One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
State supreme court rules Remington can be sued over Newtown shooting
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: 1 2 next>>
Mar 14, 2019 15:18:46   #
Oldsailor65
 
State supreme court rules Remington can be sued over Newtown shooting

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Gun maker Remington can be sued over how it marketed the Bushmaster rifle used to kill 20 children and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, a divided Connecticut Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Justices issued a 4-3 decision that reinstated a wrongful death lawsuit and overturned a lower court ruling that the lawsuit was prohibited by a 2005 federal law that shields gun manufacturers from liability in most cases when their products are used in crimes.

The plaintiffs include a survivor and relatives of nine people killed in the massacre. They argue the AR-15-style rifle used by shooter Adam Lanza is too dangerous for the public and Remington glorified the weapon in marketing it to young people.

Remington has denied wrongdoing and previously insisted it can’t be sued under the federal law.

The majority of the high court agreed with most of the lower court’s ruling and dismissed most of the lawsuit’s allegations, but allowed a wrongful marketing claim to proceed.

“The regulation of advertising that threatens the public’s health, safety, and morals has long been considered a core exercise of the states’ police powers,” Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.

Lanza, 20, shot his way into the locked school in Newtown on Dec. 14, 2012, and killed 20 first-graders and six educators with a Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle, similar to an AR-15. He shot his mother to death in their Newtown home beforehand, and killed himself as police arrived at the school.

Connecticut’s child advocate said Lanza’s severe and deteriorating mental health problems, his preoccupation with violence and access to his mother’s legal weapons “proved a recipe for mass murder.”

Joshua Koskoff, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, told the state Supreme Court during arguments in November 2017 the Bushmaster rifle and other AR-15-style rifles were designed as military killing machines and should never have been sold to the public.

“The families’ goal has always been to shed light on Remington’s calculated and profit-driven strategy to expand the AR-15 market and court high-risk users, all at the expense of Americans’ safety,” Koskoff said Thursday. “Today’s decision is a critical step toward achieving that goal.”

Military-style rifles have been used in many other mass shootings, including in Las Vegas in October 2017 when 58 people were killed and hundreds more injured.

The case was watched by gun rights supporters and gun control advocates across the country as one that could affect other cases accusing gun-makers of being responsible for mass shootings. Several groups, ranging from the National Rifle Association to emergency room doctors, submitted briefs to the court.

The 2005 federal law, named the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, has been cited by other courts that rejected lawsuits against gun makers and dealers in other high-profile shooting attacks, including the 2012 Colorado movie theater shooting and the Washington, D.C., sniper shootings in 2002.

James Vogts, a lawyer for Remington, has cited the 2005 federal law and previously said the Bushmaster rifle is a legal firearm used by millions of people for hunting, self-defense and target shooting.

Remington, based in Madison, North Carolina, filed for bankruptcy reorganization last year amid years of slumping sales and legal and financial pressure over the Sandy Hook school massacre.

http://www.gopusa.com/?p=66512?omhide=tru
***********************************************************************************
My first shotgun was a 12 Ga Remington 870 WingMaster. Got it for Christmas when I was 12 Yr old.



| Reply
Mar 14, 2019 15:30:04   #
Smedley_buzkill (a regular here)
 
Oldsailor65 wrote:
State supreme court rules Remington can be sued over Newtown shooting

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Gun maker Remington can be sued over how it marketed the Bushmaster rifle used to kill 20 children and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, a divided Connecticut Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Justices issued a 4-3 decision that reinstated a wrongful death lawsuit and overturned a lower court ruling that the lawsuit was prohibited by a 2005 federal law that shields gun manufacturers from liability in most cases when their products are used in crimes.

The plaintiffs include a survivor and relatives of nine people killed in the massacre. They argue the AR-15-style rifle used by shooter Adam Lanza is too dangerous for the public and Remington glorified the weapon in marketing it to young people.

Remington has denied wrongdoing and previously insisted it can’t be sued under the federal law.

The majority of the high court agreed with most of the lower court’s ruling and dismissed most of the lawsuit’s allegations, but allowed a wrongful marketing claim to proceed.

“The regulation of advertising that threatens the public’s health, safety, and morals has long been considered a core exercise of the states’ police powers,” Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.

