Lucky Gunner Wins CO. Lawsuit / HUFPO Nonsense

[2ADMNLOVER]

It appears that the online retailer Lucky Gunner has won a lawsuit stemming from the Aurora , Co . theater shooting brought by parents of one of the victims .

We Lost Our Daughter to a Mass Shooter and Now Owe $203,000 to His Ammo Dealer | Lonnie and Sandy Phillips


I'm not trying to be an insensitive douche but it pisses me off that these clearly libtard parents have no idea what they are talking about .

A quote , " Why is there a law that says you cannot sue an ammunitions dealer that allowed 4,000 rounds of armor piercing bullets into the wrong hands " ?

I SOOO freaking hope Trump is the next president just to see how many libtard heads explode .

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I saw that earlier. I'm surprised they're saddled with that $200K. I may be showing my ignorance here but wouldn't an attorney have taken that on contingency, where they'd be charged if they won?

 

[SSGSAD]

It appears that the online retailer Lucky Gunner has won a lawsuit stemming from the Aurora , Co . theater shooting brought by parents of one of the victims .

We Lost Our Daughter to a Mass Shooter and Now Owe $203,000 to His Ammo Dealer*|*Lonnie and Sandy Phillips


I'm not trying to be an insensitive douche but it pisses me off that these clearly libtard parents have no idea what they are talking about .

A quote , " Why is there a law that says you cannot sue an ammunitions dealer that allowed 4,000 rounds of armor piercing bullets into the wrong hands " ?

I SOOO freaking hope Trump is the next president just to see how many libtard heads explode .

I am JUMPING for JOY, right now !!!!!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I saw that earlier. I'm surprised they're saddled with that $200K. I may be showing my ignorance here but wouldn't an attorney have taken that on contingency, where they'd be charged if they won?

You have it inverted.

Instead think loser pays.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

You have it inverted.

Instead think loser pays.

Is that a thing here in Indiana as well? I've heard of "loser pays" but if it's not a law in your state, don't you have to file a countersuit in order to get reimbursed for those fees? Or am I still inverted?

 

[joncon]

Sorry for their loss of a daughter, but the lawsuit was stupid and they deserved to lose. Maybe this will make others think twice before they file same type lawsuits.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

Sorry for their loss of a daughter, but the lawsuit was stupid and they deserved to lose. Maybe this will make others think twice before they file same type lawsuits.

Libtards don't think , it's all about emotions with them .

 

[KG1]

Huffpo nonsense. Pot stirrers. What's new.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I saw that earlier. I'm surprised they're saddled with that $200K. I may be showing my ignorance here but wouldn't an attorney have taken that on contingency, where they'd be charged if they won?

"Their" lawyer (and Brady Bunch's) took the case pro bono. Lucky Gunner's didn't, as far as I could tell. Brady lawyers reportedly told them up front that CO law allows for them to be made to pay if their case is dismissed, the defendant's attorney fees. That's how the judge ruled.

They sued to make the seller of the ammo pay for the death of their daughter, when the ammo worked exactly as it was supposed to. It would be the same as suing Speedway gas station for selling the fuel in the car that killed your child in a hit and run, which makes it a frivolous lawsuit. The HuffPo crowd gets all KINDS of upset at that phrase, though, because they feel that the death of someone's child is not frivolous. They're right, it's not. But the lawsuit attempting to blame the seller of the ammo for what the perp did with it after he bought it is the very definition of frivolity.

They deserved to lose, and they did, and now they're going for the pity party reference their own actions in court.

I'm saddened that they lost their daughter to an insane murderer's actions. I'm overjoyed that they lost the court case that they knew going in they couldn't win.

Pay up, or see if you can boo-hoo your way to having a bunch of Brady folks send you money to do so.

Good luck with that. See, most of them are liberals. They're far more accustomed to signing the backs of checks than they are the fronts of them.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Principal Skinr]

I can't criticize the parents who lost their daughter for reacting emotionally. I wouldn't begin to claim to understand their grief.

I have no sympathy for those who encouraged and supported the lawsuit, though. We'll see how supportive they are of these parents when or if they put their money where their mouths are and help them pay the bill they now owe. I doubt that will happen. Maybe a few of them, but most of the ones barking at the moon won't give a dime. Of course, if they could take someone else's money and give it to them, they'd jump at that opportunity. That's the liberal way.

 

[cobber]

Why didn't they sue the maniac shooter, and say, his parents? That would have made some sense in terms of liability.

Actually after suing the ammo seller, they should have also named the company that made the shooter's car, and as Bill noted above, the station that sold him gas to get to the theater, and the company that made the duct tape he used to hold open the door (if I'm remembering that correctly).

 

[Birds Away]

While I can't begin to comprehend the grief associated with losing a child I really don't understand this. This is the muddled thought process of the liberal mind.

 

[femurphy77]

Why didn't they sue the maniac shooter, and say, his parents? That would have made some sense in terms of liability.

Actually after suing the ammo seller, they should have also named the company that made the shooter's car, and as Bill noted above, the station that sold him gas to get to the theater, and the company that made the duct tape he used to hold open the door (if I'm remembering that correctly).

