It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sue dealer for daughter's death following Aurora Massacre? Pay dealer's $200K legal costs!

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 12:02 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96
Well ya if you want to grossly over simplify what laws are for.

That is the same logic of sueing the ammo dealer neo, they should have stopped it and they didn't.




posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 12:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
If the seller did nothing wrong why were they sued?


Simply a money grabbing exercise by the parents and their lawyers.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 01:12 AM
link   
I want to take step back and talk about the parents.

I can't imagine losing a loved one like this, this wasn't about the money, they were (misguidedly) trying to make a change.

It's heartbreaking. They don't know who to blame, they don't get vengeance, they don't get justice, this event rocked them to their very core and they want to make a statement, tell the world that they were shattered, and say it loud enough that people actually listen. I really want to hug them and go back in time to tell them this was a very bad idea.

Its hard for people to accept something so senseless. These are human beings, wracked with grief, trying to make sense of an incredibly tragic loss. We should show them compassion, disagree, but understand they don't deserve scorn.

It's human nature to want to blame and make sense of the chaos. You don't want to sit by and do nothing, you've suffered a heart wrenching loss, you want to make sure no one else has to experience it, you want your child's death to MEAN something.

It's wrong to blame an ammo retailer, or arms manufacturer. People are stupid and kill themselves on ladders. You don't kill the horse that throws a rider. You don't sue Home Depot if someone buys some rope and commits suicide. You don't get to sue and expect to win if a product is used in the wrong way. I still get why they tried, and I don't think it was because they had a bad lawyer, but because they wanted desperately to make a change.

This is a win for those of us that enjoy shooting, but not one to celebrate. It's a sort of "duh" ruling, and while I vehemently disagree with the family, can't help but feel compassion for them, and respect that they stuck to their convictions.

Let's try to love and understand this family, and not be the knee jerk cheer squad. I'm glad the ruling went the way it did, but I think we should still give them some respect and empathize.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 02:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
Why don't they sue their lawyer who should have told them that it was useless to file the lawsuit in the first place. It's the bloodsucking leeches like their lawyer that is a problem with the legal system.

Yeah, if only the lawyer had told them the same as the judge told them they would not be 200+k out of pocket.


The judge dismissed our case because, he said, these online sellers had special immunity from the general duty to use reasonable care under the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and a Colorado immunity law.


Maybe they should go after the Lawyer.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 02:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
If the seller did nothing wrong why were they sued?


Simply a money grabbing exercise by the parents and their lawyers.


People should really read an article before commenting and making statements like this.




Attorneys at Arnold and Porter and the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence brought the lawsuit for us, pro bono. We knew the risks of bringing the case. We knew that Colorado and Congress have given special protection of the gun industry, and we knew that under Colorado law we could even be ordered to pay attorneys' fees because of those special protections.

But we thought it was important to take a stand, to fight to prevent other families from suffering as we have. We did not seek any money in our case. We just wanted injunctive relief -- to have these companies act reasonably when they sold dangerous materiel, like 100-round ammunition magazines, ammunition, body armor, and tear gas.




posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 02:38 AM
link   
Milah, why did you add "A popular, "heavily flouridated viewpoint that calls the mourning parents 'IDIOTS':". You insult people if they think the parents are IDIOTS?

You have to be a complete moron to sue a store for selling ammo, guns or gear to someone. That would be like suing a gas station for selling a person gasoline after they caused a fatal vehicle accident 3 days later due to drinking and driving. Like other people have said, they should sue the lawyer they used for not telling them it was impossible to win.

If that store was negligent, the ATF would be all over them. If you buy a gun from a online store, they shipping it to a registered FFL dealer near you, that FFL dealer will do all the paperwork and run a background check before releasing the firearm to you. Running a background check for ammo is stupid, you can't kill anyone with ammo alone.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 03:06 AM
link   
Why not sue the Pharmaceutical company that made the bad sh/t meds he was on or his Ex-military head shrink who knew he was crazy and didn't tell anyone so he could be prevented from owning/buying guns? But no the guns are evil. People have been killing one another as long as there have been people. Clubs rocks, spears, bow and arrows, etc, etc. inanimate objects don't kill people by themselves.
a reply to: neo96



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Milah

It's not like they didn't know this would happen if they lost. They didn't present a compelling case.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Milah

While I see why the parents would want to sue the company, it isn't the companies fault that the shooter decided to use it the way he did.



This right here is all that needs to be said. To believe anything else is just emotional foolishness. If you could sue a company for how their customers use their product, we wouldn't have ANYTHING. Beer would be gone, cars would be gone, video games would be gone, hell, even ropes would be gone.

I feel for the parents, but if you allow your emotions to get the better of you and your judgement, things like this can happen.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: ntech
a reply to: Milah

They should sue the lawyer that filed the case. He should have considered the possibility the case had no merit and would open up the plaintiffs to damages. Unless he got something in writing that he informed them that their case was possibly a losing cause.


