Ignatious Piazza offers to fund CCW denial Cinemark lawsuit - Page 6

Ignatious Piazza offers to fund CCW denial Cinemark lawsuit

This is a discussion on Ignatious Piazza offers to fund CCW denial Cinemark lawsuit within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; So if it becomes fashionable to sue sign posting businesses because the patrons aren't provided adequate safety, should we then be allowed to sue the ...

Page 6 of 17 FirstFirst ... 234567891016 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 246
Like Tree63Likes

Thread: Ignatious Piazza offers to fund CCW denial Cinemark lawsuit

  1. #76
    Distinguished Member Array deadguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,781
    So if it becomes fashionable to sue sign posting businesses because the patrons aren't provided adequate safety, should we then be allowed to sue the federal government and state government for not allowing us to carry in those places listed in the laws?

    In SC, we can't carry in establishments that serve alcohol for consumption. Gunman shoots up a Ruby Tuesdays and we should be allowed to sue the state for not providing security right?

    What about on voting day? Gunman shoots up the polling station. Sue the federal gov right? I didn't see a cop at the station. Post office...no armed security.

    Who will pay the tab trying to sue governments for not providing security at places they don't allow CC? Step up.


    Sue everyone. Sue the lawyer that sues everyone and sue him for being sued.

    I think I'll sue myself for posting this. I could have hurt myself typing this on my phone. Wait...that would be Apple's fault.
    There's nothing like a funeral to make you feel alive


  2. #77
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,881
    Quote Originally Posted by Crowman View Post
    Wisconsin law states the following:
    If a private business or property owner allows the carrying of concealed weapons and someone is injured or killed as a result of a license holder using the weapon, is the employer or property owner legally liable?
    Generally no. However, there may be circumstances where such liability may exist and a discussion of such situations is beyond the scope of this brief legal summary.
    The law provides:
    A person who does not prohibit an individual from carrying a concealed weapon on property that the person owns or occupies is immune from any liability arising from his or her decision. Wis. Stat. ß 175.60(21)(b).

    An employer who does not prohibit one or more employees from carrying a concealed weapon is immune from any liability arising from that decision. Wis. Stat. ß 175.60(21)(c).

    A person providing a firearms training course in good faith is immune from liability from any act or omission related to the course if the course is one of the courses listed in statute. Wis. Stat. ß 175.60(21)(d).


    This law would hold those businesses that posted "no weapons" signs possibly liable. Yes the movie goers choose to go into the theater with a reasonable belief they would be safe. For example: people are injured due to the roof of the theater collapsing. Are some of you saying they should not have a right to sue. Businesses are sued all the time for patrons being injured on there property what makes this shooting different. And no I don't believe anyone is not blaming the shooter . However the theater is obligated to provide for a safe environment.
    I think it is stupid sue for the Aurora trajedy but that seems to be the American way. And when I say sue I mean because of the doors or whatever and again..still stupid. I think it is idiotic to sue if you try to even equate it to the 2nd A and how ones rights were denied. That is my biggest issue. I mean what are the chances of a lone gunman planning something like this for weeks doing it? You can't protect folks 100 percent. What if he used a bomb? What now, sue because there were no bomb sniffing dogs. Just stupid. We are not talking about exit doors being locked and there was a fire. That is somethiing you sue for.
    Sorry, that was mt last 2 cents lol

  3. #78
    VIP Member Array peckman28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,085
    Quote Originally Posted by barstoolguru View Post
    and who make those decisions?
    If we have loser pays, it means yahoos who bring up idiotic lawsuits like this and lose have to pay both their legal fees and the legal fees of their opponent. If the one suing wins, the loser pays the legal tab for both sides. Therefore, rather than knee-jerk vulture style thinking dictating who gets sued, it would swing more towards decent sense, since you can't just go harassing people in the courtroom without any consequences for yourself.
    Last edited by peckman28; July 29th, 2012 at 02:26 PM.
    Rockymonster likes this.

  4. #79
    Member Array Roon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    265
    I don't think it is suing over the Aurora tragedy per se. I think it is suing to have a fundamental question answered. If you deny me the right to defend my life, are you then as the business denying me that right responsible for anything that happens to my life as a result of your policy?

  5. #80
    Ex Member Array barstoolguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    under a rock in area 51
    Posts
    2,548
    I keep hearing sue happy people and frivolous law suits but what you all forget is that this country is based on law suits and the ability to be made whole when someone else makes, sells or offers services that are not what they are said to be. The auto is better because of law suits, homes are safer because of law suits, and the work place is safer because of law suits. Are there frivolous ones; sure but show me one system that was not taken advantage of in one way shape or forum!

