Sandy Hook Lawsuit Against Gun Manufacturer Allowed to Proceed

hm1996

hm1996

Moderator
Staff member
Quote:
Sandy Hook Lawsuit
Allowed to Move Forward


By Tim Schmidt - USCCA Founder, April 2016

Connecticut Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis ruled Thursday that "a lawsuit can go forward against the maker of the rifle used in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings," rejecting the “argument that a 2005 federal law can protect gun businesses from civil lawsuits.”

Families of several children killed in the Newtown attack and one surviving teacher are suing Remington Arms, parent company of Bushmaster Firearms, who manufactured the weapon -- a Bushmaster AR-15 - used by Adam Lanza in the school shooting.

According to The Washington Examiner, the basis of the families' suit is that "the military-style gun should have never been available for civilians to purchase."

Although lawyers for Remington Arms sought to dismiss the lawsuit, Bellis ruled that Remington's argument "that the federal law shields gun manufacturers from most lawsuits over criminal use of their products...would be best made in a motion later in the process and is not grounds to dismiss the lawsuit."
Regardless of the outcome, this is a devastating blow to the firearms industry and -- quite frankly -- a blatant attempt by anti-gunners to put firearms manufacturers out of business, thus denying millions of responsible Americans their God-given right to keep and bear arms.

Listen, I agree 100% that a company should be held responsible for the product or products they produce -- when those products are utilized as intended. But holding a company liable for the inappropriate or unethical use of that product or products? That's dangerous territory -- no matter what industry we're talking about.

It's one thing if there's a manufacturing defect that causes death or great bodily harm. (Think Toyota's "unintended acceleration" problem a few years back.) But if a product functions as it should...and someone uses it to do harm ... well, that's an entirely different story. And that's the real issue here.

Listen, Toyota isn't liable if someone chooses to drive his or her car into a building filled with people. So why should firearms manufacturers be treated any differently? (Except, of course, that it's a desperate shifting of the blame in the anti-gunners' attempt to feel like they're "doing something.")

The bottom line is that Sandy Hook was a tragedy perpetrated by the evil intentions and actions of one man.
Adam Lanza's firearm wasn't defective. But his illegal and immoral use of the product certainly was.

I'm getting sort of sick of standing up for inanimate objects. I simply don't understand why we're wasting time blaming things when we should be holding individuals accountable for their heinous, unlawful actions.

Take Care and Stay Safe,

Whatever your views on the Sandy Hook episode (and it's known that opinions vary), this attempt to make a firearm's manufacturer liable for someones inappropriate use of their product is simply absurd. It is also another of H Clinton's wonderful set of 'gun-control' ideas. This could set dangerous precedent if some anti-gun judge gets hold of it .. then what?! Perhaps we should sue the manufacturer of a house brick, if one was used to break through a jewelry store window prior to the death of a clerk?

You don't have to be Jewish to fight by our side.

© 2016 JPFO All rights reserved.
jpfo@jpfo.org
1-800-869-1884
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership


Regards,
hm
 
This should be very entertaining considering that NO Children Died there.
Even the FBI Murder Statistics say that there were no deaths at Sandy Hook in 2012.
 
The bar in this case is impossibly high for the plaintiff. Good for them, the case can proceed.

Problem is that the rifle was not sold or made available to the shooter, Adam Lanza. It was legally purchased by his mother, after she passed all required Government screenings.

So to win this case, the plaintiffs would have to get not just a jury, but if it went this far, layer after layer of appellate courts to agree that a gun maker CAN be held liable when their products are stolen from the original buyer and used in a crime. On top of that, the specific Federal law prohibits ANY finding of liability.

Grouse
 
I think the puppetmasters behind the screen KNOW they cannot win but are willing to drop some coin to keep the "assault rifle" issue on MSM in hopes of gaining political advantage.

Regards,
hm
 
Originally Posted By: Wallbass45This should be very entertaining considering that NO Children Died there.
Even the FBI Murder Statistics say that there were no deaths at Sandy Hook in 2012.


It is amazing how many people out there are saying that it was a false flag hoax operation to push an agenda.
 
I agree with Foxpro.223, I think we hurt our cause when we denie something like Sandy hook happened. Those people did lose their children and loved ones. Bushmaster is not responsible and the lawsuit is BS and should be thrown out. But to say the shooting never happened is insulting for those families. This is the fault of one man and one man only, a very very mentally sick man. Let's condem the man, but honor the families by figuring out a way to "track" and "care" for those in society that are dangerous to others.
 
