News

Nevada court against gunmen in Las Vegas shooting case: NPR

An October 2017 file photo released by the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Investigations Report shows several guns in mass shooter Stephen Paddock’s room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Hotel Fly in Las Vegas.

Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department via AP


hide captions

switch captions

Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department via AP


An October 2017 file photo released by the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Investigations Report shows several guns in mass shooter Stephen Paddock’s room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Hotel Fly in Las Vegas.

Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department via AP

CARSON CITY, Nev. – Nevada’s Supreme Court ruled gun manufacturers could not be held liable for deaths in a 2017 mass shooting on the Las Vegas Strip because state law protects them from liability unless the weapon malfunctioned.

The parents of a woman who were among 60 people killed in a shooting at a crowded music festival have filed a false claim against Colt Manufacturing Co. and several other gun manufacturers in July 2019.

The suit says the gun companies “willfully manufacture and sell weapons designed for automatic fire because they are aware their AR-15s can be easily modified with stockpiles to do so.” , thereby violating federal and state machine gun bans.”

Stephen Paddock used an AR-15 with a warhead when he fired 1,049 rounds in just 10 minutes into a crowd of 22,000 people from his apartment in a resort-casino tower before killing himself. Fifty-eight people were killed at the site or died in hospital and hundreds more were injured, including two who died years after complications from their injuries.

Nevada’s Supreme Court largely sided on Thursday with the manufacturers’ argument that Nevada law excludes them from civil lawsuits, with “the only exception to liability actions.” for a product that involves a design or manufacturing defect that causes the gun to malfunction.”

“We believe (state law) provides gun companies with immunity from wrongful death and negligence claimed against them under Nevada law in this case,” Justice Kristina Pickering wrote in the decision. decided to agree.

The lawsuit, filed by Carrie Parsons parents James and Ann Marie Parsons in Seattle, alleges that the manufacturers showed “a lack of respect for public safety” by promoting guns “as military and signaling weapons.” simple transformation of the weapon.” It says there are dozens of videos online showing people how to install assistive software.

“It’s just a matter of when – not if – a shooter takes advantage of the ease of adapting the AR-15 to automatic fire in order to significantly increase body count,” the lawsuit says.

Pickering said the lawsuit is based on a claim of a fault “outside of the inherent harmfulness of firearms, i.e., by the companies that illegally manufacture and distribute machine guns by gun companies.”

But she said in the 20-page ruling, state law does not limit specific manufacturer immunity to “legal” firearms. She said they state that no civil action is allowed in such cases against the manufacturer of “any” firearm or ammunition.

“We should never underestimate the profound problems of public policy or the horrific tragedy that the 91st Sugar Harvest Festival has caused,” she wrote, noting that the law as written does not allow families The Parsons family brought claims against the manufacturers.

“If civil liability is imposed against gun manufacturers and distributors in place of gun companies in this case, that decision is up to the Legislature, not this court.” , she wrote. “We urge the Legislature to act if it is not meant to provide immunity in situations like these.”

Source link

news7g

News7g: Update the world's latest breaking news online of the day, breaking news, politics, society today, international mainstream news .Updated news 24/7: Entertainment, Sports...at the World everyday world. Hot news, images, video clips that are updated quickly and reliably

Related Articles

Back to top button