Sandy Hook families can sue gun manufacturers.

[owebo]

Did the guns malfunction?

 

[Snouter]

The court proceedings were on local TV here in CT. The case was absolutely ridiculous and should have been tossed out. If I recall, the ridiculous Judge Barbara Bellis proclaimed a need for 3 months to contemplate a decision. What the **** is going on in US courts with all these retards on the bench. Now we know why super predators are not incarcerated even after they send a message to society they cannot adapt.

 

[CowboyTed]

The court proceedings were on local TV here in CT. The case was absolutely ridiculous and should have been tossed out. If I recall, the ridiculous Judge Barbara Bellis proclaimed a need for 3 months to contemplate a decision. What the **** is going on in US courts with all these retards on the bench. Now we know why super predators are not incarcerated even after they send a message to society they cannot adapt.

Lets just say that nothing you have said on this forum could count you as objective...

 

[Papageorgio]

The court proceedings were on local TV here in CT. The case was absolutely ridiculous and should have been tossed out. If I recall, the ridiculous Judge Barbara Bellis proclaimed a need for 3 months to contemplate a decision. What the **** is going on in US courts with all these retards on the bench. Now we know why super predators are not incarcerated even after they send a message to society they cannot adapt.

Lets just say that nothing you have said on this forum could count you as objective...

I don't know anyone on this board that is objective.

 

[Dana7360]

Sandy Hook families can sue gun manufacturers.

Sandy Hook families can sue gun industry

BRIDGEPORT — Gun-safety advocates hailed a judge’s ruling that victims’ families can sue the manufacturer of the military-style rifle used in the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

hey called the Thursday decision by Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellisa landmark in the fight against the epidemic of mass shootings.

Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said it was an “important win” for the Newtown families and other victims.


“They deserve their day in court and we are pleased that at least for now they'll get it, despite the defendants' best efforts to derail this case,” Gross said. “Victims of gun violence are not second-class citizens.”

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who became the state’s leading advocate for gun-control reforms after the Newtown school massacre, said firearms companies should not be allowed blanket immunity from wrongful-death lawsuits.

“I look at this as a moral victory,” Malloy said.

Gun makers, dealers and sellers had claimed the Newtown families did not have legal standing.

But Bellis ruled that the 2005 federal law shielding gun makers from liability does not override the claims by the Sandy Hook families that the Bushmaster XM-15 rifle is a military-style rifle that should never have been marketed to civilians.

The judge’s decisions comes in the middle of a contentious race for the nation’s presidency, in which the Sandy Hook families’ lawsuit has become pivotal.

Bellis ordered participating lawyers to her courtroom Tuesday for a conference to prepare for trial. An appeal of the decision, however, could delay the issue.

Josh Koskoff, the attorney from the Bridgeport-based Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder, representing the Newtown families, said he was pleased with Bellis’s ruling.

“We are thrilled that the gun companies’ motion to dismiss was denied,” Koskoff said in a statement. “The families look forward to continuing their fight in court.”

Attorneys for the defendant gun makers, distributors and dealer did not respond for requests for comment on Thursday.Michael Bazinet, public affairs director for the Newtown-based National Shooting Sports Foundation, said the organization is reviewing the decision and has no comment at this time.

U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, both Democrats, met with gun safety advocates Thursday and called for the repeal of the laws protecting the gun industry from lawsuits.

“It is a historic and seismic step to open the courthouse doors for gun violence survivors and others who have legitimate legal complaints against the gun industry,” said Blumenthal. “It is a powerful impetus and momentum for ongoing reform efforts to stop gun violence that is an epidemic and public health crisis in our nation.”


This next election is CRITICAL...........as there will probably be 3 Supremes nominated.............Here in a lower court..............they say they can now sue the gun manufacturers..................incredible.......

There is no now about it.

Gun manufacturers have been able to be sued until 2007 when the republicans passed the law prohibiting it and the bush boy signed it into law.

So this lawsuit isn't new. It's just the first one that's been able to go forward despite the unconstitutional laws that the republicans created.

 

[Papageorgio]

Sandy Hook families can sue gun manufacturers.

Sandy Hook families can sue gun industry

BRIDGEPORT — Gun-safety advocates hailed a judge’s ruling that victims’ families can sue the manufacturer of the military-style rifle used in the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

hey called the Thursday decision by Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellisa landmark in the fight against the epidemic of mass shootings.

Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said it was an “important win” for the Newtown families and other victims.


“They deserve their day in court and we are pleased that at least for now they'll get it, despite the defendants' best efforts to derail this case,” Gross said. “Victims of gun violence are not second-class citizens.”

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who became the state’s leading advocate for gun-control reforms after the Newtown school massacre, said firearms companies should not be allowed blanket immunity from wrongful-death lawsuits.

“I look at this as a moral victory,” Malloy said.

Gun makers, dealers and sellers had claimed the Newtown families did not have legal standing.

But Bellis ruled that the 2005 federal law shielding gun makers from liability does not override the claims by the Sandy Hook families that the Bushmaster XM-15 rifle is a military-style rifle that should never have been marketed to civilians.

The judge’s decisions comes in the middle of a contentious race for the nation’s presidency, in which the Sandy Hook families’ lawsuit has become pivotal.

Bellis ordered participating lawyers to her courtroom Tuesday for a conference to prepare for trial. An appeal of the decision, however, could delay the issue.

Josh Koskoff, the attorney from the Bridgeport-based Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder, representing the Newtown families, said he was pleased with Bellis’s ruling.

“We are thrilled that the gun companies’ motion to dismiss was denied,” Koskoff said in a statement. “The families look forward to continuing their fight in court.”

Attorneys for the defendant gun makers, distributors and dealer did not respond for requests for comment on Thursday.Michael Bazinet, public affairs director for the Newtown-based National Shooting Sports Foundation, said the organization is reviewing the decision and has no comment at this time.

U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, both Democrats, met with gun safety advocates Thursday and called for the repeal of the laws protecting the gun industry from lawsuits.

“It is a historic and seismic step to open the courthouse doors for gun violence survivors and others who have legitimate legal complaints against the gun industry,” said Blumenthal. “It is a powerful impetus and momentum for ongoing reform efforts to stop gun violence that is an epidemic and public health crisis in our nation.”


This next election is CRITICAL...........as there will probably be 3 Supremes nominated.............Here in a lower court..............they say they can now sue the gun manufacturers..................incredible.......

There is no now about it.

Gun manufacturers have been able to be sued until 2007 when the republicans passed the law prohibiting it and the bush boy signed it into law.

So this lawsuit isn't new. It's just the first one that's been able to go forward despite the unconstitutional laws that the republicans created.

What law is unconstitutional? A part of the Constitution is it breaking?

 

[ChrisL]

Did the guns malfunction?

No, they want to try and sue the manufacturers because some lunatic freaks out and kills a bunch of people. MISUSE of the product. If a Muslim terrorist decides to kill a bunch of people, should we be able to sue Muslims? Lol. It's almost the same thing! It's so retarded.

 

[Dana7360]

Here's N example of the bushmaster ad.

Bushmaster Rifle Ad Reminds Us To Ask More About Masculinity And Gun Violence (PHOTO)

They're marketing to men who have a small penis and feel they have no or little control of their lives.

There are several of them on this message board.

The hilarious thing is that most intelligent women are laughing at them.

When women encounter men like that the first thing they know is that man has a very small penis and is over compensating for it.

 

[ChrisL]

Here's N example of the bushmaster ad.

Bushmaster Rifle Ad Reminds Us To Ask More About Masculinity And Gun Violence (PHOTO)

They're marketing to men who have a small penis and feel they have no or little control of their lives.

There are several of them on this message board.

The hilarious thing is that most intelligent women are laughing at them.

When women encounter men like that the first thing they know is that man has a very small penis and is over compensating for it.

Where is the STFU button? Obviously you don't know any men who own guns.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Here's N example of the bushmaster ad.

Bushmaster Rifle Ad Reminds Us To Ask More About Masculinity And Gun Violence (PHOTO)

They're marketing to men who have a small penis and feel they have no or little control of their lives.

There are several of them on this message board.

The hilarious thing is that most intelligent women are laughing at them.

When women encounter men like that the first thing they know is that man has a very small penis and is over compensating for it.

When a liberal talks about men with guns having a small penis, we gun owners KNOW who really have the small dicks. That is why a Cuban Cigar had to be used on Monica. Liberals have to have a government take care of them, they need that government to push the rest of US around, because those little dicks, are ******* cowards. Why else do they have penis envy, when it comes to guns?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Here's N example of the bushmaster ad.

Bushmaster Rifle Ad Reminds Us To Ask More About Masculinity And Gun Violence (PHOTO)

They're marketing to men who have a small penis and feel they have no or little control of their lives.

There are several of them on this message board.

The hilarious thing is that most intelligent women are laughing at them.

When women encounter men like that the first thing they know is that man has a very small penis and is over compensating for it.

Intelligent women like Hillary Clinton?

 

[FA_Q2]

Here's N example of the bushmaster ad.

Bushmaster Rifle Ad Reminds Us To Ask More About Masculinity And Gun Violence (PHOTO)

They're marketing to men who have a small penis and feel they have no or little control of their lives.

There are several of them on this message board.

The hilarious thing is that most intelligent women are laughing at them.

When women encounter men like that the first thing they know is that man has a very small penis and is over compensating for it.

It is this kind of asinine remark that show your entire premise to be based on bullshit.


If that is what you truly believe then you have nothing other than contempt to base your position on. That is truly a sad state to exist in.

 

[Rustic]

Any type of lawsuit against a firearm manufacture is frivolous at best, most likely criminal...

 

[Snouter]

Lets just say that nothing you have said on this forum could count you as objective...

Name one post that was not supported by facts.

No, they want to try and sue the manufacturers because some lunatic freaks out and kills a bunch of people. MISUSE of the product.

An example is the recent thread here in which a driver of a Jeep was assaulted and then used the Jeep as a deadly weapon. Chrysler or whatever parent company owns Jeep nowadays cannot be help responsible for that crime.

