Motion by gun manufacturers to dismiss Sandy Hook lawsuit denied
Newsweek: In a major blow to gun companies, a judge in Connecticut on Thursday decided the lawsuit brought by 10 families affected by the December 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School against the maker of the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle used in the shooting will continue. The families are suing the maker, distributor and seller of…
39 responses to Motion by gun manufacturers to dismiss Sandy Hook lawsuit denied
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Suzanne McFly April 14th, 2016 at 14:50
Good, now lets get these lawsuits in front of a judge asap.
amongoose April 14th, 2016 at 15:35
It is against federal law to sue the gun manufacturer, and the dealer followed the law in the sale.
whatthe46 April 14th, 2016 at 15:04
AWESOME! all of those types of weapons needs to be banned. no selling and no owning, caught automatic10 years.
amongoose April 14th, 2016 at 15:39
The problem with that is the constitution.
You want to change it?
Then call on your legislator to support an article 5 constitutional convention.
.
Hirightnow April 14th, 2016 at 15:47
So, you have no problem with an American owning, say, a nuke? A bazooka? Hand grenades? (All are “arms, and that’s in the constitution, you know…)
amongoose April 14th, 2016 at 16:33
I think nukes are prohibited, the bazooka and grenade you can have with a class 3 license.
And the background check for that is very thorough.
.
What do you have against someone owning and carrying handgun for personal defense?
CCW holders commit a minuscule percentage of crimes.
The problem is felons with guns they are prohibited from having committing crimes.
Mike April 14th, 2016 at 16:34
We’re not talking about handguns….
BTW, felons can own guns….and the republican party is trying to make it even easier…
http://www.newsmax.com/FastFeatures/can-a-felon-own/2014/11/17/id/607940/
amongoose April 14th, 2016 at 16:51
Really, restrictions on magazine capacities, and the sentiments expressed by others here as in, “AWESOME! all of those types of weapons needs to be banned. no selling and no owning, caught automatic 10 years.” seem to suggest otherwise.
.
Handguns are banned in all practicality in some cities by the reams of paperwork and long prepossessing and wait times.
.
“If I could have banned them all -Mr. and Ms. America, turn them all in” Barbara Boxer.
“We have federal regulations and state laws that prohibit hunting ducks with more than three rounds. And yet it’s legal to hunt humans with 15-round, 30-round, even 150-round magazines.”
Dianne Feinstein
(didn’t know hunting humans was legal)
.
And you wonder why Americans are worried about the future of their gun rights?
.
A felon cannot own a weapon, look it up.
They may petition to have their 2nd amendment rights reinstated.
Mike April 14th, 2016 at 16:58
I can only speak for myself, not others.
It’s clear from my posts I do not want to ban guns…just make it harder to get than a state ID to vote….very difficult here in FL…gun, not so much…
amongoose April 14th, 2016 at 17:32
The state ID required here in Florida is a voter registration card which can be obtained at time of drivers license renewal or by mail, and a drivers license, or state ID card, they cost $25.
And unlike a gun sale there is no background check.
Already is harder to obtain a weapon legally than to vote in Florida.
Mike April 14th, 2016 at 17:51
No $25 ID or background check necessary to purchase a weapon…we’ve been over this, it’s as easy as buying milk at the store….if you feel your granddaughter is safe in that environment I won’t challenge you, however I have grandkids too and they’re not white which puts them at a much greater risk of being killed by a gun…I will continue to fight for my family’s safety (and maybe save yours while I’m at it, you never know)
amongoose April 14th, 2016 at 19:26
Once again, how do you buy a weapon in Florida, legally, without a background check at any arms dealer. Background checks for purchase from a dealer require a background check, is federal law.
No background check it is required for voting so it is already more difficult.
.
I feel safe about my granddaughters when I drop them off and pick them up, there is no security at any other time.
.
If you do not carry I sincerely hope there is someone who does should you ever need it.
If you do carry, do it safely. If you have a Glock that means no round in the chamber as the trigger IS the safety.
Mike April 14th, 2016 at 23:12
Sorry, you keep saying the same thing, but it doesn’t make it correct. You can legally purchase a gun in my county twice a month with no ID or background….
We’ve been over this 3 times already, please stop the semantics…you and I both know what the gun show loophole is…if you don’t, here’s a link.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole
Thanks for the gun tip, but there’s a lot more to know than that if you plan on carrying a weapon around. Probably why we have so many senseless shootings.
