Legal issues with building on spec?

[Scota4570]

What are the legal/ liability implications of building a  ML rifle and selling it?  How is is normally guarded against by you builders? 

[Stophel]

I've quit making guns for other people, but when I did, I didn't worry about it.  I will not live in fear of lawyery.  Plus, the people I made guns for, I got to know.

Besides, I'm poor.  I have nothing for a lawyer to try to take from me.  There would be no profit in it. 

[rich pierce]

Make like an ostrich. Stick your head in the sand. Realistically there’s not enough money in this to afford the protection a lawyer or insurance agent would advise. If somebody makes a mistake and gets hurt, there’s not enough protection in the world for a custom gunmaker. My view only. Just hiring a lawyer to handle the lawsuit would cost enough to break you, LLC and insurance or not.

[Bill Raby]

I figure the best defense is to do quality work. Sure, there is always the chance that some dishonest scumbag will sue you when they use their own incompetence to shoot themselves. But you cannot live your life based on the possible actions of others. Just do your best to build guns that are not going to explode. I will be selling most of the guns that I build. I am also doing video for every step as I build them. I figure someone could look at the video and decide if I did it right or not.

[flehto]

I've sold all my builds {excepting my personal hunting guns}  and usually build spec guns, but have also taken a few orders and w/ these have never had a contract....won't start a build until a check arrives for the build mat'ls. W/ the spec gun purchasers, the gun isn't shipped until the full price is in my hand and the purchaser has a 10 day inspection  period, as does the buyer of  an ordered gun. Have never had a gun returned.  Also...because there is no contract, the   inspection  period guarantee is stated  verbally.

Have had only one instance of a problem w/ a buyer {an ordered gun} and this was settled  w/ the buyer eventually  paying the  quoted price.  The problem wasn't concerned w/ the  quality of my work.

Actually.....the  gunbuilding business is an excellent example of the honesty of  the  builder and the customer and in this day and age, a rare occurrence.

Can't speak as to a circumstance of the buyer using my build to perpetrate a crime ....never had it happen, that I know of.....Fred

[Bob Roller]

PROBABLY the biggest risk would be a blown up gun due to poor quality
and uncertified for specific use barrel materials. The only thing that saved
G.R.Douglas barrel company years ago was a big product liability insurance
policy when one of theirs caused severe injury to the shooter.That's the only
one I ever heard of that went to court.They were getting away from the black
powder business anyhow because of the shabby idea that anything pertaining
to a muzzle loader had be cheeeeep.This info came from a long time employee.
This idea is also why I got interested in making car parts and did so gladly.
Bob Roller

[Robby]

Talking to an attorney that handled liability issues for the company where we worked. Someone had been injured using our product and from the description, totally the fault of the injured party. I said you got an easy one here, to which he replied, you don't understand, they will get something, they always get something, my job is to keep it as painless as possible.
Oh, and this papers that some people draw up absolving themselves of any liability and signed by the user. My daughter is an attorney and says they are worth less than the time and materials it took to create them.
Robby

[okawbow]

I make archery bows. I’ve sold about 5000 bows in the past 15 years. I make very little profit actually, but I do buy product liability insurance. I carry insurance to protect anyone who would be hurt due to a problem with something I made. The insurance costs me about $800 a year. The insurance company provides lawyers in case I am sued. They also pay up to 2 million in liability.

I have been sued in the past. They wanted 7 million dollars because someone using poor judgement shot someone else with one of my bows. After the insurance company lawyers interviewed the people involved, it turned out the shooter was not even using my bow! It just happened to be one of the bows being used by 3 people and was mistakenly assumed to be the bow used by the shooter.

If I did not have insurance, I would have needed to hire lawyers and would never have been able to afford to fight the lawsuit. My company is an LLC now. I still carry insurance though to provide for anyone who legitimately gets hurt from my products.

[Scota4570]

I hear my ideas being confirmed.  LLC, lots of insurance.  Based on the meager profit it is not worth it.  As much as I would like to sign my rifles, it would be and invite for a lawsuit when some fool loads with smokeless and is injured or killed. 

I had some experience with this kind of thing years a go.  The customer blew up a shot gun by using components the hull manufacturer specifically warned against.  The guy lied and lied.  After the shell manufacturer bought him a new shotgun, he admitted he lied to me.

