Law Suit By Sandy Hook Parents Against Remington Arms Dismissed

[GLASNOST]

You can't hold any manufacturer liable for a malfunctioning operator, when their legal product performs as designed.

It depends upon who the manufacturers' competitors are.

Large sums of money has nothing to do with it.

It most certainly does. You don't believe that large and influential companies have an enormously better chance of suing you than you have of suing them? .... of them getting of scott-free when it's you who's suing them? And if you agree, to what do you attribute their legal successes? NOT their huge expense account?

You're really brainwashed, car companies have paid billions in law suits as have many other sectors such as drug companies, cigarette companies and asbestos manufacturers. Plaintiff attorneys will take and finance the cases, why do you think you see all these ads on TV looking for plaintiffs. And no competitors have nothing to do with it either.

Then why do you disagree with the parents of Sandy Hook? Assuming you agree with all you've just said, you should probably support those parents.

....

Yep, something effective, like dealing with the ******* criminals and getting them off the streets.

So you think the parents should sue law enforcement instead?

 

[OKTexas]

You can't hold any manufacturer liable for a malfunctioning operator, when their legal product performs as designed.

It depends upon who the manufacturers' competitors are.

Large sums of money has nothing to do with it.

It most certainly does. You don't believe that large and influential companies have an enormously better chance of suing you than you have of suing them? .... of them getting of scott-free when it's you who's suing them? And if you agree, to what do you attribute their legal successes? NOT their huge expense account?

You're really brainwashed, car companies have paid billions in law suits as have many other sectors such as drug companies, cigarette companies and asbestos manufacturers. Plaintiff attorneys will take and finance the cases, why do you think you see all these ads on TV looking for plaintiffs. And no competitors have nothing to do with it either.

Then why do you disagree with the parents of Sandy Hook? Assuming you agree with all you've just said, you should probably support those parents.

....

Yep, something effective, like dealing with the ******* criminals and getting them off the streets.

So you think the parents should sue law enforcement instead?

The only legal cause of action they have is against the estate of the mother of the shooter for depraved indifference wrongful death, because she allowed her son, who she knew was unstable, access to her firearms. I assume her assets weren't substantial enough to justify the expense. The suits I mentioned were because the product was defective, or they knew their product was dangerous and didn't warn the public, not because everything worked as designed and proper warnings were included with their product. Do you think Remington lawyers didn't include warning that their product could causes injuries if they were misused. Of course they did, look at the owners manual of any product, you have pages of potential hazards, just look at all the warnings on a simple product like a ladder.

 

[Darkwind]

Frivolous lawsuits by ignorant people, ends up costing everyone. .......

Maybe. But nothing is ever accomplished without that first step. Your complaint is about 'cost in dollars'. Others are more concerned about 'cost in lives', mostly innocent ones. SOMETHING should be done about gun violence, don't you think?

It isn't gun violence. It is violence by people against each other. The gun is just the tool. The violence will continue even if you remove the tool.

Why is it you think that doing something to address the problem involves harming the innocent?

 

[GLASNOST]

The only legal cause of action they have is against the estate of the mother of the shooter for depraved indifference wrongful death, because she allowed her son, who she knew was unstable, access to her firearms. I assume her assets weren't substantial enough to justify the expense. The suits I mentioned were because the product was defective, or they knew their product was dangerous and didn't warn the public, not because everything worked as designed and proper warnings were included with their product. Do you think Remington lawyers didn't include warning that their product could causes injuries if they were misused. Of course they did, look at the owners manual of any product, you have pages of potential hazards, just look at all the warnings on a simple product like a ladder.

It's good that you know so much about the case. But anyway, here we are. We've got these parents you see. You know what happened to their children. Not only the dead ones but the ones who saw it 'go down'. Even the ones who only heard the shots or are neighbours to them.

OK, let's put our emotions to one side. What do we do now? If you and I both lost a child that day what would we say to one another today? Ya' think we'd be talking about the U of C Huskies Football Team? No. There's a problem. A really big one. And you have to go up the chain of command to get to it. It's no good blaming the lowest man on the chain and 'calling it quits'. The responsibility lies with someone .... or with a click of someone(s). So, maybe you disagree with the parents aiming 'too high'. But you have to start somewhere, and Remington is on the chain of command. The buck doesn't stop there, but it is on the way up to where it does stop. You know what I mean? So should confine ourselves to talking about the Huskies or maybe join in with our grieving neighbours and see if we can lend a hand? Maybe set up a barrage and see who says "Ouch!"

 

[GLASNOST]

Why is it you think that doing something to address the problem involves harming the innocent?

