Thanks for watching guys! So what are your thoughts about this lawsuit? Think it’ll stick, or is it just a crazier version of the Walmart “slip and fall” scheme? Let me know! Thanks to TacPack for helping make this video happen! Check them out and use code “AKGUY” to get your free bonus box! www.tacpack.com Thanks to SDI! Again, it’s SDI.edu for more info!
I faced a "scattergun lawsuit" once during my Fire/EMS career. A woman got rear-ended at a traffic light. Her lawyer sued EVERYBODY for causing/aggravating her "grievous injuries & suffering": the driver who hit her, her car manufacturer, his car manufacturer, his mechanic, her mechanic, the City, the County, the State highway department (road conditions/traffic light timing), my EMS agency, our Medical Director, my crew, me, the Fire Department, the extrication equipment manufacturer, the backboard manufacturer, the cervical collar manufacturer, the IV supplies manufacturer, the oxygen supplies msnufacturer, the supplier of our oxygen (yeah, I'm serious), the stretcher manufacturer, the ambulance chassis builder, the ambulance builder, the dealer we bought our ambulance from, the hospital, the Emergency Room, the ER doc, the nurses, the xray department, xray tech, hospital gurney manufacturer, xray machine manufacturer, hospital bed manufacturer, the hospit... Well, you get the idea. The judge threw out everything against 99% of the chosen victims of the money grab but then took it a step farther. Since the insurance for the driver that hit her was paying literally EVERYTHING to help this woman, the judge threw out even the portion of the suit against the driver - mainly because of an error in the way the lawsuit was worded, but also, I think, out of spite for the utter bollocks of it all. So yeah, Brandon, these grifter lawyers are everywhere... 🤦♂️
@@bbbbbbb51 They are everywhere man look at billboards along the road. I worked in the evil pit of insurance. The amount of people who'd try and sue the other driver when their insurance covered all the bills + some pain and suffering is asinine. Then their clients would call us claiming after legal fees they were not set right. Hire a damn lawyer only if you know you are being screwed. Losing a life, or piece of your body and suing is a lot more understandable as that damage can be criminal negligence and bodily harm. Usually in accidents no jail time, but deep legal fees, etc. People often times don't get slammer time unless they are DUI.
@@bbbbbbb51 they're everywhere doesn't mean they're all of them or even the majority you clown looool all it takes is one in every area to make your day worse because of their shit at the wall strats
What really sucks is that if you pay attention to the case, you can tell the suit wasn't her idea. It was absolutely an attorney trying to take advantage of her traumatized state by convincing her to file a bullshit suit she has no chance of winning. But she's the one who's gonna lose money over this.
Indeed. ‘Violent weaponry” is as much a misnomer as ‘honest lawyer”. ‘Violence” and ‘assault” are not objects, they are Verbs, Actions, Human Behaviors, in other words, they are Verbs. Guns, magazines, ammunition etc are inanimate objects. They are incapable of making decisions, they are incapable of committing crimes.
@@metalmamasue3680 "Assault rifle" is a legitimate term, it just gets consistently misused both by tacticool morons and media organizations that don't care what the actual definition is
Every one of them should file their own countersuit. Not a class action, or a group lawsuit, make that law firm have to defend a bunch of individual suits, MUCH more painful to them, and not much more expensive to the companies affected.
@@tetraxis3011 Ideally yes but I don't think countersuits let you do it that way. I don't know what grounds they would have to sue the lawyers/firm. In fact I'm pretty sure the law is set up specifically to protect the lawyers and firms from this which is how we got to this point of sleazy lawyers willing to sue anyone for any reason: they have no personal risk in the outcome of the case. The only thing they have to lose is their pay/billable hours/time and their win/loss record, neither of which are particularly large risks
@sdivine13 you can sue the lawyer if you sue for the reasons that you allege the lawyer KNOWS the suit is spurious and contemptuous of both the law and the court.
@@umporeon0132No there are no fines however, it sets up litigation for a defamation lawsuit if it is completely proven intentional and causes financial harm or damage. Example for no consequence: Adam lies about Bet. Bet wishes to sue for defamation but can’t due to lack of financial damage and the inability to prove that Adam knew he said lies. Example for litigation: Adam lies about Bet. Because of Adam’s lie Mr. Cina stops doing business with Bet and says that Adams lie is why. Adam posts an apology on Facebook for lying. With this information Bet can prove defamation. Due to proven financial damage and proven false allegations.
Cessna ran into this problem and almost went out of business because of it. They were being continually sued even in cases where it was determined the incident was " clearly pilot error" . BTW, I went and checked when you said to and I WAS unsubscribed! I've been a subscriber for a LONG time.
Maybe you've been sleepwalking through the Neo-Marxists' post-Constitutional putsch era, but the 1st Amendment has been squarely in the sights of progressive liberals for years now.
This already has happened. I don’t know if it was a Remington or something or if they themselves appealed, but there is already a case of this happening.
Actually this is a thing, and it depends on the advertisement, and what it entails. Typically appealing to audiences that can't legally use the items they show, and/or via promoting crime among other things. However, none of these memes promote crime, the ones that even "promote violence" are about hypothetical situations of legal survival, and while their products may appeal to minors via a select few T rated games, nothing is incentivising minors to illegally obtain and use guns, and M rated games aren't promoted towards minors. Basically no legal basses here for this insufferably unhinged, idiotic lawsuit
You have too much faith in the injustice system. Whether it works or not has no bearing on the law or the merits, merely who appointed the judge presiding over the case. Was there a D by the name? Odds are it goes forward and gets dragged out, intentionally, to create costs and negative publicity. A settlement would just be a bonus. @@___meph___4547
The worst part of this isn’t that this lawsuit exists, but that when the case fails, the plaintiffs will be on the hook for the legal fees from all those companies. Because Tort is a thing.
These ambulance chasing Lawyers should be held financially accountable for manipulating the emotionally vulnerable victims of crimes into frivolous lawsuits.
Honestly I think if someone files a lawsuit that's later thrown out or found to be frivolous, they should either serve prison time and do labor, or lose their right to file a lawsuit in the future, vote, run for office, work in any public service/government position, etc. Maybe people will be less apt to waste the time of our justice system and the money of other people to defend themselves against bullshit if they know they'll lose EVERYTHING as a result.
Yup! Exactly my thoughts. They include as many as they can and if just one settles, that's money they didn't get otherwise. They know when they file these suits that most of it will get tossed, but there's always the chance one or more will go Remmington on it and the client and attorney will make out like a bandit. Mostly the attorney.
When tobacco companies, pharmaceutical companies, knife companies and home depot get sued for "their products being used to harm others", I might acknowledge a lawsuit against a firearm manufacturer.
@@EIA-Observer But Ikea had nothing to do with the bed, and you ordered the frame from Amazon. You also sue the companies that made your desk, nightstand, and dresser, despite the fact that those items have no relation.
brandon didn't collect more memes for gun meme review. he should be held accountable for not keeping his promises. every subreddit he's subbed to, as well as reddit and facebook overall should be held accountable. oh, let's hold jeff bezos and imagine dragons accountable too
If someone from the East Coast can run for governer in California, I think its fair for an Ohioan like myself to vote for Brandon. Sounds like fair trade
Went to finish watching the most recent episode of Darwin awards, only to find it yeeted from TH-cam. Please, Congressman AK Guy, please sue TH-cam for not allowing you to critique dangerous individuals in an effort to promote safety and an attempt to prevent future "award winners".
hey!!!! WHEN YOU GET INTO CONGRESS PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PUSH FOR THE BILL: IF YOU FALSELY ACCUSE SOME ONE OF SOME THING, YOU YOURSELF ARE TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE WHATEVER PENALTIES THE FALSE ACCUSATION CLAIMS!!! (or words to that effect, or... werdage 2dat effekt!)
@@alexmikhael5061 You really think he's gonna win? No way they'll let that happen. As much as I'd love it, we live in a country that no longer has fair elections. They are all manipulated, from the federal down to the local level. Some parts of the country still have it good, but places like Texas have been taken over by Soros funded losers who are more than willing to rig the system. Trump was and will be the last elected official by the people.
Unlike you, that attorney went to law school. The First Amendment does not regulate the actions of private citizens and private businesses. This is not a 1A case. Educate yourself before you speak on this topic again, lest you embarrass yourself with your ignorance again.
@@ReverendMeat51 The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects what are commonly known as The Five Freedoms: freedom of religion, freedom of press, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of petition. This amendment gives Americans the right to express themselves verbally and through publication without government interference. The First Amendment only protects your speech from government censorship. It does not include censorship or disputes between private citizens, businesses, and organizations.
@@teebob21yeah, wat? You are acting like nobody is protected by the 1A because they are private parties, this is literally that case. The ppl being sued are the ones making the speech, that’s what the court has no business assigning “harm” about. Unless the speech was literally them telling the guy to commit crimes. (But it on it’s face was not, it’s not even a question of fact)
As a small, small child, just before getting into video games, there was a lawyer by the name of Jack Thompson, suing Best Buy, Wal-Mart, and every game developer he could think of over "violent content" in video games. He lost case after case, and while he made it pretty much standard company policy across electronics retailers to ID for M-rated games, there still is not a legal binding to it. He was eventually disbarred for frivolous lawsuits. From Florida. We need to push, not just for winning these absurdist cases, but for the same punishments on any lawyers who take them.
