Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/10/2004 2:48:14 AM EST
See the Bushmaster website: http://www.bushmaster.com/


Press Release

Bushmaster Responds to Brady Groups False Claim of Victory
Thursday September 9, 2004 9:24AM est

Windham, Maine -- The Washington DC Brady Group would have you believe they won some kind of victory! The Brady Group brought this lawsuit not for the victims, but for their anti-gun agenda. The Brady Group asked for the settlement conference after reviewing all the evidence they knew they could not be successful in court and they wanted to stop paying lawyer fees.

The Brady Group sent a second tier lawyer to the settlement conference with nine demands on Bushmaster regarding business practices and Bushmaster denied them all. We then gave the Brady Group our statement that we support the BATF licensing requirements to be a Federal Firearms Licensed (FFL) holder and our support for the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) safety programs, and they accepted our statement. We did not agree and would not agree to change the way we do business or make any additional demands of our customers. We were emphatic that Bushmaster did not commit any wrong doings.

The attorney for our insurance company was at the settlement conference and informed us that about half of our policy limits had been spent on trial lawyers. It was the insurance company’s position that all of the limit would be spent on this case, and therefore turned the funds over to Bushmaster to use as we saw fit removing the insurance company from the case. Our choice was to continue spending it on trial lawyers or turn it over directly to the victims’ families with no funds going to the Brady Group for their legal fees.

We felt the compassionate thing to do was give it to the victims’ families, not because we had to but because we wanted to. The Washington DC Brady Group should learn what compassion is really all about!

Bushmaster strongly believes and vigorously supports the rights of citizens to own and use firearms, and the settlement of this case in no way compromises that stand. The Brady Group’s attempt at claiming a victory over firearms manufacturers is a hollow one with no substance. Their attempt to eliminate gun rights of citizens has failed legislatively and will continue to fail with these frivolous lawsuits against gun manufacturers.

Bushmaster Firearms, Inc.


--------------------

KAC
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 4:40:20 AM EST
Sounds like Bushmaster didnt sell out, they just have hearts.......Brady can go F themselves.....
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 4:42:23 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/10/2004 4:42:34 AM EST by mjohn3006]
Nice!
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 5:01:05 AM EST
So glad they stuck it to them bastages!

No $ to anti-gun group has to be a good thing...

- BG
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 5:06:06 AM EST
This is good to hear.
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 5:11:30 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 5:25:25 AM EST
BM did a good job at handling the publicity on this settlement. I expect they wanted to avoid the consumer backlash felt by Smith & Wesson after they sold out.

BM's decision was: (1) have the insurance company pay a settlement and put this case to rest with a definite outcome, or (2) risk a adverse judgment from a liberal jury or judge and continue to pay trial lawyers hundreds of thousands of dollars.

From a business stand point, the decision was easy. I own BM products and will continue to support BM in the future.
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 6:21:45 AM EST
There is no company better than Bushmaster.. Period.. Theyre big, lots of stock, and they care about there customers.. Hell, one of the techs even knows me by name and sends me a follow up email when I send something in.. I buy nothin' but...
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 6:24:16 AM EST
If I were Bushmaster I'd petition the court to pay the settlement $1 buck a month for however many months it'd take. Sure, the Brady bunch won a settlement but there's nothing saying how it has to be paid out.
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 7:34:17 AM EST
I love my Bushmaster and they are a real class act!
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 8:30:43 PM EST
I like my Bushmaster stuff too, but, I still think they sold out. That is just silly to pay money, what 2.5m for what? Because some crazy went off killing people with their product. That is like saying that because i got pissed at my neighbor and hit him with my "insert name brand" hammer that the hammer manufacturer should pay up. or that i got drunk and ran into someone--lets sue the beer company and the car manufacture. People are, or should be, responsible for there actions, not the manufactures of products. While i do feel sorry for the families of the victums, and i do realize the finincial cost of the lawyers to defend, i think they sold out and should not have payed out one cent. This just opens the can of worms for all gun manufactures, by setting a standard---if this keeps happening gun manufactures could be put out of busuness because of rising insurance cost, and high pay outs whenever someone is killed etc. This pay out is bad for all gun manufactures and buyers/owners. my .02.
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 12:17:12 AM EST
TKD, the deal was (as I understand it) that the dealer sold or allowed the gun to get into the hands of an underage person. The primary responsiblity was with the dealer, not BM, but BM was felt to be somewhat responsible because of not "riding herd" on their dealer(s). The settlement was mostly against the dealer and BM paid .5 M of the 2.5 M total. etc. etc....

KAC
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 3:44:39 AM EST
Bushmaster is a great company and should be applauded for their efforts. I own 2 Busmasters. They are IMO, the best out there and their customer service is top flight.
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 6:27:38 AM EST
Next Build - Bushmaster lower to start...

Link Posted: 9/11/2004 2:05:30 PM EST
Their decision may have saved their own asses. If the defense burned up all the coverage on the cost of defense and then BM got hit with any part of the damages (in some states even if you are 1% liable you can be held accountable for teh entire judgment) it would have come out of their own pockets. Way I see it at least there still IS a BM after the settlement. Things could have been MUCH worse.

Link Posted: 9/11/2004 3:06:43 PM EST
They did the right thing and it was insurance money with none going to the antis,Those who think they sold out will still be able to enjoy their unmodified products and because they didnt fight to the bitter end they are not bankrupt and wont have to pass on the cost of losing to us,they settled with the insurance money and admitted guilty to nothing,they have a heart as evident by them wanting the families to have something to help them out...way to go BUSHMASTER.
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 4:42:22 PM EST

Originally Posted By model927:
because they didnt fight to the bitter end they are not bankrupt and wont have to pass on the cost of losing to us,they settled with the insurance money



while i will agree, it was less expensive for them to settle, i still don't think they should have paid. how can they or should they be responsible for crazy people mis-using their product. And don't think for one minute that their insurance rates wont go up---and how do we know for sure that cost isn't going to get passed on to the consumer.

I understand why they did what they did--but it sure does suck that they were forced to sell out so they wouldn't be put into finincial ruin. I dont think the lawyers should be allowed to sue the manufacture because someone mis-used their product.
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 4:48:14 PM EST

Originally Posted By kennyc:
TKD, the deal was (as I understand it) that the dealer sold or allowed the gun to get into the hands of an underage person. The primary responsiblity was with the dealer, not BM, but BM was felt to be somewhat responsible because of not "riding herd" on their dealer(s). The settlement was mostly against the dealer and BM paid .5 M of the 2.5 M total. etc. etc....

KAC



No, the actual situation was that the BGs SHOPLIFTED the gun from BESS in WA...

Beady claimed that it was sold under the table and BM knew, but the Snipers themselves said otherwise...
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 4:50:43 PM EST

Originally Posted By TKD-II:

Originally Posted By model927:
because they didnt fight to the bitter end they are not bankrupt and wont have to pass on the cost of losing to us,they settled with the insurance money



while i will agree, it was less expensive for them to settle, i still don't think they should have paid. how can they or should they be responsible for crazy people mis-using their product. And don't think for one minute that their insurance rates wont go up---and how do we know for sure that cost isn't going to get passed on to the consumer.

I understand why they did what they did--but it sure does suck that they were forced to sell out so they wouldn't be put into finincial ruin. I dont think the lawyers should be allowed to sue the manufacture because someone mis-used their product.



No one does.

The only reason this happened is because a few RINOs sold out out in the US Senate when the PLCA was being debated...

Hopefully we get enough senate seats this time thru to push it up w/o ammendments next time...
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 5:59:00 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/11/2004 6:01:45 PM EST by Suburban]
I had thought that the anti-gun groups were the lowest form of life on the planet, but I failed to take their lawyers into account.
Link Posted: 9/12/2004 4:46:28 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/12/2004 4:49:05 AM EST by TKD-II]
The only reason this happened is because a few RINOs sold out out in the US Senate when the PLCA was being debated...

Hopefully we get enough senate seats this time thru to push it up w/o ammendments next time...




agreed, hopefully, we can make some changes so this kind of thing doesn't even see a court room. But, i still would have liked to see BM fight it out and win----but, they might have lost too. With all the bleeding hearts and uninformd jury members today, they BM could have ended up paying out a lot more than they did.

I guess after thinking about it, I am more upset about the legislation that allows them BM to be sued for this type of thing. While what happend was a true tragedy, I dont feel the manufacture should be held responsable for a few crazies in the world.
Top Top