Hey, a mod being reasonable, and not acting like ACFAH!
Huh ? Man .. either you or I, or both of us, are off or something because I am just not getting you lately ..heh . Maybe we need some counseling or somethin'.
Despite a mother’s plea, her mentally ill daughter was sold a firearm. Here’s why she sued.
- Thread starter Phauxtoe
- Start date
Huh ? Man .. either you or I, or both of us, are off or something because I am just not getting you lately ..heh . Maybe we need some counseling or somethin'.
spat
.950 JDJ
If she really wants to, you think physically pulling her back from the edge of the bridge will stop her ?
People who should not be allowed to be armed should not be free to walk the streets. It is that simple.
In most cases yes.
swilliams
6.5 Creedmoor
And the mother is trying to get her daughter out to come and live with her again. There goes any sympathy I may have had for her.
spat
.950 JDJ
Then she didnt really want to.
Overwhelming majority of people don't make suicide a life's goal. It's a desperate reaction driven by emotion and subject to cooling off within days, if not hours.
camper4lyfe
.308 Win
That's been Walmart policy for a LONG time (there's thread upon thread about it at the old place)
I think the guy should have refused the sale. She wanted to buy the same gun that is a little odd. Well what happened to the last one he should have wondered. Plus the call from the mother why he would get involved in that is beyond me. Look at how it turned out.
I own multiples of some of my guns. Just saying. Maybe she wanted two the same as well.
Your have a point but as a cop you probably know some people give off a vibe. I'm sure there is some people that you just know something is wrong with. One of my customers just creeps me out. If I owned a gun store would that be enough on its own not to sell him a gun, no. I would prob sell him a gun but the phone call from the mother plus a duplicate purchase would be enough for me to refuse the sale.
Catskillkid
.450/400 Nitro Ex
I have very mixed feelings about this story and have been thinking a lot about it. Here is what I mean by that:
1. Personally, I think the phone call from the mom would have been enough for the gun store owner to deny the sale. FFLs have wide latitude on who they don't have to sell too. Could the daughter have gone to another place and bought a gun? Sure, but I personally would not want that on my conscience if I was the store owner.
2. While I think everyone on here believes that severely mentally ill people with suicidal or homicidal impulses should not own guns, but who and how makes that determination? And what constitutes severity? Should someone with generalized anxiety disorder or mild depression lose their 2nd Amendment rights because of a diagnosis (proper or improper)? We have examples here in NY where a person was admitted to a hospital for insomnia and a simple wrongly checked box (involuntary committed) made him lose his guns without any course of action to get them back. Also (and yes this is wishy washy based on my statement above) but a phone call from an individual who states "don't sell to so-and-so because..." would be a huge affront to Second Amendment rights. Imagine if all it took was one phone call and you lose your right to an attorney, religion, etc. It doesn't make it right for that and it shouldn't for the 2nd either.
1. Personally, I think the phone call from the mom would have been enough for the gun store owner to deny the sale. FFLs have wide latitude on who they don't have to sell too. Could the daughter have gone to another place and bought a gun? Sure, but I personally would not want that on my conscience if I was the store owner.
2. While I think everyone on here believes that severely mentally ill people with suicidal or homicidal impulses should not own guns, but who and how makes that determination? And what constitutes severity? Should someone with generalized anxiety disorder or mild depression lose their 2nd Amendment rights because of a diagnosis (proper or improper)? We have examples here in NY where a person was admitted to a hospital for insomnia and a simple wrongly checked box (involuntary committed) made him lose his guns without any course of action to get them back. Also (and yes this is wishy washy based on my statement above) but a phone call from an individual who states "don't sell to so-and-so because..." would be a huge affront to Second Amendment rights. Imagine if all it took was one phone call and you lose your right to an attorney, religion, etc. It doesn't make it right for that and it shouldn't for the 2nd either.
eagleridge357
.223 Rem
Observing her nervousness at time of purchase, coupled with the call warning about her condition, I DEFINITELY would not have allowed this woman to purchase any firearm at my place of business. That is because I, unlike most FFL dealers, have a conscience and am interested in preventing crime MORE than I am interested in making a buck at the expense of others. Ta ta
Snappo
6.5 Creedmoor
I have a half dozen 1911's. It's not unheard of to have more than one of a type of firearm. I also have half dozen Remmy 700's.
