Two different issues.

(October 4, 2019 at 5:55 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Even today, a bar, in many locations in America can be sued and held responsible for selling a drunk too much liquor and they go off and kill someone on the road.

And this hotel was sued for allowing a stockpile of arms to accumulate in a guest's room.

Quote:Paddock arrived at Mandalay Bay on September 25, 2017. He was booked into Room 32-135, a complimentary room on the 32nd floor. Four days later, he also checked into the directly-connected Room 32-134. Both suites overlook the site of the concert at Las Vegas Village.

Between September 25 and October 1—the day of the shooting—he stockpiled an arsenal of weapons, associated equipment and ammunition that included fourteen AR-15 rifles (all of which were equipped with bump stocks and twelve of which had 100-round magazines), eight AR-10 rifles, a bolt-action rifle, and a revolver. A bump stock modifies a semi-automatic weapon so that it can shoot in rapid succession, mimicking automatic fire. Often with the help of hotel bellhops, he brought five suitcases to his room on September 25, seven on the 26th, two on the 28th, six on the 30th, and two on October 1.

Twenty two suitcases? I don't know how unusual that is but I would have given it some, 'ello ello ello, wot's all this then? But then I'm a suspicious bastard, just like security guards are expected to be, and are paid to be.

Yes, I know that gun companies are more or less above the law, thanks to the Republicans' efforts.

That said, suing MGM for owning Mandalay Bay is like suing the Texas School Depository Company because Lee Harvey Oswald used their building as a sniper's nest to kill JFK. And he was actually employed there.

Isn't it obvious? Those little mint they leave on your pillow? Those are actually 9mm bullets in disguise.

(October 4, 2019 at 10:10 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: Isn't it obvious? Those little mint they leave on your pillow? Those are actually 9mm bullets in disguise.

I am sure that the hospitality industry is highly regulated. I work in a highly regulated industry. Individual culpability or no, if it happened the facility is also responsible. Crazy mother fucker kills someone, we did not prevent it. Period. If you don't like these kinds of regulations, vote Libertarian and lose these automated protections.

The hotel isn't responsible for firearms sales, Brian.  No one has said they are.  They weren't sued for selling firearms. 

They were sued for having such stunningly inept security measures that they allowed a guest in their hotel to stockpile an arsenal in two of their rooms.

Boru

Deep pockets.


A lawyer doesn't care who is responsible - in this case -the guy pulling the trigger --- but who on t he scene has the most money.

Suing poor people isn't profitable.

"Deep Pockets", the father of many a lawsuit.

(October 4, 2019 at 6:50 pm)Brian37 Wrote:

(October 4, 2019 at 5:59 pm)EgoDeath Wrote: Sue-happy nonsense.

Bullshit.

The Hotel did not make the guns, the hotel did not sell the guns.

But the factories and shops DID.

Takata made defective air bags, and is being held responsible. Even the  vaping industry is being RIGHTFULLY persed for it's bad products.

You give me one good fucking reason why firearm companies should not be held to the same oversight as any other product sold?

That's a good question Brian.

(October 4, 2019 at 5:55 pm)Brian37 Wrote:

(October 4, 2019 at 5:42 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: You haven't been in many courtrooms, have you? I've been an interested observer in countless insurance battles. I had this taped to the inside of my briefcase:

"Military justice is to justice as military music is to music."

Insurance litigation was just more so.

Look, I get that those who sued did what their lawyers thought would pay off. Not the point. It did pay off.

I am talking about the morality of blaming a business that does not sell firearms for what a disturbed person did with the firearms and the companies and shops that sold him the firearms.

Even today, a bar, in many locations in America can be sued and held responsible for selling a drunk too much liquor and they go off and kill someone on the road.

Arguing current law isn't my argument. Arguing the moral state of our current laws is. 

The hotel should not be held responsible for the greed of the firearm makers or shops that sold the sicko the firearms. 

Otherwise every business in the world would be liable for not being armed like military base.

I think the highlighted bit is your answer.  Suppose I take my car and start running down people at random.  Should the families of my victims sue Land Rover for selling me the car?

Boru