Some Newtown families sue Bushmaster

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • NoMoreTreadingOnUs

    Active Member
    Apr 2, 2013
    159
    Garrett County
    From the WSJ: "The ruling allows the plaintiffs to move forward with their claims that Remington Outdoor Co. violated Connecticut’s law against unfair trade practices by allegedly promoting the rifle as a combat weapon intended for waging war and killing human beings."

    Somehow I'm skeptical about the accuracy of that description.
     

    fidelity

    piled higher and deeper
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 15, 2012
    22,400
    Frederick County
    Here's more on the ruling ...

    Sandy Hook Massacre: Gun Makers Lose Major Ruling Over Liability
    https://nyti.ms/2CiMz8s

    The ruling allows the lawsuit brought by victims’ relatives to go to trial, which could force gun companies to turn over internal communications that they have fiercely fought to keep private and provide a revealing — and possibly damaging — glimpse into how the industry operates.

    ...

    The ruling validates the novel strategy lawyers for the victims’ families used as they sought to find a route around the vast protections in federal law that guard gun companies from litigation when their products are used to commit a crime.

    ...

    The lawsuit argued that the AR-15-style Bushmaster used in the 2012 attack had been marketed as a weapon of war, invoking the violence of combat and using slogans like “Consider your man card reissued.”

    Such messages reflected, according to the lawsuit, a deliberate effort to appeal to troubled young men like Adam Lanza, the 20-year-old who charged into the elementary school and killed 26 people, including 20 first graders, in a spray of gunfire. The attack traumatized the nation and made Newtown, Conn., the small town where it happened, a rallying point in the broader debate over gun violence.

    ...

    The lawsuit, brought by family members of nine people who were killed and a teacher who was shot and survived, was originally filed in 2014, then moved to federal court, where a judge ordered that it be returned to the state level.

    The families were given a glimmer of hope when a State Superior Court judge, Barbara N. Bellis, permitted the case to approach a trial before she ultimately dismissed it. She found that the claims fell “squarely within the broad immunity” provided by federal law.

    In 2005, Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which restricts lawsuits against gun sellers and makers by granting industrywide immunity from blame when one of their products is used in a crime. Lawmakers behind the measure cited a need to foil what they described as predatory and politically driven litigation.

    The law does allow exceptions for sale and marketing practices that violate state or federal laws and instances of so-called negligent entrustment, in which a gun is carelessly given or sold to a person posing a high risk of misusing it.

    In the lawsuit, the families pushed to broaden the scope to include the manufacturer, Remington, which was named along with a wholesaler and a local retailer in the suit.

    The lawsuit said that the companies were wrong to entrust an untrained civilian public with a weapon designed for maximizing fatalities on the battlefield.

    Lawyers pointed out advertising — with messages of combat dominance and hyper-masculinity — that resonated with disturbed young men who could be induced to use the weapon to commit violence.

    As highlighted above, one point that they're pushing is that the public should not have access to AR-15s.


    Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
     

    Boxcab

    MSI EM
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 22, 2007
    7,865
    AA County
    The lawsuit said that the companies were wrong to entrust an untrained civilian public with a weapon designed for maximizing fatalities on the battlefield.

    I believe that blame falls on the Government, as they approve or disapprove the buyer at the time of sale. Once the State and Federal Governments stuck their noses into it, they own it. They should be suing .gov, not the manufacturers.







    .
     

    fidelity

    piled higher and deeper
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 15, 2012
    22,400
    Frederick County
    One thing that I don't get about this suit is that Adam Lanza didn't buy the AR-15. His mother did. He killed her to get access to it. He might have killed someone else to get access to their firearms if his mother didn't have one. He might have also decided to make a bomb instead. Thus, if I understand the article about the lawsuit correctly, they need to argue that his mom shouldn't have been legally sold to on the grounds that they're suing ("The law does allow exceptions for sale and marketing practices that violate state or federal laws and instances of so-called negligent entrustment, in which a gun is carelessly given or sold to a person posing a high risk of misusing it.").

    As per the weapon that Lanza used, this anti 2A CNN article from late 2017 states that 15 million AR-15 rifles are privately owned in the US ...

    https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/14/health/ar15-rifle-history-trnd/index.html

    They cite an NRA-ILA link that's currently broken. Two years prior, the NRA-ILA suggested 5 million were privately held.

