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.

 

Supreme Court lets Sandy Hook shooting lawsuit go forward

page: 3
17
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 06:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
I still fail to see how the gun manufacturers can be held in anyway complicit.

The Supreme's are way off the mark here.


If I run you over with a Ford Truck, your relatives can sue Ford? Isn't this the precedent that the Supreme Court has set?




posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Sweet, someone should forward the chopper video to the lawyers from above showing the people walking in the front, out the back, around the side, then back in the front of the firehouse building.
That kid who walked out the back and just walked in circles, obviously getting the directions wrong, until a lady corrected him and he got back into the right circle.
The psyop bs needs to stop.



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 07:32 PM
link   
So flabbergasted by this decision, how in the heck does this not set up a huge wave of frivolous law suits...



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 07:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Oraculi

Naw, no one's trying to take our guns - of course not.

Unless you consider how insurance companies are going to react to this.

And we know how they 'rule the world'...



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

That's exactly what being done here if they're not careful.

Lawsuits over defective products is one thing, such as the aforementioned Pinto. But lawsuits blaming the manufacturer over the misuse of their product, which they've absolutely no control over, is insane. Crazy, even.

The precedent would be horrific for businesses of all shapes and sizes...insurance premiums would go through the roof.



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheGreatWork
I wonder if the rifle had been a Colt or Bushmaster, how that would have flew, being the largest suppliers for the Police. Would the gov have allowed it's own weapons factory basically to be sued?


Colt recently stopped selling their semi M4 to the public and only sell to LE and military. They put out a statement that it wasn't politically/agenda driven, but because they weren't doing well in sales to the public.They were decent rifles for the price - especially for people who didn't care for all the bells and whistles.

I used to recommend them to people who wanted a budget rifle. I used to be able to be able to get them for about $500-$700, but ever since they "discontinued" them I've seen them going for $15k-$17.

I don't care if it's political or not I'll never buy a Colt rifle or recommend anyone else to buy one if people are going to sell a somewhat okay rifle for that much. Especially when I used to be able to get them for a grand less

You can build a better AR15 for less.

Honestly even if manufacturers stop selling scary black rifles from fear of lawsuit you'll still be able to get one if you wanted.

And like others have said. These rifles are no different than other hunting rifles other than they are plastic instead of wood. AKs are just as easy to get and you don't see MSM freaking out about "scary Russian rifles."

It's hard enough. To wait around in some places to get a short barreled rifle, but you can go and set up a pistol no problem just because it's not a rifle cartridge. You can literally stick a stock and scope on a pistol and that makes less sense than a AR15 build. But because it's not a scary black rifle it's cool beans.


edit on 12-11-2019 by AutomateThis1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 09:49 PM
link   
Connecticut Supreme Court.

delete as Arnie already said it.
edit on 12-11-2019 by dubiousatworst because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2019 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: AutomateThis1
Don't worry, we can start making them lime green, sky blue, and princess pink to get rid of the scary moniker...

wait...that would result in another lawsuit over advertising to minors no matter how misinformed it would be, since only minors can like bright colored guns



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 05:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Fallingdown
First of all what is that holding up the gun ?

It's the presenter (genderless) of what we'd refer to as the Dog and Pony show back when I was in the military.

Recent Remington Bankruptcy

The fact is, Remington is a good target for this. It's the Commy's little bites (that we allow) which are going to Make America Weak Again.



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 05:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Deplorable

Thank God Trump appointed 167 Federal judges . ( or there about )



posted on Nov, 13 2019 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: seagull

Maybe we can start suing insurance companies for the misuse of their products. More people have died because someone was trying to collect insurance money than have died in "mass" shootings.

While we're at it, let's start investigating lawmakers for colluding with insurance companies.



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 03:23 AM
link   
How long until parents sue beer mfg like this one for using "Family Pack" for advertisement, when they lose a loved one to a drunk driver.

i.imgur.com...
edit on 14-11-2019 by Echo007 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 06:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Oraculi




This is a really big deal. News of the month really, even with all the circus going on in D.C. If you are a constitutionalist, and I know there are a handful left here on ATS, then this is one big case to keep an eye on from this point on.

why?
the 2nd says nothing about private companies
or have I read it wrong?

also
will the auto makers be held accountable for damages from their products?
knife makers?
rope manufacturers?




Is it sad that when I read your post, the first thing I thought of was a meme, one of oprah shouting "A lawsuit for you! And a lawsuit for you! Lawsuits for everyone!"



posted on Nov, 14 2019 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: dubiousatworst

You mean like this?




posted on Nov, 18 2019 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: seagull
I still fail to see how the gun manufacturers can be held in anyway complicit.

The Supreme's are way off the mark here.


If I run you over with a Ford Truck, your relatives can sue Ford? Isn't this the precedent that the Supreme Court has set?


Only if Ford markets the truck as being really great for running over people.



posted on Nov, 18 2019 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mandroid7
Sweet, someone should forward the chopper video to the lawyers from above showing the people walking in the front, out the back, around the side, then back in the front of the firehouse building.
That kid who walked out the back and just walked in circles, obviously getting the directions wrong, until a lady corrected him and he got back into the right circle.
The psyop bs needs to stop.


The Remington lawyers have their work cut out for them.

Analysis by Wolfgang Halbig, Sofia Smallstorm and many others show the Sandy Hook thing to be a staged event from start to finish.

If they cannot show through discovery that there is no proof a Remington product killed anybody that day, they aren't worth a thing.




top topics



 
17
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join