Active Shooter at Robb Elementary in Uvalde

[Axxe55]

I hope the gun manufacturer lawsuit is UNSUCCESSFUL!(everybody else is on there own)

Standard procedure. Go after those with the deepest pockets. I'll bet the lawyers are behind this move.

 

[popsgarland]

Standard procedure. Go after those with the deepest pockets. I'll bet the lawyers are behind this move.

I agree. all they see and care about is the almighty $

 

[Axxe55]

I agree. all they see and care about is the almighty $

Exactly. It's pretty sleazy to feed off the grief of others, but pretty much what I'd expect from a bunch of bottom-feeders!

 

[General Zod]

Uvalde families poised to file $27 billion lawsuit over mass shooting

The families' legal counsel says they plan to sue the gun maker, Uvalde CISD, the city of Uvalde, the county sheriff's office, DPS, and Border Patrol.

www.statesman.com

"Charles Bonner, a lawyer based in Sausalito, Calif..."

And from a story on KSAT.com:

"Bonner’s law firm is taking on this class action lawsuit with a team of other firms, including a local Uvalde law office and Everytown, a gun safety organization."

Wait, you mean Mr Crusading California Lawyer is an Everytown shill? Say it ain't so!

Also telling in the KSAT story - the families did not file this lawsuit. Bonner and company filed it, and are meeting with families to recruit them into it. And when the lawsuit is thrown out, those families will be on the hook for the legal expenses, just like Everytown did to the families they suckered into frivolous lawsuits in the past.

 

[General Zod]

Also noteworthy - notice how the article in the Statesman ignored the Everytown connection. Liberal city (Austin), liberal rag.

 

[Axxe55]

"Charles Bonner, a lawyer based in Sausalito, Calif..."

And from a story on KSAT.com:

"Bonner’s law firm is taking on this class action lawsuit with a team of other firms, including a local Uvalde law office and Everytown, a gun safety organization."

Wait, you mean Mr Crusading California Lawyer is an Everytown shill? Say it ain't so!

Also telling in the KSAT story - the families did not file this lawsuit. Bonner and company filed it, and are meeting with families to recruit them into it. And when the lawsuit is thrown out, those families will be on the hook for the legal expenses, just like Everytown did to the families they suckered into frivolous lawsuits in the past.

As I said, a bunch of bottom-feeders!

I thought there were laws against such behavior by lawyers in soliciting business?

Wouldn't this be an ethics violation?

 

[popsgarland]

Exactly. It's pretty sleazy to feed off the grief of others, but pretty much what I'd expect from a bunch of bottom-feeders!

Yes sir..

 

[General Zod]

As I said, a bunch of bottom-feeders!

I thought there were laws against such behavior by lawyers in soliciting business?

I'm sure exceptions are made for lawyers bankrolled by Soros and Bloomberg.

If Bonner had even a whiff of ethics, he might mention to the people he's trying to sucker that law enforcement can't be held liable for not protecting the public - there's Supreme Court precedence there a local judge can't overrule - and holding the manufacturer responsible for criminal misuse of their product should rightly be thrown out as well. But no, this lawsuit isn't about the families, it's about the agenda, about lying to the public and trying to sway public opinion. And the families will just be hurt again and abandoned.

 

[Axxe55]

I'm sure exceptions are made for lawyers bankrolled by Soros and Bloomberg.

If Bonner had even a whiff of ethics, he might mention to the people he's trying to sucker that law enforcement can't be held liable for not protecting the public - there's Supreme Court precedence there a local judge can't overrule - and holding the manufacturer responsible for criminal misuse of their product should rightly be thrown out as well. But no, this lawsuit isn't about the families, it's about the agenda, about lying to the public and trying to sway public opinion. And the families will just be hurt again and abandoned.

The agenda is two-fold. Make guns appear to be evil, and to line their pockets at the same time.

