In what appears to not only violate common sense but congressional law, the Connecticut Supreme Court said Thursday that the victims and families of the Sandy Hook school shooting can move forward with a lawsuit against Remington, the manufacturer of the Bushmaster rifle Adam Lanza used to carry out the massacre. Experts predict that the case will now go before the U.S. Supreme Court, seeing as how the Second Amendment and The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act both hang in the balance of this decision.
Not to mention the fact that, um, this kind of liability could literally end U.S. gun manufacturing and sales overnight.
From the New York Times:
In the lawsuit, the families seized upon the marketing for the AR-15-style Bushmaster used in the 2012 attack, which invoked the violence of combat and used slogans like “Consider your man card reissued.”
Lawyers for the families argued that those messages reflected a deliberate effort to appeal to troubled young men like Adam Lanza, the 20-year-old who charged into the elementary school and killed 26 people, including 20 first graders, in a spray of gunfire.
In the 4-3 ruling, the justices agreed with a lower court judge’s decision to dismiss most of the claims raised by the families, but also found that the sweeping federal protections did not prevent the families from bringing a lawsuit based on wrongful marketing claims. The court ruled that the case can move ahead based on a state law regarding unfair trade practices.
Nearly 20 states sue HHS over declaration to restrict gender transition treatment for minors
Watch: Thieves drag ATM through Texas convenience store in Christmas Eve theft attempt
Trump takes NORAD Santa calls with children, praises ‘clean, beautiful coal’ and ‘high-IQ’ person
ICE agents open fire on van driver who allegedly tried to run them over on Christmas Eve
Activists tied to LA bombing plot indicted on terrorism charges
DOJ discovers more than 1M potential Epstein records, further delaying file release
Post-Christmas Disaster: How 26 Million Pounds of Molasses Killed or Injured 170 in the Streets of Boston in 1919
Pentagon to send 350 National Guard troops to New Orleans as violent crime surges ahead of major events
Alito rips Supreme Court majority as ‘unwise’ for blocking Trump’s National Guard plan
Greta Thunberg Arrested After Caught Supporting Literal Anti-Jewish Terrorist Org – This Is the Kid the Left Platformed as a God for Years
California farming tycoon arrested in wife’s killing
Massie questions control of DOJ X account after report alleged White House takeover
New charges against DC National Guard shooting suspect open death penalty door
Shock and Awe: Fiery Rubio Imposes Unprecedented Sanctions on European Elites Who Attempted to Censor Americans
US Set to See Largest One-Year Decline in Murders in History: Crime Expert
It’s hard to see how Remington could be held liable for “wrongful marketing” unless they were specifically advertising a weapon that could feasibly be used to shoot up a kindergarten. Or making some kind of “Hey, weirdo, this gun is perfect for taking your revenge out on an unloving and hateful world!” We’re pretty sure Remington did not engage in marketing of that sort, and so it is ridiculous to claim that they bear any responsibility whatsoever for what Lanza did on that fateful day in 2012.
It is impossible not to feel ongoing sympathy for the families who survived this terrible tragedy, and we don’t even have any particular ill will towards them for trying to seek redress wherever they can find it. Tragedy and logic rarely go hand in hand.
But that doesn’t change the fact that this sort of liability is outlandish, nonsensical, and in direct conflict with the Second Amendment. Not to mention, it opens the door wide open for manufacturers of knives, cars, pressure cookers, and any number of products to be sued for liability. Let’s hope the Supreme Court strikes this down, because it opens up a can of worms that could literally devastate American industry, to say nothing of our rights.
