| Author |
Message |
Hacker
Banned
Joined: Sep 13 2008
Posts: 3129
|
|
  |
|
|
Alowishus
Joined: Aug 04 2009
Posts: 2515
|
Okay it just seems the blame game is being played.
It's totally unrealistic for a cinema to have security and weapon spot checking. It seems like they just want someone to blame - that person is the killer. It has nothing to do with the cinema.
EDIT: I didn't really follow this story so it's unclear to me what happened. If the gunman walked in like a normal person then i say it's unrealistic to expect a person to be searched for weapons.
However if the gunman broke into the cinema through a backdoor or whatever then okay it is the cinemas fault. However if this didn't happen then they aren't in the wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fighter_McWarrior
Title: Gun of Brixton
Joined: Jun 05 2011
Location: Down by the River
Posts: 1087
|
Never change, legal system
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hacker
Banned
Joined: Sep 13 2008
Posts: 3129
|
Alow, I think it could be argued that no matter what door they came through there's no way check for a weapon regardless.
And Fighter  I saw you responded and I was hoping for an awesome response.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fighter_McWarrior
Title: Gun of Brixton
Joined: Jun 05 2011
Location: Down by the River
Posts: 1087
|
I think that this is a frivolous lawsuit. I think it's ridiculous that, backdoor locked or not, the theater should be held accountable for a lone gunman coming in and shooting the place. That's not what people ever expect to happen in a theater and it shouldn't be something they should be held accountable. Some lawyer is looking for a chance to cash in, that's why everyone hates them.
I have a feeling that just about everyone here's going to be on the same page, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
UsaSatsui
Title: The White Rabbit
Joined: May 25 2008
Location: Hiding
Posts: 7565
|
It's not "frivolous" (that's an actual legal term that means a suit is completely without grounds or merit), but there's no real chance of this being won. They would have to prove not only that the theater didn't take significant measures to protect the patrons, but that they would be expected to take such measures in the first place. I don't think it's reasonable to assume that.
I also don't think this is a cash grab, really, at least not a greedy one. People were injured, they deserve compensation, and the cinema is the only entity involved that can reasonably give it (the gunman is likely broke). I think they're blameless in this, but I can see them or their insurance company cutting a quick check out of the goodness of their hearts (or to make them go away).
|
|
|
|
|
|
JRA
Joined: Sep 17 2007
Location: The Opium Trail
Posts: 3475
|
They could just... you know...sue the fuckface who shot at them.
|
 There are a lot of what if's in life Donny. What if I hit you really hard in the face, knocked yo shit to the back of yo skull? What if I....had you girl gargle my nuts? The fact remains, you are a fuckin mutant. |
|
|
|
|
JoshWoodzy
Joined: May 22 2008
Location: Goshen, VA
Posts: 6544
|
| JRA wrote: |
| They could just... you know...sue the fuckface who shot at them. |
That's not how it works.
|
|
|
 |
|
|
BlazingGlory
Title: KANE LIVES IN DEATH!
Joined: Aug 10 2009
Posts: 562
|
| JoshWoodzy wrote: |
| JRA wrote: |
| They could just... you know...sue the fuckface who shot at them. |
That's not how it works. |
Actually, that's not entirely true, if I recall correctly. Since the state is trying the guy who shot up the theater in criminal court, the families could still take him to civil court. Homicide is criminal. They could sue him for battery, but if he has no money, they really can't get anything. Also, since I don't actually see him winning his trial, I doubt the families will be able to take him to civil court anyway, with him being in jail or fried.
|
|
|
|
|
|
sidewaydriver
2010 SLF Tag Champ
Title: ( ͡� 
Joined: May 11 2008
Posts: 6160
|
I think they should sue Christopher Nolan for making a movie people wanted to go see at midnight.
|
Shake it, Quake it, Space Kaboom. |
|
|
|
|
LeshLush
Joined: Oct 19 2009
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 1479
|
| JoshWoodzy wrote: |
| JRA wrote: |
| They could just... you know...sue the fuckface who shot at them. |
That's not how it works. |
They did it with OJ.
|
|
|
|
|
|
UsaSatsui
Title: The White Rabbit
Joined: May 25 2008
Location: Hiding
Posts: 7565
|
Yeah, the fuckface is what lawyers call (ironically, I'm sure) "judgement-proof". He can be sued, and yes, he'd likely lose. But he's broke. Can't get money out of someone who has none.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Black Zarak
Title: Big Coffin Hunter
Joined: Feb 01 2006
Location: Phyrexia
Posts: 4098
|
Who's got a screenshot of that South Park episode about Everyone vs. Everyone...
|
REVIEWS, LEGOS, NONSENSE Check out Zarak's Barracks!
"Let that be a lesson to you, your family and everyone you've ever known..."
"Thanks to denial, I'm immortal!" |
|
 |
|
|
The Opponent
Title: Forum Battle WINNER
Joined: Feb 24 2010
Location: The Danger Zone
Posts: 3495
|
| sidewaydriver wrote: |
| I think they should sue Christopher Nolan for making a movie people wanted to go see at midnight. |
If he has an ounce of dignity in him, he'll never make a Batman movie ever again and probably make sure no one else does either.
|
I'm not a bad enough dude, but I am an edgy little shit. I'll do what I can. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
