Didn't the movie theater in Colorado do this to prevent being financially responsible for the mass shooting as well?
They didn't ask any amount of money. It is to protect them from wrongfully being sued and paying out as if they are responsible for a random psycho killing people. There's always some greedy person looking to get rich by blaming someone else for something they didn't do. Always. I see no fault on MGM. They are protecting themselves and rightfully so.
I actually don't think anyone has started suing them yet, this is a pre-emptive strike by MGM the company to try and prevent people from suing them for damages/mental anguish and shit.sue them for what?
unlawful injuries related to their premises?
I get that it's a deterrent tactic, but what exactly are they being sued for (link isn't working for me)?
Yeah in practice I think it'd be a hard sell from the side of the people that were victims but for the company to sue them in advance of that is a super fucked up look.
no, I meant what specifically is MGM suing the victims for? Even w/ no damages being added, this seems like a 'sue a homeowner b/c you got hurt robbing it' type of situationI actually don't think anyone has started suing them yet, this is a pre-emptive strike by MGM the company to try and prevent people from suing them for damages/mental anguish and shit.
it would be an unreasonable expectation.I don't know how they can figure it out. But I would assume those people in the festival had a reasonable expectation that the MGM prevents a guy from being armed like that in his room?
If those kinds of rifles are available the only safe way to prevent someone from doing this would be to check for weapons.
It's just a matter of time until someone does it again. Now that somehow showed its possible with a high kill count.
This is what I saw in there:no, I meant what specifically is MGM suing the victims for? Even w/ no damages being added, this seems like a 'sue a homeowner b/c you got hurt robbing it' type of situation
like what is the wording? i'm at work and can't access the link for some reason
MGM Resorts International filed complaints in Nevada and California, arguing it could not be held liable for any deaths, injuries or damages caused during the attack.
"Plaintiffs have no liability of any kind to defendants," the complaints argue.
It says the security company it hired was certified by the Department of Homeland Security and was therefore protected from liability under a 2002 federal act.
MGM argues that this protection extends to the hotel giant, as it hired the security firm.
oh ok coolThis is what I saw in there:
Like, I know my group of friends and I were planning to go to that festival that year and all of us are like "exactly what can the festival goers sue for? The hotel company couldn't have prevented this" but we also all are in agreement.. pre-emptive lawsuits are REALLY fucked up looking.oh ok cool
damn, I didn't even know it was possible to do this. Like a retroactive Prenup
Maybe getting sued out the ass will make hotels want to know what their guests are bringing onto their premises. Private property after all so if they want to check bags they can.We going to have TSA checkpoints at hotels now?
I've traveled with a rifle on hunting trips before so seeing those big ass long cases especially in Vegas where they have things like Shot Show and other firearms conventions the employees are probably so used to those they don't notice them. Or the golf bags which you can also use to transport guns.
Nah, these people need to try and get financially compensated from the killer. He’s gotta have a ton of cash somewhere.I am no lawyer but if some dude is able to carry up 25 AK47s and 10,000 rounds into his hotel room.
It might be a tiny bit the fault of the hotel.
They can always defend themselves if and when the victims sue. But here they are going on the attack and suing first. Just fcuked up from an ethical/moral POV.Didn't the movie theater in Colorado do this to prevent being financially responsible for the mass shooting as well?
They didn't ask any amount of money. It is to protect them from wrongfully being sued and paying out as if they are responsible for a random psycho killing people. There's always some greedy person looking to get rich by blaming someone else for something they didn't do. Always. I see no fault on MGM. They are protecting themselves and rightfully so.
Maybe getting sued out the ass will make hotels want to know what their guests are bringing onto their premises. Private property after all so if they want to check bags they can.