Welcome to the family and god bless you. I believe since the seller disclosed the defect and the buyer bought it anyway you are good. But I would definitely get it on paper and notarized, both buyer and seller together when being notarized. The wording should say buyer knew about the defective firearm but bought it anyway. Something like that. Some buyers buy it anyway because they feel its a simple fix at a good price. Cover yourself.
2 Likes
Since we are talking what ifs, lets change the narrative slightly.
What if you neigbor introduced a young man to you and your 18 year old daughter. Nice looking well groomed young man wants to take your daughter out on a date. Later the daughter is found dead. During the investigation the neigbor admits to the fact that the young man had a mental disorder. what would your reaction be? Death or injury that can be avoided but isn’t can hold no excuse. If you know of a defect and it is not revealed, in my view you are the villian.
Anything man made can have faults. Faults must be identifed and corrected, just look at the vehicle recalls.
If it is bad say something and fix it, passing down the line does no good.
Larry
2 Likes
I would only sell a problem gun to someone with full disclosure. I traded a S&W .22 auto for a bunch of .45 ACP ammo. The gun would only function properly with CCI mini mags… Buyer was OK with that.
I have had 2 other guns that were replaced by the manufacturer. I was sent new guns from both of them. I sold them un fired. LNIB.
2 Likes
Even a bill of sale like that will not protect you. Alot of companies try to force you to go to arbitrage and they get shot down all the time same with EULA.
If a DA really wanted to force I think a case could be made for manslaughter and depraved indifference.
I would just drop a better trigger in it and keep it.
3 Likes
I can understand that word spoken cannot be used in court…but l if legal contact signed by both sides means nothing…so what’s the reason for all the contracts of the World?
2 Likes
It comes down to lawyers.
2 Likes
Everything comes to the lawyers… but the reason for signed contract is to make all clear, so lawyers cannot do much.
2 Likes
Well I am fairly certain that if I signed a receipt for a gun and then that gun killed me the next time I pulled the trigger on it. I feel pretty good about my heirs being able to get a successful civil suit verdict and I feel a DA could probably get a conviction on. It does depend on the severity of the consequences or whether anything was under or misrepresented.
That’s what civil court is for.
2 Likes
So you telling, that buyer signs the contract with these terms:
The Buyer accepts receipt of the Firearm described herein and understands and acknowledges that the firearm is sold “as is” condition without any guarantees of warranties of any kind, either express of implied
which were written or even suggested by the State and then DA, who represents the State, is going to charge me because everything was done according to the State’s document? no, no… he can try to charge me… but he is not gonna win for sure.
I know the power of the signature. I went through it already. The only way to break the signed contract is to prove that I was forced to sign it against my will, or I was somehow irresponsible signing it.
I know, in this Country, everybody can sue everyone for everything… but this everything has its limits…
4 Likes
My friend, I have broken so many leases, contracts, and binding arbitration agreements in my career as part of my jobs duties.
Think about what the OP said. He sold a defective gun knowing that it could malfunction and kill someone.
Think of how many used cars have been sold as is with no warranty implied explicit or implicit but then the original manufacturer had to do warranty work on a malfunctioning part. That just happened 4-5 years ago Toyota had to recall 3.5 million cars for the accelerator sticking. I am not saying all 3.5 of those Toyota’s were as is but I’m willing to bet some of them were.
I had a Saab Aero 6 cylinder convertible that I bought with no warranty and Saab wasn’t even in business anymore and at least once a year I would get a notice about some warranty work that had to be recalled because of a factory defect. Then I would have to drive to Atlanta’s Maserati dealership cause they had the only mechanic in the entire Southeast that could do Saab warranty work.
There’s a new one in Chattanooga now.
I understand your faith in contracts but I’ve seen far to many voided. Then one that ended in a death, well I hope it never happens to any of us.
I don’t want to argue with you.
2 Likes
no, he clearly posted:
you fully disclosed the nature of the failures to the new buyer
and contract says:
Buyer […] understands and acknowledges that the firearm is sold “as is” condition without any guarantees of warranties of any kind, either express of implied
It sounds simple…
Your examples with cars are OK… but we are talking NOT about factory warranty, but seller’s responsibility.
If you bought a used car from private seller and you had unfortunate accident… are you going to blame and sue previous owner?
2 Likes
I’m not talking about factory warranty. I am specifically talking about cars that had no warranty, yet the maker of the car provided a fix. Because when you get to talking about killing someone with something you have sold them with an as is clause. You seem to think that is the gold standard and that’s simply not the case in product liability.
Let’s take this to messages as I am sure very few are interested in our conversation about the sufficiency of a written receipt.
3 Likes
Yeah… I’m might be mistaken with this particular case. All these were hypothetical but it seemed to be reasonable to do anything to prevent being sued.
What you can do more? You’re selling unreliable firearm and notify buyer about the issue. The buyer agrees with the issue. Whatever he is going to do with the firearm, it’s his choice. Why the whole supply chain has to be blamed for his decision?