Dude, Jack Thompson. That's a name I haven't heard in a while. Even as a kid, I was born in 1990, am 33 now, I knew Jack was a monumental moron. At the time, I was like, "aren't the parents supposed to know what their kids are doing, and actually "parent" them?"
I remember this clown from when I was a child. As a child I was stunned, because I couldn't think of 2 things more dissimilar. I remember Penn & Teller giving a rifle to a gamer child and the child started crying after firing the rifle. Two different fucking universes entirely.
They could probably make counterclaims that most of their evidence is irrelevant to the case or has blatant logical fallacies like blaming the manufacturer for using a product that isn't in the scope of the case. Those counterclaims would probably get instantly accepted since it doesn't even take a lawyer to realize that.
I think it's sad that the Remington lawsuit set a precedent that marketing materials are literally violence, and that no-one has stepped in to point out how ridiculous that is
So I don't know the details of what you're talking about. But I remember hearing something about it. And as a European all I got to say is. Why did someone get upset about a firearm doing exactly what it was created for, shooting that is. Like that's what I took from that. I get that the gun laws over there is neat because, hey you get to own and shoot a gun! But I kinda strongly believe that such liberties comes at a cost. Weirdly enough, anti-gun people doesn't seem to even want to do their due diligence in research. You muricans do be as weird as you're varied.
A lawyers job is to get rhe best result for their client. If there is a chance to get more out of a situation, they are legally required to tell their client. Y'all do not seem to understand how th profession is supposed to work...
@@rompevuevitos222 scamming people into lolsuits that have little chance to win, then turning around on their clients with legal fees is not the "best result"
@@VenomSnakee legal fees are always on the table, be it with this or any other maneuver, it is not a scam, it is how lawyers work. The chances of winning part is true, they should have been more clear about the risk reward potential, but it is far from illegal to no suggest the safest option. Otherwise every lawyer would say "lets plead guilty and make a deal to be safe that you do not get max sentence"
@@rompevuevitos222 You have to be delusional to think the idea of suing literally every gun company that was vagely relevant to the case to be "the most optimal choice". Are you the lawyer in question or something?
If I wasn't looking at a new car, I would totally buy a Surefire light for my rifle. You know, "emotional support in these hard times," for Surefire. "Sorry you're getting sued for stupid reasons, allow me to ease the pain by buying an M600."
@@BOBBERTQUESTIONMARKS That's already standard practice in US federal district court. See also Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 54. It's also common at the circuit appellate level; to wit: "Unless otherwise provided by law, agreed by the parties, or ordered by the court, if an appeal is dismissed or the judgment affirmed, costs are taxed against the appellant; and if the judgment is reversed costs are taxed against the appellee. If a judgment is affirmed or reversed in part, or is vacated, costs are allowed only as ordered by the court. Fed. R. App. P. 39(a)."
@@teebob21 In this lawsuit, Defamation against a Private Party is rather irrelevant. It's better to quickly toss it out of the court or to sue for legal fees. Especially when this lawsuit is frivolous without hard evidence to back the False Advertising beyond personal grandeur.
As a filthy Brit I felt personally attacked there Brandon, but thankfully not by a gun or (more likely for me) a pointy stabby thing. And VERY thankfully not by a crazy ambulance-chasing lawyer.
Also would be funny to see how the numbers stack up if you add stabbings ontop of USA shooting numbers... And I don't mean that in the passive aggressive way, actually funny.
We have the same problem of massaged statistics. Knife crime involves any crime where a "sharp implement" was recovered, not even used in the crime. Knife deaths, it's around 150 to 300 in any year. Very few of those in schools though.
@@Valsorayu There are _more_ stabbings in the US than in the UK. Even with how easy it is to get guns in the US, there are still _more_ stabbings than in the UK where guns are much harder to get.
Yet using someone else's likeness of their art in your art is called a copyright violation. There's been dozens if not hundreds of successful lawsuits about someone sampling another song.
This lawsuit is an infringement on 1A *and* 2A. If any company settles "for an undisclosed amount", they need to be CALLED OUT and HASHTAG CANCELED like we did with Liberty Safes.
@@General_MaximusUnfortunately, in a case like this it is that first pebble before the dam fails. We knew once the laws protecting gun companies were rolled back, we would see this. Any company pleading a deal on this puts us all at risk, even just simple gun owners. As such, we MUST make them take it all the way to a jury trial. Lawyers must know that taking a case like this means months or years tied up in court, so they are not willing to take that gamble.
Bro I still can't get over the fact that, as a Canadian, I can buy real semi-auto AKs and AR-15 clones legally as long as they're being made by the correct companies. But if I own a handgun in .22 LR, I'm going to jail. A full gucci AR-15 needs a bit of paperwork, .22LR handguns are impossible to legally purchase. It's that insane. The country is like 99% empty space, give me a break.
Also, I hope that her lawyer informed her of what a “slap back lawsuit” and the possible costs this can incur for her. These are some big names with a lot of money, and their legal teams will likely charge somewhere in the area of $1,500 per hour at a minimum.
Reread this knowing lawyer is a euphemism for the people with small hat who own everything and control people with ops like Epstein's Island blackmail.
As someone who has worked for the same law firm for the past 31 years (admin capacity), I can attest that some attorneys do, in fact, lack a soul as well as a spine.
Honest to God I hope this goes nowhere and then there’s legal precedent against these kinds of frivolous lawsuits. All we need is 1 judge looking at the Plaintiff’s Counsel and just saying “no, this is dumb, you are dumb, get out of my courtroom.”
It doesn't just extend to gun companies but all other companies too. "This guy murdered my family with a knife! I'm suing them! But they also had Kelloggs cereal for breakfast, I'm also suing Kelloggs for helping the murderer to kill my family!"
Love your content! Love how you brought this lawsuit, which otherwise might have gone unnoticed setting an incredibly damaging precedent to personal liberty, to light!
The goal of this lawsuit is not to get money for the victim. The goal is to make the defendants spend obscene amounts of money defending it, and bankrupting them.
They aren't going to be capable of bankrupting most of these companies. DD, Federal/Vista, Fiocchi America/Munizioni, Surefire, and Magpul? Definitely not. The lawyers filing the suit don't have the funds to challenge multi-billion dollar, federally contracted corporations like these (yes, some aren't multi-billion, but they will work together in a suit). The smaller companies like Centurion are potentially at risk, but I think they will be able to hold themselves afloat with the help of the others. The lawyers/individual suing are putting themselves at considerable risk of loss from potential attorney's fees being awarded to the defendants.
I can guarantee you the victim wasn't laying in her hospital bed thinking, "I want to sue the manufacturers of the guns and gun parts in that asshole's safe at home." This kind of logic can only come from the mind of a lawyer and/or politician and I'm sure they pitched it to her as, "Look, this won't cost you anything, but if we win, you could get a few million."
it's not 1A, 1A only applies to when the government is the one making accusations. this is private citizen on private citizen and 1A doesn't mean shit in this case.
@@konradterlikowski8788 did you not understand anything I just said? civil court = private citizen having greivence with another private citizen, the Goverment doesn't actively go around looking for cases to drag into civil court (it would waste the courts more meager budgets for one thing)
@@themanformerlyknownascomme777 By that logic, if I sued a priest/congregation/some religious people, just because I believe that what they preach from the bible made someone else commit a crime that I was a victim of, and then a judge ( in a civil court ) would say that I am right and just for the fact that someone preaches their religion, they need to pay me.....this isn't a 1st amendment issue? Really? On one hand you can preach, but for your protected speach you will have to pay? Should a judge side with the lady that put the lawsuit just because he/she is anti gun, that isn't a 1st amendment issue? Don't you think, that if those companies would be found liable in a civil case, that woulnd't open the doors for the government to try something more? The fact, that this is not government vs people lawsuit, doesn't mean it can;t have 1st amendment ramifications with pushing more laws on speach. It's a little bit short sighted.
@@konradterlikowski8788 the thing is, you can sue them! you just have to prove to the court or a Jury that what they said was a strong contributing factor. and just because something *can* potentially have ramifications, there is a motion that can be raised before the trial starts to have the whole thing dismissed outright (that motion is usually reserved for when the more powerful party is the one on the offensive, but it can apply here) if civil court was such a deadly threat to the constitution as you think it is, then all the amendments would have been struck down long ago.
Brandon, you are a prime example of what makes the internet the most important communication vehicle in human history. Without streaming videos we get to choose your wisdom would never have been widely seen.
I'm British, and I've always had a great fascination with firearms. I love the engineering side of firearms and the history of them. I always say it's not the tool the person is using, but the person using the tool. It's stupid that people are getting sued for memes, lol.
A man was just sentenced to 7 months in a federal prison over a single meme. The saddest part about this lawsuit is that it doesn't surprise me at all.
@@matthewmorel3758 Douglass Mackey for posting an image that looked like it was from the Hillary campaign telling people they can text to vote in the 2016 election.
The attorney who filed this did not think this through the companies they are suing combined have enough money and attorneys to countersue them into oblivion.
