Supreme Court Allows Sandy Hook Families' Case Against Remington Arms To Proceed

[EvilEyeFleegle]

View attachment 289495

And when the supreme court rules in favor of Remington you'll be calling them evil
lol

In this case, I don't see that happening.

There is a law on the books protecting manufacturers from being sued when their product has been abused. They also have warnings on firearms about safety use. Remington will win especially with a pro-second amendment supreme court.

FYI..the 2nd is not an issue in this case. No one is saying that the right to bear arms should be curtailed.

Look at the Tobacco and Oxycontin settlements....for a clue as to what the plaintiffs are going for...if abuse is foreseeable...manufacturer can be held liable.

Negligent Exception ....it's a thing.

You want to bet it's not about the second amendment?
It's a back door attack on it.
So you mention Tobacco which only effected one person but you neglected to mention alcohol which kills daily and not just the one who was drinking.
Plus as I said there are laws protecting gun manufacturers from being sued when their product was abused.
So you can take your FYI and shove it up your ass.

Uh-huh----about those laws...why, do you suppose...the courts allowed this case to go forward..in the face of your putative laws?
Could it be..that you are wrong/ That there are legal exceptions to said laws..that there is, at least, a viable legal argument to be made for exception? You mention tobacco and incorrectly state that it affects only one person...thousands, if not millions, have been affected by 2nd hand smoke.

You guys are always about someone's ass.....given the Freudian interpretation of a fixation on guns....

I'll have to decline your offer of a date night! But thanx..is always flattering....

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

You are not familiar with current laws

I am pretty sure the Supreme Court is. You are in denial, sad.

a=]=
hey stupid fk . when you hit someone with a car . THAT CAR COMPANY GETS SUED YOU RETARDEDD FK NN MORON . A HOLES LIKE YOU ARE WHAT MAKE A SHIT COUNTRY!!

a baseball . HITS A KID IN THE FACW YOU FKN RETARD . NOW THE BASEBALL COMPANY GETS SUED OUT OF EXISTANCE YOU FKR ARE BEYOND GAWD DAM IDIOTS!!!!!

All other companies in America are open to being sued, for most anythang. They try to be responsible. So they are not sued.
But ANAL gun maker got a special immunity from being sued. AT ALL! FFS!? Seems like the anal gun makers sell assault weapons to the public
needs that as making guns to kill people. No American Company can have Full immunity from the damage their products do.

So was Toyota sued when a person used their truck to run over protesters?

Companies should only be libel when their products fail.
neither of these cases fall into that category.

So the car maker is marketing that car there for killing protestors?
I did not know that. Can you post the media advertising, so we all can read that..
I want to read that.

That's a stupid question. Gun manufacturers are not marketing their guns to kill people. I challenge you to find one advertisement where they advocate using their guns for killing.

 

[Godboy]

Great news. The gun industry has been irresponsible in selling weapons for mass killing to the public. Hopefully they will be soon paying for it.

Supreme Court Allows Sandy Hook Families' Case Against Remington Arms To Proceed

The Supreme Court has denied Remington Arms Co.'s bid to block a lawsuit filed by families who lost loved ones in the Sandy Hook school massacre. The families say Remington should be held liable, as the maker of the AR-15-style rifle used in the 2012 killings.

Damn, who is going to make automobiles now that that manufacturers can be sued if someone decides to run a person over? Knife makers too for that matter. How are we going to cut our steaks?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Considering the marketing slogans used by Remington, good for the Supreme Court to deny cert. "Consider your man card reissued." "the Sandy Hook families say Remington "published promotional materials that promised 'military-proven performance' for a 'mission-adaptable' shooter in need of the 'ultimate combat weapons system.' " "They also accuse the company of fostering a "lone gunman" narrative as it promoted the Bushmaster, citing an ad that proclaimed, "Forces of opposition, bow down. You are single-handedly outnumbered."

