Remington has been mired in lawsuits since the Sandy Hook shooting. And court after court dismissed the lawsuits, until March when the Connecticut Supreme Court reinstated the suit. Now Remington asks the Supreme Court to take up the case, according to the Associated Press. Will they?
Sandy Hook Lawsuit
Adam Lanza killed Nancy Lanza, his mother, stole her Bushmaster rifle, drove to Sandy Hook elementary and killed children. The horror and tragedy of that action had nothing whatsoever to do with Remington marketing, which is the crux of the lawsuit. The parents of some of the students killed at Sandy Hook in 2012 are suing Remington for marketing practices. Remington did not market the gun to “encourage illegal purposes.” Adam Lanza made the choice to be a murdering bastard…Remington’s marketing had nothing to do with it.
The Daily Caller wrote in April,
The plaintiffs, citing advertising materials that place the XM15 in a martial context and glorify its lethal capacity, say Bushmaster violated Connecticut’s unfair trade practices law because its marketing campaign for the weapon encouraged its use for illegal purposes.
The state Supreme Court said the plaintiffs can proceed on that claim under an exception to the PLCAA that sets aside immunity if a manufacturer breaks a law “applicable to the sale or marketing of the product.” The panel returned the case to a lower court for trial. The decision stunned pro-Second Amendment groups.
According to experts, Remington (Bushmaster) may be premature in its request, so the Supreme Court may not hear the case simply because it has not been adjudicated in that lower court. They are hoping to get a stay on the lower court case due to the high cost of litigation.
“If proceedings are not stayed and Remington is required to undergo the costly and time-consuming burdens of litigation, including further discovery, motion practice and possibly trial, it will irreparably lose the intended benefit of threshold PLCAA immunity from suit.”
Bushmaster/Remington court motion
The PLCAA, or the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, should have protected Remington from the ridiculous lawsuit in the first place. Do we hold Ford responsible every time some drunk jackwagon runs into a pedestrian? Do we hold Buck knives responsible if someone stabs someone with one of their knives?
Democrats have tried for years to repeal the PLCAA to no avail. Forcing gun manufacturers into bankruptcy while they fight for their livelihoods against a flood of lawsuits is what liberals hope to accomplish. Don’t let them win.
Courtesy of Conservative Firing Line