    At 5 or 15 million, it's a popular rifle design, one that other sources indicate is the best selling of centerfire rifles sold in the US.

    Yet, the frequency in which they are used in crimes is relatively low. Many, many more people are killed by a 22LR round annually than a 223 or 5.56 projectile. After 22LR, centerfire pistol calibers dominate the numbers in homicide use. Pistols are easy to hide, so this is no surprise.

    However we will continue to see AR-15 rifles used in homicides because they are prevalent, just like Toyotas will be well represented in getaways from bank robberies.

    Lanza was an aberration. His mother made unfortunate choices that led to a horrible tragedy. Lanza was sufficiently disturbed and motivated that he likely would have made some attempt in some manner to harm people even if they didn't own firearms. He was even willing to kill his mom to do it. It's really too bad that he wasn't institutionalized at some point earlier.

    Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
     
    Feb 28, 2013
    28,953
    Here's more on the ruling ...

    Sandy Hook Massacre: Gun Makers Lose Major Ruling Over Liability
    https://nyti.ms/2CiMz8s



    As highlighted above, one point that they're pushing is that the public should not have access to AR-15s.


    Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

    That horseshit implies that soldiers is bein issued Bushies, and we all know damn well that ain’t happenin. This slip-and-fall parasite lawyer’s get rich quick scheme oughta fail for that reason alone. :mad54:
     

    Melnic

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 27, 2012
    15,282
    HoCo
    One thing that I don't get about this suit is that Adam Lanza didn't buy the AR-15. His mother did. He killed her to get access to it.

    Exactly my thought, but that unfortunately does not stop law suits.
    Civil Law suits are like fake news. If people believe it, its true/guilty
     

    rascal

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 15, 2013
    1,253
    One thing that I don't get about this suit is that Adam Lanza didn't buy the AR-15. His mother did. He killed her to get access to it. ....

    I agree generally with this and all your points. But the Lanza gun safe was in the kids room and a low security safe. The argument is going to be she bought it for him motivated by the "man card" advert.


    in the bigger picture it does not matter much if they win this one. just as gun control lobby has spent about $3 for every $1 they deny the NRA, and that worked and is still worthwhile to them; in the case of lawsuits they primary want to open as many as possible.

    the win for the gun controllers on the lawsuits can be any one of the following:
    a) death of a thousand cuts from thousands of lawsuits that are costly to defend
    b) a possible gigantic payday of >$1,000,000,000 win
    c) public relations wins from say forcing gun makers to open up and provide all memos, emails, and internal discussions as to marketing etc. There could be internal memos that could be spun to make Remington look like Satan

    Lets keep in mind the gun control lobby can spend upwards of $1000 million a year on suits -- all paid for by the taxpayer since the are por bono charity of the huge law firms to the gun control "charities" -- fully tax deductable.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/07/business/dealbook/gun-control-big-law-firms.html
    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/17/opinion/sunday/a-pro-bono-dream-team-takes-on-the-nra.html
     

    foxtrapper

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 11, 2007
    4,533
    Havre de Grace
    Do they first have to prove that the rifle was actually used in the shooting? The ME comments about the bullets not exiting such little bodies sounds like the biggest pile of BS ever. Compare to a large eastern coyote, a round nose .22 LR fired from a pistol at near point blank exits a coyotes body. I'd think a soft point .223 would exit every single time. The ME ( H Wayne Carver) seems to have a been a hack, probably appointed due to come political connection. OR he and his staff were ordered to falsify evidence. Just look at his wacky behavior during the press conference. The forensics tent was " this magnificent thing!". You can also see photographic evidence of what looks like a plant by an idiot. The Glock 20 has the slide locked back and the cartridge you see "jammed" in the chamber is BACKWARDS. It reminds me of the fiasco I think was H&K ad that had the mag loaded with the round backwards lol. I honestly don't think Lanza boy with autism would have loaded a round backwards, then the next he loads properly but doesn't go back and redo the backwards one. Autism had a high amount of OCD and doing things properly on something one is fixated or obsessed with. And I have never heard of a pistol jamming due to a round flipping backwards like an acrobat. Esp a Glock...
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,921
    Messages
    7,259,069
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom