2016 Postmortem

Press Virginia

(2,329 posts)

1. Its a case of chasing deep pockets and hoping emotional arguments

Reply to Vattel (Original post)

Wed Apr 6, 2016, 03:44 PM

Apr 2016

will trump facts

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

146 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Does anyone with any competence in the law really think that the Sandy Hook lawsuit should succeed? [View all] Vattel Apr 2016 OP

Its a case of chasing deep pockets and hoping emotional arguments Press Virginia Apr 2016 #1

Is it a trial by judge or jury? LonePirate Apr 2016 #2

Judge deciding (supposedly this month) if suit should continue.. jmg257 Apr 2016 #4

The guns were compliant with all existing laws madville Apr 2016 #7

Agreed. They are shooting for negligent entrustment, I THINK... jmg257 Apr 2016 #10

Then shouldn't the state of CT also be named, since they approved the sale? Press Virginia Apr 2016 #26

Yep - not very easy to sue legislators, I guess. nt jmg257 Apr 2016 #31

waste of taxpayer money lakeguy Apr 2016 #3

I'm assuming when they lose, they will be forced to pay court cost Travis_0004 Apr 2016 #55

Only if I can sue the knife Manufacturer Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #5

You should be able to scscholar Apr 2016 #38

No he shouldn't cannabis_flower Apr 2016 #103

So if someone hits me with a hammer - I should be able to sue Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #112

They have illegally big engines... scscholar Apr 2016 #113

Dude............ Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #115

You can. athena Apr 2016 #116

Bullshit. What an insane litigious nightmare you propose Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #117

You can't sue gun manufacturers. athena Apr 2016 #118

Wow did you miss the boat Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #123

This message was self-deleted by its author CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #128

Not trying to be contentious, so correct me if I'm wrong. Maedhros Apr 2016 #129

It's just that... CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #130

When people say "assault rifle" they mean "military rifle." Maedhros Apr 2016 #135

"I don't see a problem with... CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #138

I understand. Maedhros Apr 2016 #139

This message was self-deleted by its author CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #145

I'll watch for it. Thanks! Maedhros Apr 2016 #146

You' will doubtless remain confused regardless Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #131

Thank you... CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #132

That's not a well formed question jberryhill Apr 2016 #6

Well then, how about we sue you. For damages you are giving us. Hassin Bin Sober Apr 2016 #9

You do realize you are speaking to a highly competent attorney who is a Bernie supporter? msanthrope Apr 2016 #12

It's a joke. Take a pill. Hassin Bin Sober Apr 2016 #13

Post removed Post removed Apr 2016 #14

Go to YouTube and search for Jerky Boys punitive damages. Hassin Bin Sober Apr 2016 #16

Jury results to go with all the legal talk. Autumn Apr 2016 #94

Aha!!! My good name is cleared!!!! Thank you jury! Hassin Bin Sober Apr 2016 #95

I understand there is a very good lawyer up thread, Autumn Apr 2016 #96

Who are you supposed to be again? I've never been a moderator. Hassin Bin Sober Apr 2016 #18

"Dial it back" melman Apr 2016 #93

Duh, of course you need to have the relevant facts to know how the case should be resolved. Vattel Apr 2016 #25

That's not the point jberryhill Apr 2016 #44

I understand all of that. I wasn't talking about whether the motion to dismiss should be granted. Vattel Apr 2016 #84

Thank you! EffieBlack Apr 2016 #90

Exactly. kcr Apr 2016 #101

I don't support PLCAA. I think it is bad law and Bernie made a mistake in supporting it. Vattel Apr 2016 #121

But, as you seem to realize, that's different EffieBlack Apr 2016 #133

I have no idea dsc Apr 2016 #8

Yes. The AR-15 is a battlefield weapon, marketed to civilians. msanthrope Apr 2016 #11

