Page 1 of 2

Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 2:02 pm
by puma guy
I really don't know how to begin this post or if it belongs in the "Never Again" category, since the responsible person , a term that's oxymoronic applied to him, is not. I struggled about the title of my post, but finally decided it fit based on the incredible comment he made after it happened. My take from the incident is some people shouldn't be allowed to have a gun.
This happened to my brother's son-in-law, Charlie, last week.

Until Friday I only knew Charlie had been shot, not a lot of details. I spent a little time with my brother dealing with some issues involving our late mother's estate and afterwards he told me everything he knew about the incident that left Charlie wounded.

His son-in-law was with his wife visiting her friend and was invited to go to the husband's "Safe" room. That's the term my brother used, but he didn't know if that was where a gun safe was located or a true safe room. I believe it was the latter after hearing a description of this event.

His son-in-law and the man were seated across at an angle across from one another. The guy handed Charlie a semi-auto pistol and Charlie, not really into guns all that much, handed the pistol back to the owner about as quickly as he got it. The guy then starts fiddling with it, trying to pull the slide back, but it won't budge. The pistol is pointed down toward the floor in Charlie's direction. A little uneasy Charlie starts moving but had not moved far enough when the bang happens. The 9mm bullet ricocheted off the floor, traveled upward through his calf then ricocheted off the ceiling and struck a wall before striking the floor again. (that's why I think they were in safe room, either lined or cement)

Unbelievably the guy asked Charlie what was that? Charlie says you shot me. The guys says, quote "That's impossible it wasn't loaded." Next he says what should I do? :banghead:

Charlie has to tell him to get a towel and call 911. The guy got a towel, but never called 911 as they later learned. They just drove to the hospital and Charlie and his wife thought is was because it would take too long for an ambulance. Charlie found out at the hospital no one was ever called. I don't know how Charlie and his wife would even put up with that, but nevertheless they got Charlie to the hospital at which time the medics reported it to the police, who showed up and grilled the guy a for couple of hours.

The wound was through and through w/o hitting bone thank goodness, but it did quite a bit of damage. I saw a picture taken while he was at the hospital and thought it strange that both wounds were irregular and seemed large for a 9mm. Now that I know about the ricochet it makes sense.

After the police finished with the guy he guy continued his imbecilic actions and refused to call his insurance company; his logic was they could file on their own insurance and then their company could deal with his company.
According to my brother the guy is quite wealthy and his main concern was protecting himself. His actions certainly support that in my opinion.

I asked some questions of my bro and learned that Charlie did notice the guy's finger on the trigger and that was the reason he started moving over, but he didn't say anything. If he hadn't moved the bullet would have struck him in the groin. As it is he'll have to have some further surgical procedures to repair some muscle.

Like me I imagine everyone here has some definite opinions of what they would do in a similar situation, but I feel sorry that Charlie didn't have enough gun savvy to immediately react to keep himself safe.

First by checking the weapon himself to see if it was loaded; for not dropping the mag and cycling the slide while checking the chamber, for not warning the guy to get his finger off the trigger and point the weapon away. I was cringing while my brother described the events. I don't see him often, but the next time I do I will definitely have a talk with him; about gun safety and picking your friends.

I don't know what Charlie will take from this, but I told my brother that the gun owner probably learned absolutely nothing. I do hope I'm incorrect.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 2:23 pm
by gljjt
From my understanding of the story, Charlie certainly was not knowledgeable about what he should have done, check the gun to ensure it was unloaded or to unload it. But he was not negligent in my opinion. His actions were reasonable for a person not familiar with firearms.

The friend however is a moron. He should know better and is 100% responsible for this. He was negligent. IANAL, but I believe Charlie is clearly entitled to all actual damages, hospital/physician bills, etc., and likely more for pain and suffering and for possible future medical issues. I would contact my insurance companies (health and homeowners) as an FYI (would not file a claim, but get their help to file against the gun owner) and would insist, via attorney if necessary , for his insurance information.

This guy sounds like he may be a problem to deal with. I would spend a couple hundred or so for an initial 'talk' with an attorney to ensure I was properly and fairly taken care of and map out the next steps.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 2:24 pm
by gljjt
Also, hopes and prayers for a complete and speedy recovery.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 2:36 pm
by TomsTXCHL
A very interesting story; thanks for sharing. I wanna say "the blind (gun owner) leading the visually impaired (son-in-law)" or dumb-and-dumber but I guess we have to cut the son-in-law some slack as he was a guest in the perp's house and no doubt assumed since he had a safe room with a gun cache that he knew what the bleep he was doing.

Glad no one died! And I hope the knucklehead-with-the-gun-he-didn't-know-anything-about is made to learn a few lessons out of this, whether by LE or by the SIL's attorney.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 2:49 pm
by puma guy
gljjt wrote:From my understanding of the story, Charlie certainly was not knowledgeable about what he should have done, check the gun to ensure it was unloaded or to unload it. But he was not negligent in my opinion. His actions were reasonable for a person not familiar with firearms.

The friend however is a moron. He should know better and is 100% responsible for this. He was negligent. IANAL, but I believe Charlie is clearly entitled to all actual damages, hospital/physician bills, etc., and likely more for pain and suffering and for possible future medical issues. I would contact my insurance companies (health and homeowners) as an FYI (would not file a claim, but get their help to file against the gun owner) and would insist, via attorney if necessary , for his insurance information.

This guy sounds like he may be a problem to deal with. I would spend a couple hundred or so for an initial 'talk' with an attorney to ensure I was properly and fairly taken care of and map out the next steps.
I don't think Charlie was negligent in anyway. I was just lamenting the fact that he didn't know enough to do the things a knowledgeable person would do. At least the hair on the back of his neck prompted him to move. Like you I think the friend is a moron and will be difficult. My brother and I didn't discuss whether Charlie would pursue this with a lawsuit, but fortunately Charlie has some "guns" of his own. My brother does video depositions and "day in the life" videos for a major Texas law firm and his oldest daughter's husband is a personal injury lawyer.
I think the shooter will continue to be more concerned about his liability than about Charlie's welfare or becoming a responsible gun owner. I hope Charlie sues him.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 3:03 pm
by Jim Beaux
I think Charlie has a good idea of what he should have done & imagine he has been the recipient of a lot of unsolicited advice. Consider allowing him to broach the subject.

Two things I go nuts over:

1. Someone muzzle sweeping others.
2. A finger parked on the trigger.

I cant imagine what I would do if I was shot as a result carelessness. :mad5

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 3:08 pm
by Jumping Frog
gljjt wrote:I would spend a couple hundred or so for an initial 'talk' with an attorney to ensure I was properly and fairly taken care of and map out the next steps.
I am not willing to give 33%-40% to an attorney at this stage. Instead, I'd tell the guy to provide his insurance info. Any hesitation, the next statement is, "Don't be ridiculous, do the right thing. Are you trying to force me to sue you when this should be easily handled without the attorneys?"

I've been able to get insurance adjusters to handle things on the up-and-up if they know they can avoid getting the attorneys called in.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 3:11 pm
by Jim Beaux
TomsTXCHL wrote:A very interesting story; thanks for sharing. I wanna say "the blind (gun owner) leading the visually impaired (son-in-law)" or dumb-and-dumber but I guess we have to cut the son-in-law some slack as he was a guest in the perp's house and no doubt assumed since he had a safe room with a gun cache that he knew what the bleep he was doing.

Glad no one died! And I hope the knucklehead-with-the-gun-he-didn't-know-anything-about is made to learn a few lessons out of this, whether by LE or by the SIL's attorney.
Charlie didnt do anything irresponsible.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 3:30 pm
by gljjt
I agree I wouldn't want to give 33-40% up for a lawsuit, yet. What I would do is pay for an hour of lawyer time to cover what I am entitled to in order to ensure I have the knowledge to make informed decisions. Sorry if that wasn't clear. A couple of hundred spent to know what my rights are and to not lose them due to administrative stuff (timelines, etc.) because I don't know the law, is money well spent in my opinion.

