Publix Supermarkets Sued For Selling Weapons

PALM BEACH GARDENS, Fla. (CBS12) – The estate of a boy stabbed to death during a sleepover in Palm Beach Gardens is suing Publix Supermarkets.
MORE

This entry was posted in Forgot to categorize. Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to Publix Supermarkets Sued For Selling Weapons

  1. skipperdaddy says:

    They also have pharmacies that dispense narcotics so they gonna sue them too for overdoses. This aint the fucking UK. I’m sure someone has choked out on a Ballpark frank, they sell them too.

  2. bogsidebunny says:

    When are they gonna be sued for selling a leg of lamb that was used to club someone to death?

  3. nonncom says:

    Isn’t it about time one of these companies says fuck it and takes on the lawyers, maybe even counter sue for defamation?….put it all out there….what total bullshit….

    • the other other Andrew says:

      Publix did this already. Back a few years ago a bunch of idiots protested that Publix Corporate was contributing money to a republican agricultural commissioner’s reelection campaign.

      Idiot yahoos made a big stink.

      So, yes, Publix caved. By stopping all donations and contributions to all politically connected organizations. Like Planned Parenthood.

      Which the idiot yahoos started to make a stink about. And Publix told them basically, what’s good or not good for the goose is good or not good for the gander.

  4. Nemo says:

    The plaintiffs lawyers aren’t EVER planning on going to trial as the story at the jump asserts. They are banking on Publix settling for a couple mil of which they’ll get the lion’s share and the plaintiff’s estate gets squat. Publix should tell the lawyers to fuck off and counter sue for defamation, while asking for 10 times what the plaintiff is asking.

  5. A Ninny Mouse because don't want to be targeted says:

    You Know what 100,000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean is? You’re right! It’s a good start.
    Of course, we all know that 97% of lawyers give the other 3% a bad name. That’s all my lawyer jokes, ya’ll join in, ya heah?

    • Rayvet says:

      What’s the difference between a catfish and a lawyer? One’s a bottom dwelling scum sucker, the other is a fish.

      • Padawan says:

        What’s the difference between a hooker and a lawyer? The hooker stops screwing you after you’re dead.

        • Joe Mama says:

          Why won’t sharks attack a lawyer in the water?
          “Professional courtesy”

          • Roy says:

            What’s the difference between a dead skunk in the road and a dead lawyer in the road?

            The skunk has skid marks in front of him.

    • OD says:

      Difference between a porcupine and a lawyer driving a BMW ?
      With a porcupine, the pricks are on the outside

  6. the other other Andrew says:

    I shop all the time at Publix, various stores thereof. None of them have a weapons or tactical section.

    This is an annoyance lawsuit. Meant to generate hush money.

  7. Starker says:

    Nice article by Redneck Jew and a Hispanic Catholic. I like how they actually checked the cited statute and showed the exact section. It specifically says Dealer & Bowie knife or Dirk knife. A Kitchen knife is neither of those. I also like how the lawyer states, a 6 inch stainless steel edged sharpened knife is a deadly weapon & sold to a minor under 18. Are there minors over 18?

    I say lawyers who file frivolous law suits like this need to de disbarred and / or other.

    “Above all else, send no lawyers” can’t remember who said it.

    • Butch says:

      GOD said that. It is somewhere in the Bible. HE doesn’t want any lawyers in Heaven

  8. Gordon says:

    So they sold some cheap kitchen utensil that was used for a crime. The knife wasn’t sold as a weapon, neither are the cheap hammers most grocery stores have in a small hardware section.

    • Bert says:

      ‘spose this means Lowes will have to stop selling cinder blocks and staple guns?

  9. millerized says:

    Nervous Holly their lawyer?

