MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: MU82 on February 15, 2022, 10:54:22 AM
-
The families of victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Newtown, Conn., have reached a settlement in their lawsuit against the maker of the AR-15-style weapon used in the attack.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/15/nyregion/sandy-hook-families-settlement.html?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20220215&instance_id=0&nl=breaking-news&ref=headline®i_id=108420427&segment_id=82798&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa
Remington, which made the weapon, had proposed settling with the families for $33 million as a trial date loomed. Court documents filed on Tuesday morning did not specify the amount of the settlement, but a lawyer for the families said in a statement that the settlement was for $73 million.
Twenty schoolchildren and six adults were killed when a 20-year-old man stormed into the elementary school and set off a spray of gunfire.
The agreement represents a blow to the firearm industry because the lawsuit employed a novel strategy aimed at piercing the vast shield enshrined in federal law protecting gun companies from litigation.
Still, the settlement is unlikely to open the floodgates to more settlements and successful legal efforts, since the Sandy Hook families relied upon a narrow exception in the law.
But it does represent an unusual outcome because the case has managed to move forward even as those federal protections have thwarted other lawsuits brought by families of people killed in other mass shootings.
-
good news for the Waukesha victims (remember them?) who stand to receive millions from the car company.
-
good news for the Waukesha victims (remember them?) who stand to receive millions from the car company.
Who?
-
good news for the Waukesha victims (remember them?) who stand to receive millions from the car company.
Thank you for your insight Jr.
-
good news for the Waukesha victims (remember them?) who stand to receive millions from the car company.
(https://c.tenor.com/oMqrSetNakYAAAAC/jimmy-butler-jimmy-buckets.gif)
-
good news for the Waukesha victims (remember them?) who stand to receive millions from the car company.
So much anger. Clearly, someone really hurt you. Big hug.
-
In before the lock
-
good news for the Waukesha victims (remember them?) who stand to receive millions from the car company.
Do you have to try to be a knob - or does it just come naturally?
-
Guns, especially assault rifles, are made to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time as possible. That is their purpose. Nobody "needs" an AR-15 to protect himself/herself. Nobody hunts with one (unless the prey is humans). They were not created for trap-shooting, target-shooting or any other sporting purpose in mind.
This settlement is sofa-cushion money to Bushmaster, but maybe if more of these lawsuits succeed, it will provide a disincentive to make and market these mass-murder machines.
-
Do you have to try to be a knob - or does it just come naturally?
Passed on through the genes
-
This thread went about as expected
-
This thread went about as expected
Nads needs to keep his record going.
-
Nobody "needs" an AR-15 to protect himself/herself.
I could see needing one, on your own property, if you are invaded by this.
(http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/e/e0/RedDawnJatimaticFiresTrainA.jpg/600px-RedDawnJatimaticFiresTrainA.jpg)
(http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/a/aa/RedDawnTT33A.jpg/600px-RedDawnTT33A.jpg)
Not sure why the pictures are not loading. Its photos from the movie, Red Dawn.
-
Guns, especially assault rifles, are made to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time as possible. That is their purpose. Nobody "needs" an AR-15 to protect himself/herself. Nobody hunts with one (unless the prey is humans). They were not created for trap-shooting, target-shooting or any other sporting purpose in mind.
This settlement is sofa-cushion money to Bushmaster, but maybe if more of these lawsuits succeed, it will provide a disincentive to make and market these mass-murder machines.
AR means assault rifle.
-
Does this set any precedent? Like any other survivor group of a major shooting with the bushmaster AR 15 can also file suit and get a huge settlement? What about with other companies?
-
Does this set any precedent? Like any other survivor group of a major shooting with the bushmaster AR 15 can also file suit and get a huge settlement? What about with other companies?
This case had a fairly unique set of circumstances and clever theory of liability that very likely wouldn't apply to other cases.
-
This case had a fairly unique set of circumstances and clever theory of liability that very likely wouldn't apply to other cases.
Yes. Unless the circumstances were similar. Which they very well might be.
-
Does this set any precedent? Like any other survivor group of a major shooting with the bushmaster AR 15 can also file suit and get a huge settlement? What about with other companies?