3 Likes
I do not think the original comment stated ‘sold a gun knowing it could malfunction and kill someone’. It was a trigger that would malfunction and the firearm would NOT fire. It was fully disclosed that it might malfunction.
Not sure that is something that has a need to worry, though there might be a lawsuit, it would be extremely difficult to win, with the fact that the purchaser did purchase the firearm knowingly and fully aware of the defect.
As far as contracts, it is very difficult to ‘void’ them, unless there is a defect in the contract or a ‘defect’ in or with one of the parties signing the contract. You can default, and that usually carries penalties. If not, and if contracts could be simply voided at will, for any reason, then we would actually have no enforceable contracts, no contract law, and you would be without any recourse.
2 Likes
“Let’s assume you purchased a new gun that within 100 rounds had 3 trigger failures. Obviously, the gun is unreliable so you want to get rid of it. Let’s assume you fully disclosed the nature of the failures to the new buyer. A few weeks later, the buyer is injured/killed trying to use the gun which had a trigger malfunction. Can the seller be sued?”
Maybe I have a jaded mindset with contracts concerning contracts due to previous industry. But we aren’t talking about a failure to perform on a contract to where someone lost their life. That brings a whole new level of scrutiny.
2 Likes
That is due to a known and identified manufacturing defect. The firearm may not be a known and identified manufacturing defect. If it has a recall, then the current owner, whoever it may be, can have it repaired.
Again, it is full disclosure. The seller did not hide anything and fully disclosed. And it is not ‘killing someone’, it is a firearm that may not fire all the time. Knowing that, if you decide to carry it, that is YOUR responsibility.
This is off the path. As I pointed out previously, the comment stated a firearm has a trigger that malfunctions sometimes. There is nothing being sold that can ‘kill’ the user, such as a barrel being blocked and someone fails to disassemble and inspect their firearm, simply loads it and fires having a catastrophic failure. The defect is fully disclosed, there has been no recall notices, and the buyer is aware of the defect and decides to purchase the firearm regardless of any malfunctions.
It seems you are trying to alter the scenario. Perhaps I missed something in the line of discussion above, but your assertion that it is a product that can kill a user, is incorrect, and the idea of product liability, which is not generally an issue, unless there is sufficient cases of a known manufacturing defect and it is identified and there is a recall.
In this case, the seller has a firearm with a trigger that malfunctions sometimes (why he did not take it to an armorer or gun smith or contact the manufacturer is unknown and may show something about the seller that is a totally different discussion)… .it is not a danger to the user, if they use it on the range for practice and not for daily carry. The seller fully discloses and the buyer is aware. The buyer then freely chooses to purchase, and has the opportunity to have the firearm repaired… if they want to carry it daily. But, it will not explode in their face or hand.
You are correct in the direction you took the discussion, but you are not correct based on the original comment, and the idea that contracts that have no defects in them, where all parties are competent and of legal age to enter into contracts can simply be voided is a rather concerning idea on your part.
2 Likes
First, how would the new owner be killed or injured by a trigger malfunction? Are you suggesting the new owner would point the muzzle at their face and look down the barrel of a loaded firearm that malfunctioned?
If I purchased a new firearm and it malfunctioned 3 times, if it had 3 trigger malfunctions in the first 100 rds, I would return to the point of purchase and demand it be rectified or sent to the factory for repair.
(Note or disclaimer: I am or was an armorer, and would most likely inspect the firearm and the trigger and try to install a new trigger to see if that resolved the situation, check any springs, and if it still did that, restore it to the condition I received it and return to the point of purchase)
So, we already must assume that for whatever reason, the owner decides to NOT seek repair of the firearm and simply sell it to a new owner.
As such, the new owner is made fully aware of the situation, perhaps the owner does not have time to have it repaired, is maybe preparing to go on a long trip and will not be able to have the firearm repaired and let’s the new owner decide to take care of repairs… but the buyer is has had all pertinent details disclosed, then the seller would perhaps be safe from judgement.
Would a contract, a real estate contract, for a house that has a defect, that is fully disclosed to the purchaser, and the purchaser proceeds with the purchase, and in 1 week after purchasing the house, it burns down, killing or injuring the new owner.
Is the seller of the house liable?
2 Likes
It’s only about the money. If there’s enough money in it, it’s game on. Contract, no contract, god is on your side. Doesn’t matter.
1 Like
Being an honest sort here and I would tell the person the gun is possible bomb and adjust the price accordingly. Or take it to a gunsmith or send it back to the factory for repairs and then sell it. I would feel like a real shitheel selling something that I know dont work and not warning the person.
4 Likes
And, perhaps over time, this topic has morphed into a different topic, but originally, I thought it was the ‘seller has informed the buyer of the defect and the buyer chose to buy it anyway’.
You are correct, most states have a doctrine of caveat emptor, but if you knowingly sell something defective, knowingly sell something that has material defects, you might still face some legal accountability… but if you disclose the information, the likelihood of being sued and losing is rare, as you disclosed the information.
I just stepped in because your comment, while accurate, seems to have veered away from the original topic. Not sure if there has been an intentional steerage or not.
1 Like