The Truth Behind Remington's $73 Million Settlement With Sandy Hook Survivors
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 сер 2024
- PLCAA Remington
bit.ly/2CHLudt
In this case, they initially tried to sue Remington because the shooter used a Remington rifle, The lower courts said, nope you can't do that because of PLCCA.
However, they found a way around PLCCA by using Conetticuts state laws about ads and trade practices claiming that Remington's advertising for AR15s was irresponsibly geared directly at young teens and as result should be held at least partially responsible.
Long story short, they found yet another creative way to use our court system to try to financially destroy the gun industry.
Keep in mind, this didn't mean their argument would win at trial, it just meant they were allowed to try it.
Trials are incredibly expensive for defendants because they have to pay attorneys on the front end where these plaintiffs aren't paying their attorneys anything until they win or settle the case.
So they can drag this as long as they want and keep in mind Remingtons had already gone bankrupt twice!
People have this idea that the gun industry makes a ton of money, they don't especially compared to other sectors.
Open Source Defense provides a perfect example of how small the gun industry actually is:
Ruger is the biggest publicly traded gun company in the world, and their market cap is $1.3 billion. For comparison, Google made $18.5 billion in profit last quarter; i.e. Google’s weekly profit exceeds the entire value of Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc.
Gunmakers are small companies in a low-margin business. It doesn’t take much to bankrupt them.
( opensourcedefe... )
If this is about creating change, saving lives, and proving that the gun manufacturers are responsible for these types of shootings, why did they accept the settlement?
Accepting the settlement meant that the gun company didn't accept any responsibility for what happened.
There are only 9 people in this suit on the plaintiffs side. After these 9 people going to split the settlement with the other families who are affected by this tragic event?
If this was about saving lives the only thing that would matter is getting a verdict in court demonstrating that what Remington did was responsible for the deaths of those children at that school.
Instead, once the number was high enough, they settled. That's literally what the Attorney just said.
The goal was never to win on the merits of the case.
The goal was to make it harder for gun companies to get liability insurance because they'd be too much of a risk because now they can be sued for just marketing their products and then someone using it in a crime.
There are over 8 -12 thousand gun homicides a year. If you can sue every gun manufacturer for their gun used in one of those homicides, the companies would be bankrupt in less than a year and that's what they are counting on while getting filthy rich in the process.
IYKYK The Second Amendment Merchandise
➡️ bit.ly/3l0EhYZ
Let's Go Brandon Merchandise
➡️ bit.ly/3EbcXP8
GUNS ARE ESSENTIAL Merchandise
➡️ bit.ly/2XxJxbT
If I Only Had One Concealed Carry - FREE Book
➡️ www.mrcolionno...
To Order Your PRO 2A Hats Click Here:
➡️ shop.mrcolionn...
Help US Further our Pro Constitution, Pro 2A message:
www.MrColionNo...
FOLLOW ME ON:
Twitter - / mrcolionnoir
Instagram - / colionnoir
Facebook - / colionnoir
#Remington #ColionNoir
REMEMBER: The next time you lose a family member to a reckless, drugged or drunk driver . . . sue the company who *_BUILT THE CAR_*
Or the company that makes the alcohol they were drinking, they’re at fault! 😂
How about the doctor that prescribed them drugs including now legal marijuana? Maybe the bar that sold the drunk driver the alcohol. Or perhaps the gas station that provided the gas for the guy that barreled through all those people. How about the states that provided all these businesses that Serve alcohol and while you’re at it the alcohol manufacturers. This is getting past ridiculous.
Id sue the parents for building the scumbag child and additionally bad parenting. Gimme moniiess💰💰🤑
Well...the difference is
Beer companies are very careful not to show commercials with their product being consumed any where near a vehicle
For just this reason
Even in movies where people are shown drinking and driving as part of the plot
There will be NO brand shown
An AR type firearm...is pretty distinctive
So...when that type of firearm is shown being used in an anti-social manner in any media
I guess the manufacture(s) should have objected?
Interesting....
If you show a stock film clip of a B52 dropping bombs
Should you expect a cease and desist letter from Boeing?
Hmmmmm....
The crisis actors got paid again. Wow.
