Your Network and Source for National Gun News

Remington Lawsuit Endangers Your Second Amendment Rights

The still-worthless US Supreme Court has declined to hear a case involving the Sandy Hook families’ lawsuit against Remington. This means that despite the protections of the Second Amendment and the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), a gun manufacturer will now be sued over the actions of a mass shooter.

As if that situation couldn’t get any worse, that lawsuit will now take place in front of a Connecticut jury.

I’ll try to explain this case as simply as possible but be warned – it’s a little complicated. The Sandy Hook parents are suing Remington for “negligent marketing,” which their attorneys claim is a violation of the PLCAA and Connecticut state law. The PLCAA, by the way, is the law that says gun manufacturers can’t be sued for the actions of a criminals who use their products.

The PLCAA is a good law, because it would be insane to allow people to sue product manufacturers for the actions of criminals. It would be no different than suing an auto manufacturer when a drunk driver commits a hit and run.

The Connecticut Supreme Court overturned the lower court, however. The high court ruled that the case could proceed under a statutory exemption to the PLCAA. It wrote that the federal law “did not bar the plaintiffs’ wrongful death claims predicated on the theory that the defendants violated [PLCAA] by marketing the rifle in question to civilians for criminal purposes and that those wrongful marketing tactics caused or contributed to the decedents’ injuries.”

Remington appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court then ruled 5-4 to decline to hear the case. This means that the lawsuit can now proceed through the Connecticut court system.

The Sandy Hook families are claiming that Remington marketed the Bushmaster XM15-E2S as a “weapon of war” that you can use to “commit crimes.” Among the marketing materials submitted in the court filings, Remington pitched the rifle as a “military-proven” weapon that is “mission-adaptable” for a shooter who needs “the ultimate combat weapons system.”

The tagline for one of the ads was, “Consider your man card reissued.” Another ad boasted, “Forces of opposition, bow down. You are single-handedly outnumbered.”

I know, I know. All of those statements sound pretty silly to those of us who understand the differences between actual military rifles and the fun, but glorified squirrel peashooter known as the AR-15. But it sounds spooky to suburban soccer moms and limousine liberals.

One truly infuriating aspect of this case is the fact that the Sandy Hook shooter did not purchase the rifle that he used. How can Remington be liable for “negligent marketing” when the shooter did not buy the rifle based on Remington’s marketing materials?

His single mom bought the rifle. Was her intention to make the forces of opposition bow down? Was she in need of the ultimate combat weapons system? Was she getting her man card reissued? The poor lady probably bought the rifle for any one of the same reasons why Americans buy AR-15s all the time. She doesn’t look like the target audience for any of Remington’s marketing efforts, however.

Not to mention the fact that her mentally ill son stole her rifle and murdered her in her bed with it, before carrying out the Sandy Hook shooting.

How is any of this Remington’s fault? I guess we’re not supposed to ask that.

One thing that’s very clear is that the 5-4 “conservative” Supreme Court that we keep hearing so much about is not exactly super keen on protecting the Second Amendment. John Roberts was – once again – the deciding vote on the Supreme Court to not hear the Soto v. Bushmaster case.

President Trump is going to have to replace at least one more Justice before we have any hope of having a nominally “conservative” Supreme Court, because Roberts has been deciding cases like he’s a Jeffrey Epstein blackmail victim ever since the Obamacare ruling.

On that note, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has missed arguments for two cases in a row this month, because she’s not feeling well. Can you imagine how insane DC is going to get if she passes away or steps down, and Trump gets to pick her replacement during the impeachment proceedings? Uh… We’d all better go to the store and stock up on ammo, now that I think of that.


Most Popular

These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.

To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].

Family-Friendly Content

Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More



Most Popular

These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.

To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].

Family-Friendly Content

Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.