Your Network and Source for National Gun News

Connecticut Supreme Court to Rule Over whether Gun Manufacturer can be Sued for Sandy Hook Shooting

Over six years have passed since the horrifying Sandy Hook shooting claimed the lives of twenty children and six adult staff members. It was a shooting that shocked the nation and one that we are still feeling the effects of to this day. While there was a push for increased gun control following the shooting, no major legislation was passed. Now, though, the Sandy Hook shooting is back in the news again, and yet again the rights of responsible gun owners are caught in the crossfire.

Ten families of Sandy Hook victims are pushing for the right to sue Remington – the manufacturer of the rifle that was used in the shooting, and the Connecticut Supreme Court is expected to render a decision in the case sometime this week. If the case is allowed to move forward, the consequences for all gun manufacturers – not just Remington – could be extreme.

In 2005, Congress passed a law that broadly protects gun manufacturers from being sued when their firearms are used in illegal activities. However, the families of Sandy Hook victims argue that they should be able to sue Remington under the Connecticut consumer protection law, arguing that Remington produced a deadly weapon and marketed it to civilians.

Law experts, however, agree that the families’ case is on shaky ground. Speaking on their intention to argue their case using the Connecticut consumer protection law, Victor Schwartz said, “I have never seen it used in this context, and I’ve written extensively about consumer protection acts.”

Nevertheless, assuming they are successful and the Connecticut Supreme Court does rule that the families are allowed to sue Remington for manufacturing the firearm that was used in the shooting, a highly dangerous precedent will be set.

It’s an obvious reality that gun manufacturers have no control over how their firearms are used once they are in the hands of the consumer. There are no actions they can take to prevent someone from using their firearms illegally, and if they are held liable for such actions, they will have no course of action to stop the bleeding from the flood of lawsuits that will ensue.

Worst of all, holding gun manufacturers liable when their firearms are used in a crime is in no way limited to the sale of semi-automatic firearms such as the one that was used in the Sandy Hook shooting. The reality is that any firearm can be used in an illegal manner, from firearms as capable as an AR-15 all the way down to firearms as innocent and as limited as single shot .22 rifles.

If gun manufacturers are sued every time someone robs a bank, shoots another individual, commits suicide, dies in an accidental discharge, or uses the weapon in any other way that results in an illegal activity or death, it won’t be long at all before gun manufacturers are put out of business.

It follows then that this isn’t just an issue that affects gun manufacturers, but rather one that affects all gun owners. In a world where no company dares to sell firearms for fear of the lawsuits that would inevitably follow, quality firearms may very well become almost impossible to acquire.

Hopefully, the Connecticut Supreme Court will see what a dangerous precedent allowing the families of Sandy Hook victims would set. Holding gun manufacturers responsible for the way their products are used is no more logical than holding automotive manufacturers responsible when their vehicles are involved in an accident where the vehicle functioned exactly as intended and the driver is at fault.

In fact, Victor Schwartz made this same argument, saying, “You have a car and you give it to somebody who’s drunk. And then they drive, and if they kill somebody, even though you’re not even in the car, you’re liable. But Ford Motor Company is not subject to liability if a car is used to kill somebody by a drunk driver. And that’s why the manufacturers of guns are not subject to liability.”

Supporters of the Second Amendment should keep a watchful eye on how the Connecticut Supreme Court rules in this case. If Congress’s protection of gun manufacturers is indeed upended, gun owners across the country will be opened up to yet another dangerous threat to their Second Amendment rights.

~ National Gun News

44 Comments
  1. Roger Mann says

    The NRA nor any member of the NRA is responsible for school or any other mass shooting! The authorities that ignored warnings, the FBI, the Broward County Sheriff’s Department and the on duty resource officer at the Parkland, Florida school, who apparently thought his job was to walk around looking important instead of watching for trouble, are 100% to blame! The NRA is 100% blameless!
    Because there was a resource officer on duty at the school, the shooter should never been able to enter the school. I don’t know what steps were taken to prevent this act of violence but it wasn’t enough.
    All schools should have cameras that cover every square inch of school property, they should have a central control room located near the main (only) entrance with a monitor watched by a live person every second of the school day and deliveries must be admitted under supervision of a resource officer.
    Doors should be locked so that they can only be opened from the inside and any tardy students or visitors must be admitted by a school official, after showing a picture ID. You would be surprised how often a locked door will stop a bad guy!
    If you dare to care, be aware, prepare, prevent, lock the damned doors!

  2. Roger Mann says

    Until people stop worrying about gun control and instead take steps to make our schools, our churches and all places where people congregate safe these incidents will not stop!
    Gun control does not work, never has and never will! We already have background checks and they do not work, they never have and never will for one simple reason, criminals don’t obey laws, that is why they are called criminals!
    If a person wants a gun, they will get a gun, if they can’t buy a gun, they will steal one, then who does the background check? How long is the waiting period?
    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people (the citizens of any particular state) to keep (own)and bear arms (carry