If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Tech Times)   K-Mart can be held responsible if you buy a gun from them and shoot yourself with it   ( nando.net) divider line
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

1761 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Sep 2001 at 9:07 AM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

49 Comments     (+0 »)
2001-09-06 09:11:23 AM  
Man. That's almost tempting.
2001-09-06 09:13:19 AM  
ok wait... what happens if your restraining-order-husband shoots you with the Kmart gun?
2001-09-06 09:33:28 AM  
These kinds of cases are always fun to read. The sad thing is that with the neutral justice system, the family will probably get an ass-load of cash out of this.

There's always someone else to blame for one person's independant, deliberate action.
2001-09-06 09:54:39 AM  
Playa, I agree. The article didn't mention a cash amount, but I'll bet it is an unimaginable amount. I'm sure it's for their grief.
2001-09-06 09:58:13 AM  
Hmmmm....so by this logic if the guy had bought a package of Heftly trash bags and suffocated himself then KMart was irresponsible in selling the item?

farking people make me sick...
2001-09-06 10:00:42 AM  
so since the kid is dead, i guess they can not charge him with lying on the 4473 form he had to fill out. and if he was as sick as the parents said, why was he allowed out by himself? he could have just flipped out anywhere. i say go after the parents for endangering the public by letting this looney out amongst the public.
2001-09-06 10:14:29 AM  
so this "mental defective" can drive to Kmart and fill out forms and go home.... act like nothing is wrong...... go back the next day and pick up the shotgun and drive home .... load the gun... shoot himself....

and Kmart is liable?
for failing to get the proper forms filled out, YES... for his death, NO

he should have shot his parents FIRST
2001-09-06 10:15:01 AM  
"parents blame the store"
HMMMMMMM......maybe it wasn't the farking STORE....., maybe it was his paranoid schizophrenia. damn, I mean blaming the store is like blaming a parachute company for a skydiver who dies when he jumps from a plane with no packon on. S.R.
2001-09-06 10:16:07 AM  
The manufacturer of the gun should have placed warning labels on it. I.E."Do not place near head and pull trigger"
or "Aim the end with the hole away from yourself when shooting".
2001-09-06 10:24:14 AM  
I'm currently sueing Krogers because the can of chili and hot sauce I bought gave me the shiats something fierce.
2001-09-06 10:45:42 AM  
It isn't K-Mart's responsiblity to verify anything besides the poor git's identity and address. Sure the clerk screwed up by not requiring an id with an address, but that is insignificant. Had the guy present a false ID that was good enough, he could have claimed any identity and address he desired.

The veracity of claims and statements on the _FEDERAL_ form are the responsibility of the FEDS, not K-Mart.

If the guy wanted to die, then stand out of the way. Let him go. The hell of mental illness is something you can not imagine without having lived in it.

You can not prevent a determined person from ending their life. Guns, gas, car exhaust, pills. Hell, there is a documented case of a person using the red bits from a deck of playing cards (red dye for hearts and diamonds was a mite explosive if compressed and heated) and the pipe-leg from his to bed create a nitro-cellouse pipe bomb to kill himself.

I decided to add a couple links to this for you.

And again

2001-09-06 10:47:11 AM  
Hey! How about adding a preview feature?

Here's the farked link.
And again
2001-09-06 10:52:55 AM  
Selfish, selfish people.
2001-09-06 11:26:37 AM  
I am Celestia
2001-09-06 11:31:53 AM  

Warning - Gun control Tangent

The problem is that the only thing they have to verify is this guy's age and address. Owning a gun shouldn't be like buying plastic garbage bags. This thing was designed to put a hole in something and kill it.
Maybe a little training wouldn't be out of the question. A license, insurance, periodic tests, these things aren't so terrible. No one is taking anybody's guns away unless you can't pass a background checks for criminal and mental problems. Of course, this has nothing to do with Kmart. But like a lot of bystanders, some innocents take a bullet.
2001-09-06 11:53:38 AM  
Warning - Connie Chung thinks this article was copy edited by a troop of idiots on methamphetamines

"...death saying their 17-year-old clerk should not have sold him the gun..."

