Connecticut SC rules gun maker can be sued

A retarded ruling that will likely get slapped down by a higher court. Can I sue Captain Morgan if I gt hit by a drunk driver?
 
deception in marketing is not constitutionally protected.

d'oh!

What deception?

ask the judge.

Don't you know? What is your case to support this?

i don't 'have a case'... i merely quoted what the judge said. perhaps they advertised their killing machine as good family fun.... or for hunting....

So you rely on ignorance, "feelings" and wishful speculation. How typical.

^^^ more irony.

noooooooooooooo............. i go on the article i just read in the OP. now, b4 you spew anything else - i am from CT AND have firearms in my home. & am not anti 2nd amendment, within reason.... seems you are the ignoramus here. i understand though - you somehow feel threatened by the case.
 
A retarded ruling that will likely get slapped down by a higher court. Can I sue Captain Morgan if I gt hit by a drunk driver?

not anymore... i believe alcohol has all kindsa warnings now to avoid the lawsuits. just like what the tobacco companies had to do.
 
One sma
So knife makers can be sued?

Overturned soon

cigarette manufacturers can be sued. & have lost.

Cigs are in the Constitution? Nope

deceptive advertising is the crux of the lawsuit... you didn't bother to look at the link did ya, dummy? cigarette companies did just that in order to sell their poison.

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Gun maker Remington can be sued over how it marketed the Bushmaster rifle used to kill 20 children and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, a divided Connecticut Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
One small problem. The shooter never bought the rifle, he stole it from his mother - thus was never influenced by said advertising. Case lost and thrown.

his mama was a survivalist & used those weapons to get close to her son. yep...good ol' fashioned family fun.
 

Don't you know? What is your case to support this?

i don't 'have a case'... i merely quoted what the judge said. perhaps they advertised their killing machine as good family fun.... or for hunting....

So you rely on ignorance, "feelings" and wishful speculation. How typical.

^^^ more irony.

noooooooooooooo............. i go on the article i just read in the OP. now, b4 you spew anything else - i am from CT AND have firearms in my home. & am not anti 2nd amendment. within reason.... seems you are the ignoramus here. i understand though - you somehow feel threatened by the case.

Really. :auiqs.jpg: Not anti-2nd, yet supporting nonsense that is. Such cred.

What firearms you got?
 
A retarded ruling that will likely get slapped down by a higher court. Can I sue Captain Morgan if I gt hit by a drunk driver?

not anymore... i believe alcohol has all kindsa warnings now to avoid the lawsuits. just like what the tobacco companies had to do.

All they need to do is put "Do not use in a mass shooting" on the box to avoid litigation. lol. This is an uncommonly silly ruling.
 
ask the judge.

Don't you know? What is your case to support this?

i don't 'have a case'... i merely quoted what the judge said. perhaps they advertised their killing machine as good family fun.... or for hunting....

So you rely on ignorance, "feelings" and wishful speculation. How typical.

^^^ more irony.

noooooooooooooo............. i go on the article i just read in the OP. now, b4 you spew anything else - i am from CT AND have firearms in my home. & am not anti 2nd amendment. within reason.... seems you are the ignoramus here. i understand though - you somehow feel threatened by the case.

Really. :auiqs.jpg: Not anti-2nd, yet supporting nonsense that is. Such cred.

What firearms you got?

i am against weapons that take high velocity bullets. & multi round mags over 10 & drums. personally - i only use a bb gun to rid my property of squirrals when they get outa control & attack the bird feeders... but hubby has everything from pellet guns to bbs to .22s & a glock.
 
A retarded ruling that will likely get slapped down by a higher court. Can I sue Captain Morgan if I gt hit by a drunk driver?

not anymore... i believe alcohol has all kindsa warnings now to avoid the lawsuits. just like what the tobacco companies had to do.

All they need to do is put "Do not use in a mass shooting" on the box to avoid litigation. lol. This is an uncommonly silly ruling.

they wouldn't even do that unless forced to. that is bad PR & the NRA will not allow it.
 
they wouldn't even do that unless forced to. that is bad PR & the NRA will not allow it.