Better that they get censured by their state’s board. If there’s a lawsuit, they’re getting paid and this shotgun monkey is all about the cheddar to utter disregard of what’s reasonable.
As someone from the UK, it's nice to hear someone from the US explain the UK knife crime to US gun crime ratio. I've had this argument with so many people from both sides of the pond, it's real good to hear someone knows the truth of it. Keep fighting the cause Brandon, I wish I had the rights you guys have. Sending much love and light from over the pond, I sincerely hope you make it x
Not really, because its an apples to oranges comparison, 100% of UK fatal stabbings verus just 3% of US fatal shootings or "gun murders and non-negligent manslaughter". The rifle only part is due to these are the statistics relevant to the story and historically the anti gun lobby in the US has always gotten a raging hardon about assault rifles when they arent any where near as much of an issue as they make out. half (if not more) the time they dont have a clue what they are talking about, the whole barrel shroud debacle live tv interview from a few years back is 1 hilarious example of this
Yea annually 300-350 people a year die from all rifles in the US. We have 330+ million people in the US. You'd think if it was a problem the number would be much higher.
Thats's one thing so many europeans like to throw at us but the second we acknowledge their equivalent of crime stats they gaslight it saying its not as serious as firearms. I have no clue why the thinking is like that.
@@bluetumblr LOL yeah I am. Think about how many people there are in the UK vs the US, then multiply the UK's statistics to match the US's population. Its not until you do that part that you see clearly. But hey, everyone's entitled to their own opinions lol 😉
Yeah they keep doing suits like this because nobody holds the actual lawyers accountable, they know these are BS suits but take a shot at the dark anyway in case they hit bullseye. If lawyers were held accountable and blacklisted by everyone even then nobody's gonna do it anymore. When they lose the case, that loss will lead to possibly less clients, right? In other words, the risk would be such that the off-chance of a bullseye isn't worth it.
No, the lawyer cannot be sued for the client's decisions. The lawyer did not recommend anything illegal and they did what they did in the best interest of their client, as they are supposed to. Any less than that is even possible grounds for a lawsuit against the lawyer for incompetence.
@@rompevuevitos222 Actually, at the very least they accepted an obvious BS lawsuit, although in all likelihood they actually encouraged the suit. Lawyers don't need to accept clients or specific suits, so when they willingly get involved in garbage lawsuits, they should be as liable, if not more so, than their clients, as they know better
I work for a firearms company (not any of the ones mentioned in the vid) and do some of the Social Media marketing. The dance we constantly have to do to avoid this kind of thing is insane.
Brandon, all of these "named" companies need to get together and sue the attorney for filing a maliciously false lawsuit. When companies start fighting back it will begin to deter these types of obviously slimy lawyers. These type of erroneous lawsuits should result in severe punishment for the attorneys who waste the courts time.
@@w.knudsen5570 Unfortunately the American legal system would allow the defendant to file a motion to consolidate them into one case as they are all directly connected to a single event. Basically a class-action against him.
If there are any companies that cave in to this, there needs to be a list so that we, their consumers, will know who is right and who is wrong. This lawsuit is a damn joke, and a perfect representation of just how desperate it's getting for them to strip away our 2A Rights.
I think that you're right about that "unpaid intern". The plaintiff probably came to the law firm, who examined her claims, and immediately thought, "No f*ing way"! But revenue is revenue, so they gave it to their Dufus, who wrote up what got filed, they billed her the $2,500.00 + for their "labor", and started an office pool as to how long it would take for a judge to toss the entire case out on its ear. Which I'm pretty sure is gonna happen pretty quickly...
This is genuinely inspiring us to start our own meme marketing campaign. This lawsuit is a meme. I guess we can thank Remington for settling their lawsuit and opening the door for this kind of crap.
Or just owning any sort of gun without needing to be a hunter, sport shooter or collector. Here in Germany, self-defence is not a valid reason to own a gun unless a court has recognised that you are especially endangered.
@@lonelystrategosYou'd think Germany would be well aware of the danger in letting bureaucrats dictate the rights of its citizens. It's almost like there was a tyrannical government not too long ago that disarmed the undesirables and then systemically exterminated them. Surely THAT could never happen......again. Right?
Maybe it's time to put some laws out there against lawyers and what happens when they file a BS lawsuit like this. Make it to where if they lose they don't get a dime for pay, have to pay all court costs for both sides, and fine them to make them pay not only the state fines but with the second offence, ban them from practicing or giving legal advise to anyone, ever or face jail time. Probably see a a lot less BS lawsuits if they did this.
1) Countersuits or judgments with prejudice can already happen, but the payment won't be from the law firm. It'll be from the client. 2) In cases like this, law firms typically operate on a contingency basis, with percentages of successful settlement; thus, if no companies cave, there is no payout. 3) As long as all the paperwork is in general order, you cannot ban anyone from practicing law. Trying to do so would set a bad precedence in which any politically inconvenient topic could get banned from lawsuits, resulting in a dystopian society, i.e., the ability to file against unconstitutional laws Duncan v. Bonta. 4) This is a civil matter, not criminal, which means remedies based purely on monetary or injunctive relief. BS lawsuits will always happen as the legal fee's are almost always higher than settlement costs. In the future as computing and AI technology increases to the point where simple queries may be reliably and accurately made to the legal record, the cost of consultation and response to low level harassment lawsuits will likely decrease in response. Until then however like the medical system, the legal system is likewise broken.
While I get where you're coming from, losing your license for losing two lawsuits is pretty ridiculous. You can have a lawsuit with merit that just doesn't end up winning for a number of reasons. Unless you're saying only if they lose "BS" lawsuits, but then there would need to be an objective measure for that, and then losing (or more likely having it dismissed) should be a given.
Tort reform has been opposed by the GOP (and the DP) in Congress for decades. It might have something to do with their powerful lobby group, or the fact that many in Congress throughout the modern era have been (tort) lawyers.
There's only one logical reason for this suit that I can think of: they're hoping at least one of the accused will get rattled and settle rather than go to court. In other words, blackmail.
Researching the topic for something once (around 2016ish), I went through the “Gun Violence Archive” list of school shootings and individually looked up all the incidents… and what they consider “school shootings” borders on absurd, and absolutely most of them are simply not qualifying for the term in the loosest definition. The one that stood out to me is a kid who was upset with his girlfriend. She broke up with him at school, he sent some texts from the school parking lot, drove away to retrieve a handgun, I believe he parked somewhere 3 miles away off school property, after a few hours and texts he worked up the nerve to extinguish himself. You got it- “school shooting.” 🙄 The rationale was “because the incident that prompted this shooting started at the school.” Huh? Breakup butthurt? 🤨The whole thing is a fear factory to provoke gubmint regs with hysterical nonsense… nothing we don’t know, but the brazen lies employed are still so bizarre and unbelievable….🥳
If that's the same list I'm thinking of, another 2A researcher looked into it in depth and it also included things like a negligent discharge in the car of a teacher who had a CCW license (I guess while trying to clear it to lock it in his glovebox?) before school hours in which nobody got hurt, and a failed drug deal conducted by two groups of post-high-school age perps (18-20 yrs old each, or so) that happened in a school lot near midnight on a Saturday, etc. It's typical leftist propaganda garbage.
We literally had a massacre this week. The mental gymnastics you guys make to be able to continue a hobby at the cost of thousands of dead kids is insane
I've never seen that 80% lower meme before and it got me good. I've never done that, and lost all my guns in an unfortunate boating accident, but it sounds like a great idea.
That lawyer should have sued the contractors that built the dude's house and the companies that made his clothes since they all indirectly harmed the lady, too 😂
Love the content!! And is it just me or is anybody else super excited that the AK50 song is back at the end of this video after being missing from the last like 3 vids?
Wow. You laid that out well man, what a sham of an attempt at a lawsuit. It would be sweet/ hilarious irony if the companies named counter-sued the lawyer/ law firm for libel and won LOL.
@@teebob21 Libel: 1. "a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation." 2. "defame (someone) by publishing a libel." That's exactly what the Lawyer's BS writ did lol.
@@DJTheMetalheadMercenary You didn't make it very far into law school, did you? Attorneys have absolute privilege protecting from libel or other torts of defamation for statements made in legal filings or in the courtroom. Absolute privilege applies to statements made in certain contexts or in certain venues and is a complete defense. When absolute privilege applies to an individual's speech, it is irrelevant as to whether the defamatory speech was false or what the speaker's intent was. Absolute privilege extends to judicial officers, attorneys, jurors, witnesses in legislative proceedings, legally required publications, and statements made by a party during trial or in a pleading.
For what it's worth, I've been subscribed to your channel for at least a couple years now and laughed to myself a little bit when you said TH-cam keeps unsubscribing people, thinking that they're probably just hitting the button on accident or something, but then decided to check and sure enough I had to resubscribe to your channel! That's crazy man. Anyways definitely going to keep tabs on that once in a while now. Keep up the awesome videos! 😁
Great video & like you, I hope none of these companies cave to the BS lawsuit. It's just as bad as the recent one where they're going after the parents of a shooter! WTF?!?
