I have always thought the lawsuits against the manufacturers need to stop for bad decisions of others. They did not make the people that break the law do what they did. This country has become sue crazy! I have owned guns for sport and hunting and have always believed the safe handling is my responsibility, not the manufacturers. Liability needs to return back to those that break the law or do something reckless. Society always wants to blame someone else, absolutely no personal responsibility anymore!
The lawsuit is NOT about holding gun manufacturers accountable for the bad decisions of others, the suit claims the manufacturer intentionally marketed their guns to children. The only party who can be blamed for Remington intentionally marketing products to children is Remington themselves.
This is nothing but a PR piece for gun control advocates. There is no liability on the manufacturer of the gun. They should be dismissed with costs/fees awarded to the defendant.
Marlboro, Camel, Juul etc were found liable for specifically targeting their advertising towards minors. That means Remington can be found liable for specifically targeting their advertising towards minors too.
Dream on. They aren’t selling fruit-flavored guns. Not to mention that new guns have to be sold by Federally licensed dealers – not a convenience store.
I have always thought the lawsuits against the manufacturers need to stop for bad decisions of others. They did not make the people that break the law do what they did. This country has become sue crazy! I have owned guns for sport and hunting and have always believed the safe handling is my responsibility, not the manufacturers. Liability needs to return back to those that break the law or do something reckless. Society always wants to blame someone else, absolutely no personal responsibility anymore!
The lawsuit is NOT about holding gun manufacturers accountable for the bad decisions of others, the suit claims the manufacturer intentionally marketed their guns to children. The only party who can be blamed for Remington intentionally marketing products to children is Remington themselves.
This is nothing but a PR piece for gun control advocates. There is no liability on the manufacturer of the gun. They should be dismissed with costs/fees awarded to the defendant.
Marlboro, Camel, Juul etc were found liable for specifically targeting their advertising towards minors. That means Remington can be found liable for specifically targeting their advertising towards minors too.
Dream on. They aren’t selling fruit-flavored guns. Not to mention that new guns have to be sold by Federally licensed dealers – not a convenience store.
Retail stores have to register with the Feds to sell nicotine.
There’s a whole Federal department for that.
Do you know what the “T” in ATF stands for?
Would you care to provide a citation that the Federal government requires a retail store to register with them to sell nicotine or tobacco products?