How close to criminal negligence are we

[Lohman446]

. They took everything he had and threw him in jail. This was because he knowingly violated industry standards that jeopordized the lives of his employees.

TK, and others, have brought up valid points - that with the current atmosphere in paintball we are on the wrong side of negligence - someone someday is going to go to jail over paintball. At taht point we are going to either form a real regulatory body that has power, or the goverment is going to lay out a set of laws (if we're lucky). The other alternative is that PB guns will be classed as deadly weapons and playing of the game will become criminal assault.

To me there are two answers to this. The first is to follow ATSM standards as they are written. The other, and more likely in my mind is for the companies to come together and "update" ATSM standards. There is no reason that these need to be viewed as written in stone... it can be a static document and change as needed to limit the industr.

[Muzikman]

I have not read all the posts yet, but, shouldn't the same be said for college and pro athletes? Yet, how many times have the authorities stepped overtop of the organizational bodies when there has been serious infractions between two players. Incidents like Dino Ciccarelli spearing....umm...(what ever the hell his name was back in the 80's). If I am not mistaken Ciccarelli spent time in jail for that and all that was was "illegal" use of the equipment used to play the game. I don't see much difference between spearing someone and getting arrested for it, or overshooting (and hurting) someone and getting arrested for it.

Now, if a criminal charge should ever happen, it would be against the person using the gun, not the company that made it. BUT, that does not mean the company would get away clean, it would just be brought up as a civil lawsuit.

That being said, even a person using a pump gun could be charged if the gun was used improperly. Rmping boards just make it easier. Think about how many criminal charges are brought upon drivers if they kill someone in an auto accident.

Is there really criminal negligence to it..if the person hurt or injured is playing on his/her own free will? I underdstand if they are hurt by somone shooting in an illegal mode but the person injured still knows the risk and knows that the cheat modes are out there.
i think proposing criminal negligence is a little extreme.The person is not intentionaly hurting the other person then again there is a such thing as an unintentional tort...but negligence would be intentional so a person could have a civil suit for an unintentional tort but the other person would not be acting negligently since it was not on purpose.my thoughts are kinda scttered so if that doesnt make since sorry..and plz correct me if i am wrong just using what little bit of knowledge i have of civil law.

[Lohman446]

I have not read all the posts yet, but, shouldn't the same be said for college and pro athletes? Yet, how many times have the authorities stepped overtop of the organizational bodies when there has been serious infractions between two players. Incidents like Dino Ciccarelli spearing....umm...(what ever the hell his name was back in the 80's). If I am not mistaken Ciccarelli spent time in jail for that and all that was was "illegal" use of the equipment used to play the game. I don't see much difference between spearing someone and getting arrested for it, or overshooting (and hurting) someone and getting arrested for it.

Now, if a criminal charge should ever happen, it would be against the person using the gun, not the company that made it. BUT, that does not mean the company would get away clean, it would just be brought up as a civil lawsuit.

That being said, even a person using a pump gun could be charged if the gun was used improperly. Rmping boards just make it easier. Think about how many criminal charges are brought upon drivers if they kill someone in an auto accident.

My concern is not with an accident that happens with ATSM approved equipment - though I realize the risk is there. I think at that point you may get away without criminal charges. But what if you are using equipment that is clearly in violation of industry standards?

[PBX Ronin 23]

TK, and others, have brought up valid points - that with the current atmosphere in paintball we are on the wrong side of negligence - someone someday is going to go to jail over paintball. At taht point we are going to either form a real regulatory body that has power, or the goverment is going to lay out a set of laws (if we're lucky). The other alternative is that PB guns will be classed as deadly weapons and playing of the game will become criminal assault.

Amen.

[teufelhunden]

We also know a guy in England died after getting shot in the head.

AGD

That's convenient to bring up, despite the fact that the autopsy revealed that he was not killed as a result of a paintball impact. He had a preexisting medical condition and was ordered by his doctor to not play sports.

Ask Manike for details.

[Lohman446]

That's convenient to bring up, despite the fact that the autopsy revealed that he was not killed as a result of a paintball impact. He had a preexisting medical condition and was ordered by his doctor to not play sports.

Ask Manike for details.

Could be... but the line of questions that was brought up would be brought up to a jury by a prosecutor... sure the defense would argue that preexisting condition etc. but how relevant would that be to the line of questioning. Even without that question in there.. how would you, if you were the non paintball playing public, decide a case based on those facts.

