Sandy Hook Families' Lawsuit Against Gun Companies Can Move Forward

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

The judge isn't bound by the ruling in a different circuit, she's bound by the federal law it's based on. She isn't free to ignore the law.

If I read the story correctly, she's in state court. I don't think she would be applying federal law. And if federal law did apply, she's just going to differentiate this case to get to the outcome she wants.

 

[chuter]

Auto makers absolutely know that their product will be used by criminals to rape, pillage, and kill: to transport the criminals to the scene of the crime and assist in them getting away.
If we didn't have cars, there would be a lot less crime.

And car manufactures have the technology to require the driver to pass a breathalyzer before the car will start.

So much death and destruction caused by the wrongful use of cars. And yet the driver is the one held responsible; what a concept.

 

[Biggsly]

What are consequences to a judge who makes a very poor legal assessment/ruling/judgement(?) ?
Can they be removed from the bench for errors? Are they shamed into resigning by their peers? OR are they sacrosanct for the most part, able to blithely continue making poor rulings?

If they are liberal, they will be a hero to the hipsters.

 

[Glocktogo]

What are consequences to a judge who makes a very poor legal assessment/ruling/judgement(?) ?
Can they be removed from the bench for errors? Are they shamed into resigning by their peers? OR are they sacrosanct for the most part, able to blithely continue making poor rulings?

Only if someone bothers to do something, which they won't in that place.

 

[Glocktogo]

If I read the story correctly, she's in state court. I don't think she would be applying federal law. And if federal law did apply, she's just going to differentiate this case to get to the outcome she wants.

She wouldn't be applying federal law, but she's bound by it nonetheless. It's the same with prosecuting someone for illegal possession or transport of a firearm when they meet the criteria for protection under the 86 FOPA. Yeah they can still do it, but it's unlawful.

 

[ARguy]

I don't like the premise of the suit, but maybe during court they will get to what really happened at Sandy Hook.

 

[Glocktogo]

I don't like the premise of the suit, but maybe during court they will get to what really happened at Sandy Hook.

I think that's overly optimistic of you. The suit doesn't have anything to do with what really happened. It has to do with assigning blame to anyone but the perpetrator, so log as "anyone" is someone in the gun industry.

 

[ARguy]

I think that's overly optimistic of you. The suit doesn't have anything to do with what really happened. It has to do with assigning blame to anyone but the perpetrator, so log as "anyone" is someone in the gun industry.

That's true, for sure, but once you open a can of worms, there's no telling what will come out.

 

[soonerwings]

That's true, for sure, but once you open a can of worms, there's no telling what will come out.

Um...worms?

 

[MadDogs]

New litigation of something that has been tried unsuccessfully before.

Besides, if they would only put seven rounds in their magazines/clips there would be no need for such frivolous lawsuits.