Victims and others affiliated in the shooting sued Glock, claiming negligent marketing and public nuisance. Glock aimed for a dismissal for two reasons, that they could not be held liable for the criminal acts of Furrow and as the manufacturer, Glock owed no duty of care to the third-party victims of Furrow's firearm misuse. Furrow's criminal firearm misuse constituted a superseding cause of the victims' injuries for which Glock could not be held responsible. This was before the PLCAA was enacted. This claim had not come to a conclusion prior to the PLCAA, therefore, still
So why shouldn’t law abiding citizens be able to do the same and be able to protect themselves. The deterrent effect of a concealed weapon would benefit the person and the general public that is doing the same. Because the criminals out there wouldn’t know who is armed and who is not. That would in turn get some criminals to think twice about going after someone who is also potentially armed and knowing that their life would also be in danger. I feel some crimes that have taken place in this country could have been stopped or lessened to a degree with a concealed firearm.
Did Bobby violate the assault statute? Explain your response. Answer: Although Goodman is not an active officer and an off-duty security guard, Bobby still violated the Assault Statue in an indirect manner. His actions are indicative of negligence and the incident resulted in a tort which escalated the charge by the use of the gun. The gun produced a “projectile” and during the incident bodily
It also doesn’t make sense to blame an inanimate object rather than the individual behind it and the reasons why gun violence occurs. A gun is a tool, not unlike a car or knife. When a law-abiding citizen makes the decision to purchase a gun, it is usually for the purpose of self-defense. It evens the playing field between a victim and a potentially dangerous criminal. In the story “They Each Had a Gun,” Hannah LaMarca was robbed and assaulted with no way to defend herself.
Probation and Parole Officers the Carrying of Firearms Community Resources In Corrections - Fall, 2011 Date submitted Probation and Parole Officers have a common goal to protect the public. They play a vital role in the criminal justice process. The criminal offenders and the areas in which they work may be dangerous. The question of whether parole and probation officers should carry firearms has fueled controversy. Some who favor treatment-based model of supervision have objected to officers carrying a firearm, while others have embraced it.
It was the owner of the property who shot him. The owner has a right to do so. If the man had followed the instructions clearly stated on the sign, he would have not found himself in the dilemma he was confronted with. People thus sometimes hold guns to show
One effect of this is an inaccurate ratio relating to self-defense. In the 43-1 statistic all but six of the deaths in their ratio were due to suicide. Including deaths due to suicide to the ratio is misleading in that the ways in which suicide may be accomplished without the use of firearms by far outweigh the presumption that these lives would have been saved had these firearms not been available to these people. In relation to the international comparison illustrated in the 43-1 statistic the authors do not account for the unfairness of the comparison based on the contrast of other countries due to the fact that consistent laws govern these nations . In the United States there are
A gun control initiative to be focused on would be stricter gun control laws and measures which would help crack down on gun crimes while encouraging responsible gun ownership and the use among civilians. Stricter gun control laws would also limit the ability for individuals with bad intentions from obtaining weapons, but it would allow responsible individuals from obtaining these weapons that others want to
Accountability of Military Weapons and Gear It is very important at all times for a soldier to know where their weapon ,headset or any equipment are. Especially when at war. A soldier without his/her equipment is handicapped, he she can not defend him or herself from enemy fire without having their weapon ready ,nor communicate with people in their convoy without their headset. Having your weapon and headset secure is also a matter of safety. Going out on any mission in the military without necessary equipment is dangerous.
In my opinion, a certain license should have to be carried at all times to show that the offender has the right to be in possession of a firearm whether it is in their vehicle or home. This license should be shown to law officials when approached by one and if you are in possession of a firearm unlicensed you should be detained. If this law were to take place it would not prevent violence with weapons, but it would reduce the amount of criminals on the loose with firearms. The government, in alliance with the NRA, could start by weeding out all of the unregistered firearms. After a good percentage of the illegal firearms have been put into government hands, they could issue a country wide equivalency test to be able to own or use firearms.