Connie Chung thinks that the above statement makes no sense. I believe they meant "the" not "their". Fools.

"...Eslinger was diagnosis with paranoid schizophrenia in 1995 and declared legally mentally defective..."

Was "diagnosis"? I think the editor should be declared legally mentally defective... This is Connie Chung, signing out.
2001-09-06 11:53:50 AM  
"'This case comes down to corporate greed and irresponsibility in the sale of firearms,' said James McKenna, the Eslingers' attorney."

"'If she didn't see any danger signs, I don't know how (the Eslingers) expected Kmart to see danger signs,' Parker said."

This is a classic lesson of "Follow the money." OOH, KMart the greedy bastards made a couple hundred before taxes and other overhead. Those conniving evil GREEDY evil evil corporate b*stards!

It's all about the MILLIONS, James McKenna (the attorney) and the Eslingers', think they can extort from the KMart.
2001-09-06 12:51:41 PM  
The only problem I have, is that the guy took the gun back the next day, and a K-Mart manager ASSEMBLED it for him. Other than that, K-Mart was just doing what they are in business to do...sell goods to the public.
2001-09-06 01:07:22 PM  
So, if I go to K-Mart right now and buy hedgeclippers so I can chop my weiner off, will they be responsible?

PS If they are responsible, have them add a couple inches to my length and girth when it gets re-attached!
2001-09-06 01:12:33 PM  
Wasn't Woolworth's motto: "Give the customer what he wants"? Well, the customer wanted a shotgun with which to kill himself. So they sold it to him. And, um, put it together for him. Satisfied customer, but probably not a return customer.

As for gun licenses, there has NEVER been an instance of firearms licenses that were not used to later confiscate said firearms. I would never register my firearms. Oh, wait, I don't have any firearms. You listening, Echelon?
2001-09-06 01:32:44 PM  
As someone who has sold firearms in the past, I think it is OUTRAGEOUS that a 17-year old clerk (which is against federal regulations, seller should be at least 18) would not ask for indentification, the most basic part of the gun selling procedure. Also the regulations state quite clearly that is the buyer gives ANY reason that he may injure himself or others, the sale MUST be halted. I don't know if the kid who killed himself gave any sign, but seeing the irresponsiblity on both an individual and store level, I wouldn't be surprised. Actually, the very fact that he wanted to buy a gun without a ID is a pretty big farking clue he intends to do something illegal.

If you are all going to pontificate about this, you have some knowledge of what you're talking about.
2001-09-06 01:50:17 PM  
If you sell someone like me a gun, you deserve what you get.
2001-09-06 01:55:15 PM  
the way i see it, didn't hurt anyone with. it's not like we need to justify a guy blowing away people in the streets from getting the gun out k-mart. so he checked himself out (with a gun), if it wasn't the gun, it would of been something else like drain-o or razor blade (eventually). would there be some sueing action if he bought razor blades from k-mart, and slit his wrists? NO

2001-09-06 02:14:27 PM  

The article didn't say that the gun was sold without ID. It said that he used a passport for ID, which isn't valid because it doesn't include an address.

I agree, though, about the 17-year old clerk. If it's not illegal for minors to sell guns, it should be.
2001-09-06 02:43:04 PM  

Even so, the forms clearly state (at least they did 3 years ago) that a passport is not valid ID. It actually says "A passport is not a valid form of identification." If the clerk didn't bother to read the form, what else didn't he do? Again, if someone can't produce "valid" ID, it's a sign he plans to do something illegal.

As for the argument, "If he wanted to kill himself, he would have no matter what" is untrue. The vast majority of people who kill themselves or try to don't want to die; they just want a way out of their situation and can't think of anything else. If he waited, he mighted have changed his mind. If he used clorox or razors, there's a much greater chance he'd survive. It's a big maybe, but now we'll never know.

And I do not think it's too much to ask for K-Mart to follow the law.
2001-09-06 02:53:21 PM  
"This case comes down to corporate greed...."

