Another antigun Lawsuit post Newtown

[ruthabagah]

They are trying to find a small loophole to sue Bushmaster and drive the gun makers out of business. Again, they are ignoring the real culprit of this crime.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/newtown-families-sue-gun-maker-sandy-hook-massacre-n268536

Excerpt:

"Newtown Families Sue Gun Maker for Sandy Hook Massacre
Ten families touched by the Newtown massacre filed a wrongful death lawsuit Monday against companies that made, distributed and sold the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle that Adam Lanza used to kill 20 children and six staffers at Sandy Hook Elementary two years ago. The suit argues that the gun is a military assault weapon that never should have been on the general market.
"It's important for my family to honor my sister and not have her name just be the teacher that shielding her kids," said Jillian Soto, sister of victim Vicki Soto. "I want people to remember that her family fought in court for her name and to make change happen to hold the gun industry responsible."





A federal law passed in 2005 shields gun makers and dealers from many liability lawsuits, but the families' lawyers say there are exceptions. The suit is using one of them — the theory of negligent entrustment — to argue that the companies are at fault for letting civilians get their hands on weapons meant for the battlefield. Other suits have cited that exception, but only when targeting the retailer — not the manufacturer or the distributor."

[Dave_L]

Has anyone ever sued an alcohol manufacturer after being affected by a DUI accident? I know the bar can be held liable in some cases but what about Bacardi or someone? After all, who really needs alcohol greater than 4%?

[SamuraiCO]

Can we sue the software, hardware, ISP providers for negligent "entrustment" for hackers stealing our personal information and causing us direct harm?

If we had a fair and just judicial system lawyers would never bring such tripe forward because it would be thrown out and Bushmaster could sue for costs.

[Zundfolge]

I think we should start suing anti-gun organizations. Hit them with wrongful death lawsuits in states where they have won and implemented gun control laws that disarm victims.

[wctriumph]

So Mr. Salesman, you freely admit that you sold the seed to the farmer that grew the corn that was sold by the co-op that went to the distributor that sold it to the distiller that made the whiskey that was sold to another distributor that was then sold to the bar that sold the whiskey to the defendant that was arrested for DUI? Ultimately it is your fault that my client was arrested for drinking too much.

[Sawin]

I think we should start suing anti-gun organizations. Hit them with wrongful death lawsuits in states where they have won and implemented gun control laws that disarm victims.
great idea!

[MED]

They are trying to find a small loophole to sue Bushmaster and drive the gun makers out of business. Again, they are ignoring the real culprit of this crime.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/newtown-families-sue-gun-maker-sandy-hook-massacre-n268536

Excerpt:

"Newtown Families Sue Gun Maker for Sandy Hook Massacre


Ten families touched by the Newtown massacre filed a wrongful death lawsuit Monday against companies that made, distributed and sold the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle that Adam Lanza used to kill 20 children and six staffers at Sandy Hook Elementary two years ago. The suit argues that the gun is a military assault weapon that never should have been on the general market.
"It's important for my family to honor my sister and not have her name just be the teacher that shielding her kids," said Jillian Soto, sister of victim Vicki Soto. "I want people to remember that her family fought in court for her name and to make change happen to hold the gun industry responsible."





A federal law passed in 2005 shields gun makers and dealers from many liability lawsuits, but the families' lawyers say there are exceptions. The suit is using one of them — the theory of negligent entrustment — to argue that the companies are at fault for letting civilians get their hands on weapons meant for the battlefield. Other suits have cited that exception, but only when targeting the retailer — not the manufacturer or the distributor."


It seems that if one were to use logic, then Bushmaster has already won. The semi-auto Bushmaster AR-15 in no way meets military specifications other than general cosmetics. "it's scary looking...oh my!"

[Teufelhund]

They are trying to find a small loophole to sue Bushmaster and drive the gun makers out of business. Again, they are ignoring the real culprit of this crime.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/newtown-families-sue-gun-maker-sandy-hook-massacre-n268536

Excerpt:

"Newtown Families Sue Gun Maker for Sandy Hook Massacre


Ten families touched by the Newtown massacre filed a wrongful death lawsuit Monday against companies that made, distributed and sold the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle that Adam Lanza used to kill 20 children and six staffers at Sandy Hook Elementary two years ago. The suit argues that the gun is a military assault weapon that never should have been on the general market.
"It's important for my family to honor my sister and not have her name just be the teacher that shielding her kids," said Jillian Soto, sister of victim Vicki Soto. "I want people to remember that her family fought in court for her name and to make change happen to hold the gun industry responsible."





A federal law passed in 2005 shields gun makers and dealers from many liability lawsuits, but the families' lawyers say there are exceptions. The suit is using one of them — the theory of negligent entrustment — to argue that the companies are at fault for letting civilians get their hands on weapons meant for the battlefield. Other suits have cited that exception, but only when targeting the retailer — not the manufacturer or the distributor."


As far as I know, there isn't a single military organization on the planet that employs the AR-15 (correct me if I'm wrong, please). If that's true, should be a pretty easy case to throw out since their premise is fictitious.

