Remington Lawsuit - 1911Forum
1911Forum
Advertise Here
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > >

Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-12-2019, 10:12 AM
Retired AF CE Retired AF CE is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Arlington Washington
Posts: 4,961
Remington Lawsuit

It looks like the Supreme Court says Remington can be sued over Sandy Hook.

I am considering buying a couple of their products including a 1911.

Who is with me?

I personally don't care if they are poorly made or a series 80 design.

I will buy something from them!
__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a FREE State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-12-2019, 10:33 AM
Captain H Captain H is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Age: 50
Posts: 473
That was the Connecticut Supreme Court. It will not get thru the US Supreme Court IMHO. If it did every car and motorcycle company would be out of buiseness in a year. We will see I guess.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-12-2019, 10:34 AM
byern byern is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 407
Supreme Court will allow Sandy Hook families to move forward in suit against gunmaker

Wonder if Remington will appeal to the US Supreme Court.


https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/12/supr...gton-guns.html
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #4  
Old 11-12-2019, 10:36 AM
Captain H Captain H is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Age: 50
Posts: 473
Wow I stand corrected. The SCOTUS shot the appeal down.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-12-2019, 10:51 AM
VoceNoctum VoceNoctum is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Fla
Posts: 1,258
The Arms law was specifically passed because of the attempt to bankrupt manufacturers through lawsuits for everything.

Granted, they are just allowing the case to go to discovery, so they will need to then show that it fits into the exemption of the Arms law. I cant' see any way it could prove they targeted school shooters or something equally silly like that, and I'm not familiar with any video game having Bushmaster rifles at the time, at Bushmasters request?

So it's just going to mean money wasted by Remington, as most of the lawsuits are intended to do.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-12-2019, 11:09 AM
rliebeck rliebeck is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 35
This WAS the U.S. Supreme Court. There is no where else to appeal it to.
__________________
NRA Instructor & Range Safety Officer

Life Member: NRA (Benefactor), GOA, SAF, CCRKBA, USPSA, SCSA, ICORE, GSSF, NAGR, Coalition of NJ Firearms Owners, NJ 2nd Amendment Society * Annual Member: FPC, IALEFI, ILEETA
Alumni: Gunsite, LFI, ASAA
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-12-2019, 11:10 AM
TjB101 TjB101 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Posts: 807
So not good
__________________
If at first your don't succeed, Reload
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-12-2019, 11:29 AM
Akbowman Akbowman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Alaska
Posts: 174
Not only does this present a huge threat to firearms manufacturers, but the precedent this establishes can have some absolutely huge unintended consequences.
__________________
Criminals prefer unarmed victims. Dictators prefer unarmed citizens. Member-NRA, GOA, FNRA, FPC, SAF, NAGR, and USN vet.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-12-2019, 11:41 AM
USMM guy USMM guy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Rural VA
Posts: 21,991
Maybe not.

It was allowed under a pretty narrow ruling. This being that an improper marketing strategy was used. That marketing was directed towards young people to be inclusive of even a video game. We will of course see going forward.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-12-2019, 12:07 PM
rliebeck rliebeck is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 35
On the face of it, this lawsuit is patently ridiculous. The exemption to the firearms manufacturers' protection law is for advertising the product to be used for, or useful for, illegal activities. I probably have not seen every Remington advertisement ever made, but I have never seen one saying "Remington: The gun of choice for school shooters" or "When you're thinking about committing a shopping mall massacre, think Remington."

Remington ads, for their "tactical" firearms, have always been focused on self & third-party defense, survival, and law enforcement utility.

Even if Remington WAS marketing their rifles for illegal uses, it wouldn't come into play in this case. The shooter didn't see a Remington ad and say, "Gee, that's the ticket. I need to go out and buy a Remington to use for my school massacre." He broke into his mother's gun safe and stole the rifle! How on earth any court could entertain, let alone allow, an "improper marketing" argument in this case completely boggles my mind.
__________________
NRA Instructor & Range Safety Officer

Life Member: NRA (Benefactor), GOA, SAF, CCRKBA, USPSA, SCSA, ICORE, GSSF, NAGR, Coalition of NJ Firearms Owners, NJ 2nd Amendment Society * Annual Member: FPC, IALEFI, ILEETA
Alumni: Gunsite, LFI, ASAA
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-12-2019, 12:22 PM
HT77 HT77 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by USMM guy View Post
It was allowed under a pretty narrow ruling. This being that an improper marketing strategy was used. That marketing was directed towards young people to be inclusive of even a video game. We will of course see going forward.
They claim that Remington marketed the weapon “as a highly lethal weapon designed for purposes that are illegal — namely, killing other human beings.”