It's not bad public relations. It's a bad ruling. This is a frivolous lawsuit by asshole lawyers using the unimaginable grief of the parents in the hopes of becoming famous. Or rich. Likely both.
 
Probably....but the pressure is beginning to take a toll....the GOP and the NRA will pay...you can't keep condoning mass murders and not pay the price..

Far more die from vehicle accidents. If this ever gets passed, car manufacturers will be in court next. And since drunk drivers are the main culprits, breweries, distilleries and wineries will be next.

How about we stick with punishing the person responsible?
 
No Constitutional mandate.

deception in marketing is not constitutionally protected.

d'oh!

What deception?

ask the judge.

Don't you know? What is your case to support this?

i don't 'have a case'... i merely quoted what the judge said. perhaps they advertised their killing machine as good family fun.... or for hunting....

I had an AR several years ago. I hunted coyote with it. Very accurate rifle.

My daughter was 10 or 11 at the time. She thought it was great fun at the range. That girl can shoot.
 
they wouldn't even do that unless forced to. that is bad PR & the NRA will not allow it.

It's not bad public relations. It's a bad ruling. This is a frivolous lawsuit by asshole lawyers using the unimaginable grief of the parents in the hopes of becoming famous. Or rich. Likely both.

mmmmm.... the sandy hook parents aren't the type swayed solely on emotion. sure - lawyers by profession are unconscionable assholes, but more than likely some of the parents sought them out rather than the other way around. but we'll see how the wind blows with this one. chances are it won't be ruled on favorably for them.
 
deception in marketing is not constitutionally protected.

d'oh!

What deception?

ask the judge.

Don't you know? What is your case to support this?

i don't 'have a case'... i merely quoted what the judge said. perhaps they advertised their killing machine as good family fun.... or for hunting....

I had an AR several years ago. I hunted coyote with it. Very accurate rifle.

My daughter was 10 or 11 at the time. She thought it was great fun at the range. That girl can shoot.

i bet she did. luckily there were no accidents.
 
you'll shoot your eye out.........

& make swiss cheese outa your liver, spleen, & small colon.......................

Only if you are stupid or suicidal.

In the case of the first, easily fixed with training. In case of the second, not much to do unless you know in advance and can get them therapy. Even then...
 
you'll shoot your eye out.........

& make swiss cheese outa your liver, spleen, & small colon.......................

Only if you are stupid or suicidal.

In the case of the first, easily fixed with training. In case of the second, not much to do unless you know in advance and can get them therapy. Even then...

i was being facetious... there are states that allow such a purchase with no training mandated.
 

Don't you know? What is your case to support this?

i don't 'have a case'... i merely quoted what the judge said. perhaps they advertised their killing machine as good family fun.... or for hunting....

I had an AR several years ago. I hunted coyote with it. Very accurate rifle.

My daughter was 10 or 11 at the time. She thought it was great fun at the range. That girl can shoot.

i bet she did. luckily there were no accidents.

She followed the safety rules to the letter. That cuts out any accidents except an "Act of God" sort of thing.

In fact, if someone else at the range didn't follow the basic safety rules, she would come sit by me until they left or I said something to them.
 
ask the judge.

Don't you know? What is your case to support this?

i don't 'have a case'... i merely quoted what the judge said. perhaps they advertised their killing machine as good family fun.... or for hunting....

I had an AR several years ago. I hunted coyote with it. Very accurate rifle.

My daughter was 10 or 11 at the time. She thought it was great fun at the range. That girl can shoot.

i bet she did. luckily there were no accidents.

She followed the safety rules to the letter. That cuts out any accidents except an "Act of God" sort of thing.

In fact, if someone else at the range didn't follow the basic safety rules, she would come sit by me until they left or I said something to them.

good to hear both you & she are responsible gun owners/shooters.
 

Forum List

Back
Top