Carrying a weapon with a child around is idiocy…IMO
amongoose April 15th, 2016 at 09:39
Your then refering to face to face non dealer sales. Why didn’t you say that to start with?
Back to the issue at hand in the article.
What do you suggest we do to keep kids safe in gun free zones?
Other than arming janitors with nukes that is.
And in my opinion not carrying a weapon endangers them in that if I am unarmed, I can’t protect them.
Mike April 15th, 2016 at 10:15
Let’s get this straight, every gun dealer in my state sells weapons every single day (at one gun show or another …99 a year) without ID or a background check….because they can work the rules that allow them to do it legally and call it a private sale is nothing but mere semantics…you are entitled to your opinion, not a rewrite of the truth.
I have listed my suggestions repeatedly in posts to you, feigning ignorance is intellectually dishonest.
Children solve problems with reflex actions (like meeting force with force) but adults use intelligence, guile, subterfuge, etc, to achieve their goals…your cure for mosquito bites would translate to biting the mosquito back….
Ever wonder why don’t they let soldiers on base carry a weapon…???? The military commanders are adamantly against it because of the safety factor…so in essence, our military bases are gun free zones….
43 times this year (so far) a child has been shot by a family member whose weapon discharged accidentally…please show me 43 instances where a parent or family member used a weapon to save a child’s life.
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/capitol-hill/2015/10/18/ndaa-gun-policy/73980228/
amongoose April 15th, 2016 at 11:11
If they are selling their stock, or transferring it to an employee to sell at a non FFL table that is probably illegal and should be prosecuted, as it is an attempt to circumvent the law.
.
Estimates over the number of defensive gun uses vary wildly, depending on the study’s definition of a defensive gun use, survey design, population, criteria, time-period studied, and other factors. Low-end estimates are in the range of 55,000 to 80,000 incidents per year, while high end estimates reach of 4.7 million incidents per year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use.
.
Got to be 43 somewhere in there.
Weapons are used daily in defense of self and family.
http://kfor.com/2015/11/09/she-is-definitely-a-fighter-mother-shot-during-gunfight-with-intruders-while-protecting-infant/
http://wncn.com/2016/02/01/nc-military-mom-shoots-and-kills-home-intruder/
http://abcnews.go.com/US/okla-woman-shoots-kills-intruder911-operators-shoot/story?id=15285605
http://bearingarms.com/chicago-son-saves-mother-fate-father-met/
http://bearingarms.com/neighbor-saves-woman-children-intruder-armed-metal-pole/
http://ktla.com/2015/11/10/breastfeeding-mother-uses-gun-to-fend-off-home-intruders-in-north-carolina/
http://cnsnews.com/blog/stephen-gutowski/mother-uses-gun-protect-her-child-armed-intruders
http://abcnews.go.com/US/okla-woman-shoots-kills-intruder911-operators-shoot/story?id=15285605
http://gunsnfreedom.com/ohio-woman-uses-her-gun-to-stop-an-intruder-for-the-2nd-time-in-4-months/1300
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/20/oklahoma-girl-shoots-home-intruder_n_1992381.html
http://www.kentucky.com/news/local/counties/fayette-county/article71142087.html
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2016/apr/08/man-holds-would-be-burglar-at-gunpoint/
http://www.ktvz.com/news/Madras-woman-shoots-reported-burglary-suspect/38903102
http://www.macon.com/news/state/georgia/article70677617.html
http://www.komu.com/news/sheriff-intruder-assaulted-homeowner-who-shot-killed-him/
http://bearingarms.com/deli-worker-draws-gun-forces-two-armed-robbers-to-surrender/
http://bearingarms.com/robber-tries-take-loot-takes-one-gut-instead/
Mike April 15th, 2016 at 20:46
You do realize that 47k of those DGU came from police, not private citizens…???…or that the number according to your link is subjective…still nowhere near the 100k shootings a year that result in 15k deaths and 85k injuries…
amongoose April 17th, 2016 at 12:01
There are enough “studies” out there that you can find the stats for what you want. We can argue about the numbers, but defensive gun use saves lives, daily.
How about we enforce the laws we have first. As for those dealers selling at private tables, prosecute.