 

[mongoose]

Uvalde families poised to file $27 billion lawsuit over mass shooting

The families' legal counsel says they plan to sue the gun maker, Uvalde CISD, the city of Uvalde, the county sheriff's office, DPS, and Border Patrol.

www.statesman.com

I thought LE didn’t have an obligation to protect. How would a lawsuit against a Dept. work?

 

[popsgarland]

Let me get the right.

So, your saying that any attorney, no matter where they are located, can file a lawsuit in another state without the victims
knowledge and then try to get them to sign on with them.

Sounds highly unethical and should be illegal.

 

[popsgarland]

I thought LE didn’t have an obligation to protect. How would a lawsuit against a Dept. work?

I've seen on several police cars...TO PROTECT AND SERVE....

 

[cycleguy2300]

They have no problem with people being armed. It's even encouraged. They just don't want guns being pulled unless it's time to use them. The more it's handled, the higher the chances of an accident, or someone seeing who's armed. The solution is allow carry on campus rather than put them in lockers. If you're going in an area that doesn't allow them, then leave it in your vehicle just like you would anywhere else. Again, they want people to carry so they kept the off limits areas as minimal as possible.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Guns can be lockered in a holster. We have to locker our weapons going into the jail and while I simply thoughtfully draw my pistol and put it into a locker, many officer have a Safariland QLS which allows the pistol to stay in the holster.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[Axxe55]

I thought LE didn’t have an obligation to protect. How would a lawsuit against a Dept. work?

“Neither the Constitution, nor state law, impose a general duty upon police officers or other governmental officials to protect individual persons from harm — even when they know the harm will occur,” said Darren L. Hutchinson, a professor and associate dean at the University of Florida School of Law. “Police can watch someone attack you, refuse to intervene and not violate the Constitution.”

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the government has only a duty to protect persons who are “in custody,” he pointed out.

Police Have No Duty to Protect You, Federal Court Affirms Yet Again | Ryan McMaken

Following last February's shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, some students claimed local government officials were at fault for failing to provide protection to students. The students filed suit, naming six defendants, including the Broward school district and...

mises.org

 

[General Zod]

I thought LE didn’t have an obligation to protect. How would a lawsuit against a Dept. work?

It won't. But the Everytown-backed California lawyer won't tell 'em that.

 

[Axxe55]

It won't. But the Everytown-backed California lawyer won't tell 'em that.

Isn't there also a federal law that protects manufacturers from such cases as well?

 

[General Zod]

Let me get the right.

So, your saying that any attorney, no matter where they are located, can file a lawsuit in another state without the victims
knowledge and then try to get them to sign on with them.

Sounds highly unethical and should be illegal.

I'm no legal expert. You would think he'd have to be licensed to practice law in Texas, but he's partnered with a local law firm so that might be the loophole. As for the rest, it's in this story:

$27 billion class action lawsuit announced for Uvalde victims and survivors

A California-based civil rights attorney announced a massive $27 billion class action lawsuit on behalf of all of those who were impacted by the Robb Elementary shooting.

www.ksat.com

"Bonner and his associate have been traveling to Uvalde from their California office for weeks, meeting with families at Pastor Daniel Myers’ church, Tabernacle of Worship."

He's also launching this frivolous suit on what he claims are "constitutional grounds", alleging that everyone being sued violated some imaginary "Constitutional right to life". Interesting how there's suddenly a "right to life" when a leftist isn't championing abortion...

 

[General Zod]

Isn't there also a federal law that protects manufacturers from such cases as well?

Yep. One the leftists keep claiming "shields gun manufacturers from liability", when it actually shields them from exactly this kind of legal abuse. They're still liable for defective products and the such, just not for the intentional criminal misuse of their products by an end user they have no control over.

 

[Axxe55]

I've seen on several police cars...TO PROTECT AND SERVE....

False advertising!

 

[motorcarman]

Isn't there also a federal law that protects manufacturers from such cases as well?

The dems want that past ruling 'thrown-out'.