Let's not forget the theater for not providing security, the door manufacturer for not providing a door that couldn't be held ajar, the movie production company for creating the movie, the star of the movie for. . . . . . . .ad nauseum!

 

[KG1]

Howbout suing legislators for making laws that deranged criminal elements disregard?...we can flail about and go on and on and on...

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I can't criticize the parents who lost their daughter for reacting emotionally. I wouldn't begin to claim to understand their grief.

I have no sympathy for those who encouraged and supported the lawsuit, though. We'll see how supportive they are of these parents when or if they put their money where their mouths are and help them pay the bill they now owe. I doubt that will happen. Maybe a few of them, but most of the ones barking at the moon won't give a dime. Of course, if they could take someone else's money and give it to them, they'd jump at that opportunity. That's the liberal way.

How do we check if there's a GoFundMe site set up for this? Surely, the employees of HuffPo would all give generaously.

 

[Fargo]

Is that a thing here in Indiana as well? I've heard of "loser pays" but if it's not a law in your state, don't you have to file a countersuit in order to get reimbursed for those fees? Or am I still inverted?

The general rule, also known as the American rule, is that both sides pay their own way absent some sort of really egregious misconduct. However, a variety of statutes have modified the American rule where they do allow recovery of attorney's fees by the winning party, as appears to be the case here. Additionally, many contracts also specify attorney's fee payment in the event of a breach.

 

[Bill of Rights]

The general rule, also known as the American rule, is that both sides pay their own way absent some sort of really egregious misconduct. However, a variety of statutes have modified the American rule where they do allow recovery of attorney's fees by the winning party, as appears to be the case here. Additionally, many contracts also specify attorney's fee payment in the event of a breach.

I went to Colorado's website and found what looks to be the law in question. I can't say that for sure, as the HP article described "Colorado's HB 000-208", which, at this time, does not seem to exist. However, the law I found seems to require that attorney fees be awarded to all defendants upon dismissal, and to require dismissal when the defendant is accused of being responsible for the actions of another person. They can be sued for product liability, but not in vengeance for someone's loss due to the proper function of the item they sell. Again, this is comparable to suing the car manufacturer because the car worked and got the drunk driver out onto the road.

The law in question (at least to my layman's read) follows:

C.R.S. 13-21-504.5 (2015)
​

13-21-504.5. Limitations on actions - award of fees



(1) A person or other public or private entity may not bring an action in tort, other than a product liability action, against a firearms or ammunition manufacturer, importer, or dealer for any remedy arising from physical or emotional injury, physical damage, or death caused by the discharge of a firearm or ammunition.

(2) In no type of action shall a firearms or ammunition manufacturer, importer, or dealer be held liable as a third party for the actions of another person.

(3) The court, upon the filing of a motion to dismiss pursuant to rule 12 (b) of the Colorado rules of civil procedure, shall dismiss any action brought against a firearms or ammunition manufacturer, importer, or dealer that the court determines is prohibited under subsection (1) or (2) of this section. Upon dismissal pursuant to this subsection (3), the court shall award reasonable attorney fees, in addition to costs, to each defendant named in the action.

(4) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1) of this section, a firearms or ammunition manufacturer, importer, or dealer may be sued in tort for any damages proximately caused by an act of the manufacturer, importer, or dealer in violation of a state or federal statute or regulation. In any action brought pursuant to the provisions of this subsection (4), the plaintiff shall have the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant violated the state or federal statute or regulation.

(emphasis above is mine-BoR)

In short, it says that they're responsible for what they have control over, but not for what they cannot control...which is how it should be for all businesses.
Any lawyers out there want to pick it apart or tell me I'm in some way mistaken, I will happily take it as an opportunity for education.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[jd4320t]

Good for lucky gunner.

Here's a fun game. Go to the Brady grouos Facebook page and see how many comments you can read.
https://m.facebook.com/bradycampaign

 

[jon5212]

Wow, the legal system worked for once. I hope $200,000 is enough to knock them down a few pegs only if the rest of the country would start doling out charges like this for frivolous lawsuits. I can't imagine how many BS suits are filtering through our legal system.

 

[Fargo]

I went to Colorado's website and found what looks to be the law in question. I can't say that for sure, as the HP article described "Colorado's HB 000-208", which, at this time, does not seem to exist. However, the law I found seems to require that attorney fees be awarded to all defendants upon dismissal, and to require dismissal when the defendant is accused of being responsible for the actions of another person. They can be sued for product liability, but not in vengeance for someone's loss due to the proper function of the item they sell. Again, this is comparable to suing the car manufacturer because the car worked and got the drunk driver out onto the road.

The law in question (at least to my layman's read) follows:
(emphasis above is mine-BoR)

In short, it says that they're responsible for what they have control over, but not for what they cannot control...which is how it should be for all businesses.
Any lawyers out there want to pick it apart or tell me I'm in some way mistaken, I will happily take it as an opportunity for education.

Blessings,
Bill

Yes, that is the gist of it. These people (at the Bradyites behest) filed a lawsuit knowing that they could not win and knowing that the court HAD to award fees against them.

Illustrates to to me the kind of folks the Bradyites and ther attorneys are.