No, they simply wanted to put this behind them so they can emerge from bankruptcy.
As long as this lawsuit hung in the air, they were stuck.
Keep in mind, this was all paid for by like 3 insurance companies.
Yeah, that is what I am thinking too. I would imagine that a company doing business and making money would fight this to the bitter end.
Why not also apply this to car manufacturers? Now the plaintiffs of the Christmas parade âaccidentâ can sue whatever manufacturer of the car that was usedâŠ
4 Likes
Seems to me like a reasonable justification to be happy for the families.
They probably are making moneyâŠthis lawsuit was holding them up. Look for Remington to emerge from bankruptcy in the next few months now that this cloud is out of the way.
Good point there. Remington certainly didnât have the money.
And if it was actually covered by insurance, then you can bet the decision was made by more than just Remington. Those insurance companies had to agree too.
Most manufacturers do not produce products whose primary function is to kill a living entity.
Those that do, are heavily regulated. Except for firearms. due to a horrendous mis-reading of the Constitution.
Regarding insurance âŠ
The city of Colorado Springs recently settled with the family of a guy shot by police. The cops responded to a robbery. The guy was fleeing, and while the cops were in foot pursuit, he reached for a gun in his waistband and got shot. Independent investigations determined that the cops did nothing wrong. But the family sued the city.
Insurance settled for 3 million to avoid any civil lawsuits.
Itâs easy to say, âWell, insurance covered itâŠâ But insurance costs the policy holder money too. And after such a settlement, you can bet that future insurance premiums will go up.
Now I expect liability insurance for any gun manufacturer to increase.
The new American Dream is the L-word. Either hit the Lottery, or win a Lawsuit. And those lawsuits cost us all in the end.
1 Like
Yeah, your reading is the only correct one obviously.
Well, others agree with me as wellâŠ
Hell, the NRA did until they were taken over by a bunch of gun nutters in the 70âs.
What a stupid, stupid, contents of post.
4 Likes
No, nobody agrees with you, not even you. You© just have the same stupid agenda.
There is no reading of that amendment that can render what you feel you want.
2 Likes
Couldnât have been the left trying more and more egregious ways to ban gunsâŠ.
3 Likes
Sure do. It is illogical to allow a suit such as this.
1 Like
For sure. The name itself is worth money
Why? Whatâs illogical about it?
I donât understand why it was allowed.
BUT the 2019 Supremes allowed it, so he we are.
Give it a shot. Letâs discuss it.
Itâs allowed because of lies and lack of understanding.
2 Likes
What was illogical about allowing this lawsuit?
