Remington pays 73 million to Sandy Hook families

Well, as I see it this is pretty much a nothingburger.
It wasn't litigated to the point of a jury verdict, therefore no legal precedent was set.

It was settled by Remington's insurance company, not by Remington. This was totally a financial move.
It would have cost more to continue to fight than to settle, so the insurance company settled.

Wanna' tar and feather someone, take it out on the insurance company.

Also, by settling it seems to me they specifically avoided even the risk of there being any kind of legal judgement against them - which WOULD have set legal precedent for future suits.

I mean, it isn't like settling this out of court is going to lead to any more or less lawsuits. Anybody can file a lawsuit for anything.
 
Last edited:
Sure prices of gun related products are going to go up. Money doesn't just fall from the sky. It ALL comes out of our pockets in one way or another.

I couldn't agree more with biku324's comment about some of the (ridiculous) industry advertising practices I've seen in the last twenty-years or so. Whoever thought up that idiotic zombi stuff, and any company who participated in it, should have to go stand in the corner. In some ways manufacturers have done their share to harm our Second Amendment rights by contributing to the appearance that we gun enthusiasts are mostly a bunch of Rambos, rowdies, and immature clowns. A long time ago now, when I learned scuba diving as a young man, the diving industry very correctly was all about self-regulating. Regulate yourself, or someone else will do it for you. Right or wrong, that's the world we live in, and it's much worse now than then.

I hope the effects of this settlement will play out as being based solely on questionable judgments about what may or may not be illegal advertising, but I doubt it will stop there.
 
M29since14 said:
Sure prices of gun related products are going to go up. Money doesn't just fall from the sky. It ALL comes out of our pockets in one way or another.

I couldn't agree more with biku324's comment about some of the (ridiculous) industry advertising practices I've seen in the last twenty-years or so. Whoever thought up that idiotic zombi stuff, and any company who participated in it, should have to go stand in the corner. In some ways manufacturers have done their share to harm our Second Amendment rights by contributing to the appearance that we gun enthusiasts are mostly a bunch of Rambos, rowdies, and immature clowns. A long time ago now, when I learned scuba diving as a young man, the diving industry very correctly was all about self-regulating. Regulate yourself, or someone else will do it for you. Right or wrong, that's the world we live in, and it's much worse now than then.

I hope the effects of this settlement will play out as being based solely on questionable judgments about what may or may not be illegal advertising, but I doubt it will stop there.
Click to expand...

Which ad, specifically, are you talking about?

Do you even know, or are you just speculating?
 
Hornady, for one.

iu


iu


Z-Max Bullets - YouTube
 
Last edited:
M29since14 said:
I couldn't agree more with biku324's comment about some of the (ridiculous) industry advertising practices I've seen in the last twenty-years or so.

Whoever thought up that idiotic zombi stuff, and any company who participated in it, should have to go stand in the corner. nd it's much worse now than then.

.
Click to expand...

"The Walking Dead"....... Zombies on the streets for 10 years...... and everyone needed a Python and a big knife or two!!!!
 
Settlements do NOT set legal precedent. They do present insurance companies with an excuse to have reserve funds to handle this potential liability, and raising their rates. In this case, I believe, it was not insurance involved but assets in the bankruptcy liquidation. The lawyers on both side know what kinds of crazy statements are in the Remington advertising meeting notes, we don't. And it is giving OPM (other peoples money) to a the grieving parents of dead children. No reason not to do it as there is no dog in this fight who cares.
 
Last edited:
M29since14 said:
Sure prices of gun related products are going to go up. Money doesn't just fall from the sky. It ALL comes out of our pockets in one way or another.

I couldn't agree more with biku324's comment about some of the (ridiculous) industry advertising practices I've seen in the last twenty-years or so. Whoever thought up that idiotic zombi stuff, and any company who participated in it, should have to go stand in the corner. In some ways manufacturers have done their share to harm our Second Amendment rights by contributing to the appearance that we gun enthusiasts are mostly a bunch of Rambos, rowdies, and immature clowns. A long time ago now, when I learned scuba diving as a young man, the diving industry very correctly was all about self-regulating. Regulate yourself, or someone else will do it for you. Right or wrong, that's the world we live in, and it's much worse now than then.

I hope the effects of this settlement will play out as being based solely on questionable judgments about what may or may not be illegal advertising, but I doubt it will stop there.
Click to expand...

Well stated. And why such advertising? The answer is simple, there was a purchasing surge for AR's from experienced shooters once they became available, so the manufacturers ramped up accordingly, making record profits. Once the initial buyers fulfilled their personal needs, however, the only way to keep those sales numbers up was to find new customers, so in came the contracted ad agencies (few use in-house in any industry) who recommended targeting the younger demographic, and that being a generation raised and addicted to video games feeding their hero fantasies, this is how you should do it.
 
They settled, paid, it's over and done, for now. Expect every firearm manufacturer to be sued from now on. This was just the tip of the iceberg, regardless of why...
 
Rudi said:
Very bad precedent. The "media" never mention that he murdered his own mother to STEAL the rifle.
Click to expand...

Sandy Hook would not have happened had she kept her guns secure from her mentally ill son.

Sandy hook was very much the result of an irresponsible gun owner.

This settlement is bad in terms of the lawyers and insurers for the holding company in charge of the remains of the old Remington company setting a precedent that will potentially put distinguish companies out of business in the face of massive insurance premium increases.

However it's also bad as it takes attention away from the underlying causes of the Sandy Hook - lack of adequate mental health care and an irresponsible gun owner who not only contributed to deaths of school kids, but also painted all gun owners in a bad light.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

francoisallais
The fourth of the family
Replies
0
Views
202
francoisallais
francoisallais
T
Triple Lock Revolvers Against Creditcard Debt
2 3
Replies
49
Views
2K
John in WYO
J
Kasian
.22 Rimfire 5 Round
Replies
2
Views
577
Patbar
P
5
K22's SAD RETURN HOME AFTER 56 YEARS
Replies
12
Views
1K
45Smashemflat
4
JRB416
Remington 5mm Magnum rimfire
Replies
11
Views
913
Gamecock
Gamecock

Latest posts

Back
Top