Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!
  2. We're giving away over $1,000 in prizes this month in the Northwest Firearms Winter Giveaway!
    Dismiss Notice

Cinemark wins theater shooting liability case

Discussion in 'General Firearm Discussion' started by Slobray, Jun 30, 2016.

  1. Slobray

    Slobray Yelm, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    872
    Likes Received:
    1,778
    All of the law suits against Cinemark Theater for the the maniac shooting up the place have been thrown out by a federal judge.

    Federal judge: Cinemark not liable for movie theater shooting (http://www.9news.com/news/federal-judge-cinemark-not-liable-for-movie-theater-shooting/255531519)

    CNS - Last 'Batman' Claims Against Cinemark Tossed (http://www.courthousenews.com/2016/06/29/last-batman-claims-against-cinemark-tossed.htm)

    The "Court finds that Holmes’ premeditated and intentional actions were the predominant cause of plaintiffs’ losses." (Sighting previous lawsuits for Columbine) Which is totally understandable, but how do you think it would have played out if there was a person with a concealed carry permit that was disarmed by the theaters no gun policy?


    Ray

    PS. Cinemark is asking for court costs Colorado theater wants shooting victims to pay $700K in legal fees (http://www.wxyz.com/news/national/colorado-theater-wants-shooting-victims-to-pay-700k-in-legal-fees-1)
     
    Goosebrown and Sgt Nambu like this.
  2. Ralgha

    Ralgha Portland Well-Known Member 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    461
    Did they actually bring up the argument about the no gun policy? Those articles don't mention it.
     
  3. Slobray

    Slobray Yelm, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    872
    Likes Received:
    1,778
    Not that I've heard, actually I don't think I've ever heard of someone being disarmed suing for damages after a violent attack.

    My question was more of a hypothetical question to see if people thought the case would have merit if there had been a disarmed person in the theater that night.


    Ray
     
    Sgt Nambu likes this.
  4. Ralgha

    Ralgha Portland Well-Known Member 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    461
    Honestly, I think that's the only thing that might have merit. Just as you shouldn't be able to sue San Francisco when Asiana drives an airplane into their seawall, you shouldn't be able to sue Cinemark when some lunatic shoots people in one.

    However, when Cinemark says, "you can't have a gun," they should be open to suits because they deprived you of the ability to protect yourself. If San Francisco said, "you can't have EGPWS here," they'd have gotten the bubblegum sued out of them with that Asiana crash (let's ignore the fact that EGPWS is federally mandated and didn't help in that case anyway).
     
    Joe Link and Slobray like this.
  5. Sgt Nambu

    Sgt Nambu Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    7,926
    Likes Received:
    11,829
    An interesting question, but I would never be able to participate. :cool:
     
  6. Slobray

    Slobray Yelm, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    872
    Likes Received:
    1,778
    In the lawsuit or conversation? Why?


    Ray
     
  7. Osarion

    Osarion Snohomish County, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    478
    Boy talk about ballsy, suing the victims lol. Not gonna win them any brownie points on that part, even though it's a legitimate complaint.
     
  8. Lance Jacobs

    Lance Jacobs South Willamette Valley Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,821
    Likes Received:
    2,856
    Well, the victims can then turn around and sue their own attorneys for legal malpractice, for talking them into filing a frivolous lawsuit.

    Sometimes the best legal advice is to tell your client that they don't have a case.

    .
     
    Goosebrown likes this.
  9. PaulB47

    PaulB47 Hillsboro Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,040
    Likes Received:
    2,907
    No they haven't. You simply go elsewhere.

    If you don't, you've implicitly agreed to their conditions. How can you sue for something you agreed to?

    Beware of trampling property rights, even for a good cause. That way lies disaster.