Technically, no precedent, as it didn't actually go to court. Experts for the defense thinks they would have won if it had gone to trial. It depends on what that particular state's law allows.
-
AR means assault rifle.
I respect this trolling
-
AR means assault rifle.
AR stands for armalite, the company that designed the original design of what has been commonly called the AR. you can get AR 5, 10 and 15's. despite what 82 is all geeked up about, they weren't designed to kill anymore than scissors. they are semi-automatic, not automatic, i.e. a machine gun. so if one wants a gun "to kill as many as possible in the shortest amount of time" it is not the weapon of choice. that comment right there tells you 82 knows absolutely nothing about guns and should be the last person to comment, pro or against guns because you will not get an honest answer.
-
AR stands for armalite, the company that designed the original design of what has been commonly called the AR. you can get AR 5, 10 and 15's. despite what 82 is all geeked up about, they weren't designed to kill anymore than scissors. they are semi-automatic, not automatic, i.e. a machine gun. so if one wants a gun "to kill as many as possible in the shortest amount of time" it is not the weapon of choice. that comment right there tells you 82 knows absolutely nothing about guns and should be the last person to comment, pro or against guns because you will not get an honest answer.
Lol. What exactly were they designed to do then?
-
Purely for target practice you see
-
Lol. What exactly were they designed to do then?
i realize this is one of the things that is very hard for some of you to understand, but many people just like guns. they collect them, they shoot them for sport, competition, etc. there is an Olympic event with guns. more people have guns for the right reasons and respect them than those who use them for wrong reasons. yes, they can be used for self defense if needed. they serve as a deterrent and believe it or not, they can save lives.
the guns themselves are inanimate. evil people with guns, bats, knives, etc do evil things with inanimate objects
they were not designed to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time
-
i realize this is one of the things that is very hard for some of you to understand, but many people just like guns. they collect them, they shoot them for sport, competition, etc. there is an Olympic event with guns. more people have guns for the right reasons and respect them than those who use them for wrong reasons. yes, they can be used for self defense if needed. they serve as a deterrent and believe it or not, they can save lives.
the guns themselves are inanimate. evil people with guns, bats, knives, etc do evil things with inanimate objects
they were not designed to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time
Guns are for the express purpose of killing. As many people as possible, as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Although I'll grant you that sometimes it happens accidentally. Like in the dozens of cases of toddlers shooting family members.
What fun! Collect 'em all, kids!
-
i realize this is one of the things that is very hard for some of you to understand, but many people just like guns. they collect them, they shoot them for sport, competition, etc. there is an Olympic event with guns. more people have guns for the right reasons and respect them than those who use them for wrong reasons. yes, they can be used for self defense if needed. they serve as a deterrent and believe it or not, they can save lives.
the guns themselves are inanimate. evil people with guns, bats, knives, etc do evil things with inanimate objects
they were not designed to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time
So they are designed to do what exactly again?
Let me help. They are designed to kill things. They are designed to to kill things as efficiently as possible with the user subjected to the least amount of danger possible.
And I am not anti-gun. I have several shotguns and rifles that I inherited when my father passed away. So spare me the “you just don’t understand”nonsense.
I also am intellectually honest enough to admit that the guns I own, and a weapon like an AR-15, are designed for very different purposes and are not the same.
Can you admit that?
-
i realize this is one of the things that is very hard for some of you to understand, but many people just like guns.
As Jim Jeffries said, this is the most honest and defensible pro-gun argument. It’s not great, but at least it’s honest and direct
-
Guns are for the express purpose of killing. As many people as possible, as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Although I'll grant you that sometimes it happens accidentally. Like in the dozens of cases of toddlers shooting family members.
What fun! Collect 'em all, kids!
🤡🤡🤡
-
So they are designed to do what exactly again?
Let me help. They are designed to kill things. They are designed to to kill things as efficiently as possible with the user subjected to the least amount of danger possible.
And I am not anti-gun. I have several shotguns and rifles that I inherited when my father passed away. So spare me the “you just don’t understand”nonsense.
I also am intellectually honest enough to admit that the guns I own, and a weapon like an AR-15, are designed for very different purposes and are not the same.
Can you admit that?