Jsmegs77
.308 Win
This is a complicated situation and there's no neat little answer.Ultimately, people who have intent to do harm (either to themselves or others) are going to do it, regardless of intervention. A few points I'd like to make....
1. The mental health system is massively broken. I have a military wife with PTSD, 3 of my 6 kids have psych issues caused by observing their addict mother (not my current wife) engage in self-destructive behavior (cutting, hanging/suicide attempts), and I've been variously armchair-diagnosed as having any number of maladies from Aspergers to bipolar/schizophrenia (in reality I'm just a jerk at times, which isn't a medical condition). The system largely acts as a vector to push psych meds, and/or talk to counselors or social workers who have nothing really substantive to say and can only repeat trite little phrases involving "safe spaces" and "you can talk to me, nothing leaves this room" (which are both total and complete bullshit all around).
2. An impassioned phone call to a local gun store is not indicative of anything necessarily other than a reactionary family member. Though, this combined with the observable state of the customer who was the subject of the call could be a reason to decline sale. Slippery case, with no real good answer, as it can go either way easily. It could just as well have been a perfectly sane and healthy person with a senile and deranged parent off their meds.
3. Owning multiple identical firearms is absolutely not any kind of indicator of anything at all, except a preference for that particular make and model. I personally aspire to a matched pair of Browning Hi-Powers, and given my current financials, would likely buy them one at a time. Nothing of note there, in my view.
1. The mental health system is massively broken. I have a military wife with PTSD, 3 of my 6 kids have psych issues caused by observing their addict mother (not my current wife) engage in self-destructive behavior (cutting, hanging/suicide attempts), and I've been variously armchair-diagnosed as having any number of maladies from Aspergers to bipolar/schizophrenia (in reality I'm just a jerk at times, which isn't a medical condition). The system largely acts as a vector to push psych meds, and/or talk to counselors or social workers who have nothing really substantive to say and can only repeat trite little phrases involving "safe spaces" and "you can talk to me, nothing leaves this room" (which are both total and complete bullshit all around).
2. An impassioned phone call to a local gun store is not indicative of anything necessarily other than a reactionary family member. Though, this combined with the observable state of the customer who was the subject of the call could be a reason to decline sale. Slippery case, with no real good answer, as it can go either way easily. It could just as well have been a perfectly sane and healthy person with a senile and deranged parent off their meds.
3. Owning multiple identical firearms is absolutely not any kind of indicator of anything at all, except a preference for that particular make and model. I personally aspire to a matched pair of Browning Hi-Powers, and given my current financials, would likely buy them one at a time. Nothing of note there, in my view.
eagleridge357
.223 Rem
I agree completely. The possibility of a buyer who is not fit to possess a firearm is reason enough to refuse a sale. If the buyer does not like the dealer's attitude, she can go to another FFL who sees no problem with the sale.
RDN
.357 mag
** Colby Sue Weathers was mentally ill, but she had never been identified as a threat to herself or others by a judge or ordered to an extended mental hospital stay — which meant she could pass the background check for her gun. **
That's a MO state issue not a national one.
“I can’t just go by what a phone call says,” Dady said in a deposition. “If the person that comes in . . . passes the background check, I can sell them a gun.”
NICS is not the begining and end of common sense gun safety
** The gun shop agreed to pay Delana $2.2 million. **
I agree with the mother. The shop owner shouldn't have sold the firearm.
That's a MO state issue not a national one.
“I can’t just go by what a phone call says,” Dady said in a deposition. “If the person that comes in . . . passes the background check, I can sell them a gun.”
NICS is not the begining and end of common sense gun safety
** The gun shop agreed to pay Delana $2.2 million. **
I agree with the mother. The shop owner shouldn't have sold the firearm.