This all is a direct appeal to those civilians who would be violent, including a sick identification of this weapon with masculinity. There is no legitimate use of this type of weapon in civilian U.S. society, and, when it is used for its intended purpose, it is lethal. There are other, less powerful guns that can be used for hunting or defending one's home against any invasion.

A car in the hands of a texting teen is lethal when it is used for an unintended purpose. In fact, a man texting and driving was responsible for the deaths of thirteen people in Texas in 2017.

A vehicle was not manufactured for the purpose of killing people. Cell phones were not manufactured for the purpose of killing people nor for use while driving a vehicle. But those thirteen people are just as dead as any thirteen people killed by guns. Are their deaths somehow less tragic than those killed by firearms?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I’m saying they can quickly and easily become a mass killer. That’s what the gun is for. It’s irresponsible to sell weapons for mass killing to the public.

They don't, a rifle is not a mass killing weapon, a bomb is. Or a Truck....

Most people consider 50+ people a mass killing.

Not NRA Gun Nutters.

Liberal code word for hating the Constitution

.

The 2nd allows gun ownership to members of a well REGULATED militia. Is has been bastardized by the gun lobby.

A militia is comprised of citizen soldiers with their own weapons for the most part.

 

[Wyatt earp]

And when the supreme court rules in favor of Remington you'll be calling them evil
lol

In this case, I don't see that happening.

There is a law on the books protecting manufacturers from being sued when their product has been abused. They also have warnings on firearms about safety use. Remington will win especially with a pro-second amendment supreme court.

FYI..the 2nd is not an issue in this case. No one is saying that the right to bear arms should be curtailed.

Look at the Tobacco and Oxycontin settlements....for a clue as to what the plaintiffs are going for...if abuse is foreseeable...manufacturer can be held liable.

Negligent Exception ....it's a thing.

You want to bet it's not about the second amendment?
It's a back door attack on it.
So you mention Tobacco which only effected one person but you neglected to mention alcohol which kills daily and not just the one who was drinking.
Plus as I said there are laws protecting gun manufacturers from being sued when their product was abused.
So you can take your FYI and shove it up your ass.

Uh-huh----about those laws...why, do you suppose...the courts allowed this case to go forward..in the face of your putative laws?
Could it be..that you are wrong/ That there are legal exceptions to said laws..that there is, at least, a viable legal argument to be made for exception? You mention tobacco and incorrectly state that it affects only one person...thousands, if not millions, have been affected by 2nd hand smoke.

You guys are always about someone's ass.....given the Freudian interpretation of a fixation on guns....

I'll have to decline your offer of a date night! But thanx..is always flattering....

2nd hand smoke is a huge myth.. liberals just hate cigarette smoking and like to get high.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

They don't, a rifle is not a mass killing weapon, a bomb is. Or a Truck....

Most people consider 50+ people a mass killing.

Not NRA Gun Nutters.

Liberal code word for hating the Constitution

.

The 2nd allows gun ownership to members of a well REGULATED militia. Is has been bastardized by the gun lobby.

I want to see them Gun Nutters fight off drones and laser bombs. With their 2nd anal rights. They won't be coming like in the 1770's or the civil war.
In one front line with little cover. To let insane 2nd Anal Gun Nutters shoot them down in mass.

Hah?

 

[K9Buck]

So a company can be sued when a customer intentionally misuses one of its products? The judge must be a complete loon.

 

[Leo123]

Great news. The gun industry has been irresponsible in selling weapons for mass killing to the public. Hopefully they will be soon paying for it.

Supreme Court Allows Sandy Hook Families' Case Against Remington Arms To Proceed

The Supreme Court has denied Remington Arms Co.'s bid to block a lawsuit filed by families who lost loved ones in the Sandy Hook school massacre. The families say Remington should be held liable, as the maker of the AR-15-style rifle used in the 2012 killings.

