Defensive medicine? How about defensive defensive gun training? While it’s not likely that lawsuits will drive up the price of running a gun range—business insurance isn’t particularly pricey for the firearms folk at the moment—it’s not inconceivable. And it won’t be for lack of ambulance chasing. To wit: “Upon learning of the women’s unfamiliarity with firearms, an Arms Room employee handed [Mary Buchan and an unnamed friend] a loaded weapon with the safety on and headphones and pointed the costumers toward the firing range,” setexasrecord.com reports . . .
“Buchan had her pair of headphones over her ears as she and her friend entered the gallery. The women then found their assigned place but the noise of shots fired in the neighboring lane kept increasing. According to the suit, the plaintiff “could feel the vibration of each shot ringing through her ears more than the shot before.”
Increasing noise? Sounds increasingly incredible to me. Moving on . . .
“The plaintiff reached atop her head for the headphones to push them inward against her face in an attempt to muffle the loudness of the weapon being fired,” it states.
“The plaintiff’s attempts to dampen the noise were not successful at all, which surprised the plaintiff.”
Ten minutes passed before the women exited the range.
They returned the gun to an attendant at the front counter and expressed that “the noise level inside the range was just too much.”
Buchan alleges the ringing in her ears remained days after her visit, adding she “was having an extremely difficult time hearing the world around her.”
“As a result of her trip to the gun range, the plaintiff sustained permanent hearing loss from the excessive noise level of the gun shots within the concrete walls,” the suit says.
The plaintiff later discovered that the ear muffs used at the gun range are electronic and have a volume control that must be turned down before any loud noises commenced.
I feel Ms. Buchan pain. My local range has a pair of smaller ranges whose db levels I simply can’t tolerate—even with my range-standard double ear protection. I know it’s not a legal concept or anything, but I reckon pain is mother nature’s way of saying something should be avoided (unless your last name is De Sade) or evaded as soon as possible. So . . . I don’t shoot at the aforementioned sub-ranges.
If Buchan’s story’s true, and methinks there are a few crucial details missing from this account, shame on the range for not supervising a newbie. But would I make a federal case out of it? Nope. Personal responsibility and all that. Then again, I’m not a lawyer. I only shoot with one on a regular basis. Note: I said “with.”