    I for one have been to court and filed law suits against others for a number of things because I have a right to correct what other deemed was OK to do most of the time with knowledge that it was wrong to start with. Law suits are filed all the time because it keeps people from taking advantage of others.

    Letís say you go to the amusement park and you buy a ticket, you enter at your own risk TO a degree. The park has a responsibility to make the place safe by pulling maintained and inspecting the rides for damages due to wear and tear. You are on the roller coaster and on one of the turns you fall out and are paralyzed because of a faulty seat belt that no one wanted to take the time to fix; whose fault is it?

    The parks says you bought a ticket and entered at your own risk so why should we waste good man time to make the rides safer after all it was just YOU and not them that got hurt and you did enter at your own risk. Because of a law suit, they were negligent and you got hurt so you are made whole again by way of a law suit to cover your damages

    So why is it so different in a movie theater? Why is it that they donít have to make sure you are safe in their theater? The seats donít move, nothing is going to happen or is it. Why have a fire door when they arenít responsible for the safety of the movie goers? After all by logic on here they are not responsible if you burn to death after all it was the fires fault and they didnít set it.

    I posted the you-tube video to show what happens in a country that has no rights to file for damages. Russia has no system as you can see the driver was more worried about his car then the people he hit.

  6. #81
    Ex Member Array barstoolguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    under a rock in area 51
    Posts
    2,548
    Quote Originally Posted by peckman28 View Post
    If we have loser pays, it means yahoos who bring up idiotic lawsuits like this and lose have to pay both their legal fees and the legal fees of their opponent. If the win suing wins, the loser pays the legal tab for both sides. Therefore, rather than knee-jerk vulture style thinking dictating who gets sued, it would swing more towards decent sense, since you can't just go harassing people in the courtroom without any consequences for yourself.
    I believe there is a system in place now in most states that allow you to recover damages from a suit that was lost by the opposing party

  7. #82
    Senior Member Array Landric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kansas City Metro
    Posts
    807
    Lets be clear folks, the Constitution protects citizens from the actions of the government, not individuals or private enterprise. Unless there is case law or statutory law to the contrary (such as the various anti-discrimination laws), only the government can actually violate anyone's constitutional rights. Therefore, the second amendment cannot be used as an argument against the posting of signs on private property nor are the posters of those signs violating anyone's rights. As property owners, they have the right to post or not post, or otherwise use their property as they see fit within the bounds of the law. No one who entered the theater that night had their rights violated, plain and simple.

    Whether or not a lawsuit could be successful against the theater for failing to provide adequate security is a matter for the jury, judge, etc. I suspect such a lawsuit would fail were it to make it to court, but I also suspect a good chance of a settlement before trial. Businesses are required to provide a reasonably safe environment for their customers, they are not expected to foresee any possible circumstance where someone could be injured or killed. Unless the exit door the shooter used was somehow in violation of code it is highly unlikely that I court would find the theater responsible for injuries caused by the criminal act of a person who was not an employee of the theater.
    -Landric

    "The Engine could still smile...it seemed to scare them" -Felix

  8. #83
    Member Array Roon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by Landric View Post
    Lets be clear folks, the Constitution protects citizens from the actions of the government, not individuals or private enterprise. Unless there is case law or statutory law to the contrary (such as the various anti-discrimination laws), only the government can actually violate anyone's constitutional rights. Therefore, the second amendment cannot be used as an argument against the posting of signs on private property nor are the posters of those signs violating anyone's rights. As property owners, they have the right to post or not post, or otherwise use their property as they see fit within the bounds of the law. No one who entered the theater that night had their rights violated, plain and simple.

    Whether or not a lawsuit could be successful against the theater for failing to provide adequate security is a matter for the jury, judge, etc. I suspect such a lawsuit would fail were it to make it to court, but I also suspect a good chance of a settlement before trial. Businesses are required to provide a reasonably safe environment for their customers, they are not expected to foresee any possible circumstance where someone could be injured or killed. Unless the exit door the shooter used was somehow in violation of code it is highly unlikely that I court would find the theater responsible for injuries caused by the criminal act of a person who was not an employee of the theater.
    Yea you are correct, I guess I should have thought it through more before posting. Nobody forced those folks to give up their right to self defense by entering that theater. They do so willingly and were apparently ok without the ability to defend themselves and paid the price for that. Thanks for bringing me back to reality lol.
    baren likes this.

  9. #84
    VIP Member Array mprp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,929
    If nothing else, it's good publicity for Front Sight. That and maybe an aid in raising awareness to self protection.
    Vietnam Vets, WELCOME HOME

    Crossman 760 BB/Pellet, Daisy Red Ryder, Crossman Wrist Rocket, 14 Steak Knives, 3 Fillet Knives, Rolling Pin-14", Various Hunting Knives, 2 Baseball Bats, 3 Big Dogs and a big American Flag flying in the yard. I have no firearms; Try the next house.