I think 'shotgun' lawsuits should be obligatorily immediately dismissed in their entirety by judges, and all filing fees or legal fees associated should be taken out of the FILING ATTORNEY'S pockets. This crap is ridiculous and noone can look at such a filing and seriously think the attorney representing the plaintiff actually thought they had grounds for the vast majority of it.
They exemplify the exact reason the second was written as the second to enforce the first. 1&2 are combo pack and should be treated as such: without one you don't have the other.
The only real problem i possibly can see here is that this lawsuit will not be laughed out the courtroom before it goes anywhere, and this woman should have to pay all of the legal fees for everyone.
Considering that Douglass Mackey was just given 7 months in prison for posting memes during the 2016 election, I can see how this will move forward and this woman will win a shit ton of money from innocent companies.
@@PuppyMonsters Okay let's not get crazy here, "innocent" and "company" are two words that don't fit together in any context. It's clear what you mean, at the same time calling any large company innocent makes my skin crawl. Anyways, I agree as well, this woman will likely get a massive payday from parties that are simply not responsible at all for what happened.
@@koalabro6118 it will open the door up for almost every company out there to get sued like going after jeep for making a military war machine available to the public and do you see how they drive with those war machines on the road
Brandon, if every youtuber made their in-video advertisements as entertaining as you do I'd sit through far more than I do these days. It was enjoyable to see about the tactical pack bit. Just genuinely enjoyable. Keep up the humor in these dire times.
Thanks for watching guys! So what are your thoughts about this lawsuit? Think it’ll stick, or is it just a crazier version of the Walmart “slip and fall” scheme? Let me know!
Thanks to TacPack for helping make this video happen! Check them out and use code “AKGUY” to get your free bonus box! www.tacpack.com
Thanks to SDI! Again, it’s SDI.edu for more info!
Pew pew
Be my father
hi
can i queef on your chest
Fgc9 video?
I faced a "scattergun lawsuit" once during my Fire/EMS career. A woman got rear-ended at a traffic light. Her lawyer sued EVERYBODY for causing/aggravating her "grievous injuries & suffering": the driver who hit her, her car manufacturer, his car manufacturer, his mechanic, her mechanic, the City, the County, the State highway department (road conditions/traffic light timing), my EMS agency, our Medical Director, my crew, me, the Fire Department, the extrication equipment manufacturer, the backboard manufacturer, the cervical collar manufacturer, the IV supplies manufacturer, the oxygen supplies msnufacturer, the supplier of our oxygen (yeah, I'm serious), the stretcher manufacturer, the ambulance chassis builder, the ambulance builder, the dealer we bought our ambulance from, the hospital, the Emergency Room, the ER doc, the nurses, the xray department, xray tech, hospital gurney manufacturer, xray machine manufacturer, hospital bed manufacturer, the hospit... Well, you get the idea. The judge threw out everything against 99% of the chosen victims of the money grab but then took it a step farther. Since the insurance for the driver that hit her was paying literally EVERYTHING to help this woman, the judge threw out even the portion of the suit against the driver - mainly because of an error in the way the lawsuit was worded, but also, I think, out of spite for the utter bollocks of it all. So yeah, Brandon, these grifter lawyers are everywhere... 🤦♂️
They aren't "everywhere" at all. The vast majority don't want to waste their time on a case they know they won't win.
Nah bro the attorney literally sued the entire planet.
@@bbbbbbb51 They are everywhere man look at billboards along the road. I worked in the evil pit of insurance. The amount of people who'd try and sue the other driver when their insurance covered all the bills + some pain and suffering is asinine. Then their clients would call us claiming after legal fees they were not set right. Hire a damn lawyer only if you know you are being screwed. Losing a life, or piece of your body and suing is a lot more understandable as that damage can be criminal negligence and bodily harm. Usually in accidents no jail time, but deep legal fees, etc. People often times don't get slammer time unless they are DUI.
@@bbbbbbb51 they're everywhere doesn't mean they're all of them or even the majority you clown looool all it takes is one in every area to make your day worse because of their shit at the wall strats
im proud of you for typing every party involved
As a man who has read all the Twilight books to get with a girl.....
It wasn't worth it, you made the right choice to lie about reading it.
It can't be as bad as 50 Shades. I think I read about 5 pages. It is so crap
Did you at least skip "life and death"?
Reading that is just masochism
Have you quit your simping ways?
😂
@@charlottelanvin7095 50 shades was for beginners.
These attorneys are the same scapegoat artists who blamed “violent video games” 20+ years ago.
They literally even called upon it when talking about the call of duty post
they still blame "violent video games" nowadays too lol
Brandon inspires me.. My parents said if i get 60K followers They'd buy me a professional camera for recording..begging u guys , literally
Begging.
People still play video games?
@@namantherockstar Do the letters F and O mean anything to you?
What really sucks is that if you pay attention to the case, you can tell the suit wasn't her idea. It was absolutely an attorney trying to take advantage of her traumatized state by convincing her to file a bullshit suit she has no chance of winning. But she's the one who's gonna lose money over this.
How do you know it wasnt her idea. No shortage of stupid greedy people these days
No she won't, these types of suits are paid for by other people.
Yeah, no. This is Karen type crap.
Lawyers can't sue on your behalf. She had to say yes to this, which means she's 100% responsible, just as much as the lawyer.
The fact that this lawsuit seriously contains the exact phrase "violent weaponry" says a lot!
Yep, like "assauIt rifIes" that have yet to assauIt anyone 🙄🤦♀️
Indeed.
‘Violent weaponry” is as much a misnomer as ‘honest lawyer”.
‘Violence” and ‘assault” are not objects, they are Verbs, Actions, Human Behaviors, in other words, they are Verbs.
Guns, magazines, ammunition etc are inanimate objects. They are incapable of making decisions, they are incapable of committing crimes.
@@metalmamasue3680 "Assault rifle" is a legitimate term, it just gets consistently misused both by tacticool morons and media organizations that don't care what the actual definition is
But..but...these walking and bullet-spitting pieces of metal and plastic (also known as "guns") are a threat to the society as a whole!
Woe is ours!
🤣
I wonder what the market demand is like for peaceful weapons...
Every one of them should file their own countersuit. Not a class action, or a group lawsuit, make that law firm have to defend a bunch of individual suits, MUCH more painful to them, and not much more expensive to the companies affected.
They should sue the attorney who made this and not the victim of the shooting.
@@tetraxis3011I don't think they can as the lawyer isn't the litigant
@@tetraxis3011 Ideally yes but I don't think countersuits let you do it that way. I don't know what grounds they would have to sue the lawyers/firm. In fact I'm pretty sure the law is set up specifically to protect the lawyers and firms from this which is how we got to this point of sleazy lawyers willing to sue anyone for any reason: they have no personal risk in the outcome of the case. The only thing they have to lose is their pay/billable hours/time and their win/loss record, neither of which are particularly large risks
..and keeping lawyers fed is what's important in this economy...
@sdivine13 you can sue the lawyer if you sue for the reasons that you allege the lawyer KNOWS the suit is spurious and contemptuous of both the law and the court.
Lawyers should be held accountable for frivolous lawsuits. Politicians should be held accountable.
Don't forget the asshats who hired the lawyer in the first place, like the "victim" of the attempted shooting.
Aren't false Allegations punishable by fine?
@@umporeon0132No there are no fines however, it sets up litigation for a defamation lawsuit if it is completely proven intentional and causes financial harm or damage.
Example for no consequence:
Adam lies about Bet. Bet wishes to sue for defamation but can’t due to lack of financial damage and the inability to prove that Adam knew he said lies.
Example for litigation:
Adam lies about Bet. Because of Adam’s lie Mr. Cina stops doing business with Bet and says that Adams lie is why. Adam posts an apology on Facebook for lying.
With this information Bet can prove defamation. Due to proven financial damage and proven false allegations.
@@umporeon0132 Aka, a mild inconvenience to the rich and powerful.
@@umporeon0132 maybe just a fine if its egregious enough...
Cessna ran into this problem and almost went out of business because of it. They were being continually sued even in cases where it was determined the incident was " clearly pilot error" .
BTW, I went and checked when you said to and I WAS unsubscribed! I've been a subscriber for a LONG time.
If you can successfully sue any company for advertising, then you have successfully demolished the First Amendment.
Maybe you've been sleepwalking through the Neo-Marxists' post-Constitutional putsch era, but the 1st Amendment has been squarely in the sights of progressive liberals for years now.
This already has happened. I don’t know if it was a Remington or something or if they themselves appealed, but there is already a case of this happening.
Actually this is a thing, and it depends on the advertisement, and what it entails. Typically appealing to audiences that can't legally use the items they show, and/or via promoting crime among other things.
However, none of these memes promote crime, the ones that even "promote violence" are about hypothetical situations of legal survival, and while their products may appeal to minors via a select few T rated games, nothing is incentivising minors to illegally obtain and use guns, and M rated games aren't promoted towards minors.
Basically no legal basses here for this insufferably unhinged, idiotic lawsuit
I drank a Pepsi cola, and was thirsty several days after, therefore I’m suing them for false advertising. My thirst was quenched only temporarily.
The 2nd amendment helps enforce all the other amendments. We should teach these people trying to take away our rights that.