There are no AR-15's on the battlefield. N/t actslikeacarrot Apr 2016 #17

They're everywhere!!! Behind trees, in dark alleys Press Virginia Apr 2016 #41

What about the state of CT which approved the sale of this "battlefield" weapon Press Virginia Apr 2016 #28

NO it is not the M-16 is a battlefield weapon that is fully automatic as are most battlefield guns azurnoir Apr 2016 #79

Incorrect HassleCat Apr 2016 #81

Numerous posters TeddyR Apr 2016 #111

It seems to me if you allow guns to be manufacturered then it's pushing it to say Nanjeanne Apr 2016 #15

Would you make the same argument for financial products? DanTex Apr 2016 #21

Exactly! Well stated. LAS14 Apr 2016 #27

The merits of their case will be heard in court. LAS14 Apr 2016 #29

What are the actual Merits? Remington made a gun and sold it to a dealer Press Virginia Apr 2016 #33

The part where they refuse to install biometric locks or other safety mechanisms. mythology Apr 2016 #34

Refused? Where are these locks and other safety mechanisms being used? Press Virginia Apr 2016 #36

I assume the court case would be... LAS14 Apr 2016 #35

what nuance. Remington didn't put the gun in Lanza's hand any more than the state of CT did Press Virginia Apr 2016 #39

Let the suit come to trial and find out the details then! nt LAS14 Apr 2016 #45

You mean let the parents parade their dead kids before a jury Press Virginia Apr 2016 #48

As I understand it, there was a concerted lawsuit blitz against gun manufacturers riderinthestorm Apr 2016 #51

That's incorrect. The reason the NRA wanted this law so badly is because there DanTex Apr 2016 #71

Are you a lawyer? nt riderinthestorm Apr 2016 #76

No, but I'm someone who knows about gun policy, and knew about this law DanTex Apr 2016 #83

Because nobody sues GM after getting hit by stolen Malibus Press Virginia Apr 2016 #92

are they selling guns to these criminals? Press Virginia Apr 2016 #30

Jack Daniels can be sued for that. They don't have the same legal immunity. DanTex Apr 2016 #50

Jack Daniels is liable for a kid stealing a bottle of Jack from their parents liquor Press Virginia Apr 2016 #52

They can be sued for that, because they don't have a special exemption. DanTex Apr 2016 #54

What about a kid murdering his mother and stealing her gun? Same thing? Press Virginia Apr 2016 #59

The gun industry should play by the same rules as everyone else, period. DanTex Apr 2016 #60

you mean we have to pretend any suit against the gun industry Press Virginia Apr 2016 #64

Of course not. Suits without merit get thrown out of courts all the time. DanTex Apr 2016 #66

They do. Press Virginia Apr 2016 #68

No they don't. PLCAA protects on the gun industry, nobody else. DanTex Apr 2016 #69

Protects them from what? Press Virginia Apr 2016 #70

From certain kinds of lawsuits that no other industry is immune from. DanTex Apr 2016 #75

You mean like liability in the criminal actions of murderer with a stolen gun? Press Virginia Apr 2016 #77

That's one example. Other industries don't have that protection. DanTex Apr 2016 #78

Because no one would try to sue GM after a car jacker ran them over in a 74 Camaro Press Virginia Apr 2016 #82

People file frivolous lawsuits all the time. The reason the NRA wanted this is for the DanTex Apr 2016 #85

They were succeeding in bankrupting an industry engaged in lawful commerce Press Virginia Apr 2016 #87

Well, no. Just holding them responsible for all the damage that they were inflicting. DanTex Apr 2016 #88

How were they inflicting anything through legal sales to their distributors? Press Virginia Apr 2016 #91

Your problem, is that its those pulling triggers inflicting the damage. N/T beevul Apr 2016 #141

^^^ this ^^^ eom Karma13612 Apr 2016 #24

are you a lawyer? nt geek tragedy Apr 2016 #19

I am going to sue Gwhittey Apr 2016 #20

You might have a cause of action. Hassin Bin Sober Apr 2016 #22

Wow, "old ass ugly chic", I bet you are a sexist jerk. But just basing that on your use of that term Logical Apr 2016 #23