The link provided by the OP only mentions in passing that the lawsuit is about Remington's advertising of that particular gun. From the link:

"While the suit initially centered on a claim of negligent entrustment — or providing a gun to someone who plans to commit a crime with it — the case now hinges on how Remington marketed the gun."

Also, further down in the article:

"the Sandy Hook families say Remington "published promotional materials that promised 'military-proven performance' for a 'mission-adaptable' shooter in need of the 'ultimate combat weapons system.' " They also accuse the company of fostering a "lone gunman" narrative as it promoted the Bushmaster, citing an ad that proclaimed, "Forces of opposition, bow down. You are single-handedly outnumbered."

So, the lawsuit was changed because you cannot prosecute a manufacturer for the misuse of their product. Now they are going for the advertising claiming that is why Lanza chose that particular rifle. IMO it seems a bit of a stretch to try to divine what was in the killer's mind. Also, that advertisment probably reached thousands if not millions and only Lanza chose to use the rifle to commit his horrendous act.

 

[K9Buck]

Now they are going for the advertising claiming that is why Lanza chose that particular rifle.

Didn't Lanza the rifle belong to his mother and didn't he take it and then murdered her before going to the school? That's my recollection.

 

[K9Buck]

The link provided by the OP only mentions in passing that the lawsuit is about Remington's advertising of that particular gun. From the link:

"While the suit initially centered on a claim of negligent entrustment — or providing a gun to someone who plans to commit a crime with it — the case now hinges on how Remington marketed the gun."

Also, further down in the article:

"the Sandy Hook families say Remington "published promotional materials that promised 'military-proven performance' for a 'mission-adaptable' shooter in need of the 'ultimate combat weapons system.' " They also accuse the company of fostering a "lone gunman" narrative as it promoted the Bushmaster, citing an ad that proclaimed, "Forces of opposition, bow down. You are single-handedly outnumbered."

So, the lawsuit was changed because you cannot prosecute a manufacturer for the misuse of their product. Now they are going for the advertising claiming that is why Lanza chose that particular rifle. IMO it seems a bit of a stretch to try to divine what was in the killer's mind. Also, that advertisment probably reached thousands if not millions and only Lanza chose to use the rifle to commit his horrendous act.

Ok, so Brain357 is an idiot. Thanks.

 

[Leo123]

The link provided by the OP only mentions in passing that the lawsuit is about Remington's advertising of that particular gun. From the link:

"While the suit initially centered on a claim of negligent entrustment — or providing a gun to someone who plans to commit a crime with it — the case now hinges on how Remington marketed the gun."

Also, further down in the article:

"the Sandy Hook families say Remington "published promotional materials that promised 'military-proven performance' for a 'mission-adaptable' shooter in need of the 'ultimate combat weapons system.' " They also accuse the company of fostering a "lone gunman" narrative as it promoted the Bushmaster, citing an ad that proclaimed, "Forces of opposition, bow down. You are single-handedly outnumbered."

So, the lawsuit was changed because you cannot prosecute a manufacturer for the misuse of their product. Now they are going for the advertising claiming that is why Lanza chose that particular rifle. IMO it seems a bit of a stretch to try to divine what was in the killer's mind. Also, that advertisment probably reached thousands if not millions and only Lanza chose to use the rifle to commit his horrendous act.

Ok, so Brain357 is an idiot. Thanks.

Either a useful idiot to the left or a leftist propagandist. Let's not forget also, that NPR fed them this and made it more palatable by leaving out the 'bitter' facts of the case buried in the 'whipped cream' OP ED part of the story.

 

[Leo123]

Now they are going for the advertising claiming that is why Lanza chose that particular rifle.

Didn't Lanza the rifle belong to his mother and didn't he take it and then murdered her before going to the school? That's my recollection.

Good point. The rifle must have talked to him and told him to do all this horrendous shit.

 

[KissMy]

Every citizen needs WMD's so they can take out a thousand good citizens in under 5 minutes when they have bad day at a Vegas casino.

