Truth Revolt -- Families of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting have been given a trial date in their lawsuit against Remington Arms, maker of the Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle that Adam Lanza used to murder 20 children and six adults in 2012.
CBS News reports that Judge Barbara Bellis ruled last week that a federal law protecting gun manufacturers from lawsuits doesn't prevent the lawyers representing these families from arguing that the AR-15 is a "military weapon" and shouldn't be for sale to the public:
A lawyer for the families had argued there is an exception in federal law that allows litigation against companies that know, or should know, that their weapons are likely to be used in a way that risks injury to others.Nicole Hockley lost her son, Dylan, in the massacre. She believes Remington played a role in her son's death:
"There are a lot of guns our shooter could have chosen from his arsenal. He chose the AR-15 because it served his purpose to kill as many people as possible."For clarity, and what is not mentioned in the CBS News report, an AR-15 is not a "military weapon," as it is not fully-automatic (fully automatic machine guns are highly regulated and very expensive). Instead, it is semi-automatic and will only fire one bullet for every pull of the trigger. This is no different feature than any other semi-automatic rifle, shotgun, or handgun. Just because an AR-15 looks like a machine gun doesn't mean it shoots like one, nor does it mean it is capable of killing more people.
The trial date has been set for April, 3, 2018, despite Remington's attorney arguing for dismissal per the federal law, citing that his client can't be held responsible for these deaths. He also mentioned that holding a gun maker responsible for criminal actions of an individual sets a dangerous precedent, as noted in another report.
But the husband of one of the adult victims, Bill Sherlach, is happy with the judge's decision:
"We're obviously very happy with the judge's decision, and basically this is just one more step in a long march."That apparently means the long march to more gun control.
Blog Author's Comments -- In this case they have a liberal judge and lawyer for some of the people who had or have children at the Sandy Hook school who want to sue someone. Will this make those who perhaps lost a child because the mental case with his mother's gun decided to go kill people? Why not sue the school system for not providing armed security within the school? But if this idea is put forth most of them would not want someone with the proper training in their child's school who has a gun. As the NRA's Wayne Lapierre said 'the only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun.'
It won't be too long before someone will want to sue a knife maker because it seems that more criminals are attacking people with a knife. This is a frivolous case because it is one which they cannot win. You don't see Budweiser or a car company getting sued because of a crash that involved alcoholism.
