Judge dismisses Sandy Hook families' lawsuit against gun maker

HARTFORD, Conn. – A judge on Friday dismissed a wrongful-death lawsuit by Newtown families against the maker of the rifle used in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting massacre, citing an embattled federal law that shields gun manufacturers from most lawsuits over criminal use of their products.

State Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis granted a motion by Remington Arms to strike the lawsuit by the families of nine children and adults killed and a teacher who survived the Dec. 14, 2012, school attack, in which a gunman killed 20 first-graders and six educators with a Bushmaster AR-15-style rifle made by Remington.

The families were seeking to hold Remington accountable for selling what their lawyers called a semi-automatic rifle that is too dangerous for the public because it was designed as a military killing machine.

Their lawyer vowed an immediate appeal of Friday's ruling. The judge agreed with attorneys for Madison, North Carolina-based Remington that the lawsuit should be dismissed under the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which was passed by Congress in 2005 and shields gun makers from liability when their firearms are used in crimes.

So to the families, by their logic how about we sue the car manufacturer after a drunk driving incident.

www.foxnews.com...

a reply to: starwarsisreal

Yah open that can of worms. How about who built the roads car wrecks happen on? Or the power company for electrical fires in your home? How about the farmer who grew the food you choked on?

Bottomless pit.

Pandora's box as it were........

Well, that only took three years and more money than I'll make in a lifetime to reach an obvious conclusion to the rest of the world.

a reply to: starwarsisreal

As it should be, guns do not self load with bullets and pull the trigger by themselves. People. You want to legislate the gun makers? People. The only way to make guns safe is to destroy them and that is not going to happen. People.

originally posted by: the owlbear
Well, that only took three years and more money than I'll make in a lifetime to reach an obvious conclusion to the rest of the world.

I think it was about getting attention to gun control as an end not about the lawsuit. it was probably all covertly paid for.

originally posted by: Char-Lee

originally posted by: the owlbear
Well, that only took three years and more money than I'll make in a lifetime to reach an obvious conclusion to the rest of the world.

I think it was about getting attention to gun control as an end not about the lawsuit. it was probably all covertly paid for.

I could see that... probably by the NRA and gun/ammo manufacturers to drive sales.
Nothing sells better than fear...well, maybe sex...

a reply to: intrptr

God or The Big Bang would always be the one prosecuted.

Would save on prison spaces.

a reply to: and14263

God or The Big Bang would always be the one prosecuted.

The don't put god in jail, they sue him.

force ma·jeure

a reply to: starwarsisreal

The fact is, the gun manufacturer didn't shoot anyone. And when all the emotion and grief and intrinsic human reaction to sudden and devastating personal loss are removed, that simple fact remains unwavering and true.

If I buy a gun from you, and there is a legitimate bill of sale, it is no longer your weapon; it is now mine. So, if I take my weapon in my hand and go out and end someone's life with it, should you be arrested and charged with accessory to murder because you sold it to me? It really, truly is that simple.

The judge made the right, just, and ethical decision here. I have lost a loved one to gun violence. It happened twenty years ago, but it still sickens and enrages me to this day and it always will, as long as I myself continue to draw breath.

But my rage is directed at the people who are actually to blame, and those are the four assholes who decided that the breakup of a three month relationship was sufficient cause to end the life of a vibrant, intelligent 21 year old. And none of them were named Smith or Wesson.

There are a veritable cornucopia of options for someone who is intent on killing another human being. That is a fact. We can end another person's life with nothing more than our own two hands. There is no weapon more lethal than human intent. The means by which that intent is actualized is superfluous.

No...I don't want to live in a place where it is acceptable to lay blame on people who are innocent of wrongdoing, simply to make other people feel vindicated. That kind of mentality is a dead end road.

And the lawyers for both sides get paid. Mission accomplished.

Praise Odin for a sane judge.

a reply to: starwarsisreal

That was my thought exactly

very well put