If the point of the Sandy Hook fraud was to get the guns away from citizens, then this lawsuit moving forward is certainly another step in that direction. It could be that once lawyers start digging around for facts, they may find out inconvenient things.
Sandy Hook Families' Lawsuit Against Gun Companies Can Move Forward
- Thread starter YukonGlocker
- Start Date
I rarely use the "like" feature of any kind of website, but yours deserved it. No demeaning, no name calling, just the real hard truth.
I'd like to believe many of the victims families would not have this mindset, if they were not in fact families of victims. They are gripped by emotional turmoil. No amount of assigning blame will ease what they are experiencing. It's just sad they will have to find this out the hard way.
As I age, I find more and more we have become a huge culture of blame and guilt. This is the twisted evil step-twin of what we used to consider Justice. Nobody is willing to accept the answer that sometimes terrible things happen. It must be someone's fault. A feeble attempt to convince ourselves we can somehow control the things that are scary.
The lawsuit is based on the following wording in the federal law (Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act):
(2) To preserve a citizen's access to a supply of firearms and ammunition for all lawful purposes, including hunting, self-defense, collecting, and competitive or recreational shooting.
The lawsuit claims, quite ridiculously, that the AR-15 is a military weapon. That is does not have any legitimate civilian use.
The real "villain" in this case is U.S. District Judge Robert Chatigny (a Clinton appointee) who remanded the case back to state court (without issuing an opinion as to why) instead of simply ruling the case to be merit-less and dismissing it. At some point it will be thrown out. May even be on appeal after the plaintiffs win in state court, but it will be dismissed.
(2) To preserve a citizen's access to a supply of firearms and ammunition for all lawful purposes, including hunting, self-defense, collecting, and competitive or recreational shooting.
The lawsuit claims, quite ridiculously, that the AR-15 is a military weapon. That is does not have any legitimate civilian use.
The real "villain" in this case is U.S. District Judge Robert Chatigny (a Clinton appointee) who remanded the case back to state court (without issuing an opinion as to why) instead of simply ruling the case to be merit-less and dismissing it. At some point it will be thrown out. May even be on appeal after the plaintiffs win in state court, but it will be dismissed.
About point 5: I've heard from someone in law enforcement and who trains LEOs that some officers are just given a rifle to carry in the trunk of their car with no training at all.
It shouldn't be hard to show that these points are ridiculous.
It shouldn't be hard to show that these points are ridiculous.
I thought point #4 was an M-16. The AR-15 came later down the road.
From what I understand is that the judge did some legal gymnastics to rationalize why she ignored federal law. Case should NOT be in either state or federal court.
Last edited by a moderator:
I believe you mean mental gymnastics.
Of Arms and the Law: Thoughts on the Bushmaster Connecticut ruling
According to armsandthelaw blog the ruling isn't nearly as significant as the media is making it out to be
According to armsandthelaw blog the ruling isn't nearly as significant as the media is making it out to be
Lets hope so.
Anything other than "case dismissed with prejudice" is significantly wrong. They shouldn't have to argue the plaintiff has no case because the PLCAA specifically prohibits the case from proceeding.
Similar threads
