User Panel
Did some more research. This ruling was on a motion to dismiss. The judge ruled that immunity under PLCAA (I misnamed the Act earlier) will be decided later. She did not deny PLCAA immunity.
|
|
Quoted:
They don't make list in CT they only get put on them. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Those of you living in Connecticut have a name to add to your list it would seem......You DO have a list don't you? They don't make list in CT they only get put on them. |
|
|
Quoted:
you guys really think they will get up in front of the country and sue the newtown parents? View Quote They don't have to sue. They just file a motion in the trial court. Motion: Law Says We Get Fees Evidence: Order of Dismissal, Fee Statement Result: Judgment against Plaintiffs and/or their Attorneys and /or those who put them up to the suit. |
|
Quoted:
Not surprised since its a state level judge. It will probably be tossed once it is appealed to the federal level. Edit: The state judge apparently said that the federal law doesn't prevent the case from being argued. So the case will probably get argued then tossed, if not by that judge by the next one up the food chain. View Quote Appeal, then appeal, then appeal, then appeal, then appeal, then appeal... Gun companies will have the funds to battle it out. Will the families? Just like the other one, the family had to pay all the legal fees. |
|
Quoted:
Gun companies will have the funds to battle it out. Will the families? Just like the other one, the family had to pay all the legal fees. View Quote According to the article the families won a $1.4 million wrongful death suit against the estate of Lanza's mother. So, they got cash. |
|
Quoted:
Appeal, then appeal, then appeal, then appeal, then appeal, then appeal... Gun companies will have the funds to battle it out. Will the families? Just like the other one, the family had to pay all the legal fees. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Not surprised since its a state level judge. It will probably be tossed once it is appealed to the federal level. Edit: The state judge apparently said that the federal law doesn't prevent the case from being argued. So the case will probably get argued then tossed, if not by that judge by the next one up the food chain. Appeal, then appeal, then appeal, then appeal, then appeal, then appeal... Gun companies will have the funds to battle it out. Will the families? Just like the other one, the family had to pay all the legal fees. newtown family's got over 100 million in donations. they have the cash |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
She said they have a "right to argue " . Got to keep the lawyers paid. And guess who's gonna be paying? Exactly. By prolonging this, they increase the cost for the gun manufacturer. |
|
Quoted:
So argue because it's supposedly a "military" weapon it's exactly what is protected under the 2nd Amendment. Not only should they sell them, everyone should have one with a basic load of ammo, training, and gear! View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just heard this on the news this is very very bad So argue because it's supposedly a "military" weapon it's exactly what is protected under the 2nd Amendment. Not only should they sell them, everyone should have one with a basic load of ammo, training, and gear! yeah and use United States v. Miller to prove your point. |
|
Flaunting the law and making up her own rules, it will eventually be denied but Judges who purposely do this should be held accountable.
|
|
Quoted:
Judge Barbara Bellis ruled Thursday that a federal law protecting gun makers from lawsuits does not prevent lawyers for the families of Sandy Hook victims from arguing that the AR-15 is a military weapon and should not have been sold to civilians. View Quote Judge Barbara Bellis is apparently retarded. |
|
Quoted:
What makes this total horseshit is that the law wasn't just intended to sheild gun makers from the results of the lawsuits, it was intended to shield them from having to go bankrupt from defending themselves against lawsuits. The gun was legal to sell and legal to purchase. Period, end of discussion. The stated premise is ridiculous on its face...they aren't arguing that Bushmaster should have known Lanza was a killer, they are arguing that they should have known their product was dangerous, periuod...even though it was perfectly legal and the inherent dangers understood. View Quote it's not going to get any better said than this |
|
I am thinking I might build my next AR on a Bushmaster lower.
|
|
I thought that this was already settled. Didn't the Brady Bunch or someone similar get the families to sue, and they lost, and the Bradys left the families holding the bag or some shit?
