Idiot sueing Ruger

[GunnyGene]

Idiot shoots self with Old Model BH, and blames Ruger. Excellent penetration tho! Y'all who poo-poo the .41 take note :wink: :lol: . I wonder what ammo he was using?

He'll probably lose the suit.

Sturm, Ruger & Company has been named in a personal injury case for retaining a “firing mechanism design that was over 100 years old” over more improved designs that could have prevented an accidental discharge.

Shannon Wayne Garrison, of Morgan County, Alabama, filed the suit in a Birmingham federal court in September for compensatory and punitive damages because of an injury he suffered two years ago.

According to the complaint, Garrison was injured on Sept. 21, 2014, when his .41-caliber Ruger Blackhawk revolver accidentally hit the ground and discharged.

Leading up to the incident, Garrison was checking game cameras at a hunting club in nearby Winston County. At the time, he had on his hip a handgun that was un-cocked with the hammer in the full-down position and one round was in each of the six chambers.

While riding an All Terrain Vehicle on uneven and bumpy ground, a small bump “jarred the ATV causing the subject firearm to fall out of his holster,” the lawsuit says. When the gun hit the ground, it discharged and the bullet struck Garrison’s ankle.

After getting shot, Garrison fell off the ATV and onto the ground. He tried to call 911 on his cell phone, but could not find signal. He managed to climb back on to his ATV and return to his truck. He then drove a few miles out to a nearby residence where he called 911. A short time later, emergency personnel responded and Garrison was airlifted to a hospital in Huntsville.

The lawsuit says the bullet traveled through his calf, hamstring, groin, stomach and midsection before stopping just inches away from his heart, where it remains lodged. As a result of his injuries, he needed multiple surgeries and extensive medical treatment. He’s also developed painful medical complications and emotional stress.

The lawsuit alleges Ruger retained dated technology for the Blackhawk design instead of updating it with a modern firing mechanism that would have prevented the gun from discharging if dropped.

More: http://www.guns.com/2016/09/29/ruger-blackhawk-subject-of-personal-injury-case/?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=57ece17104d30166569c4bac&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook

 

[DeletedMember275]

So, he ignores Ruger's FREE transfer bar conversion offer, then loads all six chambers in his old model, when everyone with half a brain knows that you should leave the hammer down on an empty chamber, plus he's using a holster with no retention device (strap or hammer thong) and drops his gun and shoots himself, and Ruger is responsible? He should also sue his parents for giving birth to, and raising, an idiot.

 

[contender]

For all of us who dislike the NM action over the OM action, who hate the "billboard warning label", or who choose to ignore the free transfer bar upgrade,,,,, we can at least smile a little bit now.
Why?
Because of all this, the guy will likely lose the lawsuit.
The only lawsuit Bill ever lost was over the NM design. A judge ruled that Bill knew he had a defective design when he built the NM. So, along came the safety transfer bar upgrade, offered for free, and HUGELY advertised, as well as the addition of the billboard warnings.
It may cost Ruger a bit in legal fees to answer this suit, but in the long run, the guy will likely lose.

Of course,,, a good lawyer will know this & hope to get Ruger to "settle" instead of going to trial. I hope they refuse to settle, go to mediation, with Ruger's lawyers calmly sitting rock solid, hoping for a trial to show how this guy ignored a proper education on how to load a gun of that design, AND how to properly retain it in a correct type of holster to where it couldn't fall out.

So, while I am also one of the guys who totally prefers an OM action over the NM action, and who thinks the billboard is ugly,,, I've chosen to live with all of that if it keeps us in Rugers & allows them to defend themselves against stupidity.

Hey, maybe the lawyers for both sides will look at this Forum, see these posts, and use it as part of their research for their case.

 

[Sugar River]

I'd wager Ruger will settle out of court. Litigation is just too expensive.

 

[BearBio]

Attorney is likely figuring on getting a "symbolic" or "token" decision of $1.00 in damages (and Ruger will have to pay thousands in his fees). Poor idiot who shot himself won't get anything.

ps: Ever hear of safety straps on holsters?

