Uvalde shooting victims seek $27B, class action in lawsuit

[Prometheus]

apnews.com/article/shootings-austin-texas-lawsuits-school-5c2eba7d91b060843b65b2a43654a5b4

Excerpt:

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Victims of the Uvalde school shooting that left 21 people dead have filed a lawsuit against local and state police, the city and other school and law enforcement officials seeking $27 billion due to delays in confronting the attacker, court documents show.

The lawsuit, which was filed in federal court in Austin on Tuesday, says officials failed to follow active shooter protocol when they waited more than an hour to confront the attacker inside a fourth-grade classroom.

Shit like this sort of flies in the face of the notion that "you can't put a price on human life."

The US has always been "over-litigious" but it's getting to the point where we are willing to destroy whole economies just to put up a "w" for "our side" even though no money will ever exchange hands.

What's the point of it all?

[permutojoe]

The police failed to act when they should have. Fire them all and pay civil restitution to the families of those who died for their cowardice.

[Prometheus]

Dec 9, 2022 22:30:51 GMT permutojoe said:

The police failed to act when they should have. Fire them all and pay civil restitution to the families of those who died for their cowardice.

$27 BILLION?

[abbey1227]

Dec 9, 2022 22:30:51 GMT permutojoe said:

The police failed to act when they should have. Fire them all and pay civil restitution to the families of those who died for their cowardice.

How does that reconcile with the court's previous decision that they are not obligated to 'protect and serve'?

[permutojoe]

Dec 10, 2022 13:48:05 GMT abbey1227 said:

Dec 9, 2022 22:30:51 GMT permutojoe said:

The police failed to act when they should have. Fire them all and pay civil restitution to the families of those who died for their cowardice.

How does that reconcile with the court's previous decision that they are not obligated to 'protect and serve'?

Are donuts optional or mandatory?

[abbey1227]

Dec 10, 2022 14:24:02 GMT permutojoe said:

Dec 10, 2022 13:48:05 GMT abbey1227 said:

How does that reconcile with the court's previous decision that they are not obligated to 'protect and serve'?

Are donuts optional or mandatory?

Totally optional.........but delicious. Hence the appeal

[permutojoe]

Dec 10, 2022 14:25:37 GMT abbey1227 said:

Dec 10, 2022 14:24:02 GMT permutojoe said:

Are donuts optional or mandatory?

Totally optional.........but delicious. Hence the appeal

Think they'll ever make protecting and serving optional for the armed forces?  Wonder how well that would work out.

[abbey1227]

Dec 10, 2022 14:32:07 GMT permutojoe said:

Dec 10, 2022 14:25:37 GMT abbey1227 said:

Totally optional.........but delicious. Hence the appeal

Think they'll ever make protecting and serving optional for the armed forces?  Wonder how well that would work out.

They did that decades ago. When's the last the US Military was even allowed to fight a war, much less win one?

It works out pretty well for the MIC and everyone making $Bank off of warfare.

[permutojoe]

Dec 10, 2022 14:35:40 GMT abbey1227 said:

Dec 10, 2022 14:32:07 GMT permutojoe said:

Think they'll ever make protecting and serving optional for the armed forces?  Wonder how well that would work out.

They did that decades ago. When's the last the US Military was even allowed to fight a war, much less win one?

It works out pretty well for the MIC and everyone making $Bank off of warfare.

True we send in a lot of drones, bombs, and missiles to just incinerate whoever happens to be there, but when they tell you to go in and fight, you still gotta fight.