I still can’t understand the justification for suing a manufacturer of a product that is legal and constitutionally protected. *edit* Being allowed to sue*
To them is not a legal or constitutional item. My sister is antigun for some fucking reason. And she straight up said to me. I'm conflating 2 very different things when I said, I'm gonna sue kitchen knife companies when someone gets stabbed with their knife. Like its okay to due cause one was meant to kill and the other was not okay to sue because "I use it normally, I know what a knife is" btw she didn't actually say that, but she thought it. I could see it in her words.
Ur not mentally damaged liberal...that's why u don't get it
Not to mention that it's the distributors that buy the guns from the manufacturers for resale. There's a few degrees of separation from gun maker to gun owner.
None of us can.
Because they (the government) HATE that people that can protect themself from evil people and the government, there is a big reason they want to remove the second amendment, but in many states there is no second amendment, not really anyways.
the irony of him saying gun industry blames everybody else but themselves
I love it when Colion makes videos based on law, and courts. This is where he really stands out among most 2A UA-camrs. This particular video was pure Gold.
The fact that the attorney is standing there holding a cup of coffee while giving this speech speaks volumes as to how casually little he actually takes the subject.
The cup is empty. He's holding it just in case he can't swallow all the B.S. coming out of his pie hole.
He's an ambulance chaser. Always has been. Always will be.
Truth.......
Agree. Josh Koskoff is a piece of shit that I wouldn't cross the street to piss on if he were on fire. Don't bother to give me the attorney takes the case, they aren't the case bullshit. Sometimes, you are the work.
Its brutal even listening to this guy talk while he walks away with millions, and Colion cuts right through his bs, keep up the work man, we need you
Plaintiff's attorneys generally would get 20% of the settlement...
I discriminate against people who wear glasses like that lawyer.
Yeah more than his clients get after all divided up
@@thomasstork3585 he will get, if working on contingency, 20%. 25% if it had gone to trial.
Still a lot more than each plaintiff received..
Defense counsel charged per billable hour(s)...
@@alantoon5708 If he took it probono.
More like 40%
You need to GO TO SCHOOL & Get A Degree so you can start Kicking These Politicians Ass!! Keep it up Friend!!! Amazing video like always
Thanks for the explanation. I was really pissed off at Remington. That being said....this is a HORRIBLE precedent!
"Never EVER sue those responsible. Sue the folks who have money." That is what plaintiffs attorneys do. It is all about the money.
I sat on a jury where the plaintiffs did just that. After a week-long trial, we threw the case out and gave them nothing.
Remington should of went to court and fought with that $73 million.
@@apoxrox I understand it was not Remington's choice. It was their insurance companies who made the decision to settle.
@@jaynecobb3701 it's ALWAYS the bean counters that decide, and they don't care one whit what it looks like.
@@apoxrox Remington can't take the case to court. The plaintiffs have to take my case to court. So long as the plaintiff's lawyer continues to file motions, Remington's lawyers continue to have to deal with them which costs Remington, or actually the insurance companies, a significant amount of money. Likely much more money then the 73 million
Always sue the insurance company. Always.
I’m glad I never have to be accountable for anything I ever do again. If I drink and drive it was the beers fault!
Don't count your chickens before their hatch ...if you are white , you'll be out of luck ...
And the beer manufacturer and the car company that built your vehicle
I always thought that too. HaHa!!!
A-fucking-men
Ban alcohol
The irony is that lawyer will need armed security for the rest of his life.
Thank you for opening my eyes to the truth. I had heard so many time that Remington lost the case. Now I know it was an out of court settlement. Thank you Colion. Keep up the good work bro.👍
What a manipulative piece of shit. While a settlement isn't official precedent, I'm expecting more of these type of lawsuits in the future. Here's to hoping the industry doesn't get completely crippled financially by 2030
Move the companies to states where the courts will toss the case as frivolous before it gets to court, then tag them with court fees for wasting their time.
If we can raise money for truckers and those hit by natural disasters we can raise money to defend our rights. Remington would have won that case if it went to court. My heart goes out to all affected by violent crime and I pray that each of you finds a productive way to deal with your loss tho it never heals
Exactly my thoughts when I heard about this. Start a precedent and eventually you get an avalanche.
Agreed. Meantime, KEEP BUYING GUNS AND AMMO.
First impression, Weasel
Not a single person, news organization or lawyer has ever asked or cared about the vehicle manufacturer that the Wisconsin parade killer used, including the victim's families, ever..
The car companies have lobbyists in Congress that protect them. Even the NRA and NSSF at its height were still peanuts compared to every other industry protected by lobbyists and their cronies.
I know I’m just echoing a lot of others here, and it may get lost in the mix, but I’m really thankful for Colion and this channel. My man brings so much intelligence and depth to his explanations and reasons for why our 2A rights are so important while a great many others are trying so eagerly to tear it all down.
Making money from your loved ones death by suing people who weren't responsible for it is pathetic.
When I had heard the Remington had settled in this case I was pissed. Thanks for clarifying what actually happened.
They couldn't sue the nutjob murderer or his mommy so hey, let's punish people who did nothing wrong just because they have deep pockets.
I get the fact that they lost their child to a sadistic lunatic whom the school, the newtown police, the FBI, and his own mom failed to prevent the tragedy, but in this case they need to know that they should also sue car manufacturers and alcohol companies every time a drunk driver kills someone
They don't care...they're liberals and looking for a reason to ban guns..
Yep this does open that up as well.
Let's sue SUV makers
they should sue the kids shoe company for transporting him to the school literally the same logic
Exactly! Support your local gun store and Remington! Buy up ammo guys!
Colion, you are ALWAYS so right in your assessments including the Remington lawsuit and the motives behind it.
Thank you for the in depth content you provide. This was an awesome in depth explanation of what happened in this lawsuit. I’m from Connecticut and this particular massacre hit hard. I’m also an avid believer in the 2nd amendment and consider myself punished by the actions of Connecticut’s response to this massacre. They punished all law abiding gun carrying citizens with new state gun laws including gun bans, and Ammo capacity restrictions. That being said, my response to this massacre and all other ones is, I don’t ever say the killers name publicly or privately as to not ever give them any notoriety, or potential fame. We in Connecticut refer to him as the sandy hook shooter. I would like to suggest everyone do the same. Once again thank you for all you do, and for being the voice to the voiceless sir. Keep up the great work. You are very much appreciated.
Remington is a good company. They never sold out to overseas. Even with money hardships.
This lawyer just took advantage to broken hearted people and the system says it’s ok
Really? What innovation have they made? What happed to ACR?
No.. this lawyer used the families to make himself rich. I wonder what his cut of that 73 million was.
I mean their quality control was horse shit for the last 15 + years but politically they weren't bad
@@ralphday4842 As a general rule of thumb a lawyers cut starts at 30% yet can go up to 49% (also possible as in workers comp fraud cases knowing there fraud can go up to 70%)!!!
@@ralphday4842 they can legally collect up to 40%.
I'm trying to wrap my head around how the argument that was used regarding Remington's "marketing towards kids" was able to be pushed through and deemed legitimate. You can use marketing to target minors all you want, but not a single state will allow a gun shop to sell an AR to a minor. Period. Once again, a gun was obtained through nefarious means.
Eric, I was having the same problem; couldn’t understand the settlement, why settle…why now? According to the lawsuit since it was no longer about the gun, but about marketing/advertising strategy, it seemed like the perfect lawsuit to argue in front of a jury. The thing that Colin says in this video (@ 6:50) which isn’t really stressed but is the key point to be taken away: “Remington” was not the business entity that made the decision to settle the lawsuit. Since Remington had gone bankrupt and was split up, who was left to “settle” the lawsuit? As Colin says, it fell upon the insurance companies that protected Remington at the time. The insurance companies were the ones financially “on the hook” - it was their call to make, to settle the lawsuit. It became clear to me once I understood it wasn’t technically “Remington” money that will be paid out, but “insurance” company money. Now one may still argue the insurance companies shouldn’t have agreed to pay out, but it was their call to make… after all, it is their money. Guess what I find interesting at this point is the insurance companies apparently found it cheaper to pay out ($73M) than to spend that same amount fighting the lawsuit. Guess it scared them, they could spend that amount fighting the lawsuit, still lose and then would still have to cough up settlement money. Seems they took the path of least {financial} resistance. Besides, every lawyer will tell you, ‘juries’ can be fickle things.
Not only was the marketing not directed at kids.. it's blatantly false. It's a flogging .22 caliber bullet for fudge's sake!
Remington doesn't get to decide to settle or not, their re-insurance company does, assuming Remington had insurance. After 2 bankruptcies they may have been uninsurable.
@@paulthecpa2717 They were insured. In fact, four different insurance companies were involved. So the decision to settle wasn’t a unilateral decision but evidently an agreement between all four insurance companies.
@@larrysfarris Understood Larry. I wonder if Remington may have wanted to continue the fight? The insurance companies will take a finite settlement versus one that would be left to the whims of an emotional jury. Sad day no matter what.
Thank's for the truth , Colion!
Thanks for the clarity, Colin!
Many years ago there was an interview between a reporter and Bill Ruger. The reporter asked Bill if he felt bad about the people that his guns have killed. Bill said my guns have not killed anyone. Someone is responsible as they have to load, chamber, aim and fire the gun, That person is responsible.
I have never forgotten this and I do not understand how the law can be twisted into blaming the gun. No one blames knives, cars, cellphone companies for distracted driving.
The responsible person should be wholly responsible period.
You are going to see people start suing car manufacturers for crashes due to negligence and criminal activity--I guarantee it. This mentality of "blame the object, not the person" is a cornerstone principle of Post Modernism, because the agenda is to absolve-and legally strip--people of individual responsibility. Only then, when nobody is individually responsible for their actions--can you institute true, universal slavery and totalitarian oppression.
This case isn't actually about Sandy Hook's victims, or "gun violence", or Remington. It's about establishing the legal precedent where the OBJECT used in a crime bears the responsibility, and the person who uses that object is completely and totally absolved from any and all culpability. THIS is the poison of Post-Modernism, and it needs to be stopped...
@@stereodreamer23 you are on the right path but not on target yet. Nobody gonna sue car manufacturers because citizens aren't pushing the nobody is at fault agenda...They, the ones working in the shadows, are pushing the guns is bad agenda along with the people have no responsibility so can't be trusted with guns agenda. When it's a career criminal not a word...When it's self defense it's an all out attack on their character, their maturity, their lack of training, and utter nonsense...Kyle Rittenhouse is a perfect example and not a single word about the criminal with an illegal gun that tried to murder him...bicep boy wasn't even charged.
@@ftniceberg874 You obviously haven't been paying attention to the World Economic Forum, the UN, and the WokeVolk--they all HATE private ownership of automobiles by the "common people" and are already setting up plans and programs to discourage--and eventually ban--automobiles for everyone but the elite...
Now I want every person that’s been hit by a drunk driver to sue the manufacture of the car that hit them. I also want gun manufacturers to have the same protection as vaccine manufacturers.
or the company that made the alcohol that made them drunk
The biggest quote used in the gun smith world, “If you want to make a million dollars off of guns, start at 2 million”. Thank you for ALL the time and effort you take hitting all spectrums of gun control. America definitely needs it.
That was a great video and I truly appreciate the analysis and information regarding the legal, business, and financial aspect of the case. Your absolutely correct, it is only about money. It is truly sad that many are that way and seem ignorant that guns only work by a user of the gun. Thank you for this information.
Defines the term, "Scumbag Lawyer". Our legal system can be twisted and molded to effect outcomes in so many different ways... it really is so flawed and abused by people like this.
if citizens would bother electing people to fix it instead of playing the D vs R game we might be able to fix it.
And lawyers wonder why everyone hates them.
@@ninjabearpress2574 Even the bible has nasty words for them. Luke 11:46 "...Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers." Luke 11:52 "Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered."
@@CD-vb9fi I wonder what Hell looks like for a lawyer?
@@ninjabearpress2574 I hope to never find out. "There shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." The true terror of that passage scares me in a way nothing else ever can. From them, things will be taken, things they have taken from others. It will all be taken to the last mite. Never encroach upon the Authority of God, governments are called beasts because they always encroach, deciding who lives or dies, what can or cannot be taken from others without any faith/justice/mercy... those that support them are in grave risk of receiving in their punishments. And once that is finished... then they will perish into nothingness... Do not support evil, lend it your voice, and never accept it by any measure or out of convenience. Better to suffer and die than have a hand in the death and suffering of others.
This is sick, why can a company be faulted for something they have literally no fault in
Exactly what I was saying
Filthy money hungry lawyers
Democrats
Because they settled. What are they gonna do? Go be pariah for counter suing a group of school shooting families? That would be just as bad as having Remingtons insurance company settle the case with payments over the next 30 years.
@@kentuckyearl8202 republicans
Ridiculous that any court would entertain allowing a plaintiff to sue a gun manufacturer.
Outstanding narrative! Thanks for the ease of understanding!
"Blaming everybody but themselves"
The absolute irony.
Every time. No matter what every time
This is why I watch this channel. Having a lawyer explain it gives you a much better picture then pissed off John Doe ranting about how he would have never settled.
So glad you put this out. Clarifies so much.
Thank you 4 Sharing this and yes the court system needs to be revamped. Restore common sense!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm really tired of the same people who drive 70 on the freeway speed limit or not and talk about how dangerous guns are when they fail to realize how dangerous a multiple ton vehicle is even justified going 40. If your against guns your either blindly following politics or you think making the world more controlled and regulated makes the world more safe when in fact accepting facts and being prepared not paranoid is the way to live in the world not bubble wrap everything
I go way over 70
@@dakine9445 I agree that it's a poor analogy. The logic seems to be that if I did 30 on the highway it would be more safe. Most analogies don't bear close examination, but that one is a duesey. BUT teaching people to be less repsonsible is not the answer to increasing safety. We had no problem educating about AIDS but asking parents to not provide their violent-trendency children access to firearms seems unthinkable.
Crisis actors got paid again. BS.
The most recent year I could find correlating data for is 2017. According to Small Arms Survey, there were ~393,347,000 civilian owned guns in the USA in 2017. According to the CDC, the total number of deaths from firearms in 2017 was 39,773. Homicide accounted for 36.6% of those 39,773 (=14,557). That means there were 27,021 firearms owned per every ONE homicide. To put these numbers into perspective a little bit - there were 272,480,899 motor vehicles registered in the USA in 2017. 37,133 people lost their lives in motor vehicle crashes in 2017. That means for every 7,337 cars registered there was 1 death. Even though guns are "designed to kill" and cars are literally jam packed full of safety features designed to save your life, the object to death ratio is 3.68x higher for cars.
@@redonk1740 FYI they are going after privately owned vehicles as well. They want only the wealthy to own a vehicle, the rest of us will have to take the bus. It offers them more control over the people, because you have to live where public transport is available, which is an urban environment. You can't produce your own food or get water in an urban environment, it has to be brought to you. They can simply shut everything off until you obey.
The EPA is already going after gearheads like me who build high performance vehicles, and the companies that sell us parts. It doesn't matter if the parts are only used with clean burning green fuels either, its not about the environment, its about control.
They meant it when they said they wanted us to own nothing by 2030. Hard to achieve that when we are armed and able to move around freely. Hard to resist when everything you say is censored, and you are not allowed to congregate and speak because its supposedly 'dangerous' to everyone's health. Even if you are not disarmed, there isn't much you can do without mobility.
Imagine suing Ford because a person took their car and went on a rampage…
This case just opened up this! Mark my words, this will happen
Like the insane sob who drove a Ford suv into a crowd in Wisconsin
@@kenmaurer4743 Exactly like that
The sicko in Waukesha did just that......
@@kenmaurer4743 that never happened if you ask a liberal 😂
Great job explaining Colin.
Great discussion on the truth of the settlement!
All these lawyers look like you'd think.
Sniveling worms.
He looks like he smelled a bad fart
Yeah, "Carlos" probably took one look at this guy and the money signs started flashing in his head.
This one actually looks like Charles Martin Smith. AKA Terry the Toad from American Graffiti.
You’re doing an amazing job for the 2A community. Thank you!
Amen to that.
You do a good job analyzing but are very long winded. Put the important stuff first then delve into analysis that would be far better.
So clear, passionate and truthful…Thank you, Colion. Do not relent. Do not!
Thank You, Mr. Colion... for your info well done
Colion makes a good point, Remington didn’t settle their insurance companies did to protect against their own coverage. Protesting Remington and not buying their products will only hurt American workers at those factories even more. Regardless there will be a ripple effect in terms of insurance companies not willing to protect manufacturers anymore and could lead to a back door way to get rid of 2A that they have been hoping for.
We should back door the lawyers, the judges, and the Brandomala regime.
No Remington did settle. It was up to them and they did it because their lawyers told them it would be an absolute loser in court costing them triple in court
@@show2ime Exactly, saying otherwise is laughable.
@@bs7260 yeah because once they put those babies faces up that were murdered for the Jury to see it would be over. Colin knows better. I know he is definitely a sellout for the manufacturer’s that pay him sponsorship dollars but come on. I like his gun reviews but this was an idiotic statement
Thank you for breaking all of this down and for fighting for all of us in the 2A community.
Glad u cleaned that up for me personally. I was 1 of those never to buy a a product that had that name . thanks so much .
Keep putting the truth out there Colion, good job.
Gun control : it is the gun’s fault for killing people
Also gun control: we are going to send the guy who killed the people to jail.
Why don’t you just punish the gun? Not the crazy guy
Plus why are we not building Jails for dangerous guns then we can remove the laws against all the good guns of the world and lock up the bad guns that committed crimes.
Was shocked when this came out yesterday. I was like WTF?
Just another money digging lawyer. Probably doesn't care about the families or the 2nd amendment cause it's always about the money. If they say they wanted change and believe it then they would have take it to court.
Excellent presentation! Thanks!
Thank you so much for the effort you put into your content!
Opening eyes everywhere sir.
Much love Fam
I wish more people could see through the BS and call it out when they see it, as you do. Keep it up🤘
most people only see $$$$$$ and only believe what they have seen in movies... they know nothing about freedom or guns ... schools and gov't keep people stupid
How can you blame a gun for the actions of a person?? The mom is at fault for all of this not Remington!!!!
He killed his mom and grabbed the rifle. Kind of hard to sue a dead person.
Ya, I was about to say that, he first murdered his mother, then Stole the firearm from her.
She was the first one he killed… he’s responsible.
@@DickVanNiggz nooooo she left the gun available to him and she knew he had shit tons of issues, the boy would pit black bags on the windows in the basement too!! So like I said she also is responsible, not just him
@@Ratkill9000 were talking about actually who is at fault bottom line she left the firearm available to him, knowing he had issues...she never locked it up
Well done and explained. Thank you.
Wow... I never realized that guy gave a public address. Absolutely un-American.
The only things this settlement did was:
*Made insurance more expensive for gun makers.
*Changed the way gun makers advertise.
Great job as usual Colion!
The main thing it did, and the only one that guy really cared about, was put $30 million+ in his pocket.
You know I've played FPS games since the 90s, and I've never felt compelled to buy a firearm. What compelled me to buy a firearm, was the meth dealers that are on the street of the property I am living in, and the police not caring that they sell there.
Thanks for clearing this up cn..well explained.
Thanks for covering this
I'm glad you made this video because getting the truth out there is important in this fight for our rights. Thank you.
Remington made a huge mistake in settling this.
It makes no sense to charge a company for the actions of a madman.
I think it was the insurance carriers for Remington that chose to settle, not Remington themselves
@@NistaDGB But like he said, now it's going to be harder to get insurance.
They might have to create some sort of self ins pool.
@@Qingeaton Municipalities/cities lost insurance cover back in the 80's so they had to organize state or regional pools.
Great job in getting this out!! We the people are spreading the truth about this complete nonsense that is transpiring in our country. We can never give up the fight to keep our rights!!
Thank you Mr. NOIR
I wish that all gun companies would refuse to sell any firearms to law enforcement or anyone in Massachusetts. It’s just too risky for them there now.
I appreciate everything you cover Colion. I am honestly guilty of memory holing this whole case. Thank you so much for bringing it back to my attention.
Very informative video. As you said it was a settlement which is done by insurance companies. When can we sue politicians and the news for their deceit?
Thank you for breaking it down like that, I understand a whole lot more.
Okay so when a drunk driver hits someone sue the alcohol company.
@@ARAK-tq9zc stole the comment right from under me
Pathetic... Same goes for dieing from being fat. Sue Mac Donald's and the makers of trans fats and high carb chemical food
@Dating zone 4 no one gives a f
@@desmondclark3193 youtube doesn't care about bots spamming porn sites.
@@donttreadonme4355 clearly. But let me offend a snowflake the algo removes the comment.
A self-serving money grubbing attorney, shocking.
love seeing your take on this from a legal perspective thanks colion
Mr. Noir, thank you for posting these educational vids!
Thank you for your explanation of the backstory. I had no knowledge of the details in this case. What really makes me angry is the slimy lawyer tries to pass himself off a some kind of hero. You have a gift of being able to slice right through the BS and articulate the facts in a clear and concise manner.
This is wrong!! Wrong period!!! I'm originally from Connecticut and lived there when the shooting happened, it was a horrific tragedy...but it's the mother is to blame and the psycho that carried out the act
Well the mother was the first victim anyway, she should have introduced Jesus to her son
@@Tallacus and she should have locked up her firearms as well
Can you give me the background on what the mother did.
@@mitchjames9350 She let it happen by giving her mentally deranged, Asperger’s son access to an AR.
@@mitchjames9350 as far as what the cops found out afterwards?
Excellent analysis and explanation. Thank you for making this clear and understandable.
I Love how blunt he is. I support most of what he says all the time. Really I can't think of a time I didn't. I hate any of the shootings that happen and it makes me want to cry so hard for the families lives that has been Destroyed because of what happens. I am a big supporter of law enforcement, and not just because I worked in the field. I think we should have officers in Every school. To try and stop this madness, and in doing so, create more jobs. That is always a good thing. I could go on but I think you see what I'm talking about. Hope you all stay safe and if you can, support this guy. Now days I'm afraid he is the only Big voice out there for us.
For twenty years I did subrogation for the largest Subrogation Recovery Co in the US. I recovered monies paid by health insurance carriers in accident related situations. You are right, plaintiff counsel was in it for the money. Typical personal injury attorney deals are 1/3 of the settlement plus fees and costs. If it goes to trial that fee goes to at least 40%. So Mr. Do Gooder's firm walks away with $29 million. The rest to be divided up by the families. Now Health Insurance carriers may or may not subrogate the matter. They have the right but it may be a pr thing. While I was working the company did not subrogate any claims related to the World Trade Center attack. What disturbs me is that it was a policy limits settlement. The insurance companies threw in the towel. I wonder why they did that?
They REALLY shouldn't have settled. The other side had no case. I feel like this sets a dangerous precedent.
With unlimited money....that would have been the way to go for sure.
Did you not hear what he said? It's about money. Plain and simple. The case was going on for nine years. The costs for lawyers and such was becoming far to much for Remington whom was already going through bankruptcy. It wasn't Remington that folded. It was the insurance company that did. This scumbag was only in it for the money. Because if this was about principle or sending a message they would have never taken a payout. Greed is a powerful driver of human emotion. Doesn't matter if loved ones were killed when you get an ass load of cash dumped into your bank accounts it seems.
The judges shouldn’t have let the lawsuit go forward. Greedy corrupt lawyers can’t exist without corrupt judges helping them. It’s also why so many repeat offenders are released onto the street over and over again to commit more crimes.
I love how you break it down about the laws the gun you make so much sense about what's going on with that case and all that are there a real chance to have lunch with you and we can talk about this. Be so awesome you do so much for the second way community keep up the good work
Great video! Thank you again for breaking this down!
So glad we have your experiential perspective on our side. You were able to see right through this fallen lawyer's hubris. His speech felt like nothing more than denial feuled ego inflammation. You ensure the victims of the shooting may rest in peace by helping others come to perceive the horrid truth. Thank you. Never stop fighting. You have more people ready for you to wake them up than ever before!
I agree, we as a 2A community in order to show support, should go out and buy up all things Remington.
Good info, good message. Thank you for sharing! Stay Strong.
Thank you, very eloquent
I’m glad you’re an attorney you are very articulate, and your comments are well done. Thank you.
Just gotta say thank you! I'm so happy we have people like you standing no for our rights!!!! You have our backing brother!!! Keep up the good fight.
very well laid out video and answered a lot of questions I had, keep up the good work!!
Awesome explanation of this case. Interesting to see the lawyer essentially propagandizing on camera as if he cares so much about life instead of the cash. If he did indeed care about life, he wouldn’t try to crush an industry that is responsible for saving so many lives and stopping bad guys trying to take them. CN is the fkn man!
Consequentially, anti-2a attorneys might try more cases like this in the future in hopes for the almighty $
I hope Connecticut is ready for more of these sham court cases.
This was the most ridiculous and confusing settlement I’ve ever heard about . Remington s lawyers weren’t doing their jobs .
If you watched the entire video, you should understand that Remington's lawyers were not involved in the settlement.
Very well explained, Thank you.
thank you so much for the presentation of the facts and for providing the intelligent commentary
Great job explaining it. Keep up the good work.
Pathetic that there was a law suit to begin with toward a gun manufacturer what’s next car manufacturers. This should have been thrown out of court and Remington should have never settled the case. This sets the wrong precedence.
This opens the doors for suing car manufacturers and more.
I say start going after any and all Liberal held companies.
@@bnalive5077 I agree. Seriously gonna have to fight fire with fire if we want to keep America.
Did you not listen? Remington didn't settle... insurance companies did.
@@jjsmurf8759 let’s look at this from an educated side shall we. A doctor has malpractice insurance , as a building owner liability insurance as a car owner liability as a person , healthcare insurance. Etc etc etc. no different with Remington and their insurance companies. Just like any other insurance company , do you think there are insurance companies that just on a whim pay out people’s claims. No they are employed by Remington to handle these affairs. Now , what do you think happens to remingtons (and all other gun manufacturers) premiums. They are going to skyrocket. Exactly what I was saying about this, it sets precedence and the wrong type of precedence. This will severely impact the budget needed to be insured if every dick and Jane wants to sue and can simply settle the cases. Yes the insurance companies paid it but that’s because that is what Remington pays them to do. So anyone who believes Remington is not paying for this little problem is delusional about how this all works. Basically like all insurance the more risk the higher your premium is. Does that help. Similarly if they ever get what they want and make everyone carry insurance for a gun as an individual. The goal there is to simply make it so that only a few will even be able to afford the insurance therefor no insurance no gun. This is truly a devastating ruling and again I say Remington should have never aloud the settlement to occur. Oh and by the way. My malpractice insurance is a 1,000,000 policy. So if I get sued and the case awards someone more than my insurance policy covers who do you think has to pay the rest. That’s Right. I haven’t read enough to see if their insurance policies covered the full amount or not. Simply saw that the four agreed to settle. Again premiums will go up for all manufacturers and possibly make a lot of small business go out of business with this ruling and the future.
@@m.sand- well put. Also, I believe somewhere in California, there is some wackadoo already trying to pass this gun owners insurance crap. It's not high but it gives the idea that you need to pay a fee in order to protect yourself. I do not like that one bit.
Always appreciate hits breakdown on these matters!
Quite informing. Thank you.
this is honestly crazy that they settled this way like it blows my mind someone is stupid enough to sue a company for something someone else did
Insurance companies don't care about you or your rights. Most large gun companies don't care about you or your rights. Any of them would be just as happy if you were taken into bondage as all leftists who voted for Brandon must believe after watching their reactions to things happening in the news. Major gun companies would probably even be happier since having to have a large heavily armed police force to maintain jackbooted control over the population would mean they sell even more guns.
As usual a well thought out response, and now I know why "advertising liability insurance" is being required by all of the companies I do business with. This decision is going to be used as legal precedent going forward and will be the gift that keeps on giving to the legal and insurance industries.
Great video as always. Such an important issue.
Excellent analysis mate!