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.
House Republican recognizes transgender Dem Sarah McBride as ‘the gentleman from Delaware’
Trump signals long road ahead in Venezuela in his boldest interventionist move yet
Bill Maher Issues Perfect Response to Fellow Celebs Wearing Anti-ICE ‘Be Good’ Pins
ICE head says agents facing ‘constant impediments’ after migrant seen ramming cars while trying to flee
Venezuela releases multiple American citizens from prison following military operation
Rand Paul says GOP colleagues ‘don’t give a s‑‑t about these people in the boats’: They ‘say they’re pro-life’
DOJ says ‘no basis’ for civil rights investigation into Minneapolis ICE officer killing
GOP senator suggests Fed chair Powell resign now to dodge potential criminal indictment
House Democrats Flip, Join Republicans to Overturn Biden-Era Regulation
Minneapolis-area leaders condemn ICE, call for removal amid Trump deportation campaign
White House says Trump gave ‘appropriate’ response after heckler confrontation caught on video at Ford plant
Suspected Venezuelan gangster in Portland CBP attack tied to shooting at apartment complex: police
Trump Issues Stern Mandate, Tells Tech Titans They Will Not Run Up American Utility Bills
RECKONING: Minnesota Republicans Preparing to Impeach Democratic Gov. Tim Walz
Anti-ICE Demonstrators Claimed Law Enforcement Ran Over a Protester – Then Dashcam Footage Was Released
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.