There are guidelines for dealers, it’s more than just number of weapons sold, it (according to ATF) is the circumstances. It also mentions that people have been convicted for selling as few as two.
https://www.atf.gov/file/100871/download
Hirightnow April 14th, 2016 at 22:40
When did I say that I was against handgun ownership? Those things, along with the right instruction about what they are and how to use or not use them, give me no worries.
It’s the fool who thinks that he needs an AK-47 to go to Wal-Mart that worries me. It’s the guy who thinks that the Founding Fathers (Peace be upon them) would approve of some wife-beating drunk such as himself carrying hand grenades to DisneyLand that worries me.
But the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution says “arms”…never mentions what type.
And felonies include a wide assortment of crimes, many non-violent…not too many third-time DUI offenders or people who failed to remit sales tax over $300 are out there killing people.
Say the word you meant instead of “felons”, and I’ll take you seriously.
amongoose April 15th, 2016 at 09:38
I said what I meant, felon, someone convicted of a serious crime, a felony.
How do you define felon?
And what are you assuming I meant?
Hirightnow April 15th, 2016 at 10:49
So, you’re all in line with a person losing his right to bear arms if that person, say, molests any stone crab trap, line, or buoy which is property of licenseholder, or commits an offense against intellectual property ( both felonies)?
amongoose April 15th, 2016 at 11:46
Yeah, afterwards they can petition as is their right by law to have their rights restored.
It takes some time and treasure, but it works, I know from experience
Hirightnow April 15th, 2016 at 13:27
Why should one have to pay to have their constitutional rights restored?
amongoose April 15th, 2016 at 14:57
Attorney fees, filing fees, and court costs.
Hirightnow April 15th, 2016 at 18:33
Not an answer. I’ll re-phrase.
Why should something like this not be automatic?
amongoose April 17th, 2016 at 12:02
Because that’s the law.
http://thelawdictionary.org/article/how-can-a-convicted-felon-receive-firearm-rights/
Get ready to jump through some hoops.
Mike April 14th, 2016 at 16:33
No need to …
Scalia own words in DC v Heller: “… the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose:….Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56.
We’re able to restrict machine guns and other fully automatic pistols, why not an AR-15…???
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller
amongoose April 14th, 2016 at 16:37
I believe the AR-15 is a common use weapon.
I use an FNC (.223) to hunt deer.
.
Can they be restricted?
Yea, pass the law, and win the court fight.
Or amend the constitution.
Mike April 14th, 2016 at 16:38
Everything is open to interpretation…nothing is more ambiguous than the word “common” …
robert April 14th, 2016 at 18:35
i have inlaws that bag more deer with bolt action rifles and they too say there no place in the forrest for semi or fully automatic guns its too easy to make a tragic mistake
amongoose April 14th, 2016 at 19:19
So what should we be allowed, double barrel shotguns, bolt action rifles and revolvers?
.
What kind of mistake would a hunter with a semi-auto rifle make?
robert April 14th, 2016 at 19:22
ive also met bow hunters who have no problem bagging deer and to answer your question, spraying bullets that can bounce off trees and travel 30 yards or more is self explanatory
amongoose April 14th, 2016 at 19:35
Who sprays bullets hunting? The maximum magazine capacity allowed here for hunting is five rounds. Hard to spray with that.
And I am also a bow hunter, crossbow.
robert April 14th, 2016 at 19:43
only takes 1 out of 5 quickly ejected out of a gun to kill injure another hunter. what i was hinting at is precision hunting is just effective
amongoose April 14th, 2016 at 19:50
I don’t know any hunters that spray a target, my weapon is a semi auto, and has never been fired rapidly hunting, two rounds were the most I ever needed.
robert April 14th, 2016 at 23:30
it happens out there Better check with the DNR / game warden if you go on hunting trips
fahvel April 15th, 2016 at 04:57
try a knife hero!!!!!!! blowing away munching ruminants is truly a manly thing to do so do it with your hands.
amongoose April 15th, 2016 at 11:54
No hero here, the heroes didn’t come home.
And I have used a knife to defend myself, both on the end of a rifle, and in my hand.
Have you ever been in a situation where you needed to defend yourself or a loved one?
My guess is no.
Jimmy Fleck April 14th, 2016 at 15:56
These people are going to end up owing the legal fees for the gun manufacturers after all of this goes through the courts. The gun manufacturer did not break any laws and is federally protected from these types of lawsuits. Waste of time and money by the families.