I'm fairly certain that I read another article where the parents said outright that they knew it was a possibility. I'm guessing that either they were hoping for a sympathetic judge to not award costs or there was already an agreement in place for someone else to pay any costs - the Brady Center might be footing the bill, seeing as the parents already worked for them and were most likely suing under direction from Brady.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 12:36 PM
link   
My heart aches for the family. However, what is wrong is losing a lawsuit and having to pay the defendants attorney fees is just wrong. Not only does the loser have to pay their attorney they have to pay the other attorney as well because they had to defend someone or something.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Milah

If they were not made aware of the potential outcomes, including loosing their lawsuit or having it dismissed, by their Attorneys, then their Attorney's did not do their job. It is the Attorney's job (EDIT for clarification: Or SHOULD BE) to make their client's aware of all possible outcomes, plus possible outcomes and liabilities as a result of initiating such an action.

In my opinion, if the Attorney did not do their job, then I believe it is the Attorney's responsibility (EDIT for clarification: Or SHOULD BE) to pay any fines that these people are levied with.

However, if they were aware of this possibility due to their Attorney's performing as their duties demand...

Well, whereas I do feel sorry for these people....and for their horrible loss.... they knew what they were doing. They felt anointed with a sense of being "right". Now, as per our societies rules, they are liable.

Go ahead. Flame. I've got my flame-retardant undies on. I know nobody will see past the emotion in this situation.

We live in a "feel good" era. Not one of being responsible for your own actions. And, no, I do not feel the ammunition manufacturer or dealer is guilty here. If I kill you with a spoon, should the spoon manufacturer or dealer be responsible for making certain I wouldn't have used it to kill you with?

The only person guilty is the person who willfully pulled the trigger.

Guns don't kill. Ammunition doesn't kill. These are inert and non-sentient objects. It takes sentience and will to use them to kill.

People kill.



edit on 26-9-2015 by nullafides because: Edit for Clarification



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

I have in my short life learned to NOT trust a lawyer to do even his job. Teach yourself, know the details, trust THAT to capable hands. Read, ask, get informed, THEN go see a lawyer.

The surprises never end with them.

About this case though, they lost and those are the rules. The seller would be wise to just pay that though. They got their victory and should now consider public perception.


edit on 9 26 2015 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
Why don't they sue their lawyer who should have told them that it was useless to file the lawsuit in the first place. It's the bloodsucking leeches like their lawyer that is a problem with the legal system.


We don't agree on much, but in this case, I agree completely. While I do have some sympathy for the family, you generally shouldn't be able to sue for criminal misuse of product, whether in a firearms-related case or on some other matter. In fact, under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, you specifically can't sue a firearms-related business under those circumstances...something they even admit in this article. So I'm really not sure what their argument is here. Do they want the judge to just make it up as he goes? No, the judge was absolutely right in this, IMO.

If they want to blame someone, they should blame their lawyers and the Brady bunch for enabling their all-but unwinnable lawsuit.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: nullafides
a reply to: Milah
Well, whereas I do feel sorry for these people....and for their horrible loss.... they knew what they were doing. They felt anointed with a sense of being "right". Now, as per our societies rules, they are liable.

Go ahead. Flame. I've got my flame-retardant undies on. I know nobody will see past the emotion in this situation.

We live in a "feel good" era. Not one of being responsible for your own actions. And, no, I do not feel the ammunition manufacturer or dealer is guilty here. If I kill you with a spoon, should the spoon manufacturer or dealer be responsible for making certain I wouldn't have used it to kill you with?

The only person guilty is the person who willfully pulled the trigger.

Guns don't kill. Ammunition doesn't kill. These are inert and non-sentient objects. It takes sentience and will to use them to kill.

People kill.





Somehow, I knew this wouldn't be a popular opinion


One person has starred it. I usually star posts of opinions that I agree with.



I live in Denver. I've been to that theatre. My family knows people from Aurora who were there.


I still firmly stand behind the opinion I posted.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 05:09 PM
link   
I think we had a screwed up person who broke many laws.
We have NO national mental health system it's going to happen alot until we do.



posted on Sep, 26 2015 @ 05:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: buster2010
Why don't they sue their lawyer who should have told them that it was useless to file the lawsuit in the first place. It's the bloodsucking leeches like their lawyer that is a problem with the legal system.

Yeah, if only the lawyer had told them the same as the judge told them they would not be 200+k out of pocket.


The judge dismissed our case because, he said, these online sellers had special immunity from the general duty to use reasonable care under the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and a Colorado immunity law.


Maybe they should go after the Lawyer.


Read the article. They admit that they knew the risks of proceeding with the case and chose to do so anyway.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Milah

While I see why the parents would want to sue the company, it isn't the companies fault that the shooter decided to use it the way he did.




Probably the most unbiased, responsible thing I've ever seen you write Sremmons.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: chuck258

That's nice.
There is no N in the moniker btw. Thought at least your didn't add a t after the first S like most.



posted on Sep, 28 2015 @ 12:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: chuck258

That's nice.
There is no N in the moniker btw. Thought at least your didn't add a t after the first S like most.



You know I never noticed that. All the time I've seen you on this board I always called you SremmoNs, I don't know why I never saw the lack of an an N



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join