Mom Sues Wal-Mart Over Daughter's Suicide

[Bluebear]

DALLAS - Near the end of her short life, Shayla Stewart, a diagnosed manic-depressive and schizophrenic, assaulted police officers and was arrested for attacking a fellow customer at a Denton Wal-Mart where she had a prescription for anti-psychotic medication.

Given all those signs, her parents say, another Wal-Mart just seven miles away should have never sold her the shotgun she used to kill herself at age 24 in 2003.

Her mother, Lavern Bracy, is suing the world's biggest store chain for $25 million, saying clerks should have known about her daughter's illness or done more to find out.

The case, filed earlier this month, has reignited a debate over the confidentiality of mental health records and the effectiveness of background checks on would-be buyers of guns.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041221/ap_on_re_us/gun_lawsuit

[KyndCulture]

1. Wow anti-psych drugs and shotguns. one stop shopping...

And this story could have ended with.... after killing 20 people, she turned the gun on herself...


UGH.

[Lenape85]

2. She should sue the bastards

Those nutcases deserve it for pushing guns on people.

[Egalitariat]

22. What did Wal-Mart do wrong....

that they could have LEGALLY done differently?

[Not_Giving_Up]

3. You can't have it both ways

You can't make medical records ultra-confidential, but then bitch that they should have known she was mentally ill.

[gatorboy]

4. Ahhh, Wal-Mart...They ban Stewart's "America" book

over nudity issues, but they plaster Grand Theft Auto across their game section and give out guns like candy...

[RoeBear]

5. Yes, when they rang up the sale...

...a message should have come up on the tellers register that she had
problems. In fact that info should come up on any stores register.

[vpigrad]

6. It is against the law...

to sale a gun to someone mentally ill! The criminal that sold the weapon should be put in jail, and the management of Wal-Mart should also be punished for their crime.

The sad thing is that even after one horrible incident like this after another, they still hand-out weapons like candy.

[DoNotRefill]

7. Ummmm....

then shouldn't the blame rest with the GOVERNMENT THAT APPROVED THE SALE????


Wal-mart called the government to check if she was a prohibited person before selling her the gun. The Government said she was OK. So why is it Wal-mart's fault?????

[vpigrad]

8. It is against the law...

what part of that is hard to understand?

[DoNotRefill]

9. So, you're saying that gun retailers...

should have access to the mental health records of EVERYBODY on the off chance that their customer MIGHT be insane?

Mental health records are sealed if you go in for a job interview, unless it requires a security clearance. Why should there be less protection of medical records for gun purchases?

Wal-mart obeyed the law. The Government APPROVED the transaction before it was completed. She perjured herself. So how is it Wal-mart's fault again???

[Jesus H. Christ]

10. Well, that's what the court is supposed to decide.

Apparently they're supposed to be deciding if selling somebody anti-psychosis medication is a clue as to whether or not a customer may be ill.

[DoNotRefill]

14. Ummmm....

"But pharmacy prescription records are confidential under a 1996 federal law, so stores cannot use them when deciding whether to sell a gun."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/12/21/gun.lawsuit.ap/index.html

So you're saying Wal-mart is liable because they refused to violate Federal law???

[vpigrad]

11. So if anyone is willing to lie on the 4473...

we should just hand-out guns like candy? It's against the law to sale to a prohibited person. If you sale something like that, you have the responsibility, both morally and legally, to make sure you're not breaking the law.

[DoNotRefill]

13. And that's what Wal-mart did...

they called the government, and the Government said "It's OK".

I think if you go back and read the code, you'll find that it's against the law to KNOWINGLY sell a gun to a prohibited person. Wal-mart called the FBI and asked them if it was OK to sell her a gun, and the FBI said it was OK. They obeyed the law.

[sendero]

23. The level..

.... of cluelessness you display is breathtaking.

There is NO FUCKING WAY Wal-Mart or ANY OTHER RETAILER could POSSIBLY HAVE SUCH PRIVATE INFORMATION.

What kind of dreamland do you live in?

[Yupster]

16. This is why lawyers work so hard on picking juries

and where to file cases to get certain juries.

We don't want you on the jury.

We want people on the jury who want to stick it to the big company. After all, they deserve it.

They may be able to find a jury just like that.

[TX-RAT]

19. Only law broken was her lying on the 4473, sorry. DNR is right.

[Lefty48197]

12. Walmart calls the government when people buy shotguns?

Don't tell the nuts in the NRA, they'll start shooting at random.

[DoNotRefill]

15. That's the law....

and it's been in place for over 10 years. The "nuts in the NRA" know about it, and haven't started shooting at random yet. How long do they have to know about it before they all go crazy and start randomly shooting people???

[Bandit]

18. Seems like just a week ago someone in Wisconsin

went crazy and started shooting people. It happens far more often (In America)than gun nuts want to admit. Funny only in America is this a trait. NRA is very much in favor of eliminating all gun checks period. They were successful in lowering the time from three days to twenty-four hours which hardly seems adequate for a legitimate research check or a cooling off period. The more shootings there are the happier the NRA appears to be. Typical Republicans IMHO. They hear about some nut going off with a gun and they get an erection. Sure makes one proud to be an American.

[DoNotRefill]

21. Hare you saying Vang was a NRA member?

cite, please.

If you think the Brady folks don't celebrate every time there's a shooting tragedy and try to use it to advance their agenda, you're mistaken. Of course, considering the fact that Brady worked for Reagan, your "Typical Republicans IMHO" comment is pretty much on track. Talk about an effective false-flag operation....

[RoeBear]

17. You didn't know that Lefty?

I'm surprised.

[Lefty48197]

25. Obviously not!

If I knew that sellers of shotguns contacted the government, then I'd have sand-bagged all my windows and prepared to riot.

[Redneck Socialist]

20. Not exactly

It is against the law for someone who has been "adjudicated mentally defective...or...been committed to a mental institution" to buy a gun. Plenty of people with mental illness have never been "adjudicated mentally defective" or involuntarily committed. Those folks can legally buy a gun.

If she lied on this form http://www.atf.gov/forms/4473/ as she apparently did according to the article, then walmart followed the law.

"Would-be buyers must fill out a form that asks about mental health. On Stewart's form, a box that asked whether she had been involuntarily committed to an institution or declared dangerously mentally ill by a judge was incorrectly marked no. (Her mother's attorneys question whether Stewart filled out the form herself or a clerk did it for her.)"

If the clerk filled out the form for her that's a big no-no and in that case I would say that yeah walmart is responsible.

[sendero]

24. This thread is a dupe....

.... but it is also full of bullshit.

Here's what I posted in the earlier thread.....

First off, to buy a gun she had to fill out a standard form and assert under penalty of perjury that she has never been ajudicated mentally incompetent. Wal-Mart cannot give her the third degree about that, that would be a different civil rights violation that most of you would be against.

Wal-Mart then calls a 24-hour FBI hot line to see if there is anything in their database that would prevent her from legally owning a firearm. If nothing comes up, they give Wal-Mart a reference number and the transaction is completed. Should mental-health info be in there? Perhaps - sue the FBI.

You have to be a simpleton beyond all belief to think that this is Wal-mart's fault, and this case will not win the plaintiff a dime unless Wal-mart decides to settle just to get it over with.