Lanza, 20, shot his way into the locked school in Newtown on Dec. 14, 2012, and killed 20 first-graders and six educators with a Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle, similar to an AR-15. He shot his mother to death in their Newtown home beforehand, and killed himself as police arrived at the school.

Connecticut’s child advocate said Lanza’s severe and deteriorating mental health problems, his preoccupation with violence and access to his mother’s legal weapons “proved a recipe for mass murder.”

Joshua Koskoff, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, told the state Supreme Court during arguments in November 2017 the Bushmaster rifle and other AR-15-style rifles were designed as military killing machines and should never have been sold to the public.

“The families’ goal has always been to shed light on Remington’s calculated and profit-driven strategy to expand the AR-15 market and court high-risk users, all at the expense of Americans’ safety,” Koskoff said Thursday. “Today’s decision is a critical step toward achieving that goal.”

Military-style rifles have been used in many other mass shootings, including in Las Vegas in October 2017 when 58 people were killed and hundreds more injured.

The case was watched by gun rights supporters and gun control advocates across the country as one that could affect other cases accusing gun-makers of being responsible for mass shootings. Several groups, ranging from the National Rifle Association to emergency room doctors, submitted briefs to the court.

The 2005 federal law, named the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, has been cited by other courts that rejected lawsuits against gun makers and dealers in other high-profile shooting attacks, including the 2012 Colorado movie theater shooting and the Washington, D.C., sniper shootings in 2002.

James Vogts, a lawyer for Remington, has cited the 2005 federal law and previously said the Bushmaster rifle is a legal firearm used by millions of people for hunting, self-defense and target shooting.

Remington, based in Madison, North Carolina, filed for bankruptcy reorganization last year amid years of slumping sales and legal and financial pressure over the Sandy Hook school massacre.

http://www.gopusa.com/?p=66512?omhide=tru
***********************************************************************************
My first shotgun was a 12 Ga Remington 870 WingMaster. Got it for Christmas when I was 12 Yr old.
State supreme court rules Remington can be sued ov... (show quote)


A whack job steals a legally owned firearm and kills people with it so it's the fault of the company that built the gun. Using this logic, Ford can be sued every time one of their vehicles is used in a crime.

| Reply
Mar 14, 2019 15:34:27   #
Liberty Tree (a regular here)
 
Smedley_buzkill wrote:
A whack job steals a legally owned firearm and kills people with it so it's the fault of the company that built the gun. Using this logic, Ford can be sued every time one of their vehicles is used in a crime.


Sounds like judges searching for a way to let the suit go forward.

| Reply
Mar 14, 2019 15:38:07   #
Smedley_buzkill (a regular here)
 
Liberty Tree wrote:
Sounds like judges searching for a way to let the suit go forward.


This is what happens when a Liberal Democrat is put in a position of power.

| Reply
Mar 14, 2019 15:43:44   #
prometheus
 
It may take years before this gets to SCOTUS. The type of gun has nothing to do with criminality. The kid did not own the gun. He shot his mother to steal the gun. The gun was marketed to his mother, not him. This case should be thrown out at the first level and moved directly to SCOTUS. 'Not fair to Remington to endure years of proceedings when only SCOTUS can resolve it.

| Reply
Mar 14, 2019 15:46:18   #
bahmer (a regular here)
 
Smedley_buzkill wrote:
A whack job steals a legally owned firearm and kills people with it so it's the fault of the company that built the gun. Using this logic, Ford can be sued every time one of their vehicles is used in a crime.


Or GM or Chrysler or Hyundai or any other car manufacturer.

| Reply
Mar 14, 2019 15:53:20   #
woodguru (a regular here)
 
This is a moronic case, the manufacturers are servicing a legal market that legislators are allowing

| Reply
Mar 14, 2019 15:54:08   #
Oldsailor65
 
bahmer wrote:
Or GM or Chrysler or Hyundai or any other car manufacturer.

*************************************************
If Remington can be sued then "Gold Star Families" should be able to sue CONGRESS for not doing their job!!"

| Reply
Mar 14, 2019 15:59:21   #
Sew_What
 
Oldsailor65 wrote:
State supreme court rules Remington can be sued over Newtown shooting

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Gun maker Remington can be sued over how it marketed the Bushmaster rifle used to kill 20 children and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, a divided Connecticut Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Justices issued a 4-3 decision that reinstated a wrongful death lawsuit and overturned a lower court ruling that the lawsuit was prohibited by a 2005 federal law that shields gun manufacturers from liability in most cases when their products are used in crimes.