[shatter_storm]

Could be... but the line of questions that was brought up would be brought up to a jury by a prosecutor... sure the defense would argue that preexisting condition etc. but how relevant would that be to the line of questioning. Even without that question in there.. how would you, if you were the non paintball playing public, decide a case based on those facts.

Alright, here's where I have to chime in.

"Man dies during paintball game" headlines say.
Right below it, first paragraph should read "he suffered an aneurysm during the game, a condition that his doctors had warned him about."
Then, a quote from the doctor "I had warned him not to play sports of any kind, he just didn't want to listen"

Good reporting would get the facts straight, not try and twist information to make paintball "look bad". If your doctors told you to not drive because you're prone to frequent fainting spells, and you drive, get yourself into a car accident because you fainted and kill someone, can you sue the car manufacturer? Can you sue your doctor?

[Lohman446]

I am not discussing sueing anyone, I am discussing criminal charges - and if you recall they looked into criminal charges in that issue and the fact that he had a preexisting condition probably saved people from going to jail - as I understand it.

Don't look at the real possibilities, complain that they are real - it won't solve anything. Based on what I am seeing on this thread, like it or not, it is only a matter of time before someone is on trial for an "accident" in paintball. And considering our disregard for ATSM standards someone is going to have a problem in court. Adding the fact that someone has already been killed in paintball is just going to cause your defense attorney to have one more thing to try to overcome to keep you out of jail. The facts TK brought up are likely going to be brought to a jury and work against whoever it is that becomes the test case.

Ignore the facts, hide from them, maybe they'll go away - I doubt it. We need to do something, even if it is as simple as just updating ATSM standards.

[Lohman446]

If your doctors told you to not drive because you're prone to frequent fainting spells, and you drive, get yourself into a car accident because you fainted and kill someone, can you sue the car manufacturer? Can you sue your doctor?

yes, I can sue the manufacturer is civil court, and I will likely get a "nuisance" award before it even goes to court. Doctor.. possibly for not looking at better methods. Remember, people have sued Wal-Mart for selling family members guns that they committed suicide with. Regardless.. if GM ignored known safety faults - at the order of the CEO and knowingly violated industry standards for profit with disregard to teh safety of that decision and someone was killed - could they be held criminally liable. I would argue whoever made the decision would be liable in criminal court. I think your going to find that a lot of people are going to be looked at closely in regards to criminal law should someone ever be killed in paintball without a preexisting condition. The events that have already unfolded are just going to be used against them to prove just how negligent they are. I think we are obviously past the line of criminal negligence should the unfortunate ever occur.

[REDRT]

The world is becoming a bunch back stabbers. A company gives as a product the majority wants. If anything goes wrong even if it isn't the said companys fault the once happy player is sueing that company. Lawsuits are out of control, not the paintball industry! It is like these want to get rich liberals that sue a gun company because someone used a firearm in a crime. Simply crazy! If anyone was truely concerned about high end markers being too much of anything everyone would be buying ammor that makes you look like the Michelin Man. How many people do you see wearing that crap? Paintball gear as a whole is changing. As the markers become faster, the safety gear is becoming better to. We are not out to kill,neither is the paintball industry. I say,"let it ride"!

[Lohman446]

The world is becoming a bunch back stabbers. A company gives as a product the majority wants. If anything goes wrong even if it isn't the said companys fault the once happy player is sueing that company. Lawsuits are out of control, not the paintball industry! It is like these want to get rich liberals that sue a gun company because someone used a firearm in a crime. Simply crazy! If anyone was truely concerned about high end markers being too much of anything everyone would be buying ammor that makes you look like the Michelin Man. How many people do you see wearing that crap? Paintball gear as a whole is changing. As the markers become faster, the safety gear is becoming better to. We are not out to kill,neither is the paintball industry. I say,"let it ride"!

Do you realize that that attitude (I'm guilty of having it to an extent) is what may ultimately land someone in criminal court - and subsequently jail?

This is not about sueing and getting rich, or about getting sued. The concerns I have involve the criminal court, and that attitude being on the wrong side of criminal negligence.

Am I concerned about injury or death in paintball? No I'm still in the "it will never happen to me" camp. But I am looking at things around paintball and starting to accept that it may just be a matter of time before it happens somewhere to someone. I think its not a matter of if anymore, I think its a matter of when and to who it happens.

Once it does happen I think a lot of people are going to be surprised. Surprised when they find themselves not only on the wrong end of a million dollar (or whatever) civil lawsuit but looking at a district attorney and having there attorney explain to them, that in the confines of the criminal law, they are in fact guilty of negligent homicide (or whatever) and should seek a plea to minimize jail time.

[PBX Ronin 23]

The world is becoming a bunch back stabbers. A company gives as a product the majority wants. If anything goes wrong even if it isn't the said companys fault the once happy player is sueing that company. Lawsuits are out of control, not the paintball industry! It is like these want to get rich liberals that sue a gun company because someone used a firearm in a crime. Simply crazy! If anyone was truely concerned about high end markers being too much of anything everyone would be buying ammor that makes you look like the Michelin Man. How many people do you see wearing that crap? Paintball gear as a whole is changing. As the markers become faster, the safety gear is becoming better to. We are not out to kill,neither is the paintball industry. I say,"let it ride"!

If the majority of players or members of the industry continue to take the same position you have just expressed, then we are indeed headed towards a very uncertain future.

What I do and have professed is for the industry to take pre-emptive steps to ensure that when the hammer falls, that we are in better position to defend outselves. Perhaps it is time to start looking at the ASTM Paintball Sub-Committee as more than just an advisory group. Eventually when the hammer does fall, in the absence of an industry governing body, a judge will base his knowledge on what the ASTM states as the acceptable and reasonable parameters.

No offense intended but we should discuss ideas on a probable pre-emptive solutions rather than just acquiesce and leave our fate to others.

[Lohman446]

I was trying to think of examples.

Take boxing.. there are set regulations around the glove based on safety concerns.

Let's say you as a boxer "weight" a glove, and someone is killed as a result - you are going to have criminal issues.

Let's say the promotor of the event encouraged "weighted" gloves in order to draw more participants... can we say criminal facilitation or other charges (again not a lawyer)?

Let's say that a company disregarded known safety rules in order to manufacture those "weighted" gloves - criminal facilitation?

I don't think that it's only the player that is going to have a problem when the tragedy occurs. We, from promotors, to players, to manufacturers... at least many of us, are ignoring the warning signs, the clearly posted standards, and what the non-paintball playing public would view as common sense in what we do. And remember your not likely to have a tournament player to "understand" why you did the actions that you did that resulted in a death on the jury that I beleive, ultimately will convict someone (or multiple someones) for that tragedy when it occurs.

[Lohman446]

No offense intended but we should discuss ideas on a probable pre-emptive solutions rather than just acquiesce and leave our fate to others.

100% agreed. It is time that we took action (and I have said rewriting of ATSM standards for example, and htere are others) to be in that better position to defend ourselves. Can we stop it from happening? I think eventually a tragedy is going to happen. But as it stands now, when it does... there is, to me, obvious negligence and we have nothing to defend our actions with that will help any of us in front of a jury.

[SlartyBartFast]

The world is becoming a bunch back stabbers. A company gives as a product the majority wants. If anything goes wrong even if it isn't the said companys fault the once happy player is sueing that company. Lawsuits are out of control, not the paintball industry! It is like these want to get rich liberals that sue a gun company because someone used a firearm in a crime. Simply crazy! If anyone was truely concerned about high end markers being too much of anything everyone would be buying ammor that makes you look like the Michelin Man. How many people do you see wearing that crap? Paintball gear as a whole is changing. As the markers become faster, the safety gear is becoming better to. We are not out to kill,neither is the paintball industry. I say,"let it ride"!

That's a cheap and pathetic excuse to avoid responsibility.

People want cheap infant formula. Does that mean that those is China who sold counterfeit formula that killed babies aren't responsible? After all they only "gave the product the consumers wanted".

And if you look past your Liberal hatred, even gun companies need to be put on some kind of leash if they won't regulate themselves.

Some cases may be overboard, but doesn't even a gun company cross the line when their advertising underlines that their grips don't keep fingerprints or if they sell unusually high numbers of weapons to questionable individuals near jurisdictions with restrictions (or close to a border)?

I've also had the "comapnies only give consumers what they want" argument in antoehr thread that got erased. While partially true, companies create the image and spend fortunes on advertising. Or do you believe the cigarette manufacturers crap that advertising is only for market share and not to create demand?