Sandy Hook family suing for 100 million

[raidmagic]

How do you feel about the family of a survivor suing for the state not protecting their children



http://www.therightscoop.com/parent-...r-100-million/

YAHOO NEWS – A $100 million claim on behalf of a 6-year-old survivor is the first legal action to come out of the Connecticut school shooting that left 26 children and adults dead two weeks ago.

The unidentified client, referred to as Jill Doe, heard “cursing, screaming, and shooting” over the school intercom when the gunman, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, opened fire, according to the claim filed by New Haven-based attorney Irv Pinsky.

“As a consequence, the … child has sustained emotional and psychological trauma and injury, the nature and extent of which are yet to be determined,” the claim said.

Pinsky said he filed a claim on Thursday with state Claims Commissioner J. Paul Vance Jr., whose office must give permission before a lawsuit can be filed against the state.

“We all know its going to happen again,” Pinsky said on Friday. “Society has to take action.”

Twenty children and six adults were shot dead on December 14 at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. The children were all 6 and 7 years old.

Pinsky’s claim said that the state Board of Education, Department of Education and Education Commissioner had failed to take appropriate steps to protect children from “foreseeable harm.”

It said they had failed to provide a “safe school setting” or design “an effective student safety emergency response plan and protocol.”

Pinsky said he was approached by the child’s parents within a week of the shooting. ]

[87vette81big]

Instead of personal monetary gains, that 100 million could be used in better ways of protecting children while in school.
Armed & trained teachers, administrators, faculty, under cover police, Volunteer US Military Vets.
Especially Former US Military Vets that Volunteer to protect kids. Give them a paycheck for protecting kids Our US Vets.

[Texdentist]

I think it's shameful. It's a blatant attempt to profit from the tragedy. This will surely go nowhere.

[MayZ]

It's interesting this is coming from someone who still has their little boy or little girl. The sooner this is dismissed the better, IMO.

[blckslvr79]

If it saves one child....

Why not?
We sue for everything else. It's the entitlement mentality.

[c6vettedude]

Originally Posted by MayZ

It's interesting this is coming from someone who still has their little boy or little girl. The sooner this is dismissed the better, IMO.

[KennyGS]

Allowing this to go forward will set a dangerous precedent.

[fyreline]

According to the attorney who filed it (Irving Pinsky) on behalf of the parents, the lawsuit has, for the time being at least, been withdrawn.

[ironhorse]

Originally Posted by Texdentist

I think it's shameful. It's a blatant attempt to profit from the tragedy. This will surely go nowhere.

Probably some scum bag bottom feeder lawyer put that in the head of the parent...

[XQIZT]

Originally Posted by Texdentist

I think it's shameful. It's a blatant attempt to profit from the tragedy. This will surely go nowhere.

I just can't believe parents would cook this up. Tell ya what...get out of the lawyer's office and spend time with you kids!

[Junkman2008]

Originally Posted by MayZ

It's interesting this is coming from someone who still has their little boy or little girl. The sooner this is dismissed the better, IMO.

[BJC99Hardtop]

Once you get past the subject matter and how awful the killings in Newtown were, the withdrawn suit really brings up a question.

Is the school system responsible for protecting our children?

Before you answer, consider this. You put Grandma's $30K diamond earrings in a safety deposit box and the bank blew up due to a terrorist incident. The earrings are gone, and many are dead from the attack. Would you sue for the $30K?

You bet you would, because you feel that the bank is responsible for securing your valuables. There is a trust that is imparted to the bank when you put your valuables in their possession.

I believe that the school system (for which we all pay for) is responsible for securing our most valuable asset: our children. If that system is negligent, and that negligence causes or worsens actual loss, then shouldn't the negligent be held responsible?

Flame on!

[blckslvr79]

Originally Posted by BJC99Hardtop

Once you get past the subject matter and how awful the killings in Newtown were, the withdrawn suit really brings up a question.

Is the school system responsible for protecting our children?

Before you answer, consider this. You put Grandma's $30K diamond earrings in a safety deposit box and the bank blew up due to a terrorist incident. The earrings are gone, and many are dead from the attack. Would you sue for the $30K?

You bet you would, because you feel that the bank is responsible for securing your valuables. There is a trust that is imparted to the bank when you put your valuables in their possession.

I believe that the school system (for which we all pay for) is responsible for securing our most valuable asset: our children. If that system is negligent, and that negligence causes or worsens actual loss, then shouldn't the negligent be held responsible?

Flame on!

I agree 100%.

We protect our money in the bank. We protect our homes and furnishings. If you're a business owner, you protect your business from theft and vandalism. Yet we don't protect our kids in school? As a parent, I have an expectation that my children are safe while in the custody of the school system from the time they get on the bus in the morning until they are returned back to my driveway. This tragedy is the result of the school system, and our government, failing to provide protection of our children.

[raidmagic]

Originally Posted by BJC99Hardtop

Once you get past the subject matter and how awful the killings in Newtown were, the withdrawn suit really brings up a question.

Is the school system responsible for protecting our children?

Before you answer, consider this. You put Grandma's $30K diamond earrings in a safety deposit box and the bank blew up due to a terrorist incident. The earrings are gone, and many are dead from the attack. Would you sue for the $30K?

You bet you would, because you feel that the bank is responsible for securing your valuables. There is a trust that is imparted to the bank when you put your valuables in their possession.

I believe that the school system (for which we all pay for) is responsible for securing our most valuable asset: our children. If that system is negligent, and that negligence causes or worsens actual loss, then shouldn't the negligent be held responsible?

Flame on!

Well is the bank negligent for being attacked my terrorists? Beyond that wouldn't the bank have insurance for theft?

[blckslvr79]

Originally Posted by raidmagic

Well is the bank negligent for being attacked my terrorists? Beyond that wouldn't the bank have insurance for theft?

What does the cause of loss matter? Is the bank not responsible for safeguarding your valuables?

On a side note, many commercial insurance policies have exclusions for losses from acts of terrorism or war. Just saying.

The question here has to be whether the school system owes it's customers any responsibility of safeguarding their investment while in custody?