Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The Lanza boy obtained weapons ILLEGALLY. It was not the fault of the manufacturers of the weapon. We do in fact have laws about weapons and who can have them. Felons are not allowed to own guns. Just like drunk drivers who have had their drivers licenses suspended due to drinking and driving are not allowed to drive cars, but they still do sometimes. I guess the state/city is responsible for that.
If his bitch mom lived, should she have faced charges?
Face charges for what, getting shot and getting her keys stolen from her so her son could gain access to her secured firearms?
Do we sue the pool manufacturers when someone's child drowns in their own backyard pool?
I'm sure people have .
The point is that they have the opportunity . The sandy hook suit hinges on the gun companies marketing of their product . I think they will lose.
But the point is they have the ABILITY to go to court . But u have congress passing laws to protect gun makers from lawsuits . Why not leave them tonthe courts like every other biz ?
Post a link. I don't believe you. There are no commercials on television about guns. However, there are PLENTY on about alcohol and the "joys" of drinking. My father died as a direct result of alcohol. Should I be able to sue the alcohol manufacturers? Yes or no.
I know a boy who was killed by a hit and run drunk driver. The guy was also driving after a suspended license. Should we be able to sue the manufacturer's of alcohol and the city as well, since this guy was driving when he shouldn't have been?
Ever look in a Gun magazine ? Do they not have adds ???!
The Lanza boy obtained weapons ILLEGALLY. It was not the fault of the manufacturers of the weapon. We do in fact have laws about weapons and who can have them. Felons are not allowed to own guns. Just like drunk drivers who have had their drivers licenses suspended due to drinking and driving are not allowed to drive cars, but they still do sometimes. I guess the state/city is responsible for that.
If his bitch mom lived, should she have faced charges?
Face charges for what, getting shot and getting her keys stolen from her so her son could gain access to her secured firearms?
It's obvious that they don't care about deaths. The goal is to take away our rights. They are traitors.
Funny how they want to go light on the real dangerous people (criminals) and want to take rights away from the law abiding, or how they defend the Obama administration for "losing" a whole cache of weapons to Mexican drug cartels and also defend Obama for arming people in the ME. Lol.
Do we sue the pool manufacturers when someone's child drowns in their own backyard pool?
I'm sure people have .
The point is that they have the opportunity . The sandy hook suit hinges on the gun companies marketing of their product . I think they will lose.
But the point is they have the ABILITY to go to court . But u have congress passing laws to protect gun makers from lawsuits . Why not leave them tonthe courts like every other biz ?
Post a link. I don't believe you. There are no commercials on television about guns. However, there are PLENTY on about alcohol and the "joys" of drinking. My father died as a direct result of alcohol. Should I be able to sue the alcohol manufacturers? Yes or no.
I know a boy who was killed by a hit and run drunk driver. The guy was also driving after a suspended license. Should we be able to sue the manufacturer's of alcohol and the city as well, since this guy was driving when he shouldn't have been?
Ever look in a Gun magazine ? Do they not have adds ???!
So do alcohol companies. Alcohol is a killer and not a constitutional right. I notice that you avoid my direct questions and try to gloss over them. You are very transparent, anti-rights SOB. You aren't fooling anyone.
Anti rights ?! I'm pro rights . Pro people being able to take their claims to court without having congress issue protection for thier pet industry .
So they do have ads . We've cleared that up and I was right .
And no I don't think gun companies are liable for making guns .
No I do t think that just producing alcohol makes you liable for drunk drivers .
And I don't respect a dead lady who bought her psycho son all kinds a guns and took him shooting n shit.
You didn't answer my question on if she was in any way responsible .
Here's N example of the bushmaster ad.
Bushmaster Rifle Ad Reminds Us To Ask More About Masculinity And Gun Violence (PHOTO)
Sandy Hook families can sue gun manufacturers.
Sandy Hook families can sue gun industry
BRIDGEPORT — Gun-safety advocates hailed a judge’s ruling that victims’ families can sue the manufacturer of the military-style rifle used in the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
hey called the Thursday decision by Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellisa landmark in the fight against the epidemic of mass shootings.
Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said it was an “important win” for the Newtown families and other victims.
“They deserve their day in court and we are pleased that at least for now they'll get it, despite the defendants' best efforts to derail this case,” Gross said. “Victims of gun violence are not second-class citizens.”
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who became the state’s leading advocate for gun-control reforms after the Newtown school massacre, said firearms companies should not be allowed blanket immunity from wrongful-death lawsuits.
“I look at this as a moral victory,” Malloy said.
Gun makers, dealers and sellers had claimed the Newtown families did not have legal standing.
But Bellis ruled that the 2005 federal law shielding gun makers from liability does not override the claims by the Sandy Hook families that the Bushmaster XM-15 rifle is a military-style rifle that should never have been marketed to civilians.
The judge’s decisions comes in the middle of a contentious race for the nation’s presidency, in which the Sandy Hook families’ lawsuit has become pivotal.
Bellis ordered participating lawyers to her courtroom Tuesday for a conference to prepare for trial. An appeal of the decision, however, could delay the issue.
Josh Koskoff, the attorney from the Bridgeport-based Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder, representing the Newtown families, said he was pleased with Bellis’s ruling.
“We are thrilled that the gun companies’ motion to dismiss was denied,” Koskoff said in a statement. “The families look forward to continuing their fight in court.”
Attorneys for the defendant gun makers, distributors and dealer did not respond for requests for comment on Thursday.Michael Bazinet, public affairs director for the Newtown-based National Shooting Sports Foundation, said the organization is reviewing the decision and has no comment at this time.
U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, both Democrats, met with gun safety advocates Thursday and called for the repeal of the laws protecting the gun industry from lawsuits.
“It is a historic and seismic step to open the courthouse doors for gun violence survivors and others who have legitimate legal complaints against the gun industry,” said Blumenthal. “It is a powerful impetus and momentum for ongoing reform efforts to stop gun violence that is an epidemic and public health crisis in our nation.”
This next election is CRITICAL...........as there will probably be 3 Supremes nominated.............Here in a lower court..............they say they can now sue the gun manufacturers..................incredible.......
What if...
what about skinny people who have it?.....Hmmm. Really though, I guess fat people who have diabetes and perhaps have lost a limb should be able to sue junk food manufacturers if they have eaten too many Twinkies. Lol.
Skinny people rarely get type II diabetes.what about skinny people who have it?.....Hmmm. Really though, I guess fat people who have diabetes and perhaps have lost a limb should be able to sue junk food manufacturers if they have eaten too many Twinkies. Lol.
and type 2 never lose a limb to it,but type 1's do....so she was talking type 1 and they are not all fat....Skinny people rarely get type II diabetes.what about skinny people who have it?.....Hmmm. Really though, I guess fat people who have diabetes and perhaps have lost a limb should be able to sue junk food manufacturers if they have eaten too many Twinkies. Lol.
Damn, but you're an IDIOT! Learn to think before you put fingers to keyboard, fool!What form would this defense take, shooting up Congress?
Anti rights ?! I'm pro rights . Pro people being able to take their claims to court without having congress issue protection for thier pet industry .
