"Supreme Court lets Sandy Hook shooting lawsuits go forward"

[archives]

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Tuesday that a survivor and relatives of victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting can pursue their lawsuit against the maker of the rifle used to kill 26 people."

"The justices rejected an appeal from Remington Arms that argued it should be shielded by a 2005 federal law preventing most lawsuits against firearms manufacturers when their products are used in crimes."

"The case is being watched by gun control advocates, gun rights supporters and gun manufacturers across the country, as it has the potential to provide a roadmap for victims of other mass shootings to circumvent the federal law and sue the makers of firearm."

"The court’s order allows the lawsuit filed in Connecticut state court by a survivor and relatives of nine victims who died at the Newtown, Connecticut, school on Dec. 14, 2012, to go forward."

"The lawsuit says the Madison, North Carolina-based company should never have sold a weapon as dangerous as the Bushmaster AR-15-style rifle to the public. Gunman Adam Lanza used it to kill 20 first graders and six educators."

https://apnews.com/8755008e727a4a1b804cdf5cf03ab620

About time, hope they win the case, anybody who makes, manufactures, markets, and sells weapons as an AR15 for pure profit should be held accountable, the purpose of the weapon is to kill as much as it can in the shortest period of time

I can see liability insurance a requirement for gun ownership down the road, gun huggers can't complain, none of it "confiscates" guns nor bans guns

[RB 60]

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Tuesday that a survivor and relatives of victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting can pursue their lawsuit against the maker of the rifle used to kill 26 people."

"The justices rejected an appeal from Remington Arms that argued it should be shielded by a 2005 federal law preventing most lawsuits against firearms manufacturers when their products are used in crimes."

"The case is being watched by gun control advocates, gun rights supporters and gun manufacturers across the country, as it has the potential to provide a roadmap for victims of other mass shootings to circumvent the federal law and sue the makers of firearm."

"The court’s order allows the lawsuit filed in Connecticut state court by a survivor and relatives of nine victims who died at the Newtown, Connecticut, school on Dec. 14, 2012, to go forward."

"The lawsuit says the Madison, North Carolina-based company should never have sold a weapon as dangerous as the Bushmaster AR-15-style rifle to the public. Gunman Adam Lanza used it to kill 20 first graders and six educators."

https://apnews.com/8755008e727a4a1b804cdf5cf03ab620

About time, hope they win the case, anybody who makes, manufactures, markets, and sells weapons as an AR15 for pure profit should be held accountable, the purpose of the weapon is to kill as much as it can in the shortest period of time

I can see liability insurance a requirement for gun ownership down the road, gun huggers can't complain, none of it "confiscates" guns nor bans guns

It will be appealed and struck down. Auto manufacturers can't be sued because drunk drivers kill people.

There is no way liability ins. will become mandatory for gun owners, not in my lifetime. I'd refuse to carry it if it were.

[Truth Detector]

"Supreme Court lets Sandy Hook shooting lawsuits go forward"

DUMB. This too will be overturned with time and common sense.

[archives]

It will be appealed and struck down. Auto manufacturers can't be sued because drunk drivers kill people.

There is no way liability ins. will become mandatory for gun owners, not in my lifetime. I'd refuse to carry it if it were.

The SCOTUS just said they could proceed, that the Federal Law didn't apply, so on what grounds if the gun manufactures lose can they appeal to the SCOTUS?

An auto's prime purpose is to provide transportation, AK15s purpose is to kill as many as possible in the shortest amount of time, you can't see the difference?

I would not say never, eventually, in my view, guns will be regulated as we regulate autos to include registration, tests, licenses and liability insurance

[archives]

DUMB. This too will be overturned with time and common sense.

Right, and you are one of those that have told us in the past the SCOTUS would never rule anything against guns especially with the Trump Court

And on what grounds will they appeal? You just don't say "I appeal" and the higher Court takes the case, especially since now the Federal Law doesn't aply

[RB 60]

The SCOTUS just said they could proceed, that the Federal Law didn't apply, so on what grounds if the gun manufactures lose can they appeal to the SCOTUS?

An auto's prime purpose is to provide transportation, AK15s purpose is to kill as many as possible in the shortest amount of time, you can't see the difference?