Excuse me?

 

[owebo]

Frivolous lawsuits by ignorant people, ends up costing everyone. .......

Maybe. But nothing is ever accomplished without that first step. Your complaint is about 'cost in dollars'. Others are more concerned about 'cost in lives', mostly innocent ones. SOMETHING should be done about gun violence, don't you think?

Ahhhhh.....we finally get to your stupid, ignorant ******* liberal point....

 

[owebo]

The only legal cause of action they have is against the estate of the mother of the shooter for depraved indifference wrongful death, because she allowed her son, who she knew was unstable, access to her firearms. I assume her assets weren't substantial enough to justify the expense. The suits I mentioned were because the product was defective, or they knew their product was dangerous and didn't warn the public, not because everything worked as designed and proper warnings were included with their product. Do you think Remington lawyers didn't include warning that their product could causes injuries if they were misused. Of course they did, look at the owners manual of any product, you have pages of potential hazards, just look at all the warnings on a simple product like a ladder.

It's good that you know so much about the case. But anyway, here we are. We've got these parents you see. You know what happened to their children. Not only the dead ones but the ones who saw it 'go down'. Even the ones who only heard the shots or are neighbours to them.

OK, let's put our emotions to one side. What do we do now? If you and I both lost a child that day what would we say to one another today? Ya' think we'd be talking about the U of C Huskies Football Team? No. There's a problem. A really big one. And you have to go up the chain of command to get to it. It's no good blaming the lowest man on the chain and 'calling it quits'. The responsibility lies with someone .... or with a click of someone(s). So, maybe you disagree with the parents aiming 'too high'. But you have to start somewhere, and Remington is on the chain of command. The buck doesn't stop there, but it is on the way up to where it does stop. You know what I mean? So should confine ourselves to talking about the Huskies or maybe join in with our grieving neighbours and see if we can lend a hand? Maybe set up a barrage and see who says "Ouch!"

The responsibility lies with those liberals who made the school a constitutional rights limited zone....

 

[Rustic]

Those parents are basically saying that money/frivolous lawsuits can replace their kids, their logic is nonexistent....

 

[owebo]

Those parents are basically saying that money/frivolous lawsuits can replace their kids, their logic is nonexistent....

Their anger is misplaced, quite by the design of liberals......

 

[GLASNOST]

.... your stupid, ignorant ******* liberal point....

Wow! Nice! You managed to insult me in 4 different ways ..... in a single, tiny sentence! I guess you showed me, huh!

Those parents are basically saying that money/frivolous lawsuits can replace their kids, their logic is nonexistent....

No, the parents are basically saying, if morality doesn't stir the population into action then maybe ravaging what they care about mostly will motivate them: Money. Look at how it got your attention already.

 

[owebo]

.... your stupid, ignorant ******* liberal point....

Wow! Nice! You managed to insult me in 4 different ways ..... in a single, tiny sentence! I guess you showed me, huh!

Those parents are basically saying that money/frivolous lawsuits can replace their kids, their logic is nonexistent....

No, the parents are basically saying, if morality doesn't stir the population into action then maybe ravaging what they care about mostly will motivate them: Money. Look at how it got your attention already.

Your fascism got our attention child.......

 

[GLASNOST]

.... your stupid, ignorant ******* liberal point....

Wow! Nice! You managed to insult me in 4 different ways ..... in a single, tiny sentence! I guess you showed me, huh!

Those parents are basically saying that money/frivolous lawsuits can replace their kids, their logic is nonexistent....

No, the parents are basically saying, if morality doesn't stir the population into action then maybe ravaging what they care about mostly will motivate them: Money. Look at how it got your attention already.

Your fascism got our attention child.......

Thanks for sharing your wisdom, and for NOT using potty talk .... this time.

 

[OKTexas]

The only legal cause of action they have is against the estate of the mother of the shooter for depraved indifference wrongful death, because she allowed her son, who she knew was unstable, access to her firearms. I assume her assets weren't substantial enough to justify the expense. The suits I mentioned were because the product was defective, or they knew their product was dangerous and didn't warn the public, not because everything worked as designed and proper warnings were included with their product. Do you think Remington lawyers didn't include warning that their product could causes injuries if they were misused. Of course they did, look at the owners manual of any product, you have pages of potential hazards, just look at all the warnings on a simple product like a ladder.

It's good that you know so much about the case. But anyway, here we are. We've got these parents you see. You know what happened to their children. Not only the dead ones but the ones who saw it 'go down'. Even the ones who only heard the shots or are neighbours to them.

