These two should be sued instead, as they are far more complicit than the firearms manufacturer and dealer.
Posted on 05/24/2018 9:28:02 AM PDT by Simon Green
The families of two victims of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas shooting on Wednesday sued the maker and seller of the weapon used in the rampage, claiming they should be held partially responsible for what Nikolas Cruz did with it.
The parents of Jaime Guttenberg and Alex Schachter want a judge to clear the way for them to claim damages against American Outdoor Brands, formerly known as Smith & Wesson, and Sunrise Tactical Supply. The Coral Springs store is where Cruz purchased the AR-15-style weapon used in the Feb. 14 shooting spree.
Fred and Jennifer Guttenberg, and Max Schachter “seek to hold defendants legally responsible for their complicity in the entirely foreseeable, deadly use of the assault-style weapons that they place on the market,” according to the lawsuit, filed in Broward Circuit
Before the lawsuit can go forward, their attorneys said, judges have to clarify that gun manufacturers and sellers can be sued by victims.
“A confusingly written Florida statute stands in the way,” the attorneys wrote. “If the defendants claim that [the law] entitles them to immunity from such claims, and the courts agree,” the victims will be forced to pay the gun maker’s and seller’s legal fees instead of recovering damages.
The 2001 law, Florida Statute 790.331, explicitly prohibits state, county and city government agencies from suing businesses over the legal manufacture and sale of weapons that are later used unlawfully. The law is silent on whether victims can sue on those grounds.
The same law allows governments and victims to sue over defects in the weapons, but “the potential of a firearm or ammunition to cause serious injury, damage, or death as a result of normal function does not constitute a defective condition of the product.”
(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...
I’m not reading this tripe. They’re suing because “it’ll show the gun companies what they’re doing is wrong”. Oh, and they’ll be glad to settle out of court I’ll bet!!
“A confusingly written Florida statute stands in the way,” the attorneys wrote. “If the defendants claim that [the law] entitles them to immunity from such claims, and the courts agree,” the victims will be forced to pay the gun maker’s and seller’s legal fees instead of recovering damages.
Right-then call Ford when someone dies in a crash
Who is behind this stupidity?
Finding a liberal Judge who will “make” the appropriate law allowing the suit to move forward in 3-2-1.....
Loser-pays should be the standard for civil suits, IMO.
Federal law already prohibits such suits. SLAP suits can land the lawyers in hot water.
This means a person could sue a auto dealer and the auto manufacturer when a drunk driver kills someone...
“Right-then call Ford when someone dies in a crash”
Happens if that Ford is the cause. But if not the cause of the crash (operator action), no suit possible.
Twas ever thus......
KYPD
Lawyers
then automakers are also ‘complicit’ when people use vehicles to murder other people- knife manufacturers are complicit when people die from knives- 5 gallon pail makers are ‘complicit’ when kids drown in buckets- toothbrush makers are ‘complicit’ when people choke to death accidentally- etc etc etc=-
That’s absurd of course.
Those promoting victim disarmament do not care about the rule of law or logic.
They want the guns gone (at least for others).
They are simply saying guns are bad, bad, bad.
They are likely to pay a lot of court fees and lawyers fees.
The problem, of course, is that there are leftist judges that do not care for the rule of law, either.
Some of them are on the Supreme Court.
Just like a car manufacturer is ‘complicit’ when a drunk driver kills.
Unless the guns were defective, this is stupid
These two should be sued instead, as they are far more complicit than the firearms manufacturer and dealer.
In addition to the Florida statute, this suit also falls afoul of 15 U.S.C. §§ 7901-7903 (Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act).
Hags. Housewives Against GunS. aka moms demand action funded by bloomberg. The usual suspects.
Fine - then I can sue the parkland victims for infringing my rights to gun ownership.
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.