September 27, 2004
don't do it
I believe that this is a big mistake. I can understand the financial reasons for doing it, but sometimes that's a piss-poor excuse for allowing yourself to be railroaded by blithering idiots. I would rather die broke than cave to such people.
Two survivors and the families of six slain victims of the 2002 sniper shootings have reached a $2.5 million settlement with the manufacturer of the Bushmaster rifle used during the attacks and the gun shop from which it had been stolen.
The victims' attorneys said yesterday that it was the first time a gunmaker has paid damages for crimes committed with its weapons. The manufacturer, Bushmaster Firearms Inc. of Windham, Maine, "paid damages for negligence leading to the criminal use of a gun," said the victims' co-counsel, Dennis Henigan.
This kind of twisted legal logic is destroying our country. Two thugs STEAL a gun, go on a murderous rampage with it, and somehow THEY aren't responsible for what happened. The gunmaker and the store from which then gun was stolen ARE. Yeah, I can see the sense in that... as long as I keep my head firmly implanted as far up my ass as I can poke it.
Bejus. This settlement is ridiculous and I wouldn't do it. I would spend every last dime I had fighting it. I am no martyr and I am no crusader for idealistic causes, but I just wouldn't take that SHIT from lawyers and whiners looking for a few fast bucks. I'd go down in flames, but I would fight them to the bitter end.
Got-dam. Tell me who are the REAL whores in this country?
Attorneys are definitely the REAL whores in this country---except they have a license to "screw"......Hmmmm?
I agree with you, Acidman.
However, re: "I just wouldn't take that SHIT from lawyers and whiners looking for a few fast bucks" - keep in mind that it's the lawyers that are driving the system. It doesn't matter whether the company settles the case or fights to the bitter end. Either way, the lawyers win.
I'm not sure what the best solution to this situation is. A "Loser pays" reform might be a start, though I think that in that case a lot of shaky lawsuits - ones that would otherwise be thrown out of court - would then be decided for the plaintiff because of juries who think with their emotions instead of their intellect.
I agree wholeheartedly with you Rob.
It was a mistake when the tobacco companies caved as they did, it only showed the leeches (lawyers) a whole new way to milk the cash cow at the expense of personal accountablity.
I know it sounds like a nutty conspiracy theory, but I sometimes wonder if all the GFW groups aren't instigating/using these types of suits to attempt to bankrupt the arms manufacterers? A back door way to negate the Second Amendment....you can own arms, but they will have been made too expensive for the average guy to buy them....
Possible, or did someone slip a tin foil hat on me when I wasn't looking?
I think that the Bushmaster people got told by their insurance company that they were covered up to a certain amount for the lawsuit. They had paid about half of that amount and would cut a check to Bushmaster for the remainder of the coverage and get the fuck out of the mess in court. Bushmaster then made the decision to settle with the victims, giving the money to real people rather than lawyers. Interesting decision, all things considered. I think I read this on Jeff Soyer's 2d amendment site called "Alphecca". I do agree that precedent is all important in these crazy times where lawyers play legal games and wind up millionaires at the expense of us simple people and our constitutional rights. I have seen people give up an unwinnable fight before, but I can't believe it's a good idea to let the lawyer scum keep winning these battles. There may well be a second civil war coming someday. Jerry