Taking away the 1st Amendment rights from those providing us with tools for the 2nd Amendment.
It's like the founding fathers knew exactly what was up, or something.
I legit thought he was joking arround with the title 💀
You have too much faith in the injustice system. Whether it works or not has no bearing on the law or the merits, merely who appointed the judge presiding over the case. Was there a D by the name? Odds are it goes forward and gets dragged out, intentionally, to create costs and negative publicity. A settlement would just be a bonus. @@___meph___4547
The 1A is under siege
@@___meph___4547They'll keep throwing stuff at this until something sticks, then piece by piece, they'll create precedent to do more damage.
The worst part of this isn’t that this lawsuit exists, but that when the case fails, the plaintiffs will be on the hook for the legal fees from all those companies. Because Tort is a thing.
These ambulance chasing Lawyers should be held financially accountable for manipulating the emotionally vulnerable victims of crimes into frivolous lawsuits.
You forget where they’re suing. Do you trust the judges or the people living in Washington DC?
@@justanothergmailaccount1353About as far as I can throw the entire courtroom..
Honestly I think if someone files a lawsuit that's later thrown out or found to be frivolous, they should either serve prison time and do labor, or lose their right to file a lawsuit in the future, vote, run for office, work in any public service/government position, etc. Maybe people will be less apt to waste the time of our justice system and the money of other people to defend themselves against bullshit if they know they'll lose EVERYTHING as a result.
@@RT-qd8yl Sounds like a great way to ensure lawsuits don't happen at all
A blanket lawsuit is for emotionally driven cases that usually never hold up. Basically casting a wide net, hoping for settlements
Yup! Exactly my thoughts. They include as many as they can and if just one settles, that's money they didn't get otherwise. They know when they file these suits that most of it will get tossed, but there's always the chance one or more will go Remmington on it and the client and attorney will make out like a bandit. Mostly the attorney.
When tobacco companies, pharmaceutical companies, knife companies and home depot get sued for "their products being used to harm others", I might acknowledge a lawsuit against a firearm manufacturer.
First of all Home depot!
@@martinn.8334
Don't forget Lowes! Remember, they won't call 9-1-1 if you get hurt in the store. They don't give a FCK!
@@VerdeMorte
I don't rember that policy from when I worked there.
Hurt my pinkie toe on my bed... I'm gonna sue Ikea.
@@EIA-Observer
But Ikea had nothing to do with the bed, and you ordered the frame from Amazon. You also sue the companies that made your desk, nightstand, and dresser, despite the fact that those items have no relation.
Brandon just fooled everyone by doing an entire gun meme review from a court document so he wouldn't have to search and find memes on his own
I mean, if someone already put in the leg work what's the harm.
Work smarter not harder… 😂
@OfficialNapTime at least he isn't taking the SSSniperwolf route
peal redneck efficiency.
brandon didn't collect more memes for gun meme review. he should be held accountable for not keeping his promises. every subreddit he's subbed to, as well as reddit and facebook overall should be held accountable. oh, let's hold jeff bezos and imagine dragons accountable too
If someone from the East Coast can run for governer in California, I think its fair for an Ohioan like myself to vote for Brandon. Sounds like fair trade
If someone one the east can run for office in Commiefornia, I, as an Alaskan, should be able to vote for Brandon in Texas
Register Democrat ... You can vote in both places ... You're great grandparents too!
"vote" .... hahahahahahalololololhahahaha
Let’s gooo from Ohio too
Brandon inspires me.. My parents said if i get 60K followers They'd buy me a professional camera for recording..begging u guys , literally
Begging.
Went to finish watching the most recent episode of Darwin awards, only to find it yeeted from TH-cam. Please, Congressman AK Guy, please sue TH-cam for not allowing you to critique dangerous individuals in an effort to promote safety and an attempt to prevent future "award winners".
Something needs to be done about these lawfirms. They are being actively rewarded for further destroying our society.
Tort reform.
that goes in the same file as congressional terms limits..... "shit never gonna hapen"
Sue them for emotional damage.😂😂😂🤷♂️
hey!!!! WHEN YOU GET INTO CONGRESS PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PUSH FOR THE BILL:
IF YOU FALSELY ACCUSE SOME ONE OF SOME THING,
YOU YOURSELF ARE TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE
FOR THE WHATEVER PENALTIES THE FALSE ACCUSATION CLAIMS!!! (or words to that effect, or... werdage 2dat effekt!)
@@alexmikhael5061 You really think he's gonna win? No way they'll let that happen. As much as I'd love it, we live in a country that no longer has fair elections. They are all manipulated, from the federal down to the local level. Some parts of the country still have it good, but places like Texas have been taken over by Soros funded losers who are more than willing to rig the system. Trump was and will be the last elected official by the people.
If we can be sued over our memes... *chuckles* I'm in danger!
If so, i think everyone watching would be considered a terrorist.
I’m sure somebody already stole this and made it a meme
"Man... This shit does NOT look good on paper."
@@Jkitz1003 I'll sue them for stealing it!
Right.
In a few years posting an unmodified screenshot of a scoreboard in CoD will be considered an admission of guilt to multiple cases of murder.
This lawyer must have forgotten what the First Amendment is. They hand out licenses like candy these days.
Unlike you, that attorney went to law school. The First Amendment does not regulate the actions of private citizens and private businesses. This is not a 1A case. Educate yourself before you speak on this topic again, lest you embarrass yourself with your ignorance again.
@@teebob21ok TEEBOB
@@teebob21 what
@@ReverendMeat51 The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects what are commonly known as The Five Freedoms: freedom of religion, freedom of press, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of petition. This amendment gives Americans the right to express themselves verbally and through publication without government interference.
The First Amendment only protects your speech from government censorship. It does not include censorship or disputes between private citizens, businesses, and organizations.
@@teebob21yeah, wat? You are acting like nobody is protected by the 1A because they are private parties, this is literally that case. The ppl being sued are the ones making the speech, that’s what the court has no business assigning “harm” about. Unless the speech was literally them telling the guy to commit crimes. (But it on it’s face was not, it’s not even a question of fact)
Robber breaking into Brandon’s house: Brandon with a fully automatic LMG
He's more likely to stand at his gun wall and say "what's the best way to get this bitch?"
As a small, small child, just before getting into video games, there was a lawyer by the name of Jack Thompson, suing Best Buy, Wal-Mart, and every game developer he could think of over "violent content" in video games.
He lost case after case, and while he made it pretty much standard company policy across electronics retailers to ID for M-rated games, there still is not a legal binding to it. He was eventually disbarred for frivolous lawsuits. From Florida.
We need to push, not just for winning these absurdist cases, but for the same punishments on any lawyers who take them.
Wow. Disbarred in Florida is an achievement all on its own.
Oh Jack Thompson, you lovable rascal. And by "lovable rascal" I mean complete rat bastard.
How nostalgic. Haven't heard his name in many years.
Dude, Jack Thompson. That's a name I haven't heard in a while. Even as a kid, I was born in 1990, am 33 now, I knew Jack was a monumental moron. At the time, I was like, "aren't the parents supposed to know what their kids are doing, and actually "parent" them?"
I remember this clown from when I was a child. As a child I was stunned, because I couldn't think of 2 things more dissimilar. I remember Penn & Teller giving a rifle to a gamer child and the child started crying after firing the rifle. Two different fucking universes entirely.
All of these companies should separately file a defamation lawsuit and sue them in to oblivion.
This poor bastard is boutta get Alex Jones’d into bankruptcy hell.
Litigation privilege. Court-filed documents cannot be the basis for a defamation tort.
They can
They could probably make counterclaims that most of their evidence is irrelevant to the case or has blatant logical fallacies like blaming the manufacturer for using a product that isn't in the scope of the case. Those counterclaims would probably get instantly accepted since it doesn't even take a lawyer to realize that.
@@jcornscorndog941 You're a lawyer?
I think it's sad that the Remington lawsuit set a precedent that marketing materials are literally violence, and that no-one has stepped in to point out how ridiculous that is
Settlements don't set precedent, what are you talking about?
@@crowe6961not legal precedent but showed bloodthirsty lawyers they can secure payouts off the same basis
@@crowe6961 first step in the current judicial system. they admitted guilt.
So I don't know the details of what you're talking about. But I remember hearing something about it. And as a European all I got to say is. Why did someone get upset about a firearm doing exactly what it was created for, shooting that is. Like that's what I took from that. I get that the gun laws over there is neat because, hey you get to own and shoot a gun! But I kinda strongly believe that such liberties comes at a cost. Weirdly enough, anti-gun people doesn't seem to even want to do their due diligence in research. You muricans do be as weird as you're varied.
@@Kaiquintosthe cost of unstoppable government thugs is far worse.
Lawyers need to face harsher punishments for convincing vulnerable people into frivolous lawsuits
A lawyers job is to get rhe best result for their client. If there is a chance to get more out of a situation, they are legally required to tell their client.
Y'all do not seem to understand how th profession is supposed to work...
@@rompevuevitos222 scamming people into lolsuits that have little chance to win, then turning around on their clients with legal fees is not the "best result"
@@VenomSnakee legal fees are always on the table, be it with this or any other maneuver, it is not a scam, it is how lawyers work.