[clublights]

That's like saying my 86 Honda VFR Was built for the race track.


sure they took the base of that bike and built it to win world championships...


but My bike and the one Fred Merkel won with are far from the same....

[DOC]

We could sue them to get our way. I know I would like liberalism recognized as its own religion so that way I could sue schools for teaching it.

[Gman]

I have a feeling this lawsuit isn't going anywhere.

[DOC]

We should sue them for breathing my air.

[Big John]

This covers quite a bit of the SH BS story.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/12/14/the-sandy-hook-hoax-how-we-know-it-didnt-happen/

[Bitter Clinger]

Something hinky went down Sandy hook. For sure not the story we were fed by the media, but the author of that article lost me with the claim that the Holocaust was fake.

[speedysst]

Don't forget, the Boston bombing was fake too according to that ridiculous article. Im not even sure people like that think the actual Earth is real.

[james_bond_007]

If the weapons used were an M1 Garand, M1911A1 etc., the argument MAY hold some water, but there are other laws to protect ownership of those.

[Gman]

Stop with your logic. You'll never win the argument when the basis is how a firearm looks with a bunch of emotion heaped on top.

Sent from my electronic leash.

[james_bond_007]

While on the surface, this may 'appear' to be about Sandy Hook, underneath there may be a broader agenda.

Up to now, most legislation at the state and federal level has been focused on targeting the end-user: Restrictions and/or bans on ownership, possession, etc. targeted at the gun-owner.

This one attempts to shift focus to the manufacturer. Regardless of the strength of the case in this application, it will surely bring public awareness about the level of responsibility for firearm related deaths/injuries that which firearm manufacturers should be legally burdened.

In retrospect, Obama and Co.'s press and policies were the best thing for gun sales a few years ago. The Gun Control at the user-level kind of backfired.

If I were wanting to get rid of guns in the US, I would approach it this way:
1) Stop the Supply
2) Round up the Weapons -

On the Stop the Supply item,

Obama is already enacting EOs to address the influx and the import of M1 Garands, M1 Carbines, AKs and Saigas from Russia etc.

Hypothetically, if one could get manufacturers to stop making weapons, then buyers would have no new items to purchase.
This lawsuit has the potential to plant the idea in the minds of millions of voters that 'The gun manufacturers are to blame for firearm misuse' via the press it may get.
If laws are not strong enough presently to find in favor of the plaintiff, for this case, the greater effect is to generate a following for the modification and creation of new laws that move responsibility from firearm users to firearm manufacturers.

From the firearm manufacturer's perspective:
1) Every lawsuit costs them money for defense
2) If laws start moving the responsibility of death/injury to the firearms manufacturers, it will cost them a bundle in settlements
3) Eventually they will, on their own, start to stop production of certain "High Litigation Weapons" due to the associated costs
4) If enough cost burden, they may just go out of business on their own (perhaps sell and move thier business to foreign mfgs.)
NOTE: They are presently moving out of some states and into others to avoid costs and hassle on their own.

As an analogy, every employer knows that it is better to get an employee to quit on their own, rather than having to fire them.
Same concept applies here....Get the firearms manufacturers to stop producing weapons on their own.

While trying to force them to stop via 'bans' etc. invokes other legal defenses, such as interstate commerce laws, the US Constitution, etc, getting them to 'quit' on their own avoids these. No 2nd Amendment violation if there are no guns being made.


"But there are millions of guns in the hands of US citizens right now. What if they are grandfathered in as OK to buy/possess these " ?

1) I claim the secondary market for existing guns would make it financially prohibitive for anyone to buy one. This is exactly analogous to NFA weapons today. How many of us would like to own a machine gun ? How many of us can justify the cost ? We don't own one because the cost of the $1000 machine gun on the Primary Market is $20,000 on the Secondary Market. And because of legislation, we have no ability to purchase via the Primary Market.

2) Depending on how the grandfathering works, it might come back to bite every gun owner. For example, the Colorado Mag Law pacified everyone that owns affected magazines right now by allowing them to keep them. What is going to happen when those mag owners die? Some were wise enough to put them in a trust, for future generations...but I'll wager they are the exception, and not the norm. Same thing could happen to firearms.

So in my opinion, although my above scenario is hypothetical, it is plausible. It is so plausible, that it could sneak itself in, right under our noses.
It is so plausible that other industries are experiencing similar ramifications.
This lawsuit and others like it could be quite damaging, in the long run.

If you think that "It will never happen", observe what is happening in the tobacco industry, regarding "manufacturer's responsibility".
Now think about how closely the tobacco industries parallels the firearm industry, regarding death/injuries.

So as Deputy Barney Fife says "We have to NIP IT IN THE BUD" before it gets too much traction.

[def90]

As far as I know, there isn't a single military organization on the planet that employs the AR-15 (correct me if I'm wrong, please). If that's true, should be a pretty easy case to throw out since their premise is fictitious.

There is a defense contractor that spent a few years over in Iraq and just sold off all of their rifles on the US market.. a bunch of standard AR15s and WASR type semi auto AKs.. Technically not military but..