The plaintiffs include a survivor and relatives of nine people killed in the massacre. They argue the AR-15-style rifle used by shooter Adam Lanza is too dangerous for the public and Remington glorified the weapon in marketing it to young people.

Remington has denied wrongdoing and previously insisted it can’t be sued under the federal law.

The majority of the high court agreed with most of the lower court’s ruling and dismissed most of the lawsuit’s allegations, but allowed a wrongful marketing claim to proceed.

“The regulation of advertising that threatens the public’s health, safety, and morals has long been considered a core exercise of the states’ police powers,” Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.

Lanza, 20, shot his way into the locked school in Newtown on Dec. 14, 2012, and killed 20 first-graders and six educators with a Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle, similar to an AR-15. He shot his mother to death in their Newtown home beforehand, and killed himself as police arrived at the school.

Connecticut’s child advocate said Lanza’s severe and deteriorating mental health problems, his preoccupation with violence and access to his mother’s legal weapons “proved a recipe for mass murder.”

Joshua Koskoff, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, told the state Supreme Court during arguments in November 2017 the Bushmaster rifle and other AR-15-style rifles were designed as military killing machines and should never have been sold to the public.

“The families’ goal has always been to shed light on Remington’s calculated and profit-driven strategy to expand the AR-15 market and court high-risk users, all at the expense of Americans’ safety,” Koskoff said Thursday. “Today’s decision is a critical step toward achieving that goal.”

Military-style rifles have been used in many other mass shootings, including in Las Vegas in October 2017 when 58 people were killed and hundreds more injured.

The case was watched by gun rights supporters and gun control advocates across the country as one that could affect other cases accusing gun-makers of being responsible for mass shootings. Several groups, ranging from the National Rifle Association to emergency room doctors, submitted briefs to the court.

The 2005 federal law, named the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, has been cited by other courts that rejected lawsuits against gun makers and dealers in other high-profile shooting attacks, including the 2012 Colorado movie theater shooting and the Washington, D.C., sniper shootings in 2002.

James Vogts, a lawyer for Remington, has cited the 2005 federal law and previously said the Bushmaster rifle is a legal firearm used by millions of people for hunting, self-defense and target shooting.

Remington, based in Madison, North Carolina, filed for bankruptcy reorganization last year amid years of slumping sales and legal and financial pressure over the Sandy Hook school massacre.

http://www.gopusa.com/?p=66512?omhide=tru
***********************************************************************************
My first shotgun was a 12 Ga Remington 870 WingMaster. Got it for Christmas when I was 12 Yr old.
State supreme court rules Remington can be sued ov... (show quote)


So What, The NRA will bale them out.

| Reply
Mar 14, 2019 16:00:18   #
Sew_What
 
bahmer wrote:
Or GM or Chrysler or Hyundai or any other car manufacturer.


And they pay millions a year, you just don't realize it because car prices move so slowly.

| Reply
Mar 14, 2019 16:31:58   #
badbob85037 (a regular here)
 
Oldsailor65 wrote:
State supreme court rules Remington can be sued over Newtown shooting

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Gun maker Remington can be sued over how it marketed the Bushmaster rifle used to kill 20 children and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, a divided Connecticut Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Justices issued a 4-3 decision that reinstated a wrongful death lawsuit and overturned a lower court ruling that the lawsuit was prohibited by a 2005 federal law that shields gun manufacturers from liability in most cases when their products are used in crimes.

The plaintiffs include a survivor and relatives of nine people killed in the massacre. They argue the AR-15-style rifle used by shooter Adam Lanza is too dangerous for the public and Remington glorified the weapon in marketing it to young people.

Remington has denied wrongdoing and previously insisted it can’t be sued under the federal law.

The majority of the high court agreed with most of the lower court’s ruling and dismissed most of the lawsuit’s allegations, but allowed a wrongful marketing claim to proceed.

“The regulation of advertising that threatens the public’s health, safety, and morals has long been considered a core exercise of the states’ police powers,” Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.

Lanza, 20, shot his way into the locked school in Newtown on Dec. 14, 2012, and killed 20 first-graders and six educators with a Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle, similar to an AR-15. He shot his mother to death in their Newtown home beforehand, and killed himself as police arrived at the school.

