It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: vor78
As I stated in the other thread about this lawsuit, there's actually a federal law that invalidates lawsuits arising from criminal misuse of firearms. On those grounds alone, the plaintiffs have no case. Furthermore, this was a firearm that was sold legally and where all parties presumably did their due diligence under the law. The manufacturer, distributor and gun shop aren't responsible for criminal misuse of their product by either the final purchaser or, as in this case, if it is stolen from the final purchaser.
The plaintiffs also argue that this is a 'military weapon', but that's problematic as well. First and foremost, its not a military weapon. It physically resembles one, but no military uses a semiauto-only AR-15 as its standard infantry weapon. Second, even if it is a 'military weapon', the law allows its production and sale to the civilian market. And finally, one could also argue that Supreme Court precedent from US vs Miller applies. In that case, the USSC found that weapons protected by the 2nd Amendment must have a valid purpose to a militia. If an AR-15 is indeed a military weapon, then it obviously has value and a purpose as a militia weapon and therefore is protected under the 2nd Amendment.
So needless to say, I think this case has more legal holes in it than a block of swiss cheese. I expect it to be thrown out of court, or, at worst, that the defendants choose to settle rather than suffer the bad publicity of a lengthy trial, even one they should ultimately win.
originally posted by: IShotMyLastMuse
it's a desperate attempt at somekind of justice.
Gun regulation in america is basically euql to drawing a picture of Muhammad, so you know that ain't gonna happen.
i find it laughable, the manufactor is not responsable for how you use their product.
A while back i remember someone choking his "friend"with the cord of an xbox controller...should the parents sue microsoft? (is that hwy the new controllers are wireless? hmmm)
But again. They are just trying to find a way to make sure this stuff doesn't hapen in the future, i guess their heart is in the right place.
And since a small group of idiots managed to ban GTA5 from Target, you never know what might happen in oversensitive america!
originally posted by: peter vlar
Personally, I would hope that if its not outright dismissed by a judge that it goes to trial. The legal precedent that stands to be set is, in my opinion rather important and needs to be a matter of public record as opposed to a closed door, sealed settlement because there's A. No justice in that and B. no reason for Bushmaster to be held liable for someone who was off his rocker and murdered to legal owner and stole the weapons in order to commit the crime.