ok, i thought of this odd scenario this morning. you are at a range, and they allow any rifle that is not a 50 bmg within reason, i.e. AR15 is allowed. so you go, happy to shoot indoors. this range has aged in its years, and the back stop (well assume this is entirely within the realm of possibility) has worn pretty badly. as you are shooting at said range a few rounds get through and out of the shop. there is property damage and someone is struck in the leg (non life threatening, i dont want to kill someone in my made up accident). i KNOW the range would definately be liable, however, you as the shooter, paying to use said range and ASSUMING there is proficient backstop, could you also face charges and/or liability suit? if so, would these have a snowballs chance in hell of sticking?
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
range backstop failure... your liability as the shooter?
- Thread starter jve153
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
I always heard that the property owner is responsible for any incidents that happen on his property.
But I think every shooter is responsible for where his bullet goes.
Don't you have to sign a waver, assuming responsibility for your own actions, before you can shoot on the range?
But with that being an "improper" backstop, that may be the ranges fault.
I don't know the answer to this question
But I think every shooter is responsible for where his bullet goes.
Don't you have to sign a waver, assuming responsibility for your own actions, before you can shoot on the range?
But with that being an "improper" backstop, that may be the ranges fault.
I don't know the answer to this question
I suspect, in the litigious culture we now enjoy, that you, the shooter, will almost certainly be a party to the inevitable lawsuit. It seems a shotgun approach is used for these things, rather than a rifle approach, with the aggrieved party casting the net far and wide attempting to locate whoever it is that has the most money, rather than necessarily the party at fault. I bet the range, the contractor that constructed the range, the shooter, the maker of the rifle, the manufacturer of the bullet, the miner of the lead, the NRA and the Tea Party would all be targeted! Having said that, if I noticed that the range was dilapidated to the point that I had concerns about the backstop integrity, I hope I would decide not to shoot that day.
"this range has aged in its years, and the back stop (well assume this is entirely within the realm of possibility) has worn pretty badly"
This was meant more of an explanation of my train of thought leading to possibility of said scenario. i am not sure that most of us would be able to look from downrange unless we were able to see light coming through to know enough of its structural integrity by sight from 30 feet away.
This was meant more of an explanation of my train of thought leading to possibility of said scenario. i am not sure that most of us would be able to look from downrange unless we were able to see light coming through to know enough of its structural integrity by sight from 30 feet away.
The range owner, the shooter, the manager on duty, the person who loaded the magazines and anyone nearby will likely be included in the suit.
If your question is whether you would be liable, that is for a Court ot decide.
If your questions is whether you will lose money and face serious exposure as the shooter, the answer is yes.
I have seen many people defend a lawsuit and win but still spend $50,000+. I have also seen many people know they are right and would win but their homeowner's insurance settle the case for nuisance value then the homeowner become unable to get homeowner's insurance for a reasonable rate.
If your question is whether you would be liable, that is for a Court ot decide.
If your questions is whether you will lose money and face serious exposure as the shooter, the answer is yes.
I have seen many people defend a lawsuit and win but still spend $50,000+. I have also seen many people know they are right and would win but their homeowner's insurance settle the case for nuisance value then the homeowner become unable to get homeowner's insurance for a reasonable rate.
In the world of lawyers that we live in today I believe your liability would be essentially unlimited. Make sure you know that you are catching every single bullet. I shoot down into a deep valley on my property. I worked at a range once that had a tall thick dirt mound that we all thought was adequate until one day some clown with a 50 BMG put several rounds into it and they went clear through and kept on going. Wake up call. More dirt. NO 50 BMGs allowed.
hoosierdoc
Freed prisoner
If I'm hitting golf balls at a range and I break a windshield, it's on me. Is this any different?
It is different, I think, because you'd be the one controlling the release, direction and power of the ball AND there's not (normally) a backstop right? In this case, the shooter is dependent on the facility to provide the proper backstop and/or means to capture the rounds.
If the shooter aims or fires a round AWAY from the backstop (wide or high, etc), then it'd be closer to your golf example.
hoosierdoc
Freed prisoner
Driving range has a big net to contain the balls. Gun range I'm pulling the trigger too. Not trying to be argumentative, I just see it as being similar.
I will admit to intentionally trying to slice the crap out of a ball and hit a water tower back in Carmel, but that was when cars weren't coming and it was probably 400 yards away so I had no chance to ever hit without a bounce. Heh.
Sad but true. I was involved in a construction related problem years ago and was dragged into the suit on a heating/cooling unit mold problem. The owner didn't properly maintain it and a hotel guest got sick. We were dragged in because we installed the unit. Our chickens**t insurance company felt it was cheaper to pay and caved in for a share of the pay out. That would probably be the case in your scenario.
revolvers&w
Sharpshooter
In this society I can't imagine that you would not be named in the suite.
