Comments about ‘Trolley Square gun suit ongoing’
Debate about whether weapon was illegally sold will continue
What You May Have Missed
Most Popular
Across Site
In Utah
- Bottom 30 elementary schools in Utah by test...
- Top 30 elementary schools in Utah by test scores
- Growing pains: Rate of young men struggling...
- BYU student killed after falling 70 feet in...
- New president to lead Mormon Tabernacle Choir
- Glenn Beck unleashes his dogs of war
- Gail Miller gets engaged to Salt Lake attorney
- Charges: Runaway teen caused accident that...
Most Commented
Across Site
In Utah
- Make it a small: N.Y.'s ban on large...
37 - Glenn Beck unleashes his dogs of war
34 - Cottonwood High School football coach...
25 - Rep. Jim Matheson favors getting rid of...
15 - Idaho awaits No Child Left Behind waiver
14 - Poll shows Utahns think Legislature's...
14 - Man shot brother while showing him...
13 - Jon Huntsman Jr. is done pulling punches
12






I think this paralyzed lady is right in saying that charges should be pressed against a shop that sold a gun illegally. However, I hope this isn't taken to mean that the shop itself is responsible for the shooting. It really aggravates me when people fall for such stupidity.
This is a classic example of our legal system run amuck.
Agreed. Should a gun shop (or pawn shop) make sure they're selling a gun illegally or not?
Absolutely.
Should they be held liable if the new owner kills someone?
No freaking way....
Accountability reigns!
Justice is served!
Next step "Gun Control" (Not ban but control)
Rednecks find guns their justice.
Accountability must be enforced to LIMIT these types of actions that we read daily in our papers.
Stacy is a man.
Talofic could have legally bought the same shotgun configured just like it was if there had been a rifle stock in the box. Then he could have simply left it like it was and done what he did. How did the presence or absence of a rifle stock cause or contribute to this shooting? It didn't and it's SERIOUSLY unfair to blame the dealer for selling this shotgun to a boy who is 18 and can buy a shotgun at that age. Any verdict against this dealer would be solely upon sympathy and not the law.
"Such weapons have no legitimate sporting purposes, Burbidge argued.."
So, I suppose if Talovic had used a duck gun to create his terroristic carnage Burbidge would have refused the case? I doubt it.
It is not a requirement of law that guns have legitimate sporting purpose in order to meet Second Amendment guaranty. In fact, that amendment is in place to protect militaristic weapons. Those weapons or any other are not to blame for their misuse, nor is the dealer that sold it.
If I sold a car to someone who later killed a person while driving drunk can I be sued as being criminally negligent by selling the car to that individual?
IF this case is successful we should be able to sue car dealerships for selling the cars used by drunk drivers. How silly.
How does a pistol grip make this gun more lethal than a rifle stock??? The same size shell is used. Pellets still come out of the barrell and death still insues whether he holds it with a pistol grip or up to his shoulder with a rifle stock. I am sorry for what happened that night and can't imagine the pain and suffering one man created, but can we please stop blaming the gun?? They are grasping at straws. This case is about money and trying to get someone else to pay except for the one person who is ultimately responsible.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
— About comments