Unfortunately I am to aware of scummy layers.  I worked with attorneys for 30 years providing expert testimony.  May of them lie to your face and don't even blink. 

I am living off a retirement nest egg.  Loosing it is unthinkable.  Sounds like I should only sell to people I know well.   

[WadePatton]

Talking to an attorney that handled liability issues for the company where we worked. Someone had been injured using our product and from the description, totally the fault of the injured party. I said you got an easy one here, to which he replied, you don't understand, they will get something, they always get something, my job is to keep it as painless as possible.
Oh, and this papers that some people draw up absolving themselves of any liability and signed by the user. My daughter is an attorney and says they are worth less than the time and materials it took to create them.
Robby

That is if these papers are TESTED in court.  The main thing waivers of liability do is convince folks that they have no right to sue--and thus won't seek out a lawyer to find out what you just said.  It works a --LOT--. 

Example: Did you ever sign a release for your kid (any minor in your charge) to go do something with school or a group?  Did that paper prevent you from suing--sure it does.  BUT the rights of the kid him/herself cannot EVER be waived, as they cannot waive their own rights and no one can do it for them.  The kid, if injured, can sue and will likely prevail, if a lawyer is hired.

I have a JD.  I don't care to use it professionally.  But I remember some stuff and know some things.  AS to my own liability, I'll form an LLC/INC when the flow is right and also it'll be a long time before I have enough of anything for anyone to be interested in suing me.

The video documentation as Bill mentions above is not a bad idea, one could document all pertinent features as to safety.  A very important documentation would also be your suppliers, as you are counting on them to provide sound materials. Any answer filed to a claim for injuries related to barrel failure, would quite naturally have a cross-claim in it against the bbl maker if there is any chance the bbl was suspect.  Fact of legal life. 

But the -deep pockets- are the ones that attract lawsuits.  So if you have deep pockets (nothing wrong with that), maybe don't flaunt it. 

Also none of us ever wants to see anyone get hurt.  Lawsuits of merit are always based on serious personal injuries*, not theoretical.  Build safe guns and try not to sell them to hazardous folks.

*death being the most serious one, and the buyer cannot waive his survivors' rights to sue--another example of where waivers are useless.

[JCKelly]

Bob Roller mid-1980's I shook hands, sort of, with the shooter involved in GR Douglas getting out of the barrel business. He had his ring & little fingers remaining on that hand, most of the palm gone. The gunsmith, whose only error was to use a Douglas barrel, was involved; briefly as he had no money. I do not know what were his costs, he did need a lawyer.

At that time John Baird was interested in muzzle loader safety and published a number of articles in The Gun Report With his demise now everyone is on their own. Really.

[Bob Roller]

Seems to me, as I remember, one of the guys posting here was the Expert Witness testifying for the prosecution in that case, that ultimately put John Baird and the Buckskin Report out of business.....

The Buckskin Report was started by John Baird in the early 1970's as a protest against\poor building practices involved in production muzzle
loaders,namely the T/C "Hawken" that were assembled by people that had little or no knowledge about how such work should be done.Breech plugs
in some were over stressed to the point of fracturing the last thread by forced tightening using a long bar to force the plug to align with the top flat of
the barrel. There were also cases of 45 caliber guns with 50 caliber breech plugs that would capture a cleaning patch and put the gun out of use until
the breech plug was removed.I had one in my shop years ago and the plug was so tight I couldn't budge it and when a friend,Bill "Big Bill"Hendersen
who was about 6'and 8"AND 365 POUNDS COULDN'T MOVE IT EITHER we knew there was something wrong,very wrong.There were several bad episodes
with plugs blowing off of broken last threads and I know of one terrible injury that involved the loss of an eye and brain injury.
Another case that got Baird into trouble was an imported double gun that had improper nipple seats and a big ball of fire erupted when it was fired.
When pictures of this eruption were shown,the lawyers went away and the maker revamped the guns.The man that posted about this Douglas barrel
incident had to answer only one question from the plaintiff's lawyer and it was "Will ANY steel company recommend 12L14 for gun barrels"? and the
answer was NO,not one.Game over and product liability insurance save the barrel maker.
John Baird was not put out of business by court testimony but there were personal problems and falling income from the magazine that were the major contributors to
the demise.Baird later was living here in WV and was a victim of a dementia of some sort that brought about his death. Baird,Tom Dawson,Art Resell
and myself were friends and I still have the 4th book called Hawken Rifles,the Mountain Man's Choice in my personal collection and am mentioned in it
as a supplier of locks and triggers for these rifle.
Bob Roller