Greed? I hardly think the sale of one gun is going to have an impact on K-Mart's bottom line. The lawyer should have to prove a pattern of selling guns without proper procedures being followed; not basing his case on one incident.
2001-09-06 03:07:08 PM  
Fire the 17 year old. Case dismissed.
2001-09-06 03:30:20 PM  
Okay, my prior comments notwithstanding, KMart screwed up. However, the real question seems to be, was this screwup primarily responsible for the guy's death? I think not, but juries are notorious for basing decisions on emotion.

If there are pictures, this will get expensive for KMart. Shotguns have been described as the single most destructive weapon a civilian can own.
2001-09-06 03:50:35 PM  
(The real Burt Reynolds)

I'm about to go Bandit...Reynolds style...

Just another of case of the parents trying to cover up the mistake they made keeping an insane kid :)
2001-09-06 03:54:46 PM  
However, according to some of the completely skewed logic presented by some individuals in the other day's slavery thread, if this gun was produced by a company that uses slave labor in the manufacturing process, this guy can be held responsible for THAT.... I would think that would even out the "illogical responsibility" trump card, wouldn't it?
2001-09-06 04:08:23 PM  
But Sandra and Phil Eslinger allege Kmart violated federal gun laws when their sales clerk - a high school acquaintance of Eslinger's - sold him the shotgun without seeing proper identification.
This clerk knew him from school. Not saying he read the proper procedures, or that he even should have been selling guns in the first place, but even if he had the training, would he have followed it to the letter when someone he already knew walked in? I'm sure he'd seen him before and knew who he was, so asking him for ID would have been a little weird. Especially to a 17 year old. There is no way K-Mart can be held responsible for the death. If you have to be 18 to sell guns, then they're at fault for that, but no more. A 17 year old cannot be expected to determine whether or not someone has a mental illness and should get a gun. That is for the gun regulators to decide. Not some schmo clerk.
2001-09-06 04:27:18 PM  
Hell, what if the gun was produced by a company whose employees wear shoes made by slave laborers?
You really gotta look into who you associate with, y'know?
2001-09-06 04:37:04 PM  
Pretnar: EXACTLY.
2001-09-06 04:47:19 PM  
What if they were LEATHER shoes made by slave labor. And they ate CHOCOLATE? As we all know by researching our purchases, most chocolate is produced by starved kids held at gunpoint (are some of those guns shotguns?).
2001-09-06 05:16:02 PM  

If the seller was acquainted enough with the buyer that it was embarrasing to ask for proper ID, then there's a good chance he knew about his mental illness.

"Hey, aren't you that crazy kid from school who got sent to the funny farm?"

"Ummm . . . ummm . . . no. I went off to a . . . umm . . .vacation. Yeah, that's it, a surprise vacation. By myself . . . Ummm . . . can I buy a shotgun? Please."

"Okay, since you said please."

A very good reason why 17 year-olds shouldn't sell guns.

Another thing to think about, if a 17-year old K-Mart sold cigarretes to an 18 without proper ID, they'd be paying thousands of dollars of fines and their license to sell cigarrettes will be threatened. Why shouldn't they be in trouble for this?
2001-09-06 06:00:51 PM  
Buzz: I agree that a 17 year old kid should not be selling guns. I also agree that they didn't follow the instructions written right on the stupid form. But, if you think these parents wouldn't be sueing even if everything about the sale had been legal and fine, you are living in a dream world. They would still be sueing on the grounds that the store sold the gun to their poor deranged baby. If this kid had come in with his drivers license and dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's on the form he would still be just as dead and his parents would still be sueing K-Mart. We live in a society that has convinced itself that there is no such thing as personal responsibility.

By the way, if you think the clerk was at fault, then sue him. Oh wait, he doesn't have millions of dollars. I hope those bastards choke on every penny they leach from their son's death.

