PDA

View Full Version : Supreme Court lets Sandy Hook families' lawsuit against gunmaker proceed



Teh One Who Knocks
11-13-2019, 01:28 PM
By Tyler Olson | Fox News


https://i.imgur.com/8gBVETBl.jpg

In an order released Tuesday, the Supreme Court allowed families of Sandy Hook victims to proceed with a lawsuit against gun manufacturer Remington Arms despite the company's claims that it was protected from liability by federal law.

Remington had petitioned the Supreme Court to reverse a March 2019 decision by the Connecticut Supreme Court, which ruled 4-3 that Remington could be sued under state law over its marketing practices, citing one of the few exemptions to the federal law.

The gunmaker argued that the state court's interpretation of the marketing exemption is, "intolerable given Congress's 'intention to create national uniformity'" with the federal law, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. "As the dissenters below noted, lawsuits like this one are precisely the kind the PLCAA was enacted to prevent."

Gunman Adam Lanza opened fire at the Newtown, Conn., school with a Bushmaster AR-15-style rifle on Dec. 14, 2012, killing 20 first-graders and six educators. The 20-year-old gunman earlier shot his mother to death at their Newtown home, and killed himself as police arrived at the school. The rifle was legally owned by his mother.

A survivor and relatives of nine victims filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Remington in 2015, saying the company should have never sold such a dangerous weapon to the public and alleging it targeted younger, at-risk males in marketing and product placement in violent video games.

Tuesday's order from the Supreme Court does not mean Remington or other gun manufacturers will face any immediate liability, but it does set the stage for potential court battles over whether or not the gun industry is responsible for the Sandy Hook massacre and potentially open the door to other suits in relation to other mass shootings or murders.

"The decision will have immediate and severe consequences, exposing the firearms industry to costly and burdensome litigation," Remington argued in its petition to the Supreme Court. "Thus, as a leading scholar on firearm-manufacturer liability has explained, the decision below will 'unleash a flood of lawsuits across the country,'" it continued, citing Timothy D. Lytton, a professor at the Georgia State University College of Law.

Joshua Kosoff, a lawyer for the families' victims, applauded the Connecticut Supreme Court's ruling earlier this year when Remington made its plea to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has a newly refreshed conservative majority but refused to side with the gun industry Tuesday.

“Our state’s highest court has already ruled that the families deserve their day in court and we are confident that the U.S. Supreme Court will defer to that well-reasoned opinion,” Koskoff said in a statement.

The high court's denial of Remington's petition also does not mean it will be the tribunal's last word on the issue, as it often allows controversial issues to percolate in lower courts for years before weighing in. The Remington case could also make its way back to the Supreme Court on other grounds.

The case will now proceed in a lower state court.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

DemonGeminiX
11-13-2019, 01:35 PM
That's fucking stupid. So I guess when a drunk driver kills someone now, the victim's families are going to be able to sue the auto manufacturers of the model car he or she was driving and the distilleries that made the alcohol that he or she drank?

DemonGeminiX
11-13-2019, 01:42 PM
Their premise that these guns don't belong in the hands of the people is unconstitutional on it's face.

Teh One Who Knocks
11-13-2019, 01:46 PM
The Sandy Hook families are using a loophole to sue Remington, they're going after their marketing practices instead of suing them because their product was used. It's still horseshit though.

DemonGeminiX
11-13-2019, 02:02 PM
Where in their marketing practices does Remington say that the Bushmaster is the perfect weapon to use when a mentally deranged person wants to go around and kill little school kids in their classrooms?

Teh One Who Knocks
11-13-2019, 02:23 PM
Where in their marketing practices does Remington say that the Bushmaster is the perfect weapon to use when a mentally deranged person wants to go around and kill little school kids in their classrooms?

Don't shoot the messenger :hand:


This is from a story about it on NPR, it goes into more detail about their lawsuit about marketing:


The families first filed their lawsuit in December 2014, saying the Bushmaster rifle never should have been sold to the public because it is a military-style weapon. They accuse Remington of violating Connecticut's unfair trade practices law when it "knowingly marketed and promoted the Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle for use in assaults against human beings."

The closely watched lawsuit has survived many legal twists and turns, moving from state to federal court and back, and repeatedly escaping bids by Remington and gun owners' groups to quash it. While the suit initially centered on a claim of negligent entrustment — or providing a gun to someone who plans to commit a crime with it — the case now hinges on how Remington marketed the gun.