Originally Posted By: viperBut to say the shooting never happened is insulting for those families.


it is insulting to anybody with half a brain. to think sandy hook did not happen is retarded at best.
 
Sandy hook never happened didn't you see that actor walking with 2 rifles in the parking lot the Ar carried upside down by the mag holder.. lol I forgot the actors name but you can clearly see his face.
found it David wheeler...
 
Last edited:
There are so many holes in the official story of shady hook that it don't hold water here.

Why is it that all these highly publicized so called mass shootings are occurring just prior and just after the presidential election cycles... the latest of which were foamented by the out of control regime of whom wants your firearms.

Look at one of the latest shootings when a jihadi went into the pulse night club in Orlando Florida (a department of homeland security contractor with a security clearance, was he) who just so happens to have a civilizational jihadi for a father who is running for president in afghanistan who supports klinton and her anti gun agenda for president. You just can't make this [beeep] up.

Nothing to see here now, move along.
 
question for you that think sandy hook was nothing but a drill and nobody was killed.

i had a niece that was at the school that day. her parents have not seen her since that day. somebody that looked identical to their daughter was in a casket a few days later. that casket was put in the ground and covered with dirt.

so i ask you. who was that little girl in the casket? where is my brothers daughter?
 
Slicker, sorry for your families loss. I can't believe anyone would really think, let alone say Sandy Hook did not occur. Do they really think it helps the gun industries cause to simple say it did not happen? That makes us all look stupid. As I stated I think the direction that the anti gun people are going is BS and would endanger more than it would ever protect. And I don't think you can hold a manufacturer responsible if a product it used in a manor that is illegal. You can do the same with autos, gasoline, chemicals, several things. It's just stupid to hold them responsible and the Judge should know so!
 
+1, Slick. I,too am sorry for your loss.

Still believe the anti's have no hopes of winning in court, just a ploy to keep the pot stirred in hopes of gaining support for their anti-gun agenda.

Originally Posted By: hm1996I think the puppetmasters behind the screen KNOW they cannot win but are willing to drop some coin to keep the "assault rifle" issue on MSM in hopes of gaining political advantage.

Regards,
hm
 
Originally Posted By: viper You can do the same with autos, gasoline, chemicals, several things. It's just stupid to hold them responsible and the Judge should know so!

thanks viper.

dont forget cell phones. texting while driving kills and injures more every day than guns ever will. and it is only going to get worse.

vehicles should be made to not start if there is a cell phone detected inside it!
 
I am not sure that would be practical.. But Cell phones should be locked out once the GPS detects they are moving more than 5mph.

The cars that handle hands free phone calls are fine, but the morons i see driving with it glued the whole time to their ears should be stopped and the texts too.
 
Originally Posted By: viperSlicker, sorry for your families loss. I can't believe anyone would really think, let alone say Sandy Hook did not occur. Do they really think it helps the gun industries cause to simple say it did not happen? That makes us all look stupid. As I stated I think the direction that the anti gun people are going is BS and would endanger more than it would ever protect. And I don't think you can hold a manufacturer responsible if a product it used in a manor that is illegal. You can do the same with autos, gasoline, chemicals, several things. It's just stupid to hold them responsible and the Judge should know so!

The thing there is how high up is the directive coming from to tell the Judge how to rule?
 
this one may go all the way up to SCOTUS, where hillary will make sure to appoint someone(s) to get the desired decision.

Get ready for the gun companies to be driven into total bankruptcy via law suits. And good luck buying a new gun when there isn't anyone making them any more.

You don't have to repeal the 2nd if you can simply force the industry out of business.
 
I just read on yahoo news saying the judge dismissed the lawsuit aginst Remington and bushmaster. A win for us.I hope Remington counter sues for their attorney fees. dave in wyo
 
I saw too where the judge ruled the gun manufacturer couldn't be sued. If that is allowed to happens down the road, then every adult beverage mfg. should be able to be sued if their product caused the intoxication of a driver who killed someone through drunk driving.
YEA RIGHT, the chain would be the barroom, the STATE LIQUOR STORE, and then the distillery, ain't going to happen, someone may try, but it just isn't going to happen, especially with the state liquor store being in the chain here in PA.
 
Back
Top