[marktwain]

So, if the criminal had not been convicted prior to his stealing the pistol, he would then have had standing to sue?

I certainly hope not.

[SolidRedState]

He had not been “convicted” of theft of the firearm. But he was in illegal possession of the firearm.

[LukeL]

Even though Glocks have no external safety, the common rule of guns still applies, “if you don’t pull the trigger, no bullet will come out”

[Pearls Before Swine]

A Massachusetts judge gets one right. It’s cause for celebration.

[MaxMax]

The case caused the Glock to discharge? If the dead man discharged the firearm
while placing it in the case, then continued to close the case and ending the
potential of the gun being found missing, there can no suit. And that's just for starters.

That man was mindin his own business and that dang gun just went off and shooted him.

[skinkinthegrass]

...point is, the perp (& his heirs) get nothin'
except scorn...as it should be & the lawyer($) gets disbarred, too. :-D

[Sherman Logan]

It is interesting that the perp/victim died while he was trying to return the stolen items rather than in the process of their theft.

Irony bites.

Reminds me of the Pacino movie Scarface where the immediate cause of his downfall is his (very limited) residual ethics.

[BenLurkin]

We conclude that public policy dictates that Milot’s criminal conduct acts as a bar to recovery.

As it should be.

[Lets Roll NOW]

Maybe the Darwinist’s were right.

[An American!]

What an idiot...he steals an unloaded gun and two cartridges, is later convinced to try to return it, at some point in the process he loaded the gun and in the act of returning the stolen property, shoots himself in the thigh and bleeds out.

Note...never leave a repairman or service personnel in your home un-watched...they will fall prey to greed, even if they typically are not thieves, the temptation is often too great. In this case, it cost the thief his life and gave the trusting homeowner a ton of official/legal/press hassle to deal with.

[Tubac414]

Reminds be of a law suite against Bell Helmet. The guy sued Bell Helmet because they did not sell helmets to his local motorcycle shop because they were too small and did not want to invest the money needed to be a distributor. The guy won the law suite - glad this guy did not