The 2005 federal law that shields gun companies from liability has several exceptions — including one allowing lawsuits against a gun-maker or seller that knowingly violates state or federal laws governing how a product is sold or marketed.

In March, the Connecticut Supreme Court breathed new life into the families' lawsuit when it ruled they can sue Remington for marketing a military-style weapon to civilians. That decision reversed a Connecticut superior court's ruling that would have ended the case.

Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to take up Remington's appeal, the case will return to a lower court in Connecticut.

One of the plaintiffs in the case is David Wheeler, whose 6-year-old son, Ben, was killed in the Sandy Hook shooting. Wheeler told NPR earlier this year that to him, the lawsuit is about responsibility. And he recalled one of Remington's ads for a gun that carried the tagline, "Consider your man card reissued."

"What kind of society allows manhood to be defined in this way?" Wheeler asked.

The AR-15 is a close relative of the Colt company's M16 automatic rifle used by the U.S. military. Since Colt's patents for the original AR-15 expired in the 1970s, other manufacturers have been making guns based on similar designs.

In filings with the U.S. Supreme Court, the Sandy Hook families say Remington "published promotional materials that promised 'military-proven performance' for a 'mission-adaptable' shooter in need of the 'ultimate combat weapons system.' " They also accuse the company of fostering a "lone gunman" narrative as it promoted the Bushmaster, citing an ad that proclaimed, "Forces of opposition, bow down. You are single-handedly outnumbered."

Parents who lost their children on that horrible day have said it was no accident that Lanza picked the AR-15-style rifle to carry out his shooting rampage.

In 2016, Nicole Hockley, whose son Dylan was killed in the attack on his elementary school, said the gunman chose an AR-15-style gun "because he knew it would kill as many people as possible as fast as possible."

Muddy
11-13-2019, 03:09 PM
This is fuckin' stupid.

DemonGeminiX
11-13-2019, 04:05 PM
Don't shoot the messenger :hand:


This is from a story about it on NPR, it goes into more detail about their lawsuit about marketing:

In that case, it's an issue of free speech. Advertisers have as much right to free speech as individuals, and the Supreme Court already ruled on that when they ruled that entities had the same rights as individuals. I can't remember what that case was. Whatever law forbidding whatever in advertising that Connecticut has is unconstitutional.

PorkChopSandwiches
11-13-2019, 04:16 PM
These hookers will lose, waste of time

Teh One Who Knocks
11-13-2019, 04:22 PM
These hookers will lose, waste of time

All depends on the judge....

DemonGeminiX
11-16-2019, 12:30 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a952WtNumsM

RBP
11-16-2019, 09:11 PM
Don't shoot the messenger :hand:

:rimshot:

Teh One Who Knocks
11-16-2019, 11:23 PM
:rimshot:
My genius is under appreciated [-(

RBP
11-17-2019, 12:30 AM
My genius is under appreciated [-(

https://i.imgur.com/J0uXgXb.jpg

lost in melb.
11-17-2019, 09:20 PM
A survivor and relatives of nine victims filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Remington in 2015, saying the company should have never sold such a dangerous weapon to the public and alleging it targeted younger, at-risk males in marketing and product placement in violent video games.

My guess is that the ability to own firearms is too hard to challenge directly as so many people are on the hooch. they will target the legality of advertising and promulgation, just as they did with tobacco

DemonGeminiX
11-18-2019, 06:34 AM
My guess is that the ability to own firearms is too hard to challenge directly as so many people are on the hooch. they will target the legality of advertising and promulgation, just as they did with tobacco

The problem is that their attack's a violation of free speech.

lost in melb.
11-18-2019, 07:35 AM
Yes, it does.

But then how did they manage to tackle cigarette advertising? I assume like the rest of the Western world, cigarette advertising (where you can put it, and how much ) is regulated by law?

DemonGeminiX
11-18-2019, 11:37 AM
Yes, it does.

But then how did they manage to tackle cigarette advertising? I assume like the rest of the Western world, cigarette advertising (where you can put it, and how much ) is regulated by law?

I don't know. I think that was dealt with a long time ago before the Supreme Court ruled that all entities had the same constitutional rights as individual citizens. I'm not sure how that case would go today.