|
|
|
Quoted:
According to the article the families won a $1.4 million wrongful death suit against the estate of Lanza's mother. So, they got cash. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Gun companies will have the funds to battle it out. Will the families? Just like the other one, the family had to pay all the legal fees. According to the article the families won a $1.4 million wrongful death suit against the estate of Lanza's mother. So, they got cash. Winning and collecting are different. My first lower ever was a Bushmaster. |
|
Quoted:
This can very easily backfire on the plaintiffs. Their beef is that there is no suitable civilian use for the AR-15. All the Defendants need to do is post the 10,000 Youtube videos of people using AR-15s for hunting and competition to prove it's bogus. If that court case fails, the ruling can be used against all the other "AR-15s have no civilian use" gripes. View Quote The counter argument should be that there is no military use for the AR-15. After all, how many AR-15s are in use in the military? |
|
Quoted:
I thought that this was already settled. Didn't the Brady Bunch or someone similar get the families to sue, and they lost, and the Bradys left the families holding the bag or some shit? View Quote You're thinking of Lonnie and Sandy Phillips, who tried to sue LuckyGunner after the Aurora, CO shooting. |
|
Quoted:
So argue because it's supposedly a "military" weapon it's exactly what is protected under the 2nd Amendment. Not only should they sell them, everyone should have one with a basic load of ammo, training, and gear! View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just heard this on the news this is very very bad So argue because it's supposedly a "military" weapon it's exactly what is protected under the 2nd Amendment. Not only should they sell them, everyone should have one with a basic load of ammo, training, and gear! If this stands can I sue the people who voted for Obama? |
|
Gonna sue auto manufacturers for causing accidents too right?
|
|
Quoted:
newtown family's got over 100 million in donations. they have the cash View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not surprised since its a state level judge. It will probably be tossed once it is appealed to the federal level. Edit: The state judge apparently said that the federal law doesn't prevent the case from being argued. So the case will probably get argued then tossed, if not by that judge by the next one up the food chain. Appeal, then appeal, then appeal, then appeal, then appeal, then appeal... Gun companies will have the funds to battle it out. Will the families? Just like the other one, the family had to pay all the legal fees. newtown family's got over 100 million in donations. they have the cash I'd like to be the first to thank them for sending that money to the gun industry via frivolous suit settlements. |
|
The judicial system sucks. The first press conference the police spokesman said the AR was found in the trunk with a shotgun and two handguns. The next day the AR was the weapon used to do the killing and now years later the manufacturer is being sued for the actions of a killer.
Who wants to argue the judicial system doesn't suck? |
|
Quoted:
The counter argument should be that there is no military use for the AR-15. After all, how many AR-15s are in use in the military? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
This can very easily backfire on the plaintiffs. Their beef is that there is no suitable civilian use for the AR-15. All the Defendants need to do is post the 10,000 Youtube videos of people using AR-15s for hunting and competition to prove it's bogus. If that court case fails, the ruling can be used against all the other "AR-15s have no civilian use" gripes. The counter argument should be that there is no military use for the AR-15. After all, how many AR-15s are in use in the military? My M16A2 in A-Stan had Colt AR-15 stamped on the side |
|
Just shut the company down in the US and file bankruptcy! Plain and simple.. Move operations offshore and sell their weapon on the world market and make mucho bucks!
|
|
This better end just as badly for these families as it did for the ones that tried to pull this same shit in Colorado.
|
|
Quoted:
BINGO. The Lawful Commerce in Arms act was specifically to prevent these cases from even going to a discovery phase. The entire point of these lawsuits in the '90s was to bankrupt and disrupt firearms businesses by burying them in lawyers and paperwork, not to actually win cases. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So this is legal prescedence for me to sue Government Motors/Ford/Chrysler/Toyota/etc when some drunk hits me? They should have known vehicles are dangerous and therefore they are liable for its criminal use. I'll be here waiting for the Sandy Hook families to turn in their dangerous motor vehicles. You have always been able to do so. No one would bother as it is a frivolous lawsuit you are certain to lose. Now if your goal was to bankrupt a company, and you were a municipality that didn't mind filing multiple frivolous suits against a company until they could no longer afford to defend themselves and went out of business. Well you have just won your objective without winning a case. BINGO. The Lawful Commerce in Arms act was specifically to prevent these cases from even going to a discovery phase. The entire point of these lawsuits in the '90s was to bankrupt and disrupt firearms businesses by burying them in lawyers and paperwork, not to actually win cases. The Lawful Commerce in Arms act was specifically to prevent these cases from even going to a discovery phase. The entire point of these lawsuits in the '90s was to bankrupt and disrupt firearms businesses by burying them in lawyers and paperwork, not to actually win cases. |
|
Quoted:
The judicial system sucks. The first press conference the police spokesman said the AR was found in the trunk with a shotgun and two handguns. The next day the AR was the weapon used to do the killing and now years later the manufacturer is being sued for the actions of a killer. Who wants to argue the judicial system doesn't suck? View Quote Yeah how they're going after Bushmaster stumps me. |
|
Quoted:
Not surprised since its a state level judge. It will probably be tossed once it is appealed to the federal level. Edit: The state judge apparently said that the federal law doesn't prevent the case from being argued. So the case will probably get argued then tossed, if not by that judge by the next one up the food chain. View Quote They're doing this because the SCOTUS makeup is going to change dramatically in the next five years. They will do with the judiciary what they couldn't do legislatively. |
|
Yes this will make the familes of the victims feel better.