Another question. Who the hell can't assemble a shotgun. I mean, even if it was a completely stripped pump or autoloader, there just aren't that many parts. And, I believe there is a manual sold with the gun. I suppose the real fault lies with the manager. if someone is too stupid to strip and rebuild the gun they probably shouldn't own it.
2001-09-06 06:15:04 PM  
personal responsibility, what's that? you mean it's my fault if a vending machine falls on me as i try to steal the yoo-hoo out of it. nooooooooo..no the vending company should have tempted me by not bolting it down. S.R.
2001-09-06 06:16:08 PM  

2001-09-06 06:48:21 PM  

Would they sue if they had done everything correctly? Perhaps, perhaps not. Where I worked (Wal-Mart), a co-worker sold a gun to an 18-year old kid who shot himself. He did follow procedure when he sold the gun and, surprise, Wal-Mart didn't get sued. Now Wal-Mart's pit-bull lawyers may have factored into this, but who knows what would have happened? My point is that K-Mart farked up big time and now they want get out of it. And all the people who shout "Personal responsiblity" are more than willing to let K-Mart out of their responsiblities. (As everyone else, K-Mart has responsiblity to follow the law.)
2001-09-06 07:25:24 PM  
So anyway, I think this shouldn't be something about being held responsible, rather Scary - You can buy guns from KMart.
2001-09-06 07:26:16 PM  
I'm a Kmart employee.

1. It's against Kmart policy to have any associate sell a product to an acquaintence, other than one known through Kmart. Another associate has to take the money.

2. It's against Kmart policy for anyone under 18 to be selling restricted items. Again, an associate 18 or over has to complete the transaction.

Due to this, Kmart policy protects itself. The associate acted in violation of store policy. The extent of fault lies with the associate in question, and perhaps the management structure in that store if it can be shown that this store allowed this to happen on a regular basis.

3. Kmart has a strict policy to do whatever you can for a customer. If a customer needs help assembling a product, then the associate will help as far as (s)he is able. To my knowledge, firearms are not restricted from this policy.

So, did the Kmart corporation ast irresponsibly? No. The associate did in making a sale without the proper authority, on TWO counts.
2001-09-06 07:34:37 PM  
Wal-Mart can never be successfully sued, as its board of directors is the true secret cabal that controls the one world government.
Also, I believe the kid that sold that gun used to be in charge of minority seating at the local Denny's. Ohhh, k-mart is gonna pay out the ass on this one..
2001-09-06 09:01:41 PM  
I wonder what Papa Hemingway would think of this.
2001-09-07 12:14:02 AM  
The thing that pisses me off most of all is that it comes down to farking cash value. Guess Moms and Pops will feel a helluva lot better while spending the money if they win the lawsuit. Fire the farking 17 year old, he screwed up.
Money soothes the horrible grief of losing their son, does it? I suppose the parents will claim that they're only trying to prevent this from happening to others. Yep, the money means nothing to them at all. Yeah, right.
2001-09-07 11:47:46 AM  
K Mart screwed up by having a 17 year old sell the gun. No more. The guy woulda got the gun anyway, if this kid had turned him down. Did the parents sue the knife seller when he tried to slit his own throat previously? I think not...

At least this guy didnt stand on a bridge or highway threatening to cash in his chips, and tie up traffic for hours. That's courtesy!
2001-09-07 01:41:28 PM  
Waitwaitwait you guys.

Have you looked at what KMart is selling in their "firearms" counter these days? (Okay, I'm California)

BB Guns? 22s? Paintball guns?

Boy, get you some stoppin power, then we'll talk.
2001-09-07 03:46:03 PM  
What is K-Mart doing selling SHOTGUNS? This whole article/issue sums up the good ol' US of A. Keep it up boys, sell those guns and fire em' up! Do we have a problem here?
K-Mart employing 17 year olds to sell guns? And the legal age to do so is 18?
How old do you have to be to sell and/or buy alcohol legally? How old do you have to be to sell and/or buy a farking shotgun (or any farking gun)legally?
Shake your head and smoke some B.C. pot!
2001-09-07 05:59:41 PM  
Keep your receipts in case your mad little scheme falls through.
2001-09-07 09:39:04 PM  
thats why I only shop at Target.
Displayed 49 of 49 comments

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.