I also agree with Jim Beaux, Charlie did nothing irresponsible. He acted reasonably for a non firearms savvy person.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 3:41 pm
by gljjt
The lawyer time I mentioned helps Charlie to know how to protect his future if there is any possibility that there may be long term physical issues. This is potentially more than just immediate out of pocket expense, possible future issues as I mentioned, missed wages, etc. I'm not sue happy, but I think a little up front expert advice is a good thing. The "friend's" insurance company is not Charlie's advocate / friend / on his side. They work for their shareholders. My experience (2x) for similar (injury not gunshot though) is the insurance companies are difficult until it looks like it will go to litigation. I haven't sued, but it took a long time and threat of litigation to get them to do the right thing. I may be biased and that may not be the norm, but it my experience. I would pay up front a couple of hundred for advice.

If no personal injury is involved in an incident, property damage only, I'd probably wouldn't get the paid advice. Moderate to serious personal injury, yes! Is a risk/reward decision, different for each of us.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 4:43 pm
by baldeagle
Let me see if I have this straight. He had his finger on the trigger, and he racked the slide? I can't say what I think about that here on the forum.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Sun Jun 29, 2014 4:59 pm
by C-dub
Why didn't the police arrest him? The idiot shooter.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:24 am
by TomsTXCHL
gljjt wrote:I also agree with Jim Beaux, Charlie did nothing irresponsible. He acted reasonably for a non firearms savvy person.
Where did I say he did something irresponsible. I merely suggested he couldn't have foreseen how utterly idiotic his host was/became.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:20 am
by The Annoyed Man
gljjt wrote:From my understanding of the story, Charlie certainly was not knowledgeable about what he should have done, check the gun to ensure it was unloaded or to unload it. But he was not negligent in my opinion. His actions were reasonable for a person not familiar with firearms.

The friend however is a moron. He should know better and is 100% responsible for this. He was negligent. IANAL, but I believe Charlie is clearly entitled to all actual damages, hospital/physician bills, etc., and likely more for pain and suffering and for possible future medical issues. I would contact my insurance companies (health and homeowners) as an FYI (would not file a claim, but get their help to file against the gun owner) and would insist, via attorney if necessary , for his insurance information.

This guy sounds like he may be a problem to deal with. I would spend a couple hundred or so for an initial 'talk' with an attorney to ensure I was properly and fairly taken care of and map out the next steps.
Yeah, I think Charlie's acquaintance (no longer a "friend") has some 'splainin' to do.......

......in court........

........and, given the acquaintance's duplicitous reaction and attempt to avoid any and all liability, Charlie should really make him pay, and pay heavily. I'm talking punitive damages heavy enough that the gun reconsiders the wisdom of his continuing to own firearms, scissors, carving knives, and lawn darts.

I am not normally a person who thinks that the courts should be used to extort money out of people, but in this case it seems the proper application. How much work did Charlie miss? How much pain did he suffer? How much medical costs are involved? How long will his recovery last? How much permanent loss of future function to the leg did he sustain? Using the court to punish Charlie's acquaintance for his ghastly behavior AFTER the event as much as for his negligence which led up to it seems entirely appropriate.

Re: Unbelievably stupid gun owner!

Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2014 8:41 am
by gljjt
TomsTXCHL wrote:
gljjt wrote:I also agree with Jim Beaux, Charlie did nothing irresponsible. He acted reasonably for a non firearms savvy person.
Where did I say he did something irresponsible. I merely suggested he couldn't have foreseen how utterly idiotic his host was/became.
I didn't mean to imply you said he was irresponsible. My apologies that it came across that way. Sorry!!

Thanks,

gljjt