Conn.Supreme Ct.Rules Remington can be sued for Sandy Hook.

Don’t agree with this.

Unless the ads showed people shooting up schools with the featured product.

 

Does not matter what any of us think about this case. It matters in CT.

 

Libs seem to relish tragedy if it means they can check off one box of their social utopia....taking away the guns.

 

How do you firgue that, Arch? You don't know what libs think.

 

Sure I do. Libs usually think exactly what they've been brainwashed into believing. Libs are followers. Take for example, some of them are so far out there they think Trump is our 1st Russian President.....however moronic that may be.

 

No, cons are brainwashed by the Fake Alt Right Media into believing all sorts of nonsense about libs.

Shoot, many of our cons hope that Trump is indeed a first Russian president, when we know it was really Eisenhower.

 

"The regulation of advertising that threatens the public's health, safety, and morals has long been considered a core exercise of the states' police powers," Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.

Very encouraging news if the courts begin to rule on gun violence as a matter of the public's health and safety.

 

Your overstatement of what liberals believe exposes the weakness of your argument. It isn't that President Bone Spur is a "Russian President." But his election was aided by the Russian President, an enemy of this country to which Baby Donald has given great deference.

 

Yet, still nothing.

 

But Remington shouldn't have to go through defending itself in a lawsuit to begin with.

 

I see what you did there. You took the fact that the gun companies are profiting from the sale of weapons used to kill little kids and tried to make the parents seeking restitution the bad guys. It would be clever if it wasn't so transparent.

 

Are you saying that there should be no gun companies that make and sell weapons?

 

Is this going to open the doors for Beta males to file suit against Axe body spray?

 

It's going to make Ford liable for anyone killed in a crash involving a Ford. It's going to make a rope manufacturer liable for someone committing suicide with a rope.

 

And you want to blame a company for a crime committed by someone with their stolen product. There is zero difference between this lawsuit and on brought by the family of someone killed by someone else recklessly driving a stolen car.

 

Getting a settlement involves proving two degrees of separation and each degree makes it harder They have to prove it was purchased because of the advertising and then prove that advertising had anything to do with the boy using that particular gun. They will most likely stall on the second because it is very likely she would have bought a gun regardless which had the same capability. A large magazine semiautomatic.

 

Lets wait and see EXACTLY what the trial brings, it's not going to be tried on the internet.

 

It's because of ads like this that has caused the trouble for Remington. Some feel they crossed an imaginary line. I agree.


https://www.google.com/search?q=rem...wKHYWqB-kQ9QEwB3oECAUQDA#imgrc=ccNQ2TT1wsXWKM:

 

Really quite funny. Any one that is a follower of trump should know better than accuse someone else of being brainwashed. Donald trump is the Jim Jones of the 21st century.

 

I think I need to go see my lawyer, I have an idea...

 

In my opinion, people who kill are responsible for their own actions

 

Opinions are like butt holes, we all have one.

 

What??!!?? An activist court not paying attention to the law??? Say it isn't so!

 

That is a stupid add IMO, but what makes you think it crosses the line?

 

I hear. You want to blame a company for some deranged lunatics behavior whereas I only want to blame the person who did the deed. Do you think Ford should get sued when someone use one of their cars to mow down people on purpose?