Eeyore
Regular Member
BLUF: liberal judge wither can't read or can read but chooses to ignore the law
FUQ: "While the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act generally insulates gun companies from liability, Judge Barbara Bellis said the law could be used to attack the legal sufficiency of the plaintiffs' claims, but not to have the case thrown out at this early stage."
http://www.courant.com/news/connect...-lawsuit-dismissal-denied-20160414-story.html
I hope this ruling will end up being overturned by a higher court and thus become a distinction without a difference, but one never knows. As I understand it, the so-called argument that the plaintiffs are making is that Remington marketed the Evil Black Rifle as as an Evil Black Rifle (gasp!). By appealing to Adam Lanza and who knows how many other terrorists, army-ranger-wannabes, etc., they "negligently entrusted" "military-grade hardware" to a host of dangerous mental defectives (because anybody that wants one must be homicidally crazy).
I don't need to point out the numerous laughable flaws in the plaintiffs' assertions. In many ways, the plaintiffs are just "useful idiots", willing tools of the gun control lobby. But this definitely bears watching by everybody because an activist judge is seeking to undermine/bypass/moot the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
FUQ: "While the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act generally insulates gun companies from liability, Judge Barbara Bellis said the law could be used to attack the legal sufficiency of the plaintiffs' claims, but not to have the case thrown out at this early stage."
http://www.courant.com/news/connect...-lawsuit-dismissal-denied-20160414-story.html
I hope this ruling will end up being overturned by a higher court and thus become a distinction without a difference, but one never knows. As I understand it, the so-called argument that the plaintiffs are making is that Remington marketed the Evil Black Rifle as as an Evil Black Rifle (gasp!). By appealing to Adam Lanza and who knows how many other terrorists, army-ranger-wannabes, etc., they "negligently entrusted" "military-grade hardware" to a host of dangerous mental defectives (because anybody that wants one must be homicidally crazy).
I don't need to point out the numerous laughable flaws in the plaintiffs' assertions. In many ways, the plaintiffs are just "useful idiots", willing tools of the gun control lobby. But this definitely bears watching by everybody because an activist judge is seeking to undermine/bypass/moot the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.