issue, with no real explanation.

I'm sure the gangsters who grow up in the hood, surrounded by violence and drugs, 'lack morals and a spine', and thats why they invariably end up incarcerated or dead (in many cases). Clearly that's their fault for lacking moral fibre, right?

[Frank the Tank]

Originally posted by Agamemnon+Dec 22 2004, 04:56 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Agamemnon @ Dec 22 2004, 04:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Frank the Tank@Dec 22 2004, 04:50 PM
Are you freaking joking? You're trying to say that you should be able to sue Tim Horton's because your coffee was hot? Sue McDonalds for making people fat? Sue a car company because they didn't have the vision to forsee your stupidity? Give me a frickin' break! TAKE RESPONSIBILITY! It has nothing to do with selling flame throwers or tanks, that an absurd comparison. I'm talking about common sense things here and the downfall of society due to peoples lack of morals and a spine.

Can you believe that I'm not freaking joking?

Please explain away how a handgun is a 'common sense thing' and an automatic weapon isn't? You appear to be basically towing the (American) social line on that issue, with no real explanation.

I'm sure the gangsters who grow up in the hood, surrounded by violence and drugs, 'lack morals and a spine', and thats why they invariably end up incarcerated or dead (in many cases). Clearly that's their fault for lacking moral fibre, right? [/b][/quote]
I'm not talking about gun control. I'm talking about a legal system that is so backwards that you can sue a company for making coffee hot, fast food joints for making people fat. We need to throw cases like this out before they even get started, but we don't, and we end up paying for it in the end. Thats all. Its too easy for people to say "its not my fault", when clearly, it is. I'm not talking about "the hood" or gangsters, I'm talking about stupid people in general.

[arsenal]

Originally posted by Agamemnon+Dec 22 2004, 09:56 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Agamemnon @ Dec 22 2004, 09:56 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Frank the Tank@Dec 22 2004, 04:50 PM
Are you freaking joking? You're trying to say that you should be able to sue Tim Horton's because your coffee was hot? Sue McDonalds for making people fat? Sue a car company because they didn't have the vision to forsee your stupidity? Give me a frickin' break! TAKE RESPONSIBILITY! It has nothing to do with selling flame throwers or tanks, that an absurd comparison. I'm talking about common sense things here and the downfall of society due to peoples lack of morals and a spine.

Can you believe that I'm not freaking joking?

Please explain away how a handgun is a 'common sense thing' and an automatic weapon isn't? You appear to be basically towing the (American) social line on that issue, with no real explanation.

I'm sure the gangsters who grow up in the hood, surrounded by violence and drugs, 'lack morals and a spine', and thats why they invariably end up incarcerated or dead (in many cases). Clearly that's their fault for lacking moral fibre, right? [/b][/quote]
No, its the parents fault. You are blaming the environment, when there are numerous cases of kids growing up in the "hood" that do not get involved with the gangs and drugs, becuase their parents cared.

Why isn't an automatic weapon a common sence thing? If i want to go out to the country, and rittle a gopher full of 5.56mm bullets, I should be allowed to.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally posted by Agamemnon+Dec 22 2004, 10:36 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Agamemnon @ Dec 22 2004, 10:36 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Frank the Tank@Dec 22 2004, 04:30 PM
Should Nintendo be sued because some kid played it for 80 hours straight and messed up his thumb? Should Ford be sued because a dumbass left his kid in the car and suffocated because Ford doesn't make "warning devices" to let you know when you forget your child in a car? See where I'm going with this?

I sure do. Why not sell automatic weapons and flamethrowers to the general public? Its not the weapons fault if they kill someone, its up to each of us, right? So whats the deal with not being allowed to possess tanks and bombs and stuff? Talk about restrictive legislation, right?

Pretty narrow view in my opinion to say that everyone is responsible for their own actions, all the time, completely ignoring the fact that business/media interests actively seek to mould and shape your choices on a continual basis. Assuming we all have 'free-will' outside of what we've been told by thousands of commercials, movies, tv shows, etc. might be erroneous.

Not to say we have no control at all, but to imply everyone has an equal shot at making the right or wrong decision may tend to ignore their upbringing and influences. [/b][/quote]
I gotta go with Frank on this one. Give me one good reason why someone shouldn't be responsible for their own actions, and I'm talking their own willing intentional actions.

Why should Wal-Mart be held responsible for this girl's death? Becasue they aren't mind readers who can tell that she is lying? Because they didn't break the law and check the lady's prescription, which I'm sure in most cases would just end up being birth control pills and food cream. How could anyone possibly know that checking someone's prescriptions is a good idea. Gee you look unstable, let's see what kind of pills you've been taking.

You think advertising/media/business have that much control over us that we can't even consider it free will? That's just sad. Do I eat at McDonalds? Yes. Does that mean they make me do it? No, I do it because I choose to. If you really think people are so weak that they can have their free will taken away by business/media intrests, then you must have a pretty depressing image of the world.

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by Frank the Tank@Dec 22 2004, 05:00 PM
I'm not talking about gun control. I'm talking about a legal system that is so backwards that you can sue a company for making coffee hot, fast food joints for making people fat. We need to throw cases like this out before they even get started, but we don't, and we end up paying for it in the end. Thats all. Its too easy for people to say "its not my fault", when clearly, it is. I'm not talking about "the hood" or gangsters, I'm talking about stupid people in general.

