Sandy Hook Lawsuit

[Belsnickel]

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/02/22/sandy-hook-shooting-gun-maker-lawsuit/

Quote: BRIDGEPORT, Conn. (CBSNewYork/AP) — Lawyers for the company that made the rifle used in the 2012 Newtown school massacre are expected to ask a Connecticut judge to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit filed by families of some of the victims.

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.

Jonathan Whitcomb, an attorney for Remington and Bushmaster, said the lawsuit should be dismissed, CBS2’s Lou Young reports.

“Congress has expressed its clear intention that these kinds of cases against firearm manufacturers shall not be brought and shall not proceed and I think the process by which that law was passed needs to be respected and it needs to be followed,” Whitcomb said.

A Bridgeport Superior Court judge heard arguments Monday afternoon.

The lawsuit by families of nine children and adults who died and a teacher who survived alleges the Bushmaster AR-15 is too dangerous to sell to the public. They say they’re suing under an exception to the 2005 law.

The families will argue that the AR-15 was designed for the military and that gun manufacturers knew the weapon wasn’t suitable for civilians when it was put on the open market, 1010 WINS’ Carol D’Auria reported.

“It’s about this gun and this type of marketing,” Mark Barden, father of Sandy Hook victim Daniel Barden, told CBS2. “The manufacturer is marketing to people like Adam Lanza and they know it.”

The families claim the gun manufacturer exploited the AR-15’s military value to young men with advertising like “the forces of opposition will bow down” to sell the firearm.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal said the families of the victims deserve their day in court.

“The manufacturers of these deadly weapons have to be held accountable,” Blumenthal said. “The federal law provides them right now with a complete impenetrable shield to accountability and they ought to be held accountable for producing weapons that have no purpose but to kill and maim innocent human beings.”

Gun manufacturers, however, argue the sole blame lies with the shooter, WCBS 880’s Sean Adams reported.

A decision on the case isn’t expected for several months, D’Auria reported.

In the past, nearly all cases against gun manufacturers to hold them accountable have been thrown out, D’Auria reported.

Bridgeport attorney Josh Koskoff said if allowed to proceed, the lawsuit will shed light on what he said is the covert world of gun sales, WCBS 880 Connecticut Bureau Chief Fran Schneidau reported.

“The AR-15 is a military weapon. It’s not a machine gun, actually, but it functions equivalent to a machine gun in the sense that it’s a killing machine,” he said.

Koskoff said the AR-15 is used repeatedly in mass murders.

“Before Sandy Hook, it wasn’t theoretical that these weapons would be used for mass murder,” Koskoff said. “They were designed for mass murder.”

CBS2 reports the attorneys for the Newtown families believe they’ve found an exception in the law that allows them to press the gun industry on one specific type of gun — the killer’s choice.

“He chose the AR-15 because he was aware of how many shots it could fire, how lethal it was, that it was designed to fit his objective of killing the most people in the quickest time possible,” Nicole Hockley, mother of Dylan Hockley, told CBS2.

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.

As 1010 WINS’ Steve Kastenbaum reported, Lanza fired a total of 153 rounds from an AR-15.

“Each of the kids had three to eight bullets in them,” said Jackie Barden.

David Wheeler’s 7-year-old son, Benjamin, was also killed. He believes Remington bears some responsibility because of how the company marketed the weapon, including product placements in video games like “Call Of Duty,” which Lanza played regularly, Kastenbaum reported.

“I would like them to stop looking at violence-prone young men as their ideal customer,” he said.

In December, more than a dozen victims’ families split $1.5 million under settlements of lawsuits filed against the estate of the gunman’s mother.

[GMDino]

(02-23-2016, 01:49 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/02/22/sandy-hook-shooting-gun-maker-lawsuit/

I don't see how they could win this.  

[Belsnickel]

(02-23-2016, 01:50 PM)GMDino Wrote: I don't see how they could win this.  

I don't either. I think some folks with an agenda really pressured them into this, and they will lose it.

[SteelCitySouth]

THIS WILL EVENTUALLY EXPOSE THE FALSE FLAG!!!!!

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-23-2016, 01:53 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't either. I think some folks with an agenda really pressured them into this, and they will lose it.

Are you suggesting lawyers and politicians would try to profit (monetarily and politically) from the grieving and incomprehensibly sad? Why I would never.....

[fredtoast]

Waste of time.

[Vas Deferens]

(02-23-2016, 01:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Waste of time.

Whoever is pushing this knows its unlikely they will win, but want to get the discussion rolling in the public.  Not sure its a waste of time if that occurs.

[fredtoast]

(02-23-2016, 01:59 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Whoever is pushing this knows its unlikely they will win, but want to get the discussion rolling in the public.  Not sure its a waste of time if that occurs.

The discussion this suit will raise (blaming the people who make the guns) is a waste of time because it does not address the real problem.