The chances of winning part is true, they should have been more clear about the risk reward potential, but it is far from illegal to no suggest the safest option. Otherwise every lawyer would say "lets plead guilty and make a deal to be safe that you do not get max sentence"
@@rompevuevitos222 You have to be delusional to think the idea of suing literally every gun company that was vagely relevant to the case to be "the most optimal choice". Are you the lawyer in question or something?
Being sued over memes is a fantastic advertisement, I've never wanted to buy things from these companies more than right now.
If I wasn't looking at a new car, I would totally buy a Surefire light for my rifle. You know, "emotional support in these hard times," for Surefire. "Sorry you're getting sued for stupid reasons, allow me to ease the pain by buying an M600."
Hopefully they file a counter lawsuit for defamation, this is idiotic.
Court filings have absolute privilege and have complete defense against a claim of the tort of defamation.
They can certaintly try to counter sue, but as to whether the countersuit would go through, that is the question.
@@teebob21court isn’t cheap. You wouldn’t sue for defamation, but you would sue for legal fees
@@BOBBERTQUESTIONMARKS That's already standard practice in US federal district court. See also Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 54.
It's also common at the circuit appellate level; to wit:
"Unless otherwise provided by law, agreed by the parties, or ordered by the court, if an appeal is dismissed or the judgment affirmed, costs are taxed against the appellant; and if the judgment is reversed costs are taxed against the appellee. If a judgment is affirmed or reversed in part, or is vacated, costs are allowed only as ordered by the court. Fed. R. App. P. 39(a)."
@@teebob21
In this lawsuit, Defamation against a Private Party is rather irrelevant. It's better to quickly toss it out of the court or to sue for legal fees.
Especially when this lawsuit is frivolous without hard evidence to back the False Advertising beyond personal grandeur.
As a filthy Brit I felt personally attacked there Brandon, but thankfully not by a gun or (more likely for me) a pointy stabby thing. And VERY thankfully not by a crazy ambulance-chasing lawyer.
A blacktivist in the UK was domed with a handgun, y'all arent free from it either.
Also would be funny to see how the numbers stack up if you add stabbings ontop of USA shooting numbers... And I don't mean that in the passive aggressive way, actually funny.
We have the same problem of massaged statistics. Knife crime involves any crime where a "sharp implement" was recovered, not even used in the crime.
Knife deaths, it's around 150 to 300 in any year.
Very few of those in schools though.
@@Valsorayu There are _more_ stabbings in the US than in the UK. Even with how easy it is to get guns in the US, there are still _more_ stabbings than in the UK where guns are much harder to get.
@@bobdrooples No they don't. Government and police want to _minimise_ the problem of knife crime, not exaggerate it.
As a young man. I can confirm that I am in fact "attracted" to firearms.
This is the very definition of a frivolous lawsuit and the lawyer who brought this to court should be getting disbarred for it.
Memes are classified as art. Getting sued for art is against freedom of speech.
So are drawings on a card.
The problem we are running into is that private citizens can sue for just about everything. The constitution only protects you from the government
Yet using someone else's likeness of their art in your art is called a copyright violation. There's been dozens if not hundreds of successful lawsuits about someone sampling another song.
@@hydrocarbon82 what has that got to do with the suject at hand?
@@maddhatter3564nothing they just wanted to sound like they had soemthing to add
I watched this whole video, and my brain is still stalled out trying to figure out how a company making hearing protection is at fault for a shooting.
Stupid people are stupid
There is no rational explanation for what they do
They allow you to hear no evil ...
Wait excuse me what the fuck?
they aren't, this lawyer is just cashing in on someone's idiocy. the lawsuit will fail and they get a paycheck. i despise ambulance chasers.
Wake up people..... the ones who are voted in to run things are insane
.
Which says alot for most of this society............................
Thank you Mr. Herrera! Always spittin' facts!!
This lawsuit is an infringement on 1A *and* 2A. If any company settles "for an undisclosed amount", they need to be CALLED OUT and HASHTAG CANCELED like we did with Liberty Safes.
This is obvious settlement fishing... And yes it needs to be standard that we do not pay blackmail.
cancel culture is good now?
@@General_Maximus Only when it supports the objectives of the ammosexuals, and never when it is applied to them or their buddies.
@@General_Maximusthe constitution is absolute
@@General_MaximusUnfortunately, in a case like this it is that first pebble before the dam fails. We knew once the laws protecting gun companies were rolled back, we would see this. Any company pleading a deal on this puts us all at risk, even just simple gun owners. As such, we MUST make them take it all the way to a jury trial. Lawyers must know that taking a case like this means months or years tied up in court, so they are not willing to take that gamble.
Honestly, these companies and groups need to countersue and make these frivolous claims PAINFUL.
If I lived in Texas I would definitely vote for you. Thanks for the content bro
"pop culture reference" shows a holiday themed ad, if i wasn't laughing i'd be crying
And I thought legal cases here in Canada were idiotic! This lawsuit is more brain numbing than watching current Disney movies.
Bro I still can't get over the fact that, as a Canadian, I can buy real semi-auto AKs and AR-15 clones legally as long as they're being made by the correct companies. But if I own a handgun in .22 LR, I'm going to jail. A full gucci AR-15 needs a bit of paperwork, .22LR handguns are impossible to legally purchase. It's that insane. The country is like 99% empty space, give me a break.
I call it the MAGIC HAT effect
So, you're saying that you've watched recent Disney movies? That's like telling everyone that your Mom is a bad lay.
Also, I hope that her lawyer informed her of what a “slap back lawsuit” and the possible costs this can incur for her. These are some big names with a lot of money, and their legal teams will likely charge somewhere in the area of $1,500 per hour at a minimum.
Lawyers that push cases like this should be disbarred, too many lawyers as it is
More like tarred and feathered!
@@chrissewell1608 Careful, or your name will get added to the lawsuit! :D
Reread this knowing lawyer is a euphemism for the people with small hat who own everything and control people with ops like Epstein's Island blackmail.
A lawyers job is to help their client. That's it.
They are not pushing anything, their client is
@@rompevuevitos222 help sure, but any lawyer with a reputation would tell their client whether or not they have anything. this is ambulance chasing.
Going to buy a ‘97 Taurus and sue Ferrari when I get wrecked.
As someone who has worked for the same law firm for the past 31 years (admin capacity), I can attest that some attorneys do, in fact, lack a soul as well as a spine.
Lacking a brain is unfortunately not a hindrance for a good chunk of em either.
Honest to God I hope this goes nowhere and then there’s legal precedent against these kinds of frivolous lawsuits. All we need is 1 judge looking at the Plaintiff’s Counsel and just saying “no, this is dumb, you are dumb, get out of my courtroom.”
It doesn't just extend to gun companies but all other companies too. "This guy murdered my family with a knife! I'm suing them! But they also had Kelloggs cereal for breakfast, I'm also suing Kelloggs for helping the murderer to kill my family!"
These companies should counter sue for court and legal fees from a frivolous lawsuit.
🎯
So sick of lawfare being used to abuse protected rights and legit businesses
Love your content! Love how you brought this lawsuit, which otherwise might have gone unnoticed setting an incredibly damaging precedent to personal liberty, to light!
The goal of this lawsuit is not to get money for the victim. The goal is to make the defendants spend obscene amounts of money defending it, and bankrupting them.
Saul Goodman scumbag-level shit.
The real punishment is in the process.
They aren't going to be capable of bankrupting most of these companies. DD, Federal/Vista, Fiocchi America/Munizioni, Surefire, and Magpul? Definitely not. The lawyers filing the suit don't have the funds to challenge multi-billion dollar, federally contracted corporations like these (yes, some aren't multi-billion, but they will work together in a suit). The smaller companies like Centurion are potentially at risk, but I think they will be able to hold themselves afloat with the help of the others. The lawyers/individual suing are putting themselves at considerable risk of loss from potential attorney's fees being awarded to the defendants.
and re victimize the plaintiff.
Ok... that actually makes sense, and it is scary.
Only a Karen would file such a ridiculous lawsuit. Keeping the Karen memes alive.
I believe it’s the attorney who convinced her to sue manufacturers
@@tetraxis3011 a Karen had to accept. Would you do something retarded if I tried convincing you?
@@tetraxis3011The client has as much responsibility as their attorney
@@scarecrown7s Legally yes, but many modern attorneys do this, they exploit clients to create such lawsuits.
I can guarantee you the victim wasn't laying in her hospital bed thinking, "I want to sue the manufacturers of the guns and gun parts in that asshole's safe at home." This kind of logic can only come from the mind of a lawyer and/or politician and I'm sure they pitched it to her as, "Look, this won't cost you anything, but if we win, you could get a few million."
I need to find this lawyer so I can file a lawsuit against every fast food place ever for making me fat, even the places I’ve never ate at.
I'm going to sue every restaurant and farmer because one time I got food poisoning
The right of the people to meme, shall not be infringed
it's protected free speech, right?
Nothing screams holding the actors accountable like suing minimum wage social media marketing interns! You get em Katie!
This isn't even the 2nd amendment lawsuit. It's the 1st - and that's even scarier.
it's not 1A, 1A only applies to when the government is the one making accusations. this is private citizen on private citizen and 1A doesn't mean shit in this case.