Be sure to whine the next time you BernieBros get labled as sexist assholes. JTFrog Apr 2016 #57

Someone will show up with cute computer pictures and animation to show that there is no such thing. kcr Apr 2016 #102

There would probably be one very narrow way... CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #32

I think the parents should have their day... LAS14 Apr 2016 #37

If the parents were honest about liability, they'd sue the state and the dealer Press Virginia Apr 2016 #43

They can challenge the law, why not? Jefferson23 Apr 2016 #40

Remington sells to licensed dealers. The Bushmaster is not used in any Military in the world Press Virginia Apr 2016 #42

Negligence is not a factor in product liability suits jberryhill Apr 2016 #46

I should have said Negligent in their Entrustment Press Virginia Apr 2016 #49

Negligent entrustment is something else entirely jberryhill Apr 2016 #53

You read the complaint PDF; reads like that's their grounds and isa qualification made in the PLCAA. jmg257 Apr 2016 #62

But the person to whom it was supplied was murdered. Press Virginia Apr 2016 #80

Not specifically. The complaint is more concerned with showing the frequent misuse jmg257 Apr 2016 #86

Frequent misuse of the Bushmaster, right? Press Virginia Apr 2016 #89

The reasoning I stated for you is part of the argument being made within Jefferson23 Apr 2016 #47

Is it a military weapon or one that just looks like one. Press Virginia Apr 2016 #56

I guess that will be part of Remington's position in defense. n/t Jefferson23 Apr 2016 #58

The previous post is statement from the Plaintiff's attorney in their filing Press Virginia Apr 2016 #61

Not really, they are speaking to the rifles origins, don't you think? n/t Jefferson23 Apr 2016 #63

no. They claim Remington is liable for selling a military weapon to civilians Press Virginia Apr 2016 #65

No, I think you misunderstood. See post #67 Jefferson23 Apr 2016 #72

Summarized as "a civilian weapon designed for combat". That's their argument = jmg257 Apr 2016 #67

Civilian weapons aren't military weapons and military weapons aren't available to the general public Press Virginia Apr 2016 #73

This message was self-deleted by its author CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #97

I can guarantee there is no unit in the US Army or Marines Press Virginia Apr 2016 #98

This message was self-deleted by its author CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #99

This message was self-deleted by its author CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #100

Damn it - I want my Lend-lease M1 back. nt jmg257 Apr 2016 #104

This message was self-deleted by its author CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #105

H&R and SA still in the safe. Must of gone through jmg257 Apr 2016 #107

This message was self-deleted by its author CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #108

That's a very good reason. jmg257 Apr 2016 #109

Yep agreed - especially concerning ARs vs M16s. jmg257 Apr 2016 #106

This message was self-deleted by its author CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #110

Thank you very much, I appreciate it. Jefferson23 Apr 2016 #74

Wild guess. moondust Apr 2016 #114

I do not understand why the Brady Center is not footing the bill...they really jmg257 Apr 2016 #124

Thats the whole point. beevul Apr 2016 #142

Wow...interesting notion. jmg257 Apr 2016 #144

Couple thoughts TeddyR Apr 2016 #119

Are you a member of the NRA? athena Apr 2016 #120

So once again TeddyR Apr 2016 #136

Thats an opinion. beevul Apr 2016 #143

Hillary is not "exploiting" them anymore that Obama when he pleaded make gun control a issue in Jitter65 Apr 2016 #122

Smith and Wesson CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #125

If my kid was shot down like they were MFM008 Apr 2016 #126

Your lawyer CompanyFirstSergeant Apr 2016 #127

And you would end up paying the attorney's fees TeddyR Apr 2016 #137

it is like suing Ford for a drunk driver. the case would never stand up. if a serial killer used a Vote2016 Apr 2016 #134

So I was thinking.... WiffenPoof Apr 2016 #140