 

[Leo123]

Every citizen needs WMD's so they can take out a thousand good citizens in under 5 minutes when they have bad day at a Vegas casino.

Why would you think every citizen would do such a thing? You know, if you really think about it, there are more guns (WMD's) than people in the U.S.......yet your fantasy projection has not come to pass. Apparently your projection is just that. OR does your mind really work that way?

 

[K9Buck]

Now they are going for the advertising claiming that is why Lanza chose that particular rifle.

Didn't Lanza the rifle belong to his mother and didn't he take it and then murdered her before going to the school? That's my recollection.

Good point. The rifle must have talked to him and told him to do all this horrendous shit.

I imagine that he wasn't picky about the brand and just took whatever he could get.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

So a company can be sued when a customer intentionally misuses one of its products? The judge must be a complete loon.

How was the gun misused ? It did what it was made to do.

 

[JoeB131]

And you are an idiot....where did Remington have any culpability in what happened, you doofus.

What you asshats don't understand, is these companies are the gateway......if you can sue a gun maker for the illegal use of their product, car makers, booze makers, computer makers are all next in line........you moron.

If the Car Makers acted like the Gun Manufacturers, this would be their 2020 model.

And this would be their prime customer...

You see, funny thing. When people figured out hunting was largely just animal cruelty, and stopped doing that, the gun manufacturers had a problem. How to sell people something they would never use and didn't really need?

So they created a MARKET for military grade weapons for civilian use, and marketed them to the most unstable people.

That they made it easy for Nancy Lanza to own a dozen guns and thousands of rounds of ammo, is the problem. Did she think the Zombies were coming?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And when the supreme court rules in favor of Remington you'll be calling them evil
lol

In this case, I don't see that happening.

There is a law on the books protecting manufacturers from being sued when their product has been abused. They also have warnings on firearms about safety use. Remington will win especially with a pro-second amendment supreme court.

FYI..the 2nd is not an issue in this case. No one is saying that the right to bear arms should be curtailed.

Look at the Tobacco and Oxycontin settlements....for a clue as to what the plaintiffs are going for...if abuse is foreseeable...manufacturer can be held liable.

Negligent Exception ....it's a thing.

You want to bet it's not about the second amendment?
It's a back door attack on it.
So you mention Tobacco which only effected one person but you neglected to mention alcohol which kills daily and not just the one who was drinking.
Plus as I said there are laws protecting gun manufacturers from being sued when their product was abused.
So you can take your FYI and shove it up your ass.

Uh-huh----about those laws...why, do you suppose...the courts allowed this case to go forward..in the face of your putative laws?
Could it be..that you are wrong/ That there are legal exceptions to said laws..that there is, at least, a viable legal argument to be made for exception? You mention tobacco and incorrectly state that it affects only one person...thousands, if not millions, have been affected by 2nd hand smoke.

You guys are always about someone's ass.....given the Freudian interpretation of a fixation on guns....

I'll have to decline your offer of a date night! But thanx..is always flattering....

lol wrong is still wrong

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And you are an idiot....where did Remington have any culpability in what happened, you doofus.

What you asshats don't understand, is these companies are the gateway......if you can sue a gun maker for the illegal use of their product, car makers, booze makers, computer makers are all next in line........you moron.

If the Car Makers acted like the Gun Manufacturers, this would be their 2020 model.

And this would be their prime customer...

View attachment 289582

You see, funny thing. When people figured out hunting was largely just animal cruelty, and stopped doing that, the gun manufacturers had a problem. How to sell people something they would never use and didn't really need?

So they created a MARKET for military grade weapons for civilian use, and marketed them to the most unstable people.

That they made it easy for Nancy Lanza to own a dozen guns and thousands of rounds of ammo, is the problem. Did she think the Zombies were coming?

View attachment 289583

Sorry snowflake your Nazi wishlist will not happen