Joined
·
21,635 Posts
Gunmaker not liable for dumb accident
NSSF also reported on a case discussed in Texas Lawyer Magazine. It seems that, on August 20, 2009, a judge declined to assess liability to S&W in the case of Foltz v. S&W Corp. This is the .460 Magnum case that is apparently been appearing here and there on the internet. Roger Foltz, plaintiff, was shooting his S&W .460 Magnum in 2006. It seems he placed a finger forward on the frame to steady the revolver and, upon firing, amputated some of the misplaced digit.
Revolvers revolve, hence the name. To allow the cylinder to revolve and the firing chambers inside the cylinder to individually line up with the barrel at lock-up, there has to be space between the face of the cylinder and the forcing cone of the barrel. Hot propellant gas escapes there. In this case, lots of high pressure gas.
The court ruled that makers and sellers of firearms have no duty to warn of "the obvious dangers of owning or selling a handgun."
NSSF also reported on a case discussed in Texas Lawyer Magazine. It seems that, on August 20, 2009, a judge declined to assess liability to S&W in the case of Foltz v. S&W Corp. This is the .460 Magnum case that is apparently been appearing here and there on the internet. Roger Foltz, plaintiff, was shooting his S&W .460 Magnum in 2006. It seems he placed a finger forward on the frame to steady the revolver and, upon firing, amputated some of the misplaced digit.
Revolvers revolve, hence the name. To allow the cylinder to revolve and the firing chambers inside the cylinder to individually line up with the barrel at lock-up, there has to be space between the face of the cylinder and the forcing cone of the barrel. Hot propellant gas escapes there. In this case, lots of high pressure gas.
The court ruled that makers and sellers of firearms have no duty to warn of "the obvious dangers of owning or selling a handgun."
