Lawsuit against gun maker

Obi-Wan

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
7,657
Likes
2,874
Points
698
Location
Bismarck
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/la...ooting/ar-BBrLnH9?li=BBnbcA1&OCID=msnHomepage

Lawsuit can proceed versus maker of gun used in Conn. school shooting

April 14 (Reuters) - A lawsuit can proceed against the maker of the gun used in the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School that left 20 children and 6 adults dead, a Connecticut judge ruled on Thursday.Bushmaster, manufacturer of the AR-15 assault weapon used in the attack in Newtown, Connecticut, had asked a judge to dismiss the lawsuit, saying it was protected by a 2005 federal law blocking lawsuits against gunmakers when their products were used in the commission of crimes.
The lawsuit was filed in 2014 by the families of nine of the people who were killed.
Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis declined to dismiss it, saying the gunmaker, a unit of Madison, North Carolina-based Freedom Group Inc, had not proven that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act stopped her from hearing the case.
"The Superior Court has subject matter jurisdiction over a wrongful death action where the injury arose out of conduct by the defendants," Bellis wrote. "Any immunity that PLCAA may provide does not implicate this court's subject matter jurisdiction."
The lawsuit seeks unspecified financial damages. It argues that the legally purchased AR-15 used by Adam Lanza in the attack should never have been sold because it had no reasonable civilian purpose.
Attorney Josh Koskoff, representing the families, welcomed the judge's decision and said in a statement, "The families look forward to continuing their fight in court."
An attorney for Bushmaster could not be reached for comment.
Lanza, 20, ended his attack by turning his gun on himself. Before going to the school, he fatally shot his mother, Nancy, who had bought the gun.
After the shooting, Connecticut's Democratic governor, Dannel Malloy, pushed through one of the strictest gun laws in the United States, banning more than 100 types of military-style rifles and limiting ammunition magazines to 10 bullets.
"We've passed the toughest gun laws in the nation for a reason," Malloy said in a statement. "These families deserve this, the ruling is the right one. The gun industry should not have protections that no other industry in America sees."
Modified versions of the AR-15 are legal in Connecticut.
 


Account Deleted

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 20, 2015
Posts
4,641
Likes
50
Points
246
This has nothing to do with the actual law. This is simply political. And about as ugly as anything can be. No amount of money is going to bring their kids back.
 

eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,730
Likes
708
Points
438
Location
williston
no basis. will be overturned in two minutes by another court. stupid ass liberals
 


Sum1

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Posts
4,818
Likes
294
Points
323
Location
Bismarck
This is how it all starts. Wasn't the Hildabeast pushing for something like this?
 

dean nelson

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Posts
8,270
Likes
66
Points
308
Location
Bismarck
She is bound to be left leaning and has insured that this case dies a swift death when it's not longer in her hands.
 

KDM

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
9,650
Likes
1,583
Points
563
Location
Valley City
Every car manufacturer would then be liable for EVERY death involving their products. This CAN'T go anywhere without causing EPIC precedence problems for corporate america.

Furthermore, if I pick up a rock and bash someones skull in, does that make God responsible for that death??? How about if I drown someone?? A sharp stick??
 
Last edited:


DerHornen

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 14, 2015
Posts
306
Likes
4
Points
115
It's sad but America's product liability laws and the resulting crazy lawsuits have been heading the wrong way for a long, long time. This is just the first time that's it's officially ventured into second amendment territory.

Probably the best example is products for children. Strollers cost $200 because the manufacturer is spending $100 on lawyers for each one they sell.
 

DerHornen

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 14, 2015
Posts
306
Likes
4
Points
115
I'm sure there have been lawsuits against gun manufacturers before, and there have certainly been attempts to change the interpretation of the second amendment. Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but I can't think of another lawsuit involving product liability and guns that's comparable.

Usually you would expect it if the manufacturer had a product that malfunctioned, was misrepresented, was sold illegally, etc. This case doesn't fit any of those bills.
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 190
  • This month: 153
  • This month: 142
  • This month: 137
  • This month: 113
  • This month: 93
  • This month: 93
  • This month: 88
  • This month: 84
  • This month: 78
Top Bottom