Connecticut’s child advocate said Lanza’s severe and deteriorating mental health problems, his preoccupation with violence and access to his mother’s legal weapons “proved a recipe for mass murder.”

Joshua Koskoff, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, told the state Supreme Court during arguments in November 2017 the Bushmaster rifle and other AR-15-style rifles were designed as military killing machines and should never have been sold to the public.

“The families’ goal has always been to shed light on Remington’s calculated and profit-driven strategy to expand the AR-15 market and court high-risk users, all at the expense of Americans’ safety,” Koskoff said Thursday. “Today’s decision is a critical step toward achieving that goal.”

Military-style rifles have been used in many other mass shootings, including in Las Vegas in October 2017 when 58 people were killed and hundreds more injured.

The case was watched by gun rights supporters and gun control advocates across the country as one that could affect other cases accusing gun-makers of being responsible for mass shootings. Several groups, ranging from the National Rifle Association to emergency room doctors, submitted briefs to the court.

The 2005 federal law, named the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, has been cited by other courts that rejected lawsuits against gun makers and dealers in other high-profile shooting attacks, including the 2012 Colorado movie theater shooting and the Washington, D.C., sniper shootings in 2002.

James Vogts, a lawyer for Remington, has cited the 2005 federal law and previously said the Bushmaster rifle is a legal firearm used by millions of people for hunting, self-defense and target shooting.

Remington, based in Madison, North Carolina, filed for bankruptcy reorganization last year amid years of slumping sales and legal and financial pressure over the Sandy Hook school massacre.

http://www.gopusa.com/?p=66512?omhide=tru
***********************************************************************************
My first shotgun was a 12 Ga Remington 870 WingMaster. Got it for Christmas when I was 12 Yr old.
State supreme court rules Remington can be sued ov... (show quote)


Does this mean the love ones of over 600 people who were murdered by weapons obama sent to Mexico behind the back of that country's government can sue obama? Or can they first arrest him for genocide then while waiting execution those people can sue him? What about the first attorney general found in Contempt of Congress, Holder will he have the same cell as obama and which one will be the wife

We can't allow this to go any farther. If it does we now can sue Ford, Chevy and everybody who ever sold a product that some idiot abused. I can sue the doctor that delivered me because I didn't become president or a rock star.

What this is is a major Constitutional abuse of power by the Federal Judicial System. To correct this crime one of the other branches of government must arrest the oath breaking, honorless, criminal. If one doesn't do their duty then the remaining branch will not only arrest the criminal but the other branch of the government for not doing their duty and oath to defend the Constitution.

If both branches refuse to do what their oath calls them to do, and I am sure they will, it falls on our military. It calls on states and their national guard to remove and extinguish the whole lot of those tyrants. If they fail to do so the nation will turn into one big democrat shit hole. Some time after that and before the tyrants get suicidal stupid trying to find one even more stupid to disarming America it will fall upon the militia. Which is every abled body man. If called to muster you will be there with a modern military rifle and the rounds to power it. If not you will face a military court martial. So by this alone you democrats wouldn't own the required by law steel and void of patriotism and back bone you would be setting in a stockade or hiding under a rock for your cause. Cause your type ain't worth the time it would take to flush you. But we will.

| Reply
Mar 14, 2019 17:26:31   #
Larry the Legend
 
Oldsailor65 wrote:
“The regulation of advertising that threatens the public’s health, safety, and morals has long been considered a core exercise of the states’ police powers,” Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.

And he's absolutely right, but what does marketing have to do with...?

Oldsailor65 wrote:
Lanza, 20, shot his way into the locked school in Newtown on Dec. 14, 2012, and killed 20 first-graders and six educators with a Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle, similar to an AR-15.

You know, the 'scary-looking' one!

Oldsailor65 wrote:
He shot his mother to death in their Newtown home beforehand, and killed himself as police arrived at the school.

He shot his mother. The rifle didn't do it, the maniac holding it did.
He didn't even buy it from a dealer! Where's the marketing?
How, by even the biggest stretch, can a manufacturer be held liable for the actions of someone over who they have absolutely no control?

Oldsailor65 wrote:
Connecticut’s child advocate said Lanza’s severe and deteriorating mental health problems, his preoccupation with violence and access to his mother’s legal weapons “proved a recipe for mass murder.”