Don’t argue with a Buffon
-
AR means assault rifle.
AR stands for armalite, the company that designed the original design of what has been commonly called the AR. you can get AR 5, 10 and 15's. despite what 82 is all geeked up about, they weren't designed to kill anymore than scissors. they are semi-automatic, not automatic, i.e. a machine gun. so if one wants a gun "to kill as many as possible in the shortest amount of time" it is not the weapon of choice. that comment right there tells you 82 knows absolutely nothing about guns and should be the last person to comment, pro or against guns because you will not get an honest answer.
Direct hit, on a friendly!
*chef's kiss*
-
Direct hit, on a friendly!
*chef's kiss*
Whoooosh
-
Whoooosh
Quite the opposite, sir.
-
Quite the opposite, sir.
You really think that I thought AR meant assault rifle? You're dumber than you look, if so.
-
You really think that I thought AR meant assault rifle? You're dumber than you look, if so.
Woooooooosh.
I mentioned that what you said was trolling... because I knew it would catch someone. And it did.
-
The company settled out of court but there was no admission of liability. Cases like these are settled as to not set a precedent in case law but the company still gets the message; not unlike CNNs and WAPO's settlement with Rick Sandman. This settlement will have no real consequences holding gun manufactures liable for gun shootings. The only thing that will change is how they market/advertise their product.
https://www.wsj.com/podcasts/the-journal/remington-surprising-sandy-hook-settlement/11d30a1a-6d2d-43d6-a9a4-b26621195a46
-
Woooooooosh.
I mentioned that what you said was trolling... because I knew it would catch someone. And it did.
No. I was mocking Nads' antigun tirade. If you think that was trolling to catch rocket, well, you're wrong.
Nice try though.
-
No. I was mocking Nads' antigun tirade. If you think that was trolling to catch rocket, well, you're wrong.
Nice try though.
When you go fishing, you don't pick which fish you catch.
You caught yourself a half-witted dental professional, which seem to be abundant in these waters. Hope you threw it back.
-
No. I was mocking Nads' antigun tirade. If you think that was trolling to catch rocket, well, you're wrong.
Nice try though.
I don't doubt that it was unintentional, but you definitely wooshed rocket.
-
When you go fishing, you don't pick which fish you catch.
You caught yourself a half-witted dental professional, which seem to be abundant in these waters. Hope you threw it back.
Incredible.
-
When you go fishing, you don't pick which fish you catch.
You caught yourself a half-witted dental professional, which seem to be abundant in these waters. Hope you threw it back.
Like catching an Asian Carp. A little misinformation and he flings himself into the boat.
-
When you go fishing, you don't pick which fish you catch.
You caught yourself a half-witted dental professional, which seem to be abundant in these waters. Hope you threw it back.
I beg to differ about fishing but of course I go fishing at pet stores
-
i realize this is one of the things that is very hard for some of you to understand, but many people just like guns. they collect them, they shoot them for sport, competition, etc. there is an Olympic event with guns. more people have guns for the right reasons and respect them than those who use them for wrong reasons. yes, they can be used for self defense if needed. they serve as a deterrent and believe it or not, they can save lives.
the guns themselves are inanimate. evil people with guns, bats, knives, etc do evil things with inanimate objects
they were not designed to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time
my uncle had something like 75 guns displayed around his house - handguns, rifles, shotguns, etc. He was a hunter and collector. Other than deer and pheasants he didn't kill anything. My dad has 10 or so for hunting and going to the range and his targets are the same (except add a bear and a badger to the list of what he killed). The vast majority of gun owners use their guns for hunting or recreational purposes, or there are those who have them for protection and will never use them (my neighbor and my wife, for example).
I don't see a need for anyone to have an AR or an automatic, but if they're responsible and purchased legally then I don't have an issue as long as the purchase was legal. We do need A) stricter background checks (this is where the NRA has gone off the rails), B) better tracing and registration. If someone illegally sells a gun to someone who goes forward and commits a crime they should be held liable (kind of like a bartender who overserves an individual who goes on to be involved in a drunk driving accident).
-
When you go fishing, you don't pick which fish you catch.
You caught yourself a half-witted dental professional, which seem to be abundant in these waters. Hope you threw it back.
Exactly.
-
If you want to spray some deer piss on yourself and sit in a tree for 10 hours JO'ing a rifle thats your business. semi or automatic guns and handguns are nothing but trouble. They shouldn't have any place in our society.
-
We do need A) stricter background checks (this is where the NRA has gone off the rails), B) better tracing and registration. If someone illegally sells a gun to someone who goes forward and commits a crime they should be held liable (kind of like a bartender who overserves an individual who goes on to be involved in a drunk driving accident).
Yes, that would be a very nice start to some common-sense gun reform. They and similar suggestions that have the support of a huge percentage of Americans - and I'm talking like 75%+ - have been proposed in this forum many other times.
It's infuriating when the response to sensible suggestions like yours all too often elicit the response: "Why? They won't prevent all the gun deaths anyway." As if laws against murder stop all murders, laws requiring 2-year-olds be transported in secure car seats stop all kids from dying in car accidents, laws against rape stop all rapes, etc.
There are incremental steps that can be taken that stop a bazillion miles short of "We're taking away all the guns." It sure would be nice if our elected officials would listen to the significant majority of Americans.
I appreciate the post.
-
Yes, that would be a very nice start to some common-sense gun reform. They and similar suggestions that have the support of a huge percentage of Americans - and I'm talking like 75%+ - have been proposed in this forum many other times.
It's infuriating when the response to sensible suggestions like yours all too often elicit the response: "Why? They won't prevent all the gun deaths anyway." As if laws against murder stop all murders, laws requiring 2-year-olds be transported in secure car seats stop all kids from dying in car accidents, laws against rape stop all rapes, etc.
There are incremental steps that can be taken that stop a bazillion miles short of "We're taking away all the guns." It sure would be nice if our elected officials would listen to the significant majority of Americans.
I appreciate the post.
Money and volume have the greatest influence, unfortunately. And for both sides it's all or nothing (which can be said for so many issues today). We know the influence the NRA has and the "they're going to take away ALL our guns" fearmongering they trot out whenever there's a proposal for simple, common sense reform. However, the small but loud "let's ban all gun ownership" group, even if they have little to no influence on policy making, provides the rationale for the NRA's scare tactics.
-
That is what the NRA hype machine wants you to think. But they have marketed it effectively.
-
"half-witted dental professional"
i'm starting to not feel so safe here if you continue to hurt our feelings as such...gotta feel real proud of yourself pakman, ya got me there
-
Guns, especially assault rifles, are made to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time as possible. That is their purpose. Nobody "needs" an AR-15 to protect himself/herself. Nobody hunts with one (unless the prey is humans). They were not created for trap-shooting, target-shooting or any other sporting purpose in mind.
This settlement is sofa-cushion money to Bushmaster, but maybe if more of these lawsuits succeed, it will provide a disincentive to make and market these mass-murder machines.
Well damn, that feels like an absolute insult. Just because I haven't gotten a deer in 5 years doesn't mean I don't hunt with one!
-
"half-witted dental professional"
i'm starting to not feel so safe here if you continue to hurt our feelings as such...gotta feel real proud of yourself pakman, ya got me there
You're right, he shouldn't have used the word professional. Misleading.
-
An AR-15 designed for children shocks even the most jaded gun-control advocates
https://www.fastcompany.com/90721663/an-ar-15-designed-for-children-shocks-even-the-most-jaded-gun-control-advocates
(https://images2.imgbox.com/0c/e5/6HEOoTVs_o.jpg) (https://imgbox.com/6HEOoTVs)
"Given this backdrop of ever-increasing gun violence, and especially by young perpetrators, the release of a new rifle directly marketed to kids has astonished even gun-reform experts who have followed the industry’s aggressive targeting of children for years. They say this new firearm, overtly advertised as a kids’ version of the AR-15—the style of rifle used in 11 of the 12 most high-profile mass shootings, including Sandy Hook and Las Vegas—is the most brazen example of such targeted firearms marketing they’ve ever seen. The move is part of a trend by an unstable gun industry in a volatile market to target new potential consumers, but it’s also motivated by a rise of political extremism.