[GMDino]

(02-23-2016, 01:54 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Are you suggesting lawyers and politicians would try to profit (monetarily and politically) from the grieving and incomprehensibly sad? Why I would never.....

[Belsnickel]

(02-23-2016, 02:17 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Off topic, but how great are those Strongbow commercials with him?

[Vas Deferens]

(02-23-2016, 02:08 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The discussion this suit will raise (blaming the people who make the guns) is a waste of time because it does not address the real problem.

I agree.  But, getting the conversation going about general accessibility of assault/military weapons alone may be their ultimate goal.  Certainly haven't gotten any traction through other vehicles, the court system forces it a bit.    

Again, I don't think they will win, but I can see how the case could be used as an overall tactic.

[McC]

Who would ever imagine that such a weapon sold on the open market could end up used in a crime? How could the manufacturer have ever predicted such a thing?

Nothing wrong with wanting to make money or even the love of money, for the most part. But America, at this point in time is being damaged by its obsession with it. Greed is one of the Seven Deadly Sins, after all. It's the willingness to do anything for it that is so damaging.

This manufacturer should be made to pay out the ass. I understand that a gun maker can't control where their guns end up. I pretty much agree with the law in that regard. But if you're not putting AR 15's out in public, well...

If they're stolen from the military, that's a little different.

But the law is the law. The possibility of a better solution is buried in a political stalemate.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-23-2016, 04:08 PM)McC Wrote: Who would ever imagine that such a weapon sold on the open market could end up used in a crime?  How could the manufacturer have ever predicted such a thing?

Nothing wrong with wanting to make money or even the love of money, for the most part.  But America, at this point in time is being damaged by its obsession with it.  Greed is one of the Seven Deadly Sins, after all.  It's the willingness to do anything for it that is so damaging.

This manufacturer should be made to pay out the ass.  I understand that a gun maker can't control where their guns end up.  I pretty much agree with the law in that regard.  But if you're not putting AR 15's out in public, well...

If they're stolen from the military, that's a little different.  

But the law is the law.  The possibility of a better solution is buried in a political stalemate.

I'm gonna sue every place I ate that sold fatty foods if I ever have a heart attack.
I mean, they can't control I ate 5 McDoubles a day...but if they just never made them...

[McC]

(02-23-2016, 04:18 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: I'm gonna sue every place I ate that sold fatty foods if I ever have a heart attack.
I mean, they can't control I ate 5 McDoubles a day...but if they just never made them...

Eating fatty foods for the twenty or thirty years it would take to kill you is a far cry from putting assault rifles into the hands of civilians.  They don't compare in any way.  People who eat that way are not intending to kill themselves.  And nobody ever bought or stole a Big Mac to kill large numbers of people with it.

[Au165]

(02-23-2016, 04:18 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: I'm gonna sue every place I ate that sold fatty foods if I ever have a heart attack.
I mean, they can't control I ate 5 McDoubles a day...but if they just never made them...

I get what you are saying (and agree to a point)....but your analogy kind of sucked.

[Rotobeast]

I could kill more people with my car.
Should Ford be sued ?

If I know how to kill with my bare hands.
Should the publishers of the books I learned from and my instructors be sued ?

Just where does it end ?

[BFritz21]

The cemetery where we wrecked tried to sue me (my parents) because the tree we hit died, and I wasn't even driving, so nothing really surprises me anymore.

[CKwi88]

I was working in Bridgeport superior court on Monday. Planned on sitting in, but wound up not being able.


Alas, I must agree that it is mostly a waste of time

[RoyleRedlegs]

(02-23-2016, 04:24 PM)McC Wrote: Eating fatty foods for the twenty or thirty years it would take to kill you is a far cry from putting assault rifles into the hands of civilians.  They don't compare in any way.  People who eat that way are not intending to kill themselves.  And nobody ever bought or stole a Big Mac to kill large numbers of people with it.

Are you game to sue car manufactures? 
Fertilizer, chemical companies if it gets used in a bomb? 
What about the makers of yard equipment? Chainsaws, axes etc....if they get stolen or used for a crime....

Where does it stop? 

(02-23-2016, 04:39 PM)Au165 Wrote: I get what you are saying (and agree to a point)....but your analogy kind of sucked.

Yeah I had it typed and didn't like it but I was too lazy to fix it. 

[McC]

(02-23-2016, 09:53 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Are you game to sue car manufactures? 
Fertilizer, chemical companies if it gets used in a bomb? 
What about the makers of yard equipment? Chainsaws, axes etc....if they get stolen or used for a crime....

Where does it stop? 



Yeah I had it typed and didn't like it but I was too lazy to fix it. 

Come on.  You're still reaching.  All of those things are made for a certain purpose, none of which is to kill.  What are the intended applications of assault rifles?

I'm not talking about all guns.  I've already said that.  But what business does the general population have owning such weapons?  Selling them to the public is irresponsible.  I haven't yet seen you argue against that.  Let's stick to comparing apples to apples, not apples to lawn mowers.