OK, let's put our emotions to one side. What do we do now? If you and I both lost a child that day what would we say to one another today? Ya' think we'd be talking about the U of C Huskies Football Team? No. There's a problem. A really big one. And you have to go up the chain of command to get to it. It's no good blaming the lowest man on the chain and 'calling it quits'. The responsibility lies with someone .... or with a click of someone(s). So, maybe you disagree with the parents aiming 'too high'. But you have to start somewhere, and Remington is on the chain of command. The buck doesn't stop there, but it is on the way up to where it does stop. You know what I mean? So should confine ourselves to talking about the Huskies or maybe join in with our grieving neighbours and see if we can lend a hand? Maybe set up a barrage and see who says "Ouch!"

So you say let's put emotions aside, then make an emotional argument. The parents aren't out to right a wrong, they are out to try to get a law that protects manufacturers form frivolous law suits overturned, it's political. Would they be trying to sue Louisville slugger or Stanley Tools if he'd used a bat or hammer?

 

[2aguy]

Suing Remington because someone shot somebody using a Remington gun, is no different from suing Ford because someone ran over somebody using one of their cars.

Well, there is one difference. The right to own and carry one of Remington's guns is constitutionally protected, no govt can make a law against it. The right to own and drive a Ford is not.

What if the Ford was wielded as a weapon of purpose .... taken aim and pulled accelerator.

How would that change the situation? Ford did not put an employee in the car with orders to murder someone...and in the case of Sandy Hook, the gun was actually stolen.....and then used illegally......

 

[2aguy]

Frivolous lawsuits by ignorant people, ends up costing everyone. .......

Maybe. But nothing is ever accomplished without that first step. Your complaint is about 'cost in dollars'. Others are more concerned about 'cost in lives', mostly innocent ones. SOMETHING should be done about gun violence, don't you think?

Yes.....

--lock up gun criminals for 30 years.

--end gun free zones...

that should do it.

Do you realize that rifles like the one at Sandy Hook were used to murder 162 people in mass public shootings.....in 34 years......

162 in 34 years....

Knives murder 1,500 people every single year...

So, you tell us...which is actually deadlier?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The parents that filed the suit should be forced to pay the legal fees of the gun manufacturers

 

[2aguy]

The only legal cause of action they have is against the estate of the mother of the shooter for depraved indifference wrongful death, because she allowed her son, who she knew was unstable, access to her firearms. I assume her assets weren't substantial enough to justify the expense. The suits I mentioned were because the product was defective, or they knew their product was dangerous and didn't warn the public, not because everything worked as designed and proper warnings were included with their product. Do you think Remington lawyers didn't include warning that their product could causes injuries if they were misused. Of course they did, look at the owners manual of any product, you have pages of potential hazards, just look at all the warnings on a simple product like a ladder.

It's good that you know so much about the case. But anyway, here we are. We've got these parents you see. You know what happened to their children. Not only the dead ones but the ones who saw it 'go down'. Even the ones who only heard the shots or are neighbours to them.

OK, let's put our emotions to one side. What do we do now? If you and I both lost a child that day what would we say to one another today? Ya' think we'd be talking about the U of C Huskies Football Team? No. There's a problem. A really big one. And you have to go up the chain of command to get to it. It's no good blaming the lowest man on the chain and 'calling it quits'. The responsibility lies with someone .... or with a click of someone(s). So, maybe you disagree with the parents aiming 'too high'. But you have to start somewhere, and Remington is on the chain of command. The buck doesn't stop there, but it is on the way up to where it does stop. You know what I mean? So should confine ourselves to talking about the Huskies or maybe join in with our grieving neighbours and see if we can lend a hand? Maybe set up a barrage and see who says "Ouch!"

The problem is the gun free zone....Sandy Hook was the only school the killer had attended that did not have an armed security guard...both the middle school and high school had an armed police liaison officer...so he went to Sandy Hook......you could blame the school district and sue them......

You could sue the school district for their gun free policy, which allowed the killer to kill until the police showed up with guns....shooters choose targets because they are easy places to kill people..we know this from the notes and confessions of other mass shooters......

 

[2aguy]

The parents that filed the suit should be forced to pay the legal fees of the gun manufacturers

I think I read somewhere that Remington waved that ......

 

[owebo]

The parents that filed the suit should be forced to pay the legal fees of the gun manufacturers

I think I read somewhere that Remington waved that ......

Bummer....but understandable in this fascist liberal environment....

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The parents that filed the suit should be forced to pay the legal fees of the gun manufacturers

I think I read somewhere that Remington waved that ......

That's too bad. Someone has to teach these liberal faggots that their emotions =\= constitutional rights of others