Last month, the JR-15, or Junior 15, debuted at the SHOT Show, billed as the nation’s largest annual trade show for the sport shooting, hunting, and outdoor industry. The event is organized by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), a firearms industry trade association. The rifle is manufactured by WEE1 Tactical, an offshoot of Schmid Tool and Engineering, which has sold AR-15 components for 30 years. A November press release from WEE1 specifically notes the JR-15’s appeal to children: “Our vision is to develop a line of shooting platforms that will safely help adults introduce children to the shooting sports,” it reads. To do that, it’s built a gun whose “ergonomics are geared towards children”: it’s lighter than an adult version, at 2.2 pounds, 20% smaller, and with a patented safety mechanism, not standard on AR-15s, which needs to be pulled out “with some force” and rotated before it can fire. Slight tweaks aside, the company boasts that it “operates just like Mom and Dad’s gun.”
-
An AR-15 designed for children shocks even the most jaded gun-control advocates
https://www.fastcompany.com/90721663/an-ar-15-designed-for-children-shocks-even-the-most-jaded-gun-control-advocates
(https://images2.imgbox.com/0c/e5/6HEOoTVs_o.jpg) (https://imgbox.com/6HEOoTVs)
"Given this backdrop of ever-increasing gun violence, and especially by young perpetrators, the release of a new rifle directly marketed to kids has astonished even gun-reform experts who have followed the industry’s aggressive targeting of children for years. They say this new firearm, overtly advertised as a kids’ version of the AR-15—the style of rifle used in 11 of the 12 most high-profile mass shootings, including Sandy Hook and Las Vegas—is the most brazen example of such targeted firearms marketing they’ve ever seen. The move is part of a trend by an unstable gun industry in a volatile market to target new potential consumers, but it’s also motivated by a rise of political extremism.
Last month, the JR-15, or Junior 15, debuted at the SHOT Show, billed as the nation’s largest annual trade show for the sport shooting, hunting, and outdoor industry. The event is organized by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), a firearms industry trade association. The rifle is manufactured by WEE1 Tactical, an offshoot of Schmid Tool and Engineering, which has sold AR-15 components for 30 years. A November press release from WEE1 specifically notes the JR-15’s appeal to children: “Our vision is to develop a line of shooting platforms that will safely help adults introduce children to the shooting sports,” it reads. To do that, it’s built a gun whose “ergonomics are geared towards children”: it’s lighter than an adult version, at 2.2 pounds, 20% smaller, and with a patented safety mechanism, not standard on AR-15s, which needs to be pulled out “with some force” and rotated before it can fire. Slight tweaks aside, the company boasts that it “operates just like Mom and Dad’s gun.”
I thought that was an Onion article, so I looked it up
https://wee1tactical.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/WEE1_TACTICAL_BROCHURE_W.pdf (https://wee1tactical.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/WEE1_TACTICAL_BROCHURE_W.pdf)
No words
-
An AR-15 designed for children shocks even the most jaded gun-control advocates
https://www.fastcompany.com/90721663/an-ar-15-designed-for-children-shocks-even-the-most-jaded-gun-control-advocates
(https://images2.imgbox.com/0c/e5/6HEOoTVs_o.jpg) (https://imgbox.com/6HEOoTVs)
"Given this backdrop of ever-increasing gun violence, and especially by young perpetrators, the release of a new rifle directly marketed to kids has astonished even gun-reform experts who have followed the industry’s aggressive targeting of children for years. They say this new firearm, overtly advertised as a kids’ version of the AR-15—the style of rifle used in 11 of the 12 most high-profile mass shootings, including Sandy Hook and Las Vegas—is the most brazen example of such targeted firearms marketing they’ve ever seen. The move is part of a trend by an unstable gun industry in a volatile market to target new potential consumers, but it’s also motivated by a rise of political extremism.