 

[s4s4u]

Sturm, Ruger & Company has been named in a personal injury case for retaining a “firing mechanism design that was over 100 years old” over more improved designs that could have prevented an accidental discharge.

Hammer down on an empty cylinder as is suggested would have preventeed an accidental discharge. What a maroon.

 

[Dan in MI]

The lawsuit alleges Ruger retained dated technology for the Blackhawk design instead of updating it with a modern firing mechanism that would have prevented the gun from discharging if dropped.

If that's how the lawsuit is written he already lost. They did recognize it and produce an updated version as well as a conversion for older products. He's got nothing

 

[hunter966]

But the main question is: Did the gun sustain any scratches, dents, or dings during the fall?

 

[DeletedMember275]

But the main question is: Did the gun sustain any scratches, dents, or dings during the fall?

And, is it for sale?

 

[Jimbo357mag]

I like my 'New Model' single-actions. They are fool proof.
How this guy managed to shoot himself with an 'old model' is beyond dumb. :D

 

[Chuck 100 yd]

I read a two million dollar lawsuit ,resulting from a poacher loading his SBH inside a truck at night and shooting himself in the leg ,is what prompted Bill to design theNM in the first place.
What an idiot. He shot himself. Neither the gun nor Ruger did it !

 

[daveg.inkc]

That had to be a flat point jacketed. Or maybe a Keith style cast

 

[P89DC]

OP's kinda harsh, I never rejoice and trash talk about such a serious injury and no matter the outcome I am sorry for the injuries. Watch out, Gunny, karma is a 8itch.

Just because these suits were losers a couple of decades ago doesn't mean they might not work today. In any case they serve the Left's narrative and you can be sure the lawsuit is funded by Bloomberg et al. Hillary is running her mouth about not being able to sue gun manufacturers. I assume the latest crop of judges are more sympathetic to driving Ruger out of business via the tort system....

 

[Rclark]

<Sigh> It is all someone else's fault. That's the mantra we hear today in just about everything. Failure in life/business, being poor, discrimination, race, accident, bad grades, climate, etc... Always, Someone else's fault and's gotta pay....

And I have to agree, with the sue happy society we live in, he may actually have a slim chance. Liberal/socialist Democrats get their wedge in. If should have never been accepted by the court in the first place... Just like hot coffee, or you name frivolous lawsuits.

 

[SC-REBEL]

The lawyer needs to wake up and sue the holster manufacturer as well as the atv manufacturer.

 

[CraigC]

ps: Ever hear of safety straps on holsters?

A properly fitted holster doesn't even really need one.

 

[woodperson]

"Just because these suits were losers a couple of decades ago doesn't mean they might not work today. In any case they serve the Left's narrative and you can be sure the lawsuit is funded by Bloomberg et al. Hillary is running her mouth about not being able to sue gun manufacturers. I assume the latest crop of judges are more sympathetic to driving Ruger out of business via the tort system."

Unfortunately, this!

And he might get backing from antigun sources to keep the suit alive. Any judicial way to attack a gun manufacturer... And as an argument for gun registration, for safety, so they could do a forced recall on the unsafe ones like this one.

He may be be an idiot in gun handling but the lawsuit might be a smart move for him.

 

[P89DC]

I don't know the particulars, if the injured owner inherited the three-screw he might not have know the dangers. As more new owners get into single actions I expect a rise in these dropped discharges.

One reason I hesitate to buy a three screw is the idea if I die suddenly the gun may end up in inexperienced hands and they might make the same mistake. Stupid on my part, perhaps. OTOH, I've seen too many sad things over the years and I don't want to add another.

 

[48flyer]

One reason I hesitate to buy a three screw is the idea if I die suddenly the gun may end up in inexperienced hands and they might make the same mistake. Stupid on my part, perhaps. OTOH, I've seen too many sad things over the years and I don't want to add another.

This is ridiculous thinking. By that same logic, you've never parted with a used car, because the next owner might drink and drive, and end up killing someone? :roll:

 

[GunnyGene]

"There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."
- Will Rogers.