  10. Smokin'Q says:

    Damn, I guess Home Depot and Lowes better really watch out if this frivolous lawsuit stands. Just think how many teenagers under 18 have bought hammers, screwdrivers, hand saws, rope, etc. which could all be considered “deadly weapons” also. Sporting goods stores are next. Do you know the damage you can do with an aluminum baseball bat? When will this frenzied madness end? I am sorry for the loss of their kid, but when are we going to start holding the actual perps who did the criminal act responsible instead of innocent toolmakers? (This goes for firearm manufacturers also.)

    • Rick says:

      In a case which shocked prit near everyone but especially the marine industry was the court found a manufacturer liable for damages. The case was decided around the late 1970s-early ’80s.

      A deckhand had his hand severed when it caught in the V-belt and pulleys of a winch. The winch had been made and installed ninety years prior by the manufacturer. In testimony, the captain admitted that he was the sole person who did maintenance on the winch and had left the belt guard off the winch for ease of maintenance. The 140 year old company could not afford the award therefore had declared bankruptcy. A few months later, the entire manufacturing buildings were completely destroyed in a fire. Arson was suspected but not determined. The company had been a major supplier of wire and rope in the marine industry.

      Tort reform is long past due. This shit we read about today got a start long ago, the ball keeps rolling and grows ever larger. Yes, UK-style laws are just around the corner if we let it. Do your part, get loud and noisy to turn public opinion against such fools. But before that, be informed and educate yourself on the matters.

    • Rick says:

      “…when are we going to start holding the actual perps who did the criminal act responsible instead of innocent toolmakers? (This goes for firearm manufacturers also.).”

      Hence the General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994. A key tenet was protection of manufactures from product liability. Manufactures should not incur liability when people do stupid things.

      Hence the Protection Of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005. Because a manufacturer should not incur liability when people do stupid things.

      NOTE: The two above examples are responses to a free-for-all conducted by lawyers. It is the lawyers who are doing this. Congress is merely responsive…after the fact. The damn lawyers cost every one of us thousands of dollars every year.

      Here is an example from one of my Const Mgmt classes: Werner ladder kept getting sued for product liability. And the company often lost. Each case brought new warning labels affixed to each ladder. Next time you’re in Homo Derp, go look at all the labels on the ladders. In class, a Werner rep said that fully 1/3rd of the cost of a ladder is due to labeling and a compliance officer who keeps track of potential liability claims.

      The lawsuits went away…for a short period. That was when an enterprising fucktard, I mean lawyer, came up with a novelty claim. He argued that all the warning labels were evidence that the manufacturer had prior knowledge that their product was defective.

      One more example of the dastardly deeds of ambulance chasers. A woman in my town tripped off a curb when stepping off a sidewalk. Her nose was bloodied but otherwise she was okay. Except this was catty corner to the courthouse. A lawyer saw the accident happen and said he could get her money for her troubles.

      The lawyer argued the curb was actually a couple inches too tall. (Never mind that there is a range of height for curbs and the curb was within that range.) The town settled for $50K. How much did she get? Only enough to pay her medical exam (in preparation for the court case) and $5,000 if I remember correctly. I do remember it wasn’t even 1/2 the amount of settlement.

      Oh heck, one last: a professor told the class we can expect to be sued, so plan for it. He was right. In 22 years in construction, my company was named as a defendant in five separate claims. Five times I was removed as a defendant…after I paid a lawyer to respond to the claim. Of course, a lawyer would name everyone who ever worked in a building which is the subject in a claim, That’s just good lawyering. But in four of those claims, NOT ONE of the defendants had to pay any damages. It was a shady lawyer at the heart of the matter. I’m not talking of a vexatious litigator, that’s a whole ‘nother subject.

      This kind of stuff is all around us. It happens every day. Product costs – everything from food to tools to autos to electronics – is higher because of lawyers. Tort reform is badly needed.

    • crazyeighter says:

      They’re not suing the kid because the kid gots no money. Publix gots money.

  11. Andy_TLC says:

    This is exactly why one doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.

  12. crazyeighter says:

    The upside to Publix losing this suit is all the suits we could bring against the people that sell the improvised weapons to Antifa.

Play nice.