Well, Wal-Mart selling shotguns to suicidal people seem to bring this argument into the sphere of gun control, but I guess we don't agree on that. I'd suggest the problem lies in this girl gaining access to a gun. If Wal-Mart did everything required under current legislation, then maybe the legislation failed this girl and should be modified.

I also ask again, what's the difference between a handgun (apparently a common sense item) and an automatic weapon to you? Following your logic appears to give me license to a machine-gun. Are you p*ssed that you can't get one, or happy that legislation keeps those weapons off the street?

Interesting the sueing McDonalds comment, Supersize Me (which I assume many here have seen) is all about 2 girls suing McDonalds. That movie went a long way with me in debunking my 'freedom of choice' to eat/buy/do whatever I want. People are influenced by corporations nearly as much as their parents, if not moreso, depending on the corporation and parents.

[Resolute 14]

You are arguing from an idealist standpoint Agamemnon, not from reality.

Ideally, there is no need for handguns, automatic weapons and what not, but in the US, the rights and laws guaranteed by their constitution (as currently interpreted) make the ideal moot.

Besides, I am not sure what relevence your anti handgun rant has to do with this story, as the girl bought a shotgun.

As it is, this lawsuit is a joke. Part of their claim is that Walmart should have checked their own perscription records before selling her the gun. These idiotic parents are actually trying to hold Walmart at fault for not breaking federal law.

Walmart is also apparently at fault because the FBI has no information on mental health records because of Texas law.

Simply put, Walmart is not at fault here. They did everything they could legally do to ensure this girl could legally buy a gun. If these parents are so set on blaming everyone but the one person responsible for their daughters suicide, they should be challenging the state and federal laws.

But, I suppose it is easier to simply be greedy and go for the money rather than fight for a change that could possibly prevent a similar incident from happening again.

Screw these parents. I hope Walmart buries them.

[Agamemnon]

I gotta go with Frank on this one. Give me one good reason why someone shouldn't be responsible for their own actions, and I'm talking their own willing intentional actions.

If everyone is responsible for their own actions, then why doesn't the government allow them access to more dangerous weapons, like automatic guns? Because the government, while holding you responsible for your actions, also feels the need to protect people from themselves. Thats why they provide old age pension, unemployment insurance, healthcare, education, etc. Because individuals are NOT responsible for every aspect of their lives. The government holds many of your basic rights and needs as THEIR responsibility.

Wal-Mart probably shouldn't be responsible. If they did everything within the law, and the law failed this girl, then its probably the law's fault. You believe that nothing can be done, and these tragedies are just a side-effect of freedom? Pretty poor side effect from her point of view (or was).

And btw, if you seriously think you 'choose' to eat at McDonalds, actively and without unconscious bias thats been programmed into you, then I heartily disagree. If you go because its 'good', then you have terrible taste in food, and if you go because its 'cheap' or 'convenient', check out Safeways, they've got much better, healthier, equally convenient food. Maybe you go to McDonalds for other reasons... but I'm sure its because you just love their cooking so much, that must be it.

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by Snakeeye@Dec 22 2004, 05:21 PM
You are arguing from an idealist standpoint Agamemnon, not from reality.

Ideally, there is no need for handguns, automatic weapons and what not, but in the US, the rights and laws guaranteed by their constitution (as currently interpreted) make the ideal moot.

Besides, I am not sure what relevence your anti handgun rant has to do with this story, as the girl bought a shotgun.

As it is, this lawsuit is a joke. Part of their claim is that Walmart should have checked their own perscription records before selling her the gun. These idiotic parents are actually trying to hold Walmart at fault for not breaking federal law.

Walmart is also apparently at fault because the FBI has no information on mental health records because of Texas law.

Simply put, Walmart is not at fault here. They did everything they could legally do to ensure this girl could legally buy a gun. If these parents are so set on blaming everyone but the one person responsible for their daughters suicide, they should be challenging the state and federal laws.

But, I suppose it is easier to simply be greedy and go for the money rather than fight for a change that could possibly prevent a similar incident from happening again.

Screw these parents. I hope Walmart buries them.

Sounds good to me, I don't recall blaming Wal-Mart. I'm blaming the system. Legislation reform is not 'idealist', its happened many, many times in American history, and it will happen again. If you think the 'status quo' is the only 'reality' possible, thats pretty apathetic.

My 'anti-handgun rant' was brought in because I want to know where you guys stand on gun-control to find out where you think the 'problem' is here. Squarely on the parents, is what I'm hearing from you guys. Fair enough, I disagree

[Calgary Flames]

I can't believe they sell guns at Wal-Mart....

[arsenal]

Originally posted by SuperNilson@Dec 22 2004, 10:42 AM
I can't believe they sell guns at Wal-Mart....

They sell liqour and groceries too.

[Resolute 14]

It does make you wonder though. Their daughter was so troubled and sick, yet they werent paying close enough attention to what she was doing?

The question is, how do you value the right to confidentiality against the right to bear arms against the necessity for personal accountability?

I'm not saying nothing can or should be done, but that Walmart is not the right battleground. And that *IS* the parents fault.