quote:

Three students were shot to death a year ago at an Ohio high school because the killer's parents, guardians and uncle failed to keep the gun away from him, the dead students' families claim in court.

Daniel Parmertor, Russell King Jr. and Demetrius Hewlin were shot to death in the Chardon High School cafeteria on Feb. 27, 2012. Three other students were wounded.

T.J. Lane III, then 17, shot them with his uncle's .22 caliber pistol, according to the complaint. One day short of a year after the killing, Lane pleaded guilty to three counts of aggravated murder, two counts of attempted aggravated murder and one count of felonious assault.

In exchange for his plea, prosecutors agreed not to seek the death penalty. He is expected to be sentenced to life in prison.

The families of the three people he killed sued Lane, his natural parents, his grandparents - who are also his custodial guardians - and his uncle John Bruening, in Lake County Court of Common Pleas....

The complaint states.

quote:

On or about February 27, 2012, defendant Lane, entered the Chardon High School cafeteria with a firearm he had obtained from his uncle, defendant John Bruening.

At that time, Lane shot Daniel Parmertor, Russell King Jr., and Demetrius Hewlin, all of whom were sitting in the cafeteria either eating breakfast or waiting for a bus to take them to a local vocational school. Defendant Lane shot three other students who survived the assault.

Defendant Lane fired a total of ten (10) rounds of ammunition from defendant John Bruening's firearm at close range at the plaintiffs.

The families seek compensatory and punitive damages for wrongful death, negligent supervision, parental statutory liability, and loss of consortium.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto


Should the gun owner be treated the same way if they allow someone (like a family member who is a minor) to use their gun to commit a crime?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I would think it would have to be proven the family knew he was a danger. In the case of a bartender, that person is "aiding and abetting" by continuing to give the patron more alcohol. Seems to be the families would have to prove the same with the gun, as in knowing he had these plans and doing nothing about it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto

quote:

Three students were shot to death a year ago at an Ohio high school because the killer's parents, guardians and uncle failed to keep the gun away from him, the dead students' families claim in court.

Daniel Parmertor, Russell King Jr. and Demetrius Hewlin were shot to death in the Chardon High School cafeteria on Feb. 27, 2012. Three other students were wounded.

T.J. Lane III, then 17, shot them with his uncle's .22 caliber pistol, according to the complaint. One day short of a year after the killing, Lane pleaded guilty to three counts of aggravated murder, two counts of attempted aggravated murder and one count of felonious assault.

In exchange for his plea, prosecutors agreed not to seek the death penalty. He is expected to be sentenced to life in prison.

The families of the three people he killed sued Lane, his natural parents, his grandparents - who are also his custodial guardians - and his uncle John Bruening, in Lake County Court of Common Pleas....

The complaint states.

quote:

On or about February 27, 2012, defendant Lane, entered the Chardon High School cafeteria with a firearm he had obtained from his uncle, defendant John Bruening.

At that time, Lane shot Daniel Parmertor, Russell King Jr., and Demetrius Hewlin, all of whom were sitting in the cafeteria either eating breakfast or waiting for a bus to take them to a local vocational school. Defendant Lane shot three other students who survived the assault.

Defendant Lane fired a total of ten (10) rounds of ammunition from defendant John Bruening's firearm at close range at the plaintiffs.

The families seek compensatory and punitive damages for wrongful death, negligent supervision, parental statutory liability, and loss of consortium.

Families Sue Family for School Killings

If the owner of a bar or his bartender continues to serve alcohol to a patron who is clearly already drunk and that drunk later kills or injures someone while driving under the influence, the bar owner and his bartender can be can be found criminally negligent and can even face jail time.

Should the gun owner be treated the same way if they allow someone (like a family member who is a minor) to use their gun to commit a crime?

[image]local://upfiles/42188/8392A02C5AD843C4A27C7C5E9CA64DB6.jpg[/image]

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto


Should the gun owner be treated the same way if they allow someone (like a family member who is a minor) to use their gun to commit a crime?

The laws in California are that way. If a minor gets a firearm unsupervised and even accidentally discharges it, the gun owner is charged.

quote:

ORIGINAL: muhly22222

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I would think it would have to be proven the family knew he was a danger. In the case of a bartender, that person is "aiding and abetting" by continuing to give the patron more alcohol. Seems to be the families would have to prove the same with the gun, as in knowing he had these plans and doing nothing about it.

I'm on board with this. In the same way that it's negligent for a bartender to continue to serve beer to a clearly intoxicated person, it's negligent for a gun owner to allow a clearly dangerous person to use their gun. That negligence is why liability falls on the bartender, not the negligence (or recklessness) of the drunk person then going out and killing somebody while driving.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Every time I see a thread on guns and/or related issues, it makes me so glad that I live in a place where the laws about guns and gun ownership are strict and strictly enforced. Need I add that discussions like this thread never happen here?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Dear oh dear! HW, I expect better of you!

However it is refreshing to see that we academics don't have a monopoly on pedantry. [:D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlkTallFullfig

I didn't think this was the first time I'd ever seen a discussion regarding guns, and laws governing them on these boards.

Better late, I suppose.

I cannot fathom why people who continue to stick their heads in the sand, regarding sensible gun control laws. It cannot be that they don't care about all of the distruction caused by people with firearms every year, can it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Dear oh dear! HW, I expect better of you!

However it is refreshing to see that we academics don't have a monopoly on pedantry. [:D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


What I want to know is, why does the guy behind the counter in the gun store look like Kissinger?

K.