As an FFL is it common for people to get nervous when they fill out the paperwork? I don't know why I get nervous every time I fill out a 4473. I've never been denied but I don't know why I get nervous filling the paperwork out. I was a fireman and did all sorts of crazy stuff during training and never got as nervous as I do when I fill out the stupid form. Just curious if I'm the only oddball.
eagleridge357
.223 Rem
Understood. However, the phone caller tipped the scales. Caller could have been lying, or whatever, or could have been truthful. Weighing the $60 profit benefit against the possibility odds (50-50) of caller being bogus or truthful, I would have opted for truthful. I would have lost $60 but prevented the possible loss of license or even worse. I also get nervous when doing certain things. Nervousness was not the issue here, if not for the phone call.
ManrisFrack
6.5 Creedmoor
Nope. There are at least two of us.
Snappo
6.5 Creedmoor
All that FFL had to say was "Ma'am - can you please come down with your D/L and the birth certificate for your daughter and I will make sure I do not sell her any weapons. I just want to confirm this isn't some prank". But he wanted $60 and didn't give a fuck who died in the process. Shame an insurance company paid that $2.2M and the shop owner walks with nothing more than a guilty conscience. Poetic justice would be the mom blowing the $2.2M on a mercenary from Soldier of Fortune magazine and getting an eye for an eye. And if something like that happened, I would feel the vendetta was properly paid back in spades.
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
2. While I think everyone on here believes that severely mentally ill people with suicidal or homicidal impulses should be in a rubber room .. away from any
dangerous item .. fork, spork, nail file pen , pencil .. so on so on so on then the firearm ..
mom should have her committed to the padded room if she was that concerned .. if they say shes ok then fine she has a RIGHT!! .. if she abuses that RIGHT .. off to never never land .. GITMO ... how dang hard is this ... thou shall not kill ... unless your about to be killed ...
@Catskillkid edited it some ....
i think the FFL was ok to sell .. she posed no danger .. mom didn't call saying she wanted to kill someone .. this is a RIGHT!!! ...
hay you with high levels of lead in your blood .. you cant have firearms anymore .. you might hurt someone ... do we really want to go this route .. ??
didn't we just save the vets and them on SS from this type of crap ..
you don't want to handle your bills so no guns for you ...
deal with the Criminal Action .. not the WHAT IF !!! ..
My Dad committed suicide with his 357 .. do i hold it against him Fin NO ..
and i heard the all the talk on the police scanner at the time it happened ..
i called dispatch ... to fill them on what i knew what my dad and mom routine was ..
if you want more details .. PM me ..
oh my dog is sick and old lets put it down .,.. where is that same feeling with humans ..
dangerous item .. fork, spork, nail file pen , pencil .. so on so on so on then the firearm ..
mom should have her committed to the padded room if she was that concerned .. if they say shes ok then fine she has a RIGHT!! .. if she abuses that RIGHT .. off to never never land .. GITMO ... how dang hard is this ... thou shall not kill ... unless your about to be killed ...
@Catskillkid edited it some ....
i think the FFL was ok to sell .. she posed no danger .. mom didn't call saying she wanted to kill someone .. this is a RIGHT!!! ...
hay you with high levels of lead in your blood .. you cant have firearms anymore .. you might hurt someone ... do we really want to go this route .. ??
didn't we just save the vets and them on SS from this type of crap ..
you don't want to handle your bills so no guns for you ...
deal with the Criminal Action .. not the WHAT IF !!! ..
My Dad committed suicide with his 357 .. do i hold it against him Fin NO ..
and i heard the all the talk on the police scanner at the time it happened ..
i called dispatch ... to fill them on what i knew what my dad and mom routine was ..
if you want more details .. PM me ..
oh my dog is sick and old lets put it down .,.. where is that same feeling with humans ..