Last month, the JR-15, or Junior 15, debuted at the SHOT Show, billed as the nation’s largest annual trade show for the sport shooting, hunting, and outdoor industry. The event is organized by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), a firearms industry trade association. The rifle is manufactured by WEE1 Tactical, an offshoot of Schmid Tool and Engineering, which has sold AR-15 components for 30 years. A November press release from WEE1 specifically notes the JR-15’s appeal to children: “Our vision is to develop a line of shooting platforms that will safely help adults introduce children to the shooting sports,” it reads. To do that, it’s built a gun whose “ergonomics are geared towards children”: it’s lighter than an adult version, at 2.2 pounds, 20% smaller, and with a patented safety mechanism, not standard on AR-15s, which needs to be pulled out “with some force” and rotated before it can fire. Slight tweaks aside, the company boasts that it “operates just like Mom and Dad’s gun.”
How do they not see immediate comparisons to a Tommy gun? Light and small so it can be easily concealed, that can fire at an extremely fast rate. Why just the other day I was asking myself "how can we return to the days of Capone"
-
'Murica!
-
An AR-15 designed for children shocks even the most jaded gun-control advocates
https://www.fastcompany.com/90721663/an-ar-15-designed-for-children-shocks-even-the-most-jaded-gun-control-advocates
(https://images2.imgbox.com/0c/e5/6HEOoTVs_o.jpg) (https://imgbox.com/6HEOoTVs)
"Given this backdrop of ever-increasing gun violence, and especially by young perpetrators, the release of a new rifle directly marketed to kids has astonished even gun-reform experts who have followed the industry’s aggressive targeting of children for years. They say this new firearm, overtly advertised as a kids’ version of the AR-15—the style of rifle used in 11 of the 12 most high-profile mass shootings, including Sandy Hook and Las Vegas—is the most brazen example of such targeted firearms marketing they’ve ever seen. The move is part of a trend by an unstable gun industry in a volatile market to target new potential consumers, but it’s also motivated by a rise of political extremism.
Last month, the JR-15, or Junior 15, debuted at the SHOT Show, billed as the nation’s largest annual trade show for the sport shooting, hunting, and outdoor industry. The event is organized by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), a firearms industry trade association. The rifle is manufactured by WEE1 Tactical, an offshoot of Schmid Tool and Engineering, which has sold AR-15 components for 30 years. A November press release from WEE1 specifically notes the JR-15’s appeal to children: “Our vision is to develop a line of shooting platforms that will safely help adults introduce children to the shooting sports,” it reads. To do that, it’s built a gun whose “ergonomics are geared towards children”: it’s lighter than an adult version, at 2.2 pounds, 20% smaller, and with a patented safety mechanism, not standard on AR-15s, which needs to be pulled out “with some force” and rotated before it can fire. Slight tweaks aside, the company boasts that it “operates just like Mom and Dad’s gun.”
I personally enjoy the cute children skull and crossbones.
Really brings out the death part of the 157 that have lost lives in school shootings since 1999.
-
Sandy Hook families maybe are not done?
https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/Sandy-Hook-families-settled-for-73-million-with-16931068.php?t=5c6fdbcac5&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=test&utm_campaign=CT_NHR_MorningBriefing&sid=5baaacf72ddf9c545d737065
Sandy Hook families settled for $73 million with Remington, but the documents turned over might be the ‘most valuable part of the settlement’
Photo of Rob Ryser
Rob Ryser
Feb. 19, 2022
Updated: Feb. 20, 2022 9:30 p.m.
NEWTOWN — Lost in the reverberations across the country after the “historic” $73 million settlement between Remington and nine Sandy Hook families was their promise that their case against the defunct gunmaker was not over, but could now begin in earnest.
The families’ unlikely victory over what had been America’s oldest and largest gun manufacturer was unlike anything the country has ever seen, not only because the families found a crack in the armor of an industry many believed was immune to liability when guns are misused.
More importantly, the families said, they now have the internal company documents they would have brought to a jury to argue that Remington used “reckless marketing techniques to appeal to at-risk and violent-prone young men.”
As the families won’t have a jury to hear their case, they’ll make their appeal to the American people.
“This was never about the money — it was always about holding an organization accountable for its marketing,” said Scarlett Lewis, the mother of a boy killed in the Sandy Hook shooting. “We have emails that detail (Remington) talking about how much money they were making off the AR-15s, and how they were going to market them to young men.”
Prospects the families will use Remington’s proprietary internal marketing data — which companies strive to protect at all costs — could shake up and reshape the gun industry landscape more than other ripple effects of a settlement the White House called “historic,” experts said.
