SCOTUS rules Sandy Hook victims families can sue Remington

JJ45 · November 12, 2019, 12:50 PM

This was reported on Fox

Total Bull (expletive)...the kid steals the gun from his mom and somehow Remington is to blame?

This in inexplicable !

American Man · November 12, 2019, 01:23 PM

It is nonsense. No one is suing the alcohol companies for all the misery they have caused with drunk driving deaths... not to mention the vehicle manufacturers.

Maybe the oil companies should be sued for whenever someone uses gasoline to commit arson.

NoSecondBest · November 12, 2019, 02:28 PM

SCOTUS stands for Supreme Court of the United States. They are not the ones who ruled this. It was the Connecticut Supreme Court. Two different courts entirely.

zukiphile · November 12, 2019, 02:40 PM

It's an understandable confusion, but this was a denial of cert to the US Sup Ct, so this is a SCOTUS denial. It is also true that there is a CT Sup Ct decision involved. That's what Remington was trying to have reviewed by SCOTUS.

USNRet93 · November 12, 2019, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zukiphile

It's an understandable confusion, but this was a denial of cert to the US Sup Ct, so this is a SCOTUS denial. It is also true that there is a CT Sup Ct decision involved. That's what Remington was trying to have reviewed by SCOTUS.

So what does ‘denial of cert’ mean?

zukiphile · November 12, 2019, 03:45 PM

Remington filed an application for a writ of certiorari. The application essentially askes the court to review the case. SCOTUS denied that application for that writ.

It means the Sup Ct responded to Remington's please with a no thanks.

BarryLee · November 12, 2019, 04:20 PM

These types of things can be frustrating for those of us not familiar with the finer points of court procedure, but I don't think the SCOTUS is agreeing they are just declining to get involved at this time. I think often they want to let cases work their way through the lower courts before they get involved. So, not sure this means anything as of yet, but I agree it is frustrating. Maybe our members with a leagl backgroud could offer some clafication/opnions.

**Aguila Blanca** · November 12, 2019, 04:56 PM

Already being discussed here: https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=601234

Closed.

November 12, 2019, 12:50 PM	#1
JJ45 Senior Member Join Date: June 8, 2015 Posts: 908	SCOTUS rules Sandy Hook victims families can sue Remington This was reported on Fox Total Bull (expletive)...the kid steals the gun from his mom and somehow Remington is to blame? This in inexplicable !

November 12, 2019, 02:40 PM	#4
zukiphile Senior Member Join Date: December 13, 2005 Posts: 4,451	It's an understandable confusion, but this was a denial of cert to the US Sup Ct, so this is a SCOTUS denial. It is also true that there is a CT Sup Ct decision involved. That's what Remington was trying to have reviewed by SCOTUS. __________________ http://www.npboards.com/index.php

November 12, 2019, 03:45 PM	#6
zukiphile Senior Member Join Date: December 13, 2005 Posts: 4,451	Remington filed an application for a writ of certiorari. The application essentially askes the court to review the case. SCOTUS denied that application for that writ. It means the Sup Ct responded to Remington's please with a no thanks. __________________ http://www.npboards.com/index.php

November 12, 2019, 04:20 PM	#7
BarryLee Senior Member Join Date: July 29, 2010 Location: The ATL (OTP) Posts: 3,946	These types of things can be frustrating for those of us not familiar with the finer points of court procedure, but I don't think the SCOTUS is agreeing they are just declining to get involved at this time. I think often they want to let cases work their way through the lower courts before they get involved. So, not sure this means anything as of yet, but I agree it is frustrating. Maybe our members with a leagl backgroud could offer some clafication/opnions. __________________ A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that it ... gives people what they want instead of what a particular group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

November 12, 2019, 04:56 PM	#8
Aguila Blanca Staff Join Date: September 25, 2008 Location: CONUS Posts: 18,460	Already being discussed here: https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=601234 Closed. __________________ NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor NRA Chief RSO / CMP RSO 1911 Certified Armorer Jeepaholic

November 12, 2019, 01:23 PM	#2
American Man Senior Member Join Date: June 21, 2018 Posts: 218	It is nonsense. No one is suing the alcohol companies for all the misery they have caused with drunk driving deaths... not to mention the vehicle manufacturers. Maybe the oil companies should be sued for whenever someone uses gasoline to commit arson.

November 12, 2019, 02:28 PM	#3
NoSecondBest Senior Member Join Date: December 7, 2009 Location: Western New York Posts: 2,736	SCOTUS stands for Supreme Court of the United States. They are not the ones who ruled this. It was the Connecticut Supreme Court. Two different courts entirely.