 

[gtxmonte]

Since Ruger addressed this issue 40 years ago, I have a hard time believing this guy has a chance. I think they are likely just hoping Ruger offers SOMETHING to make him go away. This would be like suing Ford because you crashed your 70s Ford and went through the windshield because it has no airbags

 

[P89DC]

This is ridiculous thinking. By that same logic, you've never parted with a used car, because the next owner might drink and drive, and end up killing someone? :roll:

Would you put your pregnant daughter or wife in a rear-wheel drive van without ABS, no airbags, in the winter with icy roads? Older Aerostar vans are set up that way, I used to have one and I was pretty good at keeping it on the Michigan roads but many people failed. I see that as similar to a three-screw that requires special knowledge compared to any modern handgun.

 

[z1r]

This is ridiculous thinking. By that same logic, you've never parted with a used car, because the next owner might drink and drive, and end up killing someone? :roll:

Would you put your pregnant daughter or wife in a rear-wheel drive van without ABS, no airbags, in the winter with icy roads? Older Aerostar vans are set up that way, I used to have one and I was pretty good at keeping it on the Michigan roads but many people failed. I see that as similar to a three-screw that requires special knowledge compared to any modern handgun.

So, in that case, are you as a father at fault, or is Ford?

While ABS is standard equipment nowadays, when it was introduced it was an "upgrade." Just because technology and consumer demands evolve, doesn't mean the original product had a defect.

 

[Geoff Timm]

If I am elected to congress (After I win the lotto the second time) I will spend 1/2 my staffs time finding stupid Federal Judges and writing bills of impeachment. I start with the vicious discrimination where a Supreme Court full of Harvard Lawyers finds in favor of other Harvard Lawyers again and again etc.
Geoff
Who is a mean motor scooter.

 

[DPris]

I would find the idea of depriving myself of my three prized custom Colt Peacemakers, because of the thought that some intellectually-challenged future owner after I die may possibly render himself a couple toes short, utterly ludicrous.

If I wanted, or owned, a 3-screw Blackhawk, exactly the same.

P89, I mean no offense, but your reasoning is extremely flawed.
If you extend it only slightly, you'd never buy a gun at all because of the remote possibility that some successor owner at some point, somewhere down the line, may injure somebody with it, somehow.
Denis

 

[mohavesam]

Did this guy not understand that the ATV could hit a bump?

Alabama. - says a lot.

 

[gtxmonte]

Did this guy not understand that the ATV could hit a bump?

Alabama. - says a lot.

Stupid people in every state. I am sure Arizona has plenty as well

 

[powder smoke]

This is ridiculous thinking. By that same logic, you've never parted with a used car, because the next owner might drink and drive, and end up killing someone? :roll:

Would you put your pregnant daughter or wife in a rear-wheel drive van without ABS, no airbags, in the winter with icy roads? Older Aerostar vans are set up that way, I used to have one and I was pretty good at keeping it on the Michigan roads but many people failed. I see that as similar to a three-screw that requires special knowledge compared to any modern handgun.

Depends, here in Maine my road is covered with ice at least 3 mo. a year. the hard
pack quickly turns to ice. You learn quickly how to drive on ice.
It is NOT the manufactures
responsibility to educate a person of the proper handling of a 40 year old handgun.
Same with the state of Maine teaching folks to drive on ice!!. When I purchase a firearm
new to me I MAKE IT A POINT TO LEARN SAFE PRACTICES. that is YOUR responsibility NO ONE ELSES.. Lawyers are seeing dollar signs. ps

 

[s4s4u]

Alabama. - says a lot.

Seriously? :roll:

 

[Rclark]

When I purchase a firearm new to me I MAKE IT A POINT TO LEARN SAFE PRACTICES. that is YOUR responsibility NO ONE ELSES.

Pretty much what I would say. When a new gun is acquired (inherited, gunshow find, brand new, etc.), you learn about it and know exactly how it works and intended to be used and is it functioning correctly before you shoot it. That is your responsibility. Now, if the barrel falls off on the first shot, not your responsibility. It really is in your best interest to get an understanding of a tool that is intended to be used to kill something including yourself. There are so many 'resources' available now there is no excuse for unsafe practices or usage. Darwin missed an opportunity here, and it doesn't look like he learned anything as he is blaming the gun for his own misfortune. Pleading Ignorant is no excuse.