@@themanformerlyknownascomme777 well the government by the hand of a judge will decide if you can post memes or not. If this goes anywhere of course.
@@konradterlikowski8788 did you not understand anything I just said?
civil court = private citizen having greivence with another private citizen, the Goverment doesn't actively go around looking for cases to drag into civil court (it would waste the courts more meager budgets for one thing)
@@themanformerlyknownascomme777 By that logic, if I sued a priest/congregation/some religious people, just because I believe that what they preach from the bible made someone else commit a crime that I was a victim of, and then a judge ( in a civil court ) would say that I am right and just for the fact that someone preaches their religion, they need to pay me.....this isn't a 1st amendment issue? Really? On one hand you can preach, but for your protected speach you will have to pay?
Should a judge side with the lady that put the lawsuit just because he/she is anti gun, that isn't a 1st amendment issue?
Don't you think, that if those companies would be found liable in a civil case, that woulnd't open the doors for the government to try something more?
The fact, that this is not government vs people lawsuit, doesn't mean it can;t have 1st amendment ramifications with pushing more laws on speach. It's a little bit short sighted.
@@konradterlikowski8788 the thing is, you can sue them! you just have to prove to the court or a Jury that what they said was a strong contributing factor. and just because something *can* potentially have ramifications, there is a motion that can be raised before the trial starts to have the whole thing dismissed outright (that motion is usually reserved for when the more powerful party is the one on the offensive, but it can apply here) if civil court was such a deadly threat to the constitution as you think it is, then all the amendments would have been struck down long ago.
I love you and your content, and I really appreciated that little Jab at the U.K.
Those Knife goblins need to be humbled every so often.
Brandon, you are a prime example of what makes the internet the most important communication vehicle in human history. Without streaming videos we get to choose your wisdom would never have been widely seen.
Last week, a dude was thrown in jail for making memes about texting to vote yet the left made the same memes and nothing happened to them
hypocrisy and double standards. welcome to the new USA!
A leftoid gave a number out in her meme, said to vote by text for Trump and nothing happened to her.
Lol america is becoming russia
that is real power
@@КыдырбекНамджунбеков I feel like you're not giving Russia enough credit. America is becoming China.
I'm British, and I've always had a great fascination with firearms. I love the engineering side of firearms and the history of them. I always say it's not the tool the person is using, but the person using the tool. It's stupid that people are getting sued for memes, lol.
Same, although I have the annoying fact that I'm afraid of loud noises.
This is taking ambulance chasing lawyers to a whole new level.
They have GTA'd the Ambulance to drive to victims EVEN FASTER
A man was just sentenced to 7 months in a federal prison over a single meme. The saddest part about this lawsuit is that it doesn't surprise me at all.
Where?
@@matthewmorel3758 His name is Douglass Mackey, the case is easy to find.
@@matthewmorel3758 Douglass Mackey for posting an image that looked like it was from the Hillary campaign telling people they can text to vote in the 2016 election.
@@matthewmorel3758I’d guess Europe, ppl get arrested over there for mean tweets 😂
@@carsonhunt4642 that's not true lol
The attorney who filed this did not think this through the companies they are suing combined have enough money and attorneys to countersue them into oblivion.
Better that they get censured by their state’s board. If there’s a lawsuit, they’re getting paid and this shotgun monkey is all about the cheddar to utter disregard of what’s reasonable.
Most likely the attorneys are funded by some leftwing activist group with Bloomberg money.
I wanted to see your new video that was posted today but YT took it down. F**k YT for that. Best wishes man! God bless you!
As someone from the UK, it's nice to hear someone from the US explain the UK knife crime to US gun crime ratio. I've had this argument with so many people from both sides of the pond, it's real good to hear someone knows the truth of it. Keep fighting the cause Brandon, I wish I had the rights you guys have. Sending much love and light from over the pond, I sincerely hope you make it x
LOL are you serious ?? He completely left out handguns which is where 90% of the shootings come from in the United States.
Not really, because its an apples to oranges comparison, 100% of UK fatal stabbings verus just 3% of US fatal shootings or "gun murders and non-negligent manslaughter". The rifle only part is due to these are the statistics relevant to the story and historically the anti gun lobby in the US has always gotten a raging hardon about assault rifles when they arent any where near as much of an issue as they make out. half (if not more) the time they dont have a clue what they are talking about, the whole barrel shroud debacle live tv interview from a few years back is 1 hilarious example of this
Yea annually 300-350 people a year die from all rifles in the US. We have 330+ million people in the US. You'd think if it was a problem the number would be much higher.
Thats's one thing so many europeans like to throw at us but the second we acknowledge their equivalent of crime stats they gaslight it saying its not as serious as firearms. I have no clue why the thinking is like that.
@@bluetumblr LOL yeah I am. Think about how many people there are in the UK vs the US, then multiply the UK's statistics to match the US's population. Its not until you do that part that you see clearly. But hey, everyone's entitled to their own opinions lol 😉
It’s not the gun itself that makes a gun dangerous, it’s person using it and their intentions with it
False, my 12 gauge once fell off my sofa and bruised my toe.
@@JamesChurchill3 If only there was somewhere else to store a 12 gauge.
How about a sig?
@@zuzusuperfly8363 But it was watching TV.
It's like expecting road accidents to reduce by going after VW, GM and Toyota.
This is so ridiculous! I hate how the gun grabbers have so many people thinking everyone is going to die from a gun. End this crap now!
Christ, now we have to blame each and every single part of a gun for something? Talk about ridiculous.
My uncle swallowed a spoon. He is now suing all manufacturers of silwerware, including silver mines. Way to go Uncle Joe!
This whole suit not only should be tossed, but the client and lawyer that filed it should both be liable for all the defendants legal fees
Yeah they keep doing suits like this because nobody holds the actual lawyers accountable, they know these are BS suits but take a shot at the dark anyway in case they hit bullseye.
If lawyers were held accountable and blacklisted by everyone even then nobody's gonna do it anymore.
When they lose the case, that loss will lead to possibly less clients, right?
In other words, the risk would be such that the off-chance of a bullseye isn't worth it.
Just the lawyer. I doubt the plantif actually wanted to file and was manipulated into doing it.
@@xDRAMx Well if that's the case the client needs to grow a backbone
No, the lawyer cannot be sued for the client's decisions. The lawyer did not recommend anything illegal and they did what they did in the best interest of their client, as they are supposed to.
Any less than that is even possible grounds for a lawsuit against the lawyer for incompetence.
@@rompevuevitos222 Actually, at the very least they accepted an obvious BS lawsuit, although in all likelihood they actually encouraged the suit.
Lawyers don't need to accept clients or specific suits, so when they willingly get involved in garbage lawsuits, they should be as liable, if not more so, than their clients, as they know better
at what point did someone else's feelings become a legal precedent?
The moment they tossed people from Jan 6 who weren't even in the building into prison for multiple years with no trial.
People literally lost their jobs over "misgendering". It was only a matter of time until people started bringing their hurt feelings to court.
The early 90s
I wish I could hit the like button more than once. I kept finding myself trying to hit it again at every great point Herrera said. A lot.
I work for a firearms company (not any of the ones mentioned in the vid) and do some of the Social Media marketing. The dance we constantly have to do to avoid this kind of thing is insane.
The lawsuit needs to be thrown out and fine those that even wasted the courts time with it.
Brandon, all of these "named" companies need to get together and sue the attorney for filing a maliciously false lawsuit. When companies start fighting back it will begin to deter these types of obviously slimy lawyers. These type of erroneous lawsuits should result in severe punishment for the attorneys who waste the courts time.
I think it would be better for individual lawsuits. The lawyer would be buried under the court with litigation.
@@w.knudsen5570 Unfortunately the American legal system would allow the defendant to file a motion to consolidate them into one case as they are all directly connected to a single event. Basically a class-action against him.
If there are any companies that cave in to this, there needs to be a list so that we, their consumers, will know who is right and who is wrong.
This lawsuit is a damn joke, and a perfect representation of just how desperate it's getting for them to strip away our 2A Rights.
Do you want to boycott every company whos ever done wrong?
Good luck buying anything.
@@ALovelyBunchOfDragonballzfor the most part, yes. Maybe the economy will finally change for the better.
@@ALovelyBunchOfDragonballz Only the companies that cave on the important things.
Unfortunately, the cave in point is the insurance company, which reserves the right to settle *on your behalf* if it is cheaper.
That's what happen3d with the sandy hook advertisement case, inaurance settled on behalf of the gun company rather than go to scotus
I think that you're right about that "unpaid intern".
The plaintiff probably came to the law firm, who examined her claims, and immediately thought, "No f*ing way"! But revenue is revenue, so they gave it to their Dufus, who wrote up what got filed, they billed her the $2,500.00 + for their "labor", and started an office pool as to how long it would take for a judge to toss the entire case out on its ear. Which I'm pretty sure is gonna happen pretty quickly...
This is genuinely inspiring us to start our own meme marketing campaign.
This lawsuit is a meme.
I guess we can thank Remington for settling their lawsuit and opening the door for this kind of crap.
The insurance company that Remington had folded also the parent company to Remington
You mentioned the TH-cam unsubscribe thing and i actually had that happen to me, like wtf! I re-subscribed...
Daniel Defense: Wishes everyone a safe Halloween
Lawyer: "And I took that personally"
You’d be surprised how many Europeans dream of owning unregistered machine guns.
Exactly. Europeans are based and want what the Yanks have, especially when our governments are fucked.
🙋♂️
Or just owning any sort of gun without needing to be a hunter, sport shooter or collector. Here in Germany, self-defence is not a valid reason to own a gun unless a court has recognised that you are especially endangered.
So do Americans lmao
@@lonelystrategosYou'd think Germany would be well aware of the danger in letting bureaucrats dictate the rights of its citizens. It's almost like there was a tyrannical government not too long ago that disarmed the undesirables and then systemically exterminated them. Surely THAT could never happen......again. Right?
Maybe it's time to put some laws out there against lawyers and what happens when they file a BS lawsuit like this. Make it to where if they lose they don't get a dime for pay, have to pay all court costs for both sides, and fine them to make them pay not only the state fines but with the second offence, ban them from practicing or giving legal advise to anyone, ever or face jail time. Probably see a a lot less BS lawsuits if they did this.
The sad thing is, they aren’t “bs” lawsuits if they’re successful. Depending on the court, they very well could be.
1) Countersuits or judgments with prejudice can already happen, but the payment won't be from the law firm. It'll be from the client. 2) In cases like this, law firms typically operate on a contingency basis, with percentages of successful settlement; thus, if no companies cave, there is no payout. 3) As long as all the paperwork is in general order, you cannot ban anyone from practicing law. Trying to do so would set a bad precedence in which any politically inconvenient topic could get banned from lawsuits, resulting in a dystopian society, i.e., the ability to file against unconstitutional laws Duncan v. Bonta. 4) This is a civil matter, not criminal, which means remedies based purely on monetary or injunctive relief.
BS lawsuits will always happen as the legal fee's are almost always higher than settlement costs. In the future as computing and AI technology increases to the point where simple queries may be reliably and accurately made to the legal record, the cost of consultation and response to low level harassment lawsuits will likely decrease in response. Until then however like the medical system, the legal system is likewise broken.
While I get where you're coming from, losing your license for losing two lawsuits is pretty ridiculous. You can have a lawsuit with merit that just doesn't end up winning for a number of reasons. Unless you're saying only if they lose "BS" lawsuits, but then there would need to be an objective measure for that, and then losing (or more likely having it dismissed) should be a given.
Tort reform has been opposed by the GOP (and the DP) in Congress for decades. It might have something to do with their powerful lobby group, or the fact that many in Congress throughout the modern era have been (tort) lawyers.
lawsuit review turned into gun meme review... about spit out some good banquet. dang my dude, got to love it lolol
There's only one logical reason for this suit that I can think of: they're hoping at least one of the accused will get rattled and settle rather than go to court. In other words, blackmail.
Researching the topic for something once (around 2016ish), I went through the “Gun Violence Archive” list of school shootings and individually looked up all the incidents… and what they consider “school shootings” borders on absurd, and absolutely most of them are simply not qualifying for the term in the loosest definition. The one that stood out to me is a kid who was upset with his girlfriend. She broke up with him at school, he sent some texts from the school parking lot, drove away to retrieve a handgun, I believe he parked somewhere 3 miles away off school property, after a few hours and texts he worked up the nerve to extinguish himself. You got it- “school shooting.” 🙄 The rationale was “because the incident that prompted this shooting started at the school.” Huh? Breakup butthurt? 🤨The whole thing is a fear factory to provoke gubmint regs with hysterical nonsense… nothing we don’t know, but the brazen lies employed are still so bizarre and unbelievable….🥳
That’s ridiculous.
If that's the same list I'm thinking of, another 2A researcher looked into it in depth and it also included things like a negligent discharge in the car of a teacher who had a CCW license (I guess while trying to clear it to lock it in his glovebox?) before school hours in which nobody got hurt, and a failed drug deal conducted by two groups of post-high-school age perps (18-20 yrs old each, or so) that happened in a school lot near midnight on a Saturday, etc. It's typical leftist propaganda garbage.
We literally had a massacre this week. The mental gymnastics you guys make to be able to continue a hobby at the cost of thousands of dead kids is insane
@@nielslarsen1693Better that than tyranny. Also, you didn't pay attention.
@@nielslarsen1693The mental gymnastics you go through to make people defenseless victims is evil.
The fact that the complaint was made by Karen is not lost on me.
name the money grubbing attorney, file defamation of character lawsuit and bar complaint against them.
The founding fathers wouldve challenged this mf to a duel!!
I've never seen that 80% lower meme before and it got me good. I've never done that, and lost all my guns in an unfortunate boating accident, but it sounds like a great idea.
That lawyer should have sued the contractors that built the dude's house and the companies that made his clothes since they all indirectly harmed the lady, too 😂
Bravo Brandon!! Keep the fires burning, and thank you for keeping us informed (and entertained)!!
Was in the process of commenting but I’m to stoned for this. Love your content, keep up the good work man ✌🏻
Gun lawsuits these days are like wads of toilet paper on the ceiling. They just wanna see if it sticks.
You are right Brandon once they get a win in a case they will use it in the future to justify their ruling. that's how it works. FIGHT!
Yep, setting a precedent which will be referenced in the future as the way to apply the law.
@@chemistryofquestionablequa6252 That is exactly how they got this far...
@@zzzzzzzzzzaper unfortunately true. Activist judges not following the law influencing future cases. They know exactly what they're doing.
Any attorney who brings such a frivolous lawsuit should be disbarred, after being ordered to pay the defendants' legal fees.
Love the content!! And is it just me or is anybody else super excited that the AK50 song is back at the end of this video after being missing from the last like 3 vids?
Wow. You laid that out well man, what a sham of an attempt at a lawsuit. It would be sweet/ hilarious irony if the companies named counter-sued the lawyer/ law firm for libel and won LOL.
....Except there hasn't been any libel.
@@teebob21 Libel: 1. "a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation."
2. "defame (someone) by publishing a libel."
That's exactly what the Lawyer's BS writ did lol.
@@DJTheMetalheadMercenary You didn't make it very far into law school, did you? Attorneys have absolute privilege protecting from libel or other torts of defamation for statements made in legal filings or in the courtroom.
Absolute privilege applies to statements made in certain contexts or in certain venues and is a complete defense. When absolute privilege applies to an individual's speech, it is irrelevant as to whether the defamatory speech was false or what the speaker's intent was.
Absolute privilege extends to judicial officers, attorneys, jurors, witnesses in legislative proceedings, legally required publications, and statements made by a party during trial or in a pleading.
For what it's worth, I've been subscribed to your channel for at least a couple years now and laughed to myself a little bit when you said TH-cam keeps unsubscribing people, thinking that they're probably just hitting the button on accident or something, but then decided to check and sure enough I had to resubscribe to your channel! That's crazy man.
Anyways definitely going to keep tabs on that once in a while now.
Keep up the awesome videos! 😁
I hope she has to pay their lawyer bills for this frivolous BS.
Great video & like you, I hope none of these companies cave to the BS lawsuit. It's just as bad as the recent one where they're going after the parents of a shooter! WTF?!?
I think 'shotgun' lawsuits should be obligatorily immediately dismissed in their entirety by judges, and all filing fees or legal fees associated should be taken out of the FILING ATTORNEY'S pockets.
This crap is ridiculous and noone can look at such a filing and seriously think the attorney representing the plaintiff actually thought they had grounds for the vast majority of it.
I hate to age myself, but I'm wondering if this attorney is using the Steve Dallas school of lawsuits.
Federal law prevents suing gun companies for selling legal products.
Cases dismissed with prejudice. Pay their lawyers.
This cant be allowed to happen
They exemplify the exact reason the second was written as the second to enforce the first. 1&2 are combo pack and should be treated as such: without one you don't have the other.
The only real problem i possibly can see here is that this lawsuit will not be laughed out the courtroom before it goes anywhere, and this woman should have to pay all of the legal fees for everyone.
Considering that Douglass Mackey was just given 7 months in prison for posting memes during the 2016 election, I can see how this will move forward and this woman will win a shit ton of money from innocent companies.
@@PuppyMonsters Okay let's not get crazy here, "innocent" and "company" are two words that don't fit together in any context. It's clear what you mean, at the same time calling any large company innocent makes my skin crawl.
Anyways, I agree as well, this woman will likely get a massive payday from parties that are simply not responsible at all for what happened.
@@koalabro6118Slow your roll, Karl Marx.
@@reliantncc1864 Calm down over there, Red Scare.
@@koalabro6118 it will open the door up for almost every company out there to get sued like going after jeep for making a military war machine available to the public and do you see how they drive with those war machines on the road
More people are cancelled from life by drivers than gun crime, where's my Fully Automatic Assault SUV ban?
Brandon, if every youtuber made their in-video advertisements as entertaining as you do I'd sit through far more than I do these days. It was enjoyable to see about the tactical pack bit. Just genuinely enjoyable. Keep up the humor in these dire times.