“These documents are going to be relevant beyond Remington because they don’t just tell the history about how Remington marketed (AR-15s),” said Peter Kochenburger, executive director of the Insurance Law Program and an associate clinical professor of Law at UConn Law School. “These documents provide a pathway to attack other companies. People will say, ‘We have seen these documents, and now we have questions we can ask the next gun company.”
Kochenburger was referring to a case that experts thought was unwinnable in 2014 when a group of Sandy Hook families filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the maker of the AR-15-style rifle used in the 2012 shooting of 20 first-graders and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School. What got legal observers’ attention was how the families tried to loophole through a federal law that protects the gun industry from most liability when its guns are misused, by arguing that Remington showed negligent entrustment in marketing a militarized rifle to civilians.
Although that strategy didn’t work and the families’ case was thrown out of state Superior Court, the Connecticut Supreme Court overruled and found by a 4-to-3 vote that the families had grounds to argue Remington unlawfully marketed the AR-15 under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act.
When the United States Supreme Court declined to review the case, Remington was out of options and declared bankruptcy for a second time, selling itself off to competitors in an Alabama courtroom, and transferring its defense of the Sandy Hook lawsuit to four insurance carriers, who made the settlement offer to families last week.
A leading gun industry analyst noted that because every state has its version of an unfair trade practices law, the Sandy Hook case is precedent setting.
“Smith & Wesson is going through similar thing in New Jersey that is not necessarily related to bodily injury but has the New Jersey Attorney General going after its marketing practices,” said Rich Duprey, an analyst for Motley Fool, referring to a 2020 subpoena. “This is going to embolden the states to go after gun companies — if they can’t bankrupt them in the marketplace, they can bankrupt them in the courtroom.”
The Newtown-based trade association for the gun industry disagrees about any precedent-setting impact, saying the Sandy Hook settlement was an outlier that “does not alter the fundamental facts of the case.”
Not only is the federal law shielding the gun industry intact and not in danger of imminent repeal, says the National Shooting Sports Foundation, but the Sandy Hook families in the Remington lawsuit “never produced any evidence that (Remington’s) advertising had any bearing or influence over Nancy Lanza’s decision to legally purchase a Bushmaster rifle, nor on the decision of murderer Adam Lanza to steal that rifle, kill his mother in her sleep, and go on to commit the rest of his horrendous crimes.”
“We renew our sincere sympathy for the victims of this unspeakable tragedy and all victims of violence committed through the misusing of any firearm,” the NSSF said in a statement. “But the fact remains that modern sporting rifles are the most popular rifle in America with over 20 million sold to law-abiding Americans and rifles, of any kind, are exceedingly rarely used in crime.”
The families’ lead attorney Josh Koskoff argues the opposite, saying the connection between Lanza’s attraction to the AR-15 and Remington’s targeting of susceptible young men is contained in thousands of pages of documents recently handed over to the families as part of the settlement.
Koskoff and Sandy Hook family members offered a hint of that connection during an emotional two-hour news conference on Tuesday in Trumbull.
Koskoff said the heart of the families’ case against Remington was not so much about guns as it was about greed, arguing the aggressive marketing of the AR-15 rifle to civilians began in earnest when a private equity firm took over Remington in 2005.
“In 2005, there were about 100,000 AR-15s sold,” Koskoff said. “In 2012, there were over 2 million AR-15s sold.”
The ads contained messages including “Consider Your Man Card Reissued” and “Clear the Room, Cover the Rooftop, Rescue the Hostage.” Koskoff said Remington targeted younger, at-risk males in advertising and product placement in violent video games. The lawsuit said the company’s advertising played a role in the school shooting, but did not elaborate.
It was not clear this week how soon the families would make public Remington’s marketing documents, or what form such a presentation might take.
UConn Law School’s Kochenburger expects a new wave of reverberations once they’re released.
“Those documents are probably the most valuable part of the settlement,” he said.
An Associated Press report was used in this story. rryser@newstimes.com 203-731-3342
-
They won against Alex Jones and got a settlement from Remington. Good on them.
-
Good. Hold gun manufacturers accountable, similar to battles against opioid and tobacco companies.