Their argument has always been that its too painful for the parents. Of course that doesn't work for us, but there are plenty suckers out there that believe propaganda that appeals to emotion.
Why would a gun manufacturer want school records? It sounds like they are planning on arguing there is no proof the victims were actually students at that school. That can't be what they plan to argue in court, can it?
Is there something more to the story that is not obvious?
At most they would need attendance records. The lawyers are asking for years worth or report cards and other bullshit for only a few of the teachers and students. It looks like lawyers trying to make money through work for other lawyers, as lawyers tend to do.
Can't believe everyone here is on the sides of scummy lawyers for a gun company. Pretty fucked.
This is a nuisance lawsuit that legally should have been barred by the PLCAA, except the "scummy lawyers" for the plaintiff made up a bullshit story that they can prove Remington deliberately marketed their guns to attract the shooter. (Doubly ridiculous as the shooter didn't buy the gun, but stole it fr his mom)
Firearm makers are the only business that a court would even consider holding responsible for the criminal misuse of their product, as the concept is laughable and it's only allowed at all because people like you think gun makers are evil.
I support Remington making it as painful and costly as possible for these plaintiffs, as that was their only reason for bringing suit against Remington.
Why would you need or want to seal records of dead kids unless they didn't exist.
Their argument has always been that its too painful for the parents. Of course that doesn't work for us, but there are plenty suckers out there that believe propaganda that appeals to emotion.
If its too painful, why are they in court where they likely have to be on the stand about it?
Why would a gun manufacturer want school records? It sounds like they are planning on arguing there is no proof the victims were actually students at that school. That can't be what they plan to argue in court, can it?
Is there something more to the story that is not obvious?
Asking for records is called "discovery", thats how it always works.
https://engine.presearch.org/search?q=Lets+talk+about+sandy+hook
Of course, but why attendance records unless they are considering arguing that there is insufficient evidence of the children existing.
At most they would need attendance records. The lawyers are asking for years worth or report cards and other bullshit for only a few of the teachers and students. It looks like lawyers trying to make money through work for other lawyers, as lawyers tend to do.
Can't believe everyone here is on the sides of scummy lawyers for a gun company. Pretty fucked.
go fuck yourself
Of course a guy with the handle richard nixon would be against guns lolololol.
This is a nuisance lawsuit that legally should have been barred by the PLCAA, except the "scummy lawyers" for the plaintiff made up a bullshit story that they can prove Remington deliberately marketed their guns to attract the shooter. (Doubly ridiculous as the shooter didn't buy the gun, but stole it fr his mom)
Firearm makers are the only business that a court would even consider holding responsible for the criminal misuse of their product, as the concept is laughable and it's only allowed at all because people like you think gun makers are evil.
I support Remington making it as painful and costly as possible for these plaintiffs, as that was their only reason for bringing suit against Remington.
Some other article said that is common practice for cases like this. Idk though I’m smooth brained