Olly wrote:http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Families-of-Newtown-Shooting-Victims-Sue-Bushmaster-Gun-Seller-285819681.html
Families if the new town shooting are suing Bushmaster.
Protection of arms commerce act 2005. They can't win shit.
Olly wrote:http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Families-of-Newtown-Shooting-Victims-Sue-Bushmaster-Gun-Seller-285819681.html
Families if the new town shooting are suing Bushmaster.
Olly wrote: We're still the bastard pirates of the duck forum world.
Duckdog wrote:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act
Olly wrote:Duckdog wrote:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act
Another article I read said that Connecticut has a state law that might allow this because they are arguing that Bushmaster misrepresented the rifles by not rightfully explaining how dangerous they are. That's their angle.
Olly wrote: We're still the bastard pirates of the duck forum world.
The Duck Hammer wrote:Olly wrote:Duckdog wrote:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act
Another article I read said that Connecticut has a state law that might allow this because they are arguing that Bushmaster misrepresented the rifles by not rightfully explaining how dangerous they are. That's their angle.
Can't work. If it does that's absolute shit. Case in point. A rapist breaks into your house attempting to rape your girlfriend, she pulls out your scary black gun and kills the motherfucker. Then said motherfuckers family sues bushmaster for the rapist death. Yeah, I don't think so.
Olly wrote:The Duck Hammer wrote:Olly wrote:Duckdog wrote:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act
Another article I read said that Connecticut has a state law that might allow this because they are arguing that Bushmaster misrepresented the rifles by not rightfully explaining how dangerous they are. That's their angle.
Can't work. If it does that's absolute shit. Case in point. A rapist breaks into your house attempting to rape your girlfriend, she pulls out your scary black gun and kills the motherfucker. Then said motherfuckers family sues bushmaster for the rapist death. Yeah, I don't think so.
Did you forget how the liberal mindset works?
Olly wrote: We're still the bastard pirates of the duck forum world.
Olly wrote: We're still the bastard pirates of the duck forum world.
The Duck Hammer wrote:The US legal system is a fucking joke sometimes. Bushmaster will probably settle out of court on this one though. Wish theyd fight it just to see how itd turn out.
Olly wrote: We're still the bastard pirates of the duck forum world.
The Duck Hammer wrote:Regardless of bushmaster's standings what happens when the come after FN, Wilson Combat, or Berretta? Still no big deal?
Olly wrote:The Duck Hammer wrote:Regardless of bushmaster's standings what happens when the come after FN, Wilson Combat, or Berretta? Still no big deal?
Who said it wasn't a big deal? I was saying Bushmaster is a joke and will roll over. Other companies like Barrett Arms and Magpul Industries have proven they will not be rolled over like this.
Olly wrote: We're still the bastard pirates of the duck forum world.
Woody wrote:Olly wrote:Woody wrote:A settlement outside of court sets no precedent legally speaking. It may encourage victims and their families to follow suit, but eventually they will try it on a company that will stand up and once that happens it will end.
Their settlement just postpones the inevitable. That is if they settle.
Isn't it common in law suits to site past settlements as kind of "giving in". I'm probably wrong though.
I'm pretty sure common law precedent is only for cases decided over by a judge and taken to trial.
AKPirate wrote:Jason is usually right but sometimes wrong
rebelp74 wrote:Yeah I have a yacht, suck it bitches!
Feelin' Fowl wrote:Unfortunately, that New Town family is going to get paid for the B.S. lawsuit.
Kinda like that woman didn't know that coffee from McDonalds is hot.
NuffDaddy wrote:This thread has been getting awfully political lately.
Feelin' Fowl wrote:Unfortunately, that New Town family is going to get paid for the B.S. lawsuit.
Kinda like that woman didn't know that coffee from McDonalds is hot.
Woody wrote:Feelin' Fowl wrote:Unfortunately, that New Town family is going to get paid for the B.S. lawsuit.
Kinda like that woman didn't know that coffee from McDonalds is hot.
You may want to read up on that hot coffee case... If I am not mistaken the lady got third degree burns and the coffee was thought to be nearly 300*F. She had a real case and should have won.
Olly wrote:Woody wrote:Feelin' Fowl wrote:Unfortunately, that New Town family is going to get paid for the B.S. lawsuit.
Kinda like that woman didn't know that coffee from McDonalds is hot.
You may want to read up on that hot coffee case... If I am not mistaken the lady got third degree burns and the coffee was thought to be nearly 300*F. She had a real case and should have won.
Wasn't the fact that she claimed she didn't know the coffee was hot that made the case famous? Not that she was burned
Woody wrote:Olly wrote:Woody wrote:Feelin' Fowl wrote:Unfortunately, that New Town family is going to get paid for the B.S. lawsuit.
Kinda like that woman didn't know that coffee from McDonalds is hot.
You may want to read up on that hot coffee case... If I am not mistaken the lady got third degree burns and the coffee was thought to be nearly 300*F. She had a real case and should have won.
Wasn't the fact that she claimed she didn't know the coffee was hot that made the case famous? Not that she was burned
I believe that was made up. What she really claimed was that she didn't expect it to be that hot.
Olly wrote:Woody wrote:Olly wrote:Woody wrote:Feelin' Fowl wrote:Unfortunately, that New Town family is going to get paid for the B.S. lawsuit.
Kinda like that woman didn't know that coffee from McDonalds is hot.
You may want to read up on that hot coffee case... If I am not mistaken the lady got third degree burns and the coffee was thought to be nearly 300*F. She had a real case and should have won.
Wasn't the fact that she claimed she didn't know the coffee was hot that made the case famous? Not that she was burned
I believe that was made up. What she really claimed was that she didn't expect it to be that hot.
Ahhhh how did she even have a case? There is no standard for coffee temps is there?
AKPirate wrote:Jason is usually right but sometimes wrong
Flightstopper wrote:The machine was putting out coffee hotter than mcdonalds intended to. If she claimed she didn't know it was going to be that hot they do that to support their case under the tort of negligence. The money she got basically just covered the reconstructive surgeries to put her hoohah back together.
AKPirate wrote:Jason is usually right but sometimes wrong
Bad17 wrote:Olly yes there is a standard on how hot coffee has to be to be served in a restaurant.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 99 guests