Sandy Hook Massacre: Gun Makers Lose Major Ruling Over Liability

[redtide]

Can families now sue cell phone makers and carriers when someone dies in an auto accident due to being distracted?
Well libbers there is how you too can be rich just sue everyone

 

[PNWest]

The NRA/GOP ran a protection racket for the gun industry, passing laws to shield them from liability. Now that's coming to an end. Good.

We can only hope. Check out the WILLFULLY ignorant posts by the righties that try to conflate LOSING a lawsuit with being able to file it in the first place.

 

[Abatis]

The NRA/GOP ran a protection racket for the gun industry, passing laws to shield them from liability. Now that's coming to an end. Good.

Boy, you are dense. The court ruled that the shield law DID protect Remington from every gun related count in the lawsuit . . . The court held the shield law does not protect any company from being sued for how it MARKETS its product.

So, just so the idiocy will stop, Remington can NOT be sued for any aspect of the gun's "deadliness" or it's rate of fire, or any other attack on the gun's operation OR its actual availability for sale to the general public. NONE of that is part of this lawsuit -- all of those concerns were thrown out because of the federal shield law.

This case is a 1st Amendment case now; the legal argument of the plaintiffs is that WORDS are designed to kill and that WORDS on a page were a precursor, a direct cause of the deaths at Sandy Hook. The plaintiffs want Remington held liable for the deaths because of how Remington described the gun and its capabilities in advertisements.

So, no gun right is under attack here, you can substitute any other product that might cause death and that is advertised featuring certain [above ordinary, potentially harmful] performance characteristics -- think of a commercial showing a Ford Mustang being driven fast on a winding road and somebody suing Ford because a family member was killed driving a Mustang fast on a winding road -- and you might understand what is at issue here.

 

[Abatis]

We can only hope. Check out the WILLFULLY ignorant posts by the righties that try to conflate LOSING a lawsuit with being able to file it in the first place.

Or the posts from dumb lefties that think a court ruling that one aspect of a lawsuit can proceed, is winning the suit.

 

[PNWest]

Or the posts from dumb lefties that think a court ruling that one aspect of a lawsuit can proceed, is winning the suit.

Except no one has none that.

 

[Sickofleft]

Funny stuff. You can sue a car manufacturer if a defect in the car can be proven. Going down the road you rabid anti- gun nuts want to go, I can sue Ford if a drunk hits me if he's driving a Ford.

I'm not surprised you don't understand the difference.

Which is why the Supreme Court will strike this down.

If something like this were allowed, nobody is ever going to be able to buy a car again due to how expensive it will be as the manufacturers attempt to cover the Liability.