Oh! There it is! It's Remington's fault that his mother is an idiot and they sold her a firearm! Unfortunately, it wasn't stamped across her forehead and anyway, it's a little late now, because she's already dead. Murdered with her own firearm. Just imagine what she was thinking as he pointed the rifle at her and pulled the trigger. What was the last thing she said to him?

Turns out he was suffering from
Oldsailor65 wrote:
severe and deteriorating mental health problems, his preoccupation with violence and access to his mother’s legal weapons
not some marketing ploy used by some shady arms dealer.

Legislating from the bench, much?

| Reply
Mar 15, 2019 08:58:30   #
Wonttakeitanymore (a regular here)
 
How about his mental illness exacerbated by the legal drugs he took and a shrink that should be held liable! You know he should have shared the illness with the police! Should be no client confidality with potentional killers! Heard the shrink was molesting the kid!

| Reply
Mar 15, 2019 09:04:55   #
lindajoy
 
Oldsailor65 wrote:
State supreme court rules Remington can be sued over Newtown shooting

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Gun maker Remington can be sued over how it marketed the Bushmaster rifle used to kill 20 children and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, a divided Connecticut Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Justices issued a 4-3 decision that reinstated a wrongful death lawsuit and overturned a lower court ruling that the lawsuit was prohibited by a 2005 federal law that shields gun manufacturers from liability in most cases when their products are used in crimes.

The plaintiffs include a survivor and relatives of nine people killed in the massacre. They argue the AR-15-style rifle used by shooter Adam Lanza is too dangerous for the public and Remington glorified the weapon in marketing it to young people.

Remington has denied wrongdoing and previously insisted it can’t be sued under the federal law.

The majority of the high court agreed with most of the lower court’s ruling and dismissed most of the lawsuit’s allegations, but allowed a wrongful marketing claim to proceed.

“The regulation of advertising that threatens the public’s health, safety, and morals has long been considered a core exercise of the states’ police powers,” Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.

Lanza, 20, shot his way into the locked school in Newtown on Dec. 14, 2012, and killed 20 first-graders and six educators with a Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle, similar to an AR-15. He shot his mother to death in their Newtown home beforehand, and killed himself as police arrived at the school.

Connecticut’s child advocate said Lanza’s severe and deteriorating mental health problems, his preoccupation with violence and access to his mother’s legal weapons “proved a recipe for mass murder.”

Joshua Koskoff, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, told the state Supreme Court during arguments in November 2017 the Bushmaster rifle and other AR-15-style rifles were designed as military killing machines and should never have been sold to the public.

“The families’ goal has always been to shed light on Remington’s calculated and profit-driven strategy to expand the AR-15 market and court high-risk users, all at the expense of Americans’ safety,” Koskoff said Thursday. “Today’s decision is a critical step toward achieving that goal.”

Military-style rifles have been used in many other mass shootings, including in Las Vegas in October 2017 when 58 people were killed and hundreds more injured.

The case was watched by gun rights supporters and gun control advocates across the country as one that could affect other cases accusing gun-makers of being responsible for mass shootings. Several groups, ranging from the National Rifle Association to emergency room doctors, submitted briefs to the court.

The 2005 federal law, named the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, has been cited by other courts that rejected lawsuits against gun makers and dealers in other high-profile shooting attacks, including the 2012 Colorado movie theater shooting and the Washington, D.C., sniper shootings in 2002.

James Vogts, a lawyer for Remington, has cited the 2005 federal law and previously said the Bushmaster rifle is a legal firearm used by millions of people for hunting, self-defense and target shooting.

Remington, based in Madison, North Carolina, filed for bankruptcy reorganization last year amid years of slumping sales and legal and financial pressure over the Sandy Hook school massacre.

http://www.gopusa.com/?p=66512?omhide=tru
***********************************************************************************
My first shotgun was a 12 Ga Remington 870 WingMaster. Got it for Christmas when I was 12 Yr old.
State supreme court rules Remington can be sued ov... (show quote)


Off to the SCOTUS it goes~~

| Reply
Mar 15, 2019 09:31:47   #
Larry the Legend
 
lindajoy wrote:
Off to the SCOTUS it goes~~

Where it will suffer a suitably ignominious death.

| Reply
Page: 1 2 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2019 IDF International Technologies, Inc.