CA Judge says Victims of California synagogue shooting can sue gun maker S&W

Button Pusher

Button Pusher

Well-Known Member
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Benefactor
Life Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
29,819
Location
Raleigh
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
A California judge has decided victims of the 2019 synagogue shooting near San Diego that killed one worshiper can sue the manufacturer of the semiautomatic rifle and the gun shop that sold it to the teenage gunman.
Superior Court Judge Kenneth Medel said Wednesday that victims and families in the Poway, California, synagogue shooting have adequately alleged that Smith & Wesson, the nation’s largest gunmaker, knew its AR-15-style rifle could be easily modified into a machine-gun-like or an assault weapon in violation of state law.

news.yahoo.com

Victims of California synagogue shooting can sue gunmaker

A California judge decided victims of the 2019 synagogue shooting near San Diego that killed one worshiper and wounded three can sue the manufacturer of the semiautomatic rifle and the gun shop that sold it to the teenage gunman, according to a newspaper report. Superior Court Judge Kenneth...
news.yahoo.com news.yahoo.com
 
Actually, I think this ruling will establish precedent for future "product misuse" lawsuits.

Potential misuse of high horsepower Camaros, Mustangs, Challengers, etc. "should be known" by their respective manufactures and, therefore, make them just as liable for misuse of their vehicles as S&W would be of their guns.

Then let's see how fast that genie gets stuffed back into the bottle.
 
rcems2000 said:
I hate a life was lost and folks hurt in this incident.

The judges decision is stupid. Does it mean that if I'm rear ended by someone driving a Ford or chevy I can sue the manufacturer. It's total crazy, all this crap comes from California.
Click to expand...
And the dealer that sold it to them.... ridiculous.
 
We all know how this ends. As stupid as that judge's decision was, it is going to end in more heartache and financial loss for the poor families involved.
 
notso556 said:
Actually, I think this ruling will establish precedent for future "product misuse" lawsuits.

Potential misuse of high horsepower Camaros, Mustangs, Challengers, etc. "should be known" by their respective manufactures and, therefore, make them just as liable for misuse of their vehicles as S&W would be of their guns.

Then let's see how fast that genie gets stuffed back into the bottle.
Click to expand...
How about all the distilleries? Surely they know that their product can be abused, leading to death and destruction to others.
 
The complete lack of logic here is almost comical. They just want to sue the mfg’s because they have money and with a few winning suits, they can put them into bankruptcy. This has been tried for decades but fails because it makes no sense.
 
There is already a lawsuit by the Sandy Hook families against Remington over its marketing practices that the SC refused to block and is proceeding.
 
The families will sue. The families will lose. The families will have to pay all court costs for themselves, the gun store, and S&W.

Now the families are sad from losing a family member and poor from losing a frivolous law suit.

This judge should have to pay the court costs, when it's all over, for goading the families into it...
 
While I do feel bad for our freedom loving friends in CA, it is well past time for businesses to tell CA as a state to piss off and no longer do business with anyone on the state, imo.
 
notso556 said:
Actually, I think this ruling will establish precedent for future "product misuse" lawsuits.

Potential misuse of high horsepower Camaros, Mustangs, Challengers, etc. "should be known" by their respective manufactures and, therefore, make them just as liable for misuse of their vehicles as S&W would be of their guns.

Then let's see how fast that genie gets stuffed back into the bottle.
Click to expand...
So can we blame and sue the State of California for child molesters from that State?? Same principal right
 
Last edited:
SPST said:
How about all the distilleries? Surely they know that their product can be abused, leading to death and destruction to others.
Click to expand...
Sue the state of NC because the ABC store sold them their booze.
 
Les White said:
I wasn't aware the rifle used had been converted to FA. How was this rifle "easily converted" as the honerable Comacho contends?
Click to expand...
So I’m commiforniastan, you cannot have a detachable mag. So they mod the mag release so that the mag goes in, but then you have to use a separate tool to get it to release, they call that a bullet button, or you could have a blind mag like an SKS. Also the mag can only hold 10 rounds I think, or must be modded to do so. It’s all patently retarded, but what do you expect from a place that keeps electing ghouls like mad max, feinstien, and pelosi?
 
I was thinkin the precedent would be we could sue the wireless phone companies for accidents while using the phone and driving. Or even the late night drunk dialing calls.
 
Last edited:
Chuckman said:
We all know how this ends. As stupid as that judge's decision was, it is going to end in more heartache and financial loss for the poor families involved.
Click to expand...
Alabamacoastie said:
The families will sue. The families will lose. The families will have to pay all court costs for themselves, the gun store, and S&W.

Now the families are sad from losing a family member and poor from losing a frivolous law suit.

This judge should have to pay the court costs, when it's all over, for goading the families into it...
Click to expand...
I remember the first couple times this happened, the companies won the suit but dropped the requirement to cover legal costs when the public outraged.
Last time I heard it go through, they didn't drop the legal costs. Who cares what "the public" says? The only people who were outraged were the people who weren't buying guns anyway.

What we need is for the gun companies to start investigating illegal campaign contributions, get some leftist politicians and brady people thrown in prison for a spell.
 
Alabamacoastie said:
The families will sue. The families will lose. The families will have to pay all court costs for themselves, the gun store, and S&W.

Now the families are sad from losing a family member and poor from losing a frivolous law suit.

This judge should have to pay the court costs, when it's all over, for goading the families into it...
Click to expand...
the attorneys that bring the suit should have to pay or be disbarred due to filing a frivolous suit that violates the PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE ACT
 
Last edited:
vaskeet said:
the attorneys that bring the suit should have to pay or be disbarred due to filing a frivolous suit that violates the PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE ACT
Click to expand...
Make them do their community service in a gun store, or moping the floors at the NRA headquarters in VA.
 
vaskeet said:
the attorneys that bring the suit should have to pay or be disbarred due to filing a frivolous suit that violates the PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE ACT
Click to expand...
nah, they're trying a different approach, honest mistake. and since they are city prosecutors that will be doing it, they're mostly exempt from being disciplined anyway. Qualified immunity and all that, as long as they THINK what they're doing is okay...

Spartan01 said:
Make them do their community service in a gun store, or moping the floors at the NRA headquarters in VA.
Click to expand...
ever had to clean up under a urinal after old men with prostate problems?
that's a fine punishment
 
vaskeet said:
the attorneys that bring the suit should have to pay or be disbarred due to filing a frivolous suit that violates the PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE ACT
Click to expand...
They should be sued for defrauding their clients by taking their money for a case that will go nowhere.
 
Is portland gonna sue the companies that make black clothes and masks?
 
Doesn't this precedent mean I can now sue the manufacturer of any car I get into an accident with?
 
DrScaryGuy said:
nah, they're trying a different approach, honest mistake. and since they are city prosecutors that will be doing it, they're mostly exempt from being disciplined anyway. Qualified immunity and all that, as long as they THINK what they're doing is okay...
Click to expand...

Criminal prosecutors do not handle civil cases. Or at they do not in NC. But…… we are talking about CA so knows what rules and laws they have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom