Posted on 12/15/2014 9:37:46 AM PST by Boomer
HARTFORD, Conn. – The families of nine of the 26 people killed and a teacher wounded two years ago at the Sandy Hook Elementary School filed a lawsuit Monday against the manufacturer, distributor and seller of the rifle used in the shooting.
The negligence and wrongful death lawsuit, filed in Bridgeport Superior Court, asserts that the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle should not have been made publicly available because it was designed for military use and is unsuited for hunting or home defense.
"The AR-15 was specifically engineered for the United States military to meet the needs of changing warfare," attorney Josh Koskoff said in a release. "In fact, one of the Army's specifications for the AR-15 was that it has the capability to penetrate a steel helmet."
In addition to Bushmaster, the defendants are Camfour, a firearm distributor, and Riverview Gun Sales, the East Windsor store where the gunman's mother purchased the Bushmaster rifle in 2010.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
This is a self defense firearm and in no way is the same as what the military uses other than how it looks. Those scary black rifles you know.
I hope this lawsuit finds itself kicked out of court on the grounds of being ludicrous.
Under Miller vs US, the Supreme Court ruled that ONLY arms suitable for militia use were protected by the 2A.
As was the .30-06 cartridge, the .45ACP, the Colt 1911, the 7.62x51, the Jeep, etc.
“”The AR-15 was specifically engineered for the United States military to meet the needs of changing warfare,” attorney Josh Koskoff said in a release. “
Perhaps he is correct.
So let us conduct an experiment.
We’ll take the AR and fire one bullet into his left leg.
We’ll take a Ruger Ranch Rifle (fires the same cartridges) and send a bullet into his other leg.
We can then assess the damage to determine which gun is “mo bad”.
by definition every firearm is suitable for the militia because the militia bring their own. IMO
I would really like to have an M3 Grease gun. That was a fun little critter to shoot. It was also the first weapon that was my personal issue weapon when I went into the Reserves in ‘85.
I miss that gun.
Another SLAPP suit. I hope that the defendants recover their legal fees from the plaintiffs.
Dumb asses!
The deliberate ignorance here is staggering.
Only because they can’t sue mom or her whacked out son from Neptune.
Follow the money. It will fail, of course.
Companies cannot be held liable if their product works as designed to di. They cannot control what somebody will do with it.
If I ran my car into a car, you can’t sue Ford.
Isn’t there a federal law that protects FFL holders and firearms manufactures from this type of frivolous lawsuit?
Well, good for them. Now bushmaster can ask for the evidence/proof that their rifle was the murder weapon. So far I believe this was an orchestrated cover up. This is why not one surveilece photo has been released. It would be very clear there was no rifle present. They had cameras all over the school. Show me one image of the perp carrying a rifle. And the interview with the coroner, looked pretty obvious her was very uncomfortable trying to say it was the rifle.
Even if she did keep it under lock and key, he probably knew how to get at it. The kid lived in the house, probably knew where the key was (or otherwise knew how to get into the safe), and even if he was thoroughly locked out of the safe he could still get in as his goal was far worse than merely tearing a most-likely cheap safe open with a crowbar & hacksaw.
“I hope this lawsuit finds itself kicked out of court on the grounds of being ludicrous.”
I do too, but I smell Bloomberg money behind this.
Nine of 26 families leaves 17 families who are not joining this suit. Highly likely that there are some who are pursuing a different law suit BUT equally likely that there are some who know it is the fault of the trigger-puller and his deluded mother who enabled him. A tool (gun) that properly functions, is a target because the legal system looks for the ‘deep pockets’ and insurance policies.
FYI: Any and Every lawyer, good/bad, is the equivalent of the hired gunslinger from the old west. He or she will say anything and claim everything to forward their client’s lawsuit or defense. This does not malign them nor praise them, it is just a reminder that their statements only have as much facts and truth behind them as they choose to use.
So what if it’s a military design? Sure it’s the same as what the military uses, other than having full-auto capability (which soldiers are discouraged from using; place each shot!). The difference between an AR15 and M16 is a chunk of metal and a different shaped
And heck yeah that’s what I want for home defense. After much study & consideration, that’s what I settled on: short-barreled AR15 suppressed. Need to know that it will penetrate whatever needs penetrating, has sufficient stopping power, and has greater capacity & faster cycling than I’ll need - because needing more than what’s available in a firefight gets you killed.
Don’t downplay the military angle of the equipment. The point is to defend 1/300,000,000th of the US population from prepared attack. A home invader may very well have body armor, rifles, and an organized team. There is no ideal weapon for home defense, but there are optimal balances of various factors - AR15 showing quite well.
Certainly should get kicked out, and methinks there is now a law preventing lawful gun manufacturers/resellers from being sued for unquestionably legal activity.
This is so idiotic as to be breathtaking.
Rifles are used in murder less than half as often as hands and feet.
Rifles of all kinds are used less commonly in murder than either shotguns or handguns.
Yet they sue this manufacturer for producing a rifle that is one of the least commonly used in crime?
Facts and logic do not matter to the left.
It is a bill of rights not “needs”.
Around six years ago, my dad was nearing 78 and a rural farmer. He was shown a AR-15 by a neighbor, and ended up going out to buy one. I was rather surprised about this, but he added the benefits.
The gun was light and the grip was perfect for a older guy with light arthritis. The ammo magazine could be prefilled and ready to go. For coyotes and wild dogs messing with the cattle...you could retrieve the gun easily from the truck and be ready to fire in two seconds. For the local rural population around where I grew up...I’d say that sixty percent of the farms now have a AR-15 and by 2020...it’ll be 100-percent.
The overall problem I see is some idiots trying assemble a phrase or language which says automatic rifles, or assault rifles...are anything other than a rifle with three simple capabilities. The minute we crossed the line and had an automatic capability...you could have predicted a hundred years ago where this is going.
We can even predict that within thirty years....a non-ammo weapon will be available for the public, which will ‘zap’ a guy from a hundred feet away. What will the non-gun crowd say then? A metalic rod device....battery within it....some type of laser-device...operating on a rapid-fire principal?
For home defense, it’s a lot easier to work the corners with a compact weapon than a long rifle or shotgun. And the smaller .223 bullet is less likely to go thru walls and into a neighbor’s house.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.