If a Muslim terrorist decides to kill a bunch of people, should we be able to sue Muslims? Lol. It's almost the same thing! It's so retarded.

I disagree in that at a minimum Muslims, since they do willing kill on behalf of their religion, should not be allowed to enter civilized countries. They are all ticking time bombs. The point being killing people and performing other evil acts are encouraged in their particular religion which encompasses their entire worldview which is a form of mental illness.

 

[Timmy]

Lets just say that nothing you have said on this forum could count you as objective...

Name one post that was not supported by facts.

No, they want to try and sue the manufacturers because some lunatic freaks out and kills a bunch of people. MISUSE of the product.

An example is the recent thread here in which a driver of a Jeep was assaulted and then used the Jeep as a deadly weapon. Chrysler or whatever parent company owns Jeep nowadays cannot be help responsible for that crime.

If a Muslim terrorist decides to kill a bunch of people, should we be able to sue Muslims? Lol. It's almost the same thing! It's so retarded.

I disagree in that at a minimum Muslims, since they do willing kill on behalf of their religion, should not be allowed to enter civilized countries. They are all ticking time bombs. The point being killing people and performing other evil acts are encouraged in their particular religion which encompasses their entire worldview which is a form of mental illness.

Jeeps aren't designed or marketed as killing machines.

Look, I don't think the lawsuit has a chance . The issue is , should gun makers have SPECIAL laws shielding them from lawsuits .

 

[FA_Q2]

Lets just say that nothing you have said on this forum could count you as objective...

Name one post that was not supported by facts.

No, they want to try and sue the manufacturers because some lunatic freaks out and kills a bunch of people. MISUSE of the product.

An example is the recent thread here in which a driver of a Jeep was assaulted and then used the Jeep as a deadly weapon. Chrysler or whatever parent company owns Jeep nowadays cannot be help responsible for that crime.

If a Muslim terrorist decides to kill a bunch of people, should we be able to sue Muslims? Lol. It's almost the same thing! It's so retarded.

I disagree in that at a minimum Muslims, since they do willing kill on behalf of their religion, should not be allowed to enter civilized countries. They are all ticking time bombs. The point being killing people and performing other evil acts are encouraged in their particular religion which encompasses their entire worldview which is a form of mental illness.

Jeeps aren't designed or marketed as killing machines.

Look, I don't think the lawsuit has a chance . The issue is , should gun makers have SPECIAL laws shielding them from lawsuits .

They should have protection from being sued for the illegal use of their product as vehicles should be as well.

Do you honestly believe that the manufacturers should be sued when someone illegally uses a product and it causes harm?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Jeeps aren't designed or marketed as killing machines.

Look, I don't think the lawsuit has a chance . The issue is , should gun makers have SPECIAL laws shielding them from lawsuits .

Do they really have special laws?

Lawsuits awards are a very small part of a lawsuit. The larger part is the cost associated with defending yourself from a lawsuit. That's why many up front try to settle out of court just to avoid the expense.

What we need in this country is a loser pays all law. Sue anybody you like, but if you lose, you are responsible for all expenses of the person or people you tried to sue.

 

[Rustic]

Lets just say that nothing you have said on this forum could count you as objective...

Name one post that was not supported by facts.

No, they want to try and sue the manufacturers because some lunatic freaks out and kills a bunch of people. MISUSE of the product.

An example is the recent thread here in which a driver of a Jeep was assaulted and then used the Jeep as a deadly weapon. Chrysler or whatever parent company owns Jeep nowadays cannot be help responsible for that crime.

If a Muslim terrorist decides to kill a bunch of people, should we be able to sue Muslims? Lol. It's almost the same thing! It's so retarded.

I disagree in that at a minimum Muslims, since they do willing kill on behalf of their religion, should not be allowed to enter civilized countries. They are all ticking time bombs. The point being killing people and performing other evil acts are encouraged in their particular religion which encompasses their entire worldview which is a form of mental illness.

Jeeps aren't designed or marketed as killing machines.

Look, I don't think the lawsuit has a chance . The issue is , should gun makers have SPECIAL laws shielding them from lawsuits .

Because people kill people not firearms dip shit LOL

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

When a liberal talks about men with guns having a small penis, we gun owners KNOW who really have the small dicks. That is why a Cuban Cigar had to be used on Monica. Liberals have to have a government take care of them, they need that government to push the rest of US around, because those little dicks, are ******* cowards. Why else do they have penis envy, when it comes to guns?

I don't think you understand the liberal mentality. They think they are smarter than everybody else, so they often try to use reverse psychology to get their way. In their minds, it's supposed to work something like this:

You gun owners only need a gun because you have small penises.

Oh no! I don't want anybody to think I have a small penis. I'm going to get rid of this gun so people don't look at me that way.

Believe it or not, this is what goes on in the mind of a liberal. Until we actually find a cure for it, they will continue to think this way.

 

[Flash]

Trump will prove the near perfect Trojan Horse for the hapless GOP......What the DNC has been trying to accomplish for decades, Trump will manage to destroy in a little over one year......Gotta love the pompous ass.

Of course the alternative is for Crooked Hillary to continue with the destruction of Obama so we are pretty much screwed no matter what, aren't we?