Last edited:
eagleridge357
.223 Rem
The crux of this is: Yes the FFL had legal authority to make the transfer, notwithstanding the possibility that the caller made a true statement about the buyer's mental health. IE, It's a legal transfer even if the dealer was aware the buyer may go out and kill herself or someone else after the sale. PERFECTLY LEGAL. HOWEVER, because the ATF has given the dealer the option of denying a sale based on information (perceived or real) that the buyer is a risk and therefore SHOULD NOT be in possession of a firearm, when the dealer makes the final evaluation of fitness to possess, he/she is responsible for the decision. Without the option to transfer or not transfer, the dealer is NOT liable. However, the dealer's decision IS in question, based on the caller's info, whether bogus or real. Consequently, dealer's decision may be considered a basis for negligence. That is the thinking of the plaintiff. MORAL of this story - when an FFL has any reason to question a sale, the intelligent thing to do is refuse the transfer. That is why ATF has allowed the FFL this option.
Saltwater60
20×102mm Vulcan
I think you missed this part.
She called the police. Then ATF. After that, the FBI.
Honestly If her mom called him to say don't sell her a gun she has mental illness do t sell the girl the gun. Yes of course she will
Go 10 miles away and buy another one and kill herself. Sure it's sad, but not the fault of the gun owner. Honestly this looks really bad for the industry. For the money he received he should have passed on the sale. He got $60.00 and it cost him 2.2 million.
Snappo
6.5 Creedmoor
But he didn't give a rat's ass because it never really cost him $2.2M. It cost ITT Hartford, or Lloyd's of London, or State Farm. So he no doubt figured he made $60 *and* "got his money's worth" from his insurance payments. The mom can't "pierce the corporate veil". The guy's insurance and the company he made probably holds him quite blameless. Sadly she cannot go after his house, his car, his 401K, the 529 plan he set up for his kids, etc. Which is why I say a SoF mercenary is the only one who can pay this greedy shitbag back in spades.
The store owner did nothing wrong. Nothing. The pay out should not have been made. This woman is a murderer. Nothing more, nothing less. There is only one victim and only one person to blame for this.
The victim is the Father, the Blame falls 100% on this woman.
If she bought a knife at Walmart or a baseball bat from Dicks to use as the murder weapon, would you all blame those stores as well?
The victim is the Father, the Blame falls 100% on this woman.
If she bought a knife at Walmart or a baseball bat from Dicks to use as the murder weapon, would you all blame those stores as well?
eagleridge357
.223 Rem
Yes the woman is the murderer, and the transfer was technically legal. What you do not get is that the 4473 clearly states in section D that when the transferor (seller) signs his name to the form, he is certifying that "...(3)...it is my belief that it is not unlawful for me to sell, deliver, transport, or otherwise dispose of the firearm(s) listed on this form to the person identified in section A". Therefore, the transferor has made a professional evaluation, based on all information presented to him before the completion of the transfer (4473 replies, NICS results, and ANY OTHER INFORMATION PRESENTED TO HIM), that the transfer is NOT UNLAWFUL. Based on that evaluation, which requires a conscious weighing of information and factors, the dealer has warranted that he/she has evaluated all factors pertaining to the legality of this transfer, and has decided to either deny or proceed with the transfer based on that evaluation. This decision is open to question by the plaintiff, based on information the dealer had been given. Plain and simple. The dealer gambled that his decision would not be challenged, and lost. Buying a knife or a baseball bat from Walmart does not involve the seller in the same way that a firearms dealer is involved when making a decision to transfer or not transfer. You are a cop, you should see this point.
Last edited:
I do see and understand the point of your posts. I do. I sold guns for years and during that time, I refused multiple sales.
My point is simple, we as a society need to stop putting the blame of crimes on others. This woman, more than likely would have killed the father with or without this gun.
spat
.950 JDJ
The transfer was not unlawful.
You can debate whether it was unwise or not, but it was not unlawful, and the seller correctly indicated that on the forms.
TBH, being a woman, it would have been far more likely for her to have used poison than a firearm. I'm sure we would not be having this discussion if the mother called walmart and asked them not to sell her anything poisonous.