[rick/pa]

Over the years we've moved 3 times.  I usually end up throwing out all the magazines I've stockpiled between moves but I still have my copies of the Buckskin Report from June of '75 to June of '82.  I remember the articles John wrote about barrel steels.  I also have an autographed copy of John's book "Who's Who in Buckskins" 1973 first edition. Gotta dig out those old copies and reread them.

[kentuckyrifleman]

As someone in law school, I'd say....don't give them any ideas.

[Dphariss]

Most or all ML blow ups are protected by the "handloader defense". Shooter can't prove they loaded it right.
Has worked every time.....

(longer post deleted)


Dan

[Dphariss]

As someone in law school, I'd say....don't give them any ideas.

What about people making barrels from steels the major steel maker says is not to be used for gun barrels? Hmm? Then what?

Dan

[rich pierce]

The whole gun barrel steel case was a lawyers trick, nothing more.

Why: apples and oranges
When you ask a steel manufacturer whether a steel is suitable for gun barrels, what are they thinking of?  .270. 30-06. We all know that muzzleloaders generate half or less the pressure of center fire rounds. We all know that wrought iron (which is not a barrel steel btw) was used successfully for centuries along with Damascus twist barrels in modern style shotguns.

A lawyers trick, no more than that.

Example. Let’s say I want to make wooden bats for playing wiffleball. So, I make and sell some in pine. They work great and are light enough for kids to use. Plus they are real wooden bats! Everybody happy for years.

Then some adult smashes one of my wiffle ball bats against a tree in frustration. The end flies off and hits a kid in the eye causing loss of vision. Everybody sues.

Lawyer for plaintiff hires a wood products engineer. The guy makes a living on these cases. Doesn’t care a whit for logic. Plaintiff lawyer:”Sir, expert witness of inestimable veracity, is pine suitable for baseball bats?”

Expert witness replies, “Under no circumstances should pine be used for baseball bats. It is grossly inferior to well known, available hardwoods including ash and hard maple. Furthermore 6061-T6 aluminum could have been used. The use of pine for a baseball bat is unconscionable.”

I lose my pine wiffle bat business. Anyone using wood other than ash or maple is pilloried forevermore.

A lawyers trick. Doesn’t have to make sense. Just sell the jury and celebrate! 

[Dphariss]

Over the years we've moved 3 times.  I usually end up throwing out all the magazines I've stockpiled between moves but I still have my copies of the Buckskin Report from June of '75 to June of '82.  I remember the articles John wrote about barrel steels.  I also have an autographed copy of John's book "Who's Who in Buckskins" 1973 first edition. Gotta dig out those old copies and reread them.

I have a complete set, or nearly so that I gleaned from my own and those bought in yard sales in Big Timber over the years. Then one day I was over at Vivian Baird's house getting  her  car running, again,  and mentioned the magazine I had got from the CLA and how much easier and better quality it was with desktop publishing  than how we did the Buckskin Report. She had the complete set of both magazines in the original binders from John's office in a cabinet in the garage which she gave to me. I also have an index that covers the early years. These and the Blackpowder Cartridge News are all I keep other than specific issues of the American Rifleman or others with articles of specific interest.

Dan

[Dphariss]

The whole gun barrel steel case was a lawyers trick, nothing more.

Why: apples and oranges
When you ask a steel manufacturer whether a steel is suitable for gun barrels, what are they thinking of?  .270. 30-06. We all know that muzzleloaders generate half or less the pressure of center fire rounds. We all know that wrought iron (which is not a barrel steel btw) was used successfully for centuries along with Damascus twist barrels in modern style shotguns.

A lawyers trick, no more than that.

Example. Let’s say I want to make wooden bats for playing wiffleball. So, I make and sell some in pine. They work great and are light enough for kids to use. Plus they are real wooden bats! Everybody happy for years.

Then some adult smashes one of my wiffle ball bats against a tree in frustration. The end flies off and hits a kid in the eye causing loss of vision. Everybody sues.

Lawyer for plaintiff hires a wood products engineer. The guy makes a living on these cases. Doesn’t care a whit for logic. Plaintiff lawyer:”Sir, expert witness of inestimable veracity, is pine suitable for baseball bats?”

Expert witness replies, “Under no circumstances should pine be used for baseball bats. It is grossly inferior to well known, available hardwoods including ash and hard maple. Furthermore 6061-T6 aluminum could have been used. The use of pine for a baseball bat is unconscionable.”

I lose my pine wiffle bat business. Anyone using wood other than ash or maple is pilloried forevermore.

A lawyers trick. Doesn’t have to make sense. Just sell the jury and celebrate!

Interesting take.  But remember that pine baseball bats don't have to safely contain 10000-20000 psi 4" from your face. The info has been out there for years but its too scary to talk about. Then the people with maimed hands and faces, what of them? But irrelevant arguments like yours are typical when this subject comes up.
A VERY well known modern barrel maker (I am sure he makes more barrels in a year than all the ML barrel makers do) was talking to a friend of mine and my friend, a ML shooter since childhood and heavily involved in BPCR at the time brought up the subject of leaded screw stock ML barrels. The barrel maker said that anyone who watched a steel mill make mill run steel would never make a barrel from the stuff. He also stated that he would rather shoot a wrought iron barrel than one of leaded screw stock. Did you ever stop to wonder why the US military staid with skelp welded IRON barrels for the rifle musket and not steel? Yeah, probably not.... Until about the time of the Civil War, steel was not very reliable stuff, improvements in steel making around 1860 greatly improved the quality. When Colt started using 36 Navy frames to make 44 caliber revolvers. But controlling the alloy was still difficult and mostly guess work compared to even the 1890s. If you think steel alloy does not matter in gun barrels you need to look at the law suit Remington lost over their 870 barrel failures when they decided to use a steel that was "strong enough" but lacked the properties needed for a gun barrel. People were maimed because Remington used a steel that was subject to work hardening and embrittlement (if thats the correct term) as a result. The barrels failed AT PRESSURES THE SAME OR LOWER THAN BP WILL PRODUCE in a ML. SAAMI standard pressure for 12 gauge is under 12000 psi. Look at Lyman's pressure data for MLs.  This is about 10% of the yield number for the steel used so why did it fail? IT WAS THE WRONG ALLOY FOR THE APPLICATION.  Yeah they were trap shooters and they shot a lot. But EVERY trap shooter does. Remington cut a corner to save a few bucks a barrel and people were maimed. It cost them. So was this a "lawyers trick"? No it was a manufacturer making barrels of an alloy unsuitable for the specific application. How about a auto maker making brake calipers out of pot metal? You wife is driving one of these. Get on the brakes. Caliper breaks, she ends up turned into hamburger under a semi. Its found the material in the brake calipers was the wrong material for the application.  What are YOU going to do? Yeah, thats what I thought.

Dan

[rich pierce]

Most of your arguments deliberately ignore statistics and tests. Over-exaggerate illustrations to try to make ignoring statistics seem the right thing to do.

Tens of thousands of barrels made of leaded steel. Millions of round balls fired downrange. Only obstructions lead to failure. And it is NOT PROVEN BY ANYONE that 4140 will survive an obstruction. By your logic, 4140 is unsuitable as a barrel steel. It’s been proven scores of times that it fails catastrophically when a barrel obstruction occurs. Sometimes fatally.

[Joe S]

Rich - My understanding from the many discussion on this topic is that the issue is the failure mode of the steel, not the probability failure .

According to the metallurgists, 12L14 tends to shatter and fragment, while better gun barrel steels tend to bulge and split, but stay together.

There is no question that under normal use 12L14 is fine for a gun barrel, but when accidents happen it's nice to have a little more probability of escaping injury.

Personally, I would never buy another 12L14 barrel if "certified gun barrel steel" was available from our suppliers. It's out there, we just need to have enough people ask for it and we can have it.