Posted on 04/15/2016 5:52:01 AM PDT by blueyon
BRIDGEPORT, Conn. – A lawsuit can go forward against the maker of the rifle used in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings, a judge ruled Thursday.
Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis said that a 2005 federal law protecting gun-makers from lawsuits does not prevent lawyers for the victims' families from arguing that the semi-automatic rifle is a military weapon and should not have been sold to civilians.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
This will eventually be thrown out as just another legal boondoggle clogging the courts.
The only winners will be the lawyers, as always.
Great way to waste a lot of time and a lot of money!
And, of course, the fact that it lacked selective fire capability, and was not in a production run for the DOD or other military is irrelevant, apparently. . .
This is exactly the type of frivolous lawsuit the Federal law was designed and intended to prevent. This ruling will be reversed on appeal.
Can we sue Oldsmobile/GM?
So military snipers use bolt action rifles.
Pretty low bar they are shooting for.
Prior to my boating accident I had numerous semi auto rifles in various calibers that would do the job just as effectively as the Bushmaster would. Of course they had walnuts stocks, not the scary black finish like the deadly Bushmaster.
Maybe Judge Barbara Bellis would say so.
I want cars and swimming pools outlawed. More people die in cars and more kids drown than get shot.
Joshua Koskoff, a lawyer for the families, argues there is an exception in the federal law that allows litigation against companies that know, or should know, that their weapons are likely to be used in a way that risks injury to others.
Why would anyone write this into the law? It's a weapon, that's its job.
What’s amazing is that their argument basically boils down to “the gun looks scary, and they used pictures of people in military uniforms in their advertising”
These people (including the judge) really are stupid.
Yep. Like the Ruger mini-14. You can buy the ultra-tactical version which looks at first glance like a scary black AR type rifle or you can buy the ranch version (walnut stock) which looks a a .22 farm gun for critters. Both have the exact same functionality (semi-auto, 5.56 caliber).
Sorry sister, this ain't happening.
This is just another gambit to remove guns from America. Limit ammo, trace ammo, universal registration, anything to make us totally dependent upon the liberal class in D.C. The 2nd amendment is the only thing separating us from Australia, Europe, and the rest of the unarmed western world.
FYI, text of the law can be found here
“This ruling will be reversed on appeal.”
I have a feeling that a lot of Obama’s judicial appointees are going to ‘re-interpret’ the law, as they see fit.
I hope I’m wrong.
Great opportunity to tell the gun grabbers they are wrong.
You would think the lesser courts would respect ‘stare desisis’, particularly when it was a Supreme Court decision.
The 2nd amendment doesn’t rule out military weapons, in fact it’s purpose was that an armed people should have military weapons.
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.