Community for Kel-Tec Shooters banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
703 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,876 Posts
I am all in favor of the firearms manufacturers counter-suing for defamation, harassment, frivolous lawsuit, etc. Recover actual damages - lawyer fees, court costs, forced time away from productive work, etc. - as well as punitive damages. If the goal of the anti-gunners is to set a precedent, let's make it a good precedent.

I have zero sympathy for people who try to benefit financially or prop up a wrong-minded cause by using their personal family tragedy as a campaign. Of course I have sympathy for the kids that were killed in the criminal shooting, but for their families that are doing this now? Nope. No sympathy for them. Not after they do something like this - trying to blame and punish the innocent for the acts of a deranged madman.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
I agree with you, I have been trying to think of a similar situation only instead of the gun being a weapon, something equally as lethal. Automobiles have been used a a weapon in many homicides but you never see a plaintiff suing an auto manufacturer merely because it was used as a weapon. The only reasoning I can think of is the automobile has other positive attributes and is used for those more than the latter. Staying on that train of thought, if we could convince average people who wouldn't ordinarily own a gun, sell them on the idea they make wonderful door stops as well as a weapon, then they too might be look at in a differently and not just for shooting projectiles.

I know I'm reaching, but there needs to be fairness in these court decisions. As haertig eloquently put it "for the acts of deranged madmen" , so far it's been nothing but a big chit sandwich for the innocent law abiding citizen to eat. Gun Wood Furniture Room Door


Im being facetious of course.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
703 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Well, since there is a laws passed by Congress to specifically prevent suits like this, it's not going anywhere. If she rules on her own, without a jury, it seems, against the gun industry, it will just get overturned and she'll look like the stupid fool that she is.

An annoyance, for sure, especially since these companies are paying legal fees. I hope they countersue to recoup them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
703 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Wait, this is NOT a federal judge. It's a Connecticut superior judge. I misread that, sorry. That makes this even less of a deal. She'll get slapped down when this goes to the federal district court.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,986 Posts
I agree with you, I have been trying to think of a similar situation only instead of the gun being a weapon, something equally as lethal.
Pills.

Why aren't drug companies being sued because junkies and pushers are abusing their products and people are dying because of it? Abuse of oxycotton, oxycodone, hydrocodone, &tc. are at an all time high.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,383 Posts
Pills.

Why aren't drug companies being sued because junkies and pushers are abusing their products and people are dying because of it? Abuse of oxycotton, oxycodone, hydrocodone, &tc. are at an all time high.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
I weigh more than I should and that likely has an impact on my health. Reckon I could sue Nabisco because Oreos are just too, darned hard to resist - and those insidious Double Stuf ones are even worse?

In the past, I have heard of people who were injured in a car accident involving a drunk driver (or the family of individuals killed in such an accident) suing the bar where the drunk driver got drunk but maybe that isn't going far enough. Maybe they should be suing the car companies for making the car, suing the booze companies for making the booze and suing the local, state and federal governments for building all those blasted roads and highways.

Of course it seems that the daughter of Paul Walker (a guy who starred in films glamorizing illegal street racing and then died while riding in a car while the driver was exhibiting very similar behavior) did sue Porsche, claiming that they were partially responsible for his death. She lost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,092 Posts
I weigh more than I should and that likely has an impact on my health. Reckon I could sue Nabisco because Oreos are just too, darned hard to resist - and those insidious Double Stuf ones are even worse?

In the past, I have heard of people who were injured in a car accident involving a drunk driver (or the family of individuals killed in such an accident) suing the bar where the drunk driver got drunk but maybe that isn't going far enough. Maybe they should be suing the car companies for making the car, suing the booze companies for making the booze and suing the local, state and federal governments for building all those blasted roads and highways.

Of course it seems that the daughter of Paul Walker (a guy who starred in films glamorizing illegal street racing and then died while riding in a car while the driver was exhibiting very similar behavior) did sue Porsche, claiming that they were partially responsible for his death. She lost.
...but his daughter did win a case against the estate of the driver for a hefty chunk o' change. SOMEONE had to pay up, right? If not Porsche, then whoever else they could squeeze for some cash.

Point being, it always is and always will be about MONEY. These Sandy Hook families looking to cash in on their kids' demise by trying to demonize firearm manufacturers while their lawyers are simply trying to make a big-money score ... ugh. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,383 Posts
...but his daughter did win a case against the estate of the driver for a hefty chunk o' change. SOMEONE had to pay up, right? If not Porsche, then whoever else they could squeeze for some cash.

Point being, it always is and always will be about MONEY. These Sandy Hook families looking to cash in on their kids' demise by trying to demonize firearm manufacturers while their lawyers are simply trying to make a big-money score ... ugh. :rolleyes:
Well, at least in that case the (estate of the) person who was actually most responsible for the accident, i.e. the guy who was driving (apparently recklessly) was held responsible. Isn't that analogous with holding the person who pulled the trigger responsible for their actions rather than blaming the gun?
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top