Let the lawsuits begin

[2sac]

http://news.yahoo.com/claim-seeks-10...003646074.html

[ryan1088]

You knew it was just a matter of time. The first horse is out of the gate, the rest are sure to follow.

[Tool-Slinger]

http://news.yahoo.com/claim-seeks-10...003646074.html

This type of insane shooting has happened before and will happen again. It was a foreseeable safety concern. Predictably, the rampage ended only when the nut was confronted with armed response and/or decided to kill himself. By not allowing staff to be armed, or alternately providing other professional armed security on site the state was indeed negligent.

Armed security is a good idea.

[2sac]

100M negligent for a survivor who listened to it on an intercom???

[Tool-Slinger]

100M negligent for a survivor who listened to it on an intercom???

While the amount may be absurd, that is the nature of legal claims against large entities. They get negotiated or settled down or reduced.

Punitive damages,.. the amount has to be enough that the guilty cannot simply 'pay the bill' and walk off un-bothered by the infraction.

[2sac]

So, it's the schools fault the shooting happened????

[Tool-Slinger]

So, it's the schools fault the shooting happened????

The state did nothing to directly make it happen. The state did take steps to enable it to happen, encourage it to happen, and prevent the reduction in damages.

There is an inherent liability there. Same as if there had been a fire and fire extinguishers were not allowed on premises.

Nobody would blame the state for starting the fire.

[Tool-Slinger]

The state did nothing to directly make it happen. The state did take steps to enable it to happen, encourage it to happen, and prevent the reduction in damages.

There is an inherent liability there. Same as if there had been a fire and fire extinguishers were not allowed on premises.

Nobody would blame the state for starting the fire.

Let me make a point of clarification here in case anyone does not get it and is willing to listen...

When a nut goes on a shooting spree there is only two common things that will stop it. TWO things, simple things. That's it. 1- Somebody else has a gun and shoots or apprehends them. 2- The nut volunteers to stop shooting. The latter is often suicide, and also often after being confronted with point 1.


The immediate situation is really no more complicated than that.

I understand there are a myriad of other somewhat related issues worthy of discussion.

[2sac]

The state did nothing to directly make it happen. The state did take steps to enable it to happen, encourage it to happen, and prevent the reduction in damages.

There is an inherent liability there. Same as if there had been a fire and fire extinguishers were not allowed on premises.

Nobody would blame the state for starting the fire.

Murder, being against the law, is not enough? Not allowing crazy people to obtain guns is not enough? Declaring the school a "Gun free zone" is not enough?

[Tool-Slinger]

Murder, being against the law, is not enough? Not allowing crazy people to obtain guns is not enough? Declaring the school a "Gun free zone" is not enough?

The third item is the problem. In doing so they made the school guaranteed, and publicly known, defenseless.

[2sac]

The lawsuit then should be directed to Bill Clinton and Janet Reno.

[ga-hvac-tech]

Good approach Tool... lessee if it will catch on...

[netsalt]

Did armed guards stop the Columbine or Virginia Tech shootings?

Turning schools, shopping malls, libraries, movie theaters, etc. into armed camps is probably the most ridiculous proposal I have ever heard from so called adults.