I would not say never, eventually, in my view, guns will be regulated as we regulate autos to include registration, tests, licenses and liability insurance

Uh, it was the Connecticut Supreme Court, you fool! Not the US Supreme Court. As I said, it will be appealed and dismissed.

Your view is blurred. Most of us will never submit to those regulations...ever.

[Bigdog]

Right, and you are one of those that have told us in the past the SCOTUS would never rule anything against guns especially with the Trump Court

And on what grounds will they appeal? You just don't say "I appeal" and the higher Court takes the case, especially since now the Federal Law doesn't aply

Will we be able to sue Alcohol manufacturers, too?

[Bigdog]

Uh, it was the Connecticut Supreme Court, you fool! Not the US Supreme Court. As I said, it will be appealed and dismissed.

Your view is blurred. Most of us will never submit to those regulations...ever.

[OG Yurt]

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Tuesday that a survivor and relatives of victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting can pursue their lawsuit against the maker of the rifle used to kill 26 people."

"The justices rejected an appeal from Remington Arms that argued it should be shielded by a 2005 federal law preventing most lawsuits against firearms manufacturers when their products are used in crimes."

"The case is being watched by gun control advocates, gun rights supporters and gun manufacturers across the country, as it has the potential to provide a roadmap for victims of other mass shootings to circumvent the federal law and sue the makers of firearm."

"The court’s order allows the lawsuit filed in Connecticut state court by a survivor and relatives of nine victims who died at the Newtown, Connecticut, school on Dec. 14, 2012, to go forward."

"The lawsuit says the Madison, North Carolina-based company should never have sold a weapon as dangerous as the Bushmaster AR-15-style rifle to the public. Gunman Adam Lanza used it to kill 20 first graders and six educators."

https://apnews.com/8755008e727a4a1b804cdf5cf03ab620

About time, hope they win the case, anybody who makes, manufactures, markets, and sells weapons as an AR15 for pure profit should be held accountable, the purpose of the weapon is to kill as much as it can in the shortest period of time

I can see liability insurance a requirement for gun ownership down the road, gun huggers can't complain, none of it "confiscates" guns nor bans guns

Your opinion does not reflect the Courts reasoning, at all. You're a fool.

If a car manufacturer advertises their product to produce maximum speed, you would hold them liable if someone illegally broke the speed limit and killed someone.

People like you belong in a communist government with a nanny all times of your existence.

[OG Yurt]

Will we be able to sue Alcohol manufacturers, too?

And the spork manufacturer!! Never forget the SPORK!

[archives]

Uh, it was the Connecticut Supreme Court, you fool! Not the US Supreme Court. As I said, it will be appealed and dismissed.

Your view is blurred. Most of us will never submit to those regulations...ever.

Ah, no, it was the SCOTUS, it was on appeal from the Connecticut Supreme Court, the byline was from "Washington," but here it is from a second source (https://thehill.com/regulation/court...n-lawsuit-from)

Well, if they win the lawsuit, it will put some manufactures out of business, the price of your toys will skyrocket

And if the law did evolve to treating guns as it does autos you will follow, it won't be a 24hr change and what are you going do, baracade yourself in your house

[archives]

Will we be able to sue Alcohol manufacturers, too?

No, alcohol's primary purpose isn't to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time

[Gonzomin]

It will be appealed and struck down. Auto manufacturers can't be sued because drunk drivers kill people.

There is no way liability ins. will become mandatory for gun owners, not in my lifetime. I'd refuse to carry it if it were.

Auto manufacturers have been sued many times for making unsafe automobiles that hurt and killed people. They are expected to do their best to make autos safer.

[archives]

He, and you "big chiwawa," are wrong, shocking

https://thehill.com/regulation/court...n-lawsuit-from

[archives]

Your opinion does not reflect the Courts reasoning, at all. You're a fool.

If a car manufacturer advertises their product to produce maximum speed, you would hold them liable if someone illegally broke the speed limit and killed someone.

People like you belong in a communist government with a nanny all times of your existence.

Don't even know you, but you are incorrect, the SCOTUS ruled that the gun manufactures' defense that they couldn't be sued based upon a 2005 Federal law was erroneous, that the case could continue, a bad omen for the gun manufactures

And once again, the primary purpose for an auto is to provide transportation, the main purpose of an AK15 is to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time, if you can't see the difference you never will understand the arguement