  10. #85
    Ex Member Array barstoolguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    under a rock in area 51
    Posts
    2,548
    if the law suit fails and business see that they can put up a sign without recourse and that they don’t have to ensure the safety of others from violence you might as well leave your gun at home because the only place you will be able to carry at is Wal-Mart and 7-11

  11. #86
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    3,637
    The fire door operated as intended, it allowed people or a person to exit the theater - kind of hard to prevent the same person from re-entering if they actually have the intelligence to block the door slightly open. Having such a rare incident happen at that particular theater is not reasonably foreseeable.

    You never answered the question about your liability for a shooter in your home.

  12. #87
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,881
    Quote Originally Posted by nedrgr21 View Post
    The fire door operated as intended, it allowed people or a person to exit the theater - kind of hard to prevent the same person from re-entering if they actually have the intelligence to block the door slightly open. Having such a rare incident happen at that particular theater is not reasonably foreseeable.

    You never answered the question about your liability for a shooter in your home.
    Or if I should be sued becasue of my no gun policy to skydiving students.

  13. #88
    Ex Member Array barstoolguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    under a rock in area 51
    Posts
    2,548
    Quote Originally Posted by nedrgr21 View Post
    The fire door operated as intended, it allowed people or a person to exit the theater - kind of hard to prevent the same person from re-entering if they actually have the intelligence to block the door slightly open. Having such a rare incident happen at that particular theater is not reasonably foreseeable.

    You never answered the question about your liability for a shooter in your home.
    I’m responsible if someone gets shot in my home? It counts to the circumstances; did they enter through an open door or a door that was in poor maintained? Was it a hold up or was it someone playing with a gun recklessly? Did I leave the gun out where a child could get to it? In any and all cases my homeowner policy (1,000,000.00 worth) will pick up the tab because that is what insurance is for.

    Remember if you enter my home you are invited in (if not you are dead) so that as a homeowner makes me responsible for injury caused by my negligents but if you get hurt by your own stupidity then it’s your problem… (If my dog bits you, I pay but if you tease the dog and then get bit; you lose)
    Now if I sell you a ticket to enter my home and someone enter through an unsecure door and shoots you then I didn’t provide a safe environment and crowd control and am liable.

    I for one am surprised that no one has mention why the fire doors didn’t have alarms on them in the first place … we can only assume it is because people exit the theater when the movie is over instead of using the front doors. The alarms would constantly be going off and need someone to reset them thus using more man power = less profit for the theater.

  14. #89
    Ex Member Array barstoolguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    under a rock in area 51
    Posts
    2,548
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Or if I should be sued becasue of my no gun policy to skydiving students.
    I don't believe I ever said that, what I said is that you restrict your students from having a gun BUT you never said where. Most airplanes don't allow guns and this is a given, would you need a gun jumping out of a plane...only if you are an airborne ranger. Like I said before I can imagine hitting the ground wrong with a gun on your hip can be painful.

    We are not talking about 6-10 people here landing in a dirt field; we are talking about thousands of people in a highly charged environment with a violent movie. I remember the movie "the warriors" when it came out back in the 1979 and the violence the movie created from supercharging the crowd after the movie. This is not new to the theater people but to save money and increase profit they don’t hire security to patrol the area

    After several violent incidents that occurred at various showings of the film, the producers decided to change the poster as a way of cutting down on the violence. The original poster featured the logo as well as a picture of several tough looking gang members. The second poster just featured the logo against a white background.
    Movie Facts | The Warriors Movie Site

    Remember this Abraham Lincoln was shot in a movie theater over 150 years ago and security is still the pits

  15. #90
    VIP Member Array Harryball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lansing Mi
    Posts
    7,264
    Ban it all, sue them all. We have reached the utopia, known as the Nanny states of America.
    farronwolf likes this.
    Don"t let stupid be your skill set....

    Never be ashamed of a scar. It simply means, that you were stronger than whatever tried to hurt you......

Page 6 of 17 FirstFirst ... 234567891016 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

ccw instructor sued

,

cinemark lawsuits

,

franklin county ccw denial

,

lawsuit against cinemark no firearms

,

powered by mybb area 51

,

powered by mybb class action lawsuit

,
powered by mybb florida building codes
,
powered by mybb minnesota personal injury lawyers
,
powered by mybb movie listing
,

powered by mybb movie theater

,

powered by mybb movie theatres

,

powered by mybb wisconsin personal injury lawyers

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors