Lawsuit By Sandy Hook Victims Against Gun Manufacturer Allowed To Move Forward

[USincognito]

Is killing always murder?

I asked first. Does murder involve killing or not?

 

[Hammster]

I asked first. Does murder involve killing or not?

You didn’t ask. You made a statement.

But yes, it does. However, the reverse isn’t true.

 

[USincognito]

But yes, it does. However, the reverse isn’t true.

On that we are in agreement.

 

[NotreDame]

If you really think that’s what this is about, then you’ve been duped.

The complaint alleges, inter alia, that the marketing tactics of the manufacturer left the impression the gun was to be used to shoot at civilian population. The lawsuit isn’t based on the manufacturer is liable because it made a firearm or a dangerous item for sale.

From the decision:

“The plaintiffs’ second theory of liability was that the defendants marketed the rifle, through advertising and product catalogs, in an unethical, oppressive, immoral, and unscrupulous manner by extolling the militaris- tic and assaultive qualities of the rifle and reinforcing the image of the rifle as a combat weapon that is intended to be used for the purposes of waging war and killing human beings.

The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants advertised this rifle differently from how they would promote and sell rifles intended for legal civilian purposes such as hunting and recreation. In connection with this second theory of liability, the plain- tiffs also alleged that the defendants’ marketing of the rifle to civilians for offensive assault missions was a substantial factor in causing the decedents’ injuries in that L’s attack, had it occurred at all, would have been less lethal if L had not been encouraged by the defendants’ market- ing campaign to select the rifle in question as his weapon of choice.”

​

 

[Allandavid]

Because there’s no way that a manufacturer of a product should be held liable for the misuse of their product.

Trouble is, it wasn’t “misused”....what was done with it is exactly what it is designed for...

 

[Allandavid]

Not just that. Any time someone uses a product to harm someone else, the manufacturer would be liable.

No...not any time.

 

[Hammster]

Trouble is, it wasn’t “misused”....what was done with it is exactly what it is designed for...

Then it should be easy to demonstrate that Remington designed it to murder children.

I’ll wait.

 

[Allandavid]

Then it should be easy to demonstrate that Remington designed it to murder children.

I’ll wait.

No, Remington designed a weapon to efficiently kill multiple persons in a short time frame. Under those circumstances, they share a responsibility that their product does not fall into the hands of certain sections of the populace. Only those who can demonstrate that they have some useful purpose in obtaining the weapon should be their clients.

 

[Hammster]

No, Remington designed a weapon to efficiently kill multiple persons in a short time frame. Under those circumstances, they share a responsibility that their product does not fall into the hands of certain sections of the populace. Only those who can demonstrate that they have some useful purpose in obtaining the weapon should be their clients.

The intended use was never to murder children. Just like the intended use of cars isn’t to plow into a crowd.

 

[NotreDame]

No, Remington designed a weapon to efficiently kill multiple persons in a short time frame. Under those circumstances, they share a responsibility that their product does not fall into the hands of certain sections of the populace. Only those who can demonstrate that they have some useful purpose in obtaining the weapon should be their clients.

Mmm...that’s difficult to apply here since the mom purchased the firearm. Rather difficult to blame them because mom was perhaps not careful enough to ensure her firearm was not possessed in some reckless manner by someone else.

Besides, the lawsuit in Connecticut isn’t based on that theory anyway.

 

[USincognito]

Then it should be easy to demonstrate that Remington designed it to murder children.

I’ll wait.

Look at those goalposts fly!

 

[Hammster]

Look at those goalposts fly!

I didn’t move anything. I’m just responding to another post.