And then when they lose and are forced to pay 100s of thousadsn of dollars in legal fees as losers, some nasty people here will feel good. No kids brought back from the dead; lots of pain all around. Thank you Leftism. |
|
Quoted:
BRIDGEPORT, Conn. (CBSNewYork/AP) — A Connecticut state judge has denied a gun company’s motion to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit filed by families of some of the victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting. The lawsuit, which has been the center of a heated debate, alleges the families of the Sandy Hook victims have the right to sue the gun manufacturer of the Bushmaster AR-15 used in the incident because the manufacturers knew the gun was too dangerous for public use. Freedom Group, the Madison, North Carolina, parent company of AR-15 maker Bushmaster Firearms, says it’s protected by a 2005 federal law that shields gun manufacturers from most lawsuits over criminal use of their products. Judge Barbara Bellis ruled Thursday that a federal law protecting gun makers from lawsuits does not prevent lawyers for the families of Sandy Hook victims from arguing that the AR-15 is a military weapon and should not have been sold to civilians. “We are thrilled that the gun companies’ motion to dismiss was denied. The families look forward to continuing their fight in court,” Josh Koskoff, one of the lawyers representing the families, said in a statement Thursday. The lawsuit recently made its way into the political spotlight, when Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders was criticized for reportedly saying he did not support the plaintiffs in the suit. “…I do believe that gun manufacturers and gun dealers should be able to be sued when they should know that guns are going into the hands of wrong people,” Sanders said in an interview with the Daily News. “So if somebody walks in and says, ‘I’d like 10,000 rounds of ammunition,’ you know, well, you might be suspicious about that. So I think there are grounds for those suits, but not if you sell me a legal product.” Bushmaster Firearms has not yet commented on the ruling as of Thursday afternoon. On Dec. 14, 2012, Adam Lanza, 20, shot and killed 20 first-graders and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Lanza killed his mother before the school shooting and killed himself afterward. Last year, more than a dozen victims’ families split $1.5 million under settlements of lawsuits filed against the estate of the gunman’s mother. link View Quote All you need to know right there. |
|
|
Yes, it is. Appeals by gun manufacturers going up the judicial ladder, only to land in the laps of a Supreme Court whose ninth seat was a Democrat appointee. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
So... Bushmaster shouldn't have sold a rifle to a distributer who sold that rifle to a retailer who sold that rifle to a woman who passed a background check that has been sold to civilians since 1965. Exactly. Why aren't the idiots suing the FBI for failing to (somehow) know that the legal and lawfully qualified buyer was going to be killed by her retard son who would then go and kill all those chilluns? And Obungo failed to appoint an AG and a Director of BATFE who had the required psychic abilities. So in the end, it's Obungo's fault. |
|
|
Quoted:
According to the article the families won a $1.4 million wrongful death suit against the estate of Lanza's mother. So, they got cash. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Gun companies will have the funds to battle it out. Will the families? Just like the other one, the family had to pay all the legal fees. According to the article the families won a $1.4 million wrongful death suit against the estate of Lanza's mother. So, they got cash. lol. Lawyers will burn through that in 6 months. |
|
The judge is just allowing them their day in court
They will lose and cry about having to pay BM legal fees. |
|
Quoted:
Not surprised since its a state level judge. It will probably be tossed once it is appealed to the federal level. Edit: The state judge apparently said that the federal law doesn't prevent the case from being argued. So the case will probably get argued then tossed, if not by that judge by the next one up the food chain. View Quote At exorbitant amounts of money, all the while lawyers get rich Fuck that judge, when the suit gets thrown out above his head, he should be on the hook for the legal bills |
|
Quoted:
No it's not. It will go through the courts, BM will win, and counter sue to reclaim their attorney's fee, crippling the families that sued them financially. Then we will find out who is financially supporting and pushing the families to do this. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just heard this on the news this is very very bad Activist judge should be included in countersuit. |
|
Quoted:
Here's a pic of the Koskoff family <a href="http://s33.photobucket.com/user/gspointer/media/a7345570f7c09449ed4b1c1f76535033_zps74d6c71c.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d80/gspointer/a7345570f7c09449ed4b1c1f76535033_zps74d6c71c.jpg</a> View Quote Surprise, surprise. |
|
It does not matter. The only people that will win are the Lawyers. They won't win so I hope it drains the plaintiff's bank account
|
|
Not entirely true . I hate to say it but the Galil was issued to the Guat forces....Granted they were originally full auto but they were neutered so the conscripts wouldn't mag dump all their ammo |
|
So, if he hadn't had an AR-15, all of those kids would be alive?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.