Well that isn't true either if the killing of other humans qualifies as legal self defense. If the case proceeds under a Lefty Obama type judge or a jury of liberal morons, they won't care about narrowness or the wording of the ruling. All they want is an opening and this might be it. Once again, another opportunity for a renegade judiciary to negate the law. This is how they do it.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-12-2019, 12:38 PM
Plantar5 Plantar5 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 6,577
Ridiculous. Of all the 2A issues scotus could take up. I hope it fails miserably.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-12-2019, 12:41 PM
Robotaz Robotaz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 62
The attorneys are just using them hoping for a class action afterwards that makes them billions.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-12-2019, 12:45 PM
LW McVay's Avatar
LW McVay LW McVay is offline
Adminstrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 18,300
Quote:
Originally Posted by robotaz View Post
the attorneys are just using them hoping for a class action afterwards that makes them billions.
100%
__________________
"Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more. You should never do less." - Gen. Robert E. Lee
RLTW!
"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace." - Thomas Paine
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-12-2019, 12:52 PM
goaround28 goaround28 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,969
This is a very narrow marketing lawsuit only that just happens to involve firearms. The SCOTUS was right to deny, but sadly the left will both see and spin it as supporting their anti 2A position. We need to remind people this is theatre and not the destruction and impending doom the anti's are claming.
__________________
"A 1911 catches the eye in a way that only a true icon can. The gun is a part of our national fabric..."
- AC

Last edited by goaround28; 11-12-2019 at 12:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-12-2019, 12:53 PM
Frank Vaccaro Frank Vaccaro is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: S.W. Montana
Posts: 1,311
I guess it shouldn't but it escapes me how if you run down a little old lady in a crosswalk, it's your fault. A criminal guns down an innocent person & it's the guns & uninvolved gun owners fault?
__________________
U.S.A. RIDE FOR THE BRAND OR LEAVE!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-12-2019, 12:55 PM
1911_Kid 1911_Kid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 6,680
Dodge markets their Demon as the bad'est production car on the road. So if an idiot driver gets one by legal or illegal means and kills 10 people, victims can sue Dodge?

Seems like no maker of anything can market their stuff as "the best" any longer.

Makes no sense. Not sure SCOTUS is all good.
__________________
Citizens for 2A
"We choose truth over facts" - Joe Biden (Iowa Aug 2019)
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-12-2019, 12:59 PM
LW McVay's Avatar
LW McVay LW McVay is offline
Adminstrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 18,300
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1911_Kid View Post
Dodge markets their Demon as the bad'est production car on the road. So if an idiot driver gets one by legal or illegal means and kills 10 people, victims can sue Dodge?

Seems like no maker of anything can market their stuff as "the best" any longer.

Makes no sense. Not sure SCOTUS is all good.
Gee, what was your first clue?
__________________
"Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more. You should never do less." - Gen. Robert E. Lee
RLTW!
"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace." - Thomas Paine
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-12-2019, 01:07 PM
goaround28 goaround28 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1911_Kid View Post
Dodge markets their Demon as the bad'est production car on the road. So if an idiot driver gets one by legal or illegal means and kills 10 people, victims can sue Dodge?

I hear ya. But this is where we have to educate the left. The Remingtong suit isn't that broad. If Dodge marketed the Demon in the same way that the Plaintifs are saying Remington did with their guns, then Dodge could be in the same position.



Now, no one in their right mind can think that the POS who shot up the school did so based on Remington's advertising. But that's all the left has because of the wide 2005 Federal protection already in place.


Had the SCOTUS granted, the theatre of spin would have only been bigger than it is now.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 1911_Kid View Post
Seems like no maker of anything can market their stuff as "the best" any longer.

And that's the unfortunate part!
__________________
"A 1911 catches the eye in a way that only a true icon can. The gun is a part of our national fabric..."
- AC
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-12-2019, 01:17 PM
byern byern is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 407
Quote:
Originally Posted by rliebeck View Post
This WAS the U.S. Supreme Court. There is no where else to appeal it to.
Right on. Read it incorrectly. However, after the State Court gets done, it can then be appealed back to the USSC. Could take years.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-12-2019, 01:19 PM
Plantar5 Plantar5 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 6,577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robotaz View Post
The attorneys are just using them hoping for a class action afterwards that makes them billions.
Right. These blood suckers couldn’t give a rats azz about the families.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-12-2019, 01:27 PM
HT77 HT77 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plantar5 View Post
Right. These blood suckers couldn’t give a rats azz about the families.
Most of the family members only care about the money and trying to punish the gun manufacturer. These are people who fight against arming teachers and administrators.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-12-2019, 01:59 PM
Robotaz Robotaz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by HT77 View Post
Most of the family members only care about the money and trying to punish the gun manufacturer. These are people who fight against arming teachers and administrators.


I don’t know. I try to put myself in their shoes and figure it sounds good to punish anyone you can pin responsibility on. Not saying I would, but I can imagine it.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-12-2019, 02:33 PM
Ginge Ginge is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 193
Its tyranny. This is merely the stepping stone for the rest of the sheep to follow suit in bypassing the 2A. Another blow to liberty, another nail in the coffin for our dying republic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-12-2019, 02:37 PM
wccphd wccphd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 62
I see this more as a back door way to destroy the Second Amendment. It would be interesting to learn who actually is paying the bill (behind the scenes) for the lawyers. I'll bet its one of the Soros/Bloomberg organizations.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:43 AM.


NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS SITE: By continuing to use this site, you certify that you have read and agree to abide by the Legal Terms of Use. All information, data, text or other materials ("Content") posted to this site by any users are the sole responsibility of those users. 1911Forum does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such Content.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2015 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved