Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

deminks

(11,014 posts)
Tue Jun 14, 2016, 03:27 PM Jun 2016

In Newtown Families’ Suit Against Maker of the AR-15 Rifle, Surprising Progress

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/15/nyregion/in-newtown-families-suit-against-maker-of-the-ar-15-rifle-surprising-progress.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fus&_r=0

For two years, a group of families in Newtown, Conn., quietly laid the groundwork for a legal case against the maker and sellers of the assault rifle that on Dec. 14, 2012, claimed their loved ones’ lives — and shattered their own — in less than five minutes.

The shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, which killed 26 people, was carried out with an AR-15, a military-style assault rifle that has surfaced in recent mass shootings, from Aurora, Colo., to San Bernardino, Calif. On the eve of a hearing to determine whether the lawsuit can proceed, a rifle similar to the AR-15 was used yet again — in an attack at an Orlando nightclub early Sunday morning, the deadliest shooting in American history.

The legal challenge faces long odds, and a key hearing next week will determine its future. But the lawsuit has already progressed further than many had expected — a judge has set a trial date and has ordered the defendants to turn over documents — and no matter the outcome, it represents a muscular campaign against the powerful gun industry.

(end snip)

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
In Newtown Families’ Suit Against Maker of the AR-15 Rifle, Surprising Progress (Original Post) deminks Jun 2016 OP
the "slippery slope" argument is bullshit. The AR-15 is not a hunting rifle anymore than an Uzi is mikehiggins Jun 2016 #1
... Crepuscular Jun 2016 #2
It makes a fine hunting rifle. Accurate, light recoil and quite modular. Plus the ability Waldorf Jun 2016 #4
And it works the same way when hunting humans gratuitous Jun 2016 #5
This judge Crepuscular Jun 2016 #3
The lawyers for the families are going to have to pay the lawyer fees and I doubt they will be cheap yeoman6987 Jun 2016 #6
yep Crepuscular Jun 2016 #7

mikehiggins

(5,614 posts)
1. the "slippery slope" argument is bullshit. The AR-15 is not a hunting rifle anymore than an Uzi is
Tue Jun 14, 2016, 03:41 PM
Jun 2016

It is a well designed weapon aimed at one goal: the mutilation and murder of as many as possible as quickly as possible. I can recall the tests of the prototype vs the more mundane M-14. The differences between the weapons and more especially the ammo were obvious.

One was a traditional weapon, an outgrowth of the M1 familiar to many WWII and Korea vets. The other was a killing machine designed to put down an opponent with severe injuries and/or death as quickly as possible. How does this translate to civilian life? It doesn't. Like the AK-47 it has no civilian purpose other than being the weapon of choice for mass murderers.

Banning weapons like that do not constitute a move towards banning all weapon anymore than banning Oxycontin would constitute a move towards banning pain killers.

You do not "walk away" when shot with one of these weapons, no matter what TV or Dirty Harry movies might suggest. There are no "flesh wounds". These weapons should not be in the hands of private citizens under the justification of the Second Amendment anymore than screaming "fire" in a crowded theatre is protected by the First.

Grownups have to make distinctions.

Crepuscular

(1,057 posts)
2. ...
Tue Jun 14, 2016, 03:58 PM
Jun 2016

Bullshit because you say so? I hate to break it to you but the AR15 is used for hunting by hundreds of thousands of people in this country every year.

You may also be surprised to find that the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with hunting, either. Your analogy employing screaming fire is a lame one, as ownership of a weapon is passive, while shouting in a theater is active. Possessing vocal cords and owning a weapon is the accurate analogy, what you do with those objects is what results in the problem.

Waldorf

(654 posts)
4. It makes a fine hunting rifle. Accurate, light recoil and quite modular. Plus the ability
Tue Jun 14, 2016, 04:10 PM
Jun 2016

to swap out different upper calibers while keeping the same lower receiver is a big plus.

Here it Texas it is the preferred rifle for hog hunting as those can be dangerous animals to hunt and it offers the ability to follow up quickly with a 2nd or 3rd shot if needed.

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
5. And it works the same way when hunting humans
Tue Jun 14, 2016, 04:14 PM
Jun 2016

Very versatile, the choice of shooting enthusiasts from Newtown to San Bernardino, from Roseburg to Orlando. They're everywhere!

Crepuscular

(1,057 posts)
3. This judge
Tue Jun 14, 2016, 04:00 PM
Jun 2016

is ultimately going to look foolish when the case is eventually thrown out or the plaintiffs lose and are subjected to substantial legal costs.

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
6. The lawyers for the families are going to have to pay the lawyer fees and I doubt they will be cheap
Tue Jun 14, 2016, 05:30 PM
Jun 2016

Crepuscular

(1,057 posts)
7. yep
Tue Jun 14, 2016, 06:39 PM
Jun 2016

that's the likely outcome. I doubt the anti-gun crusaders are going to come out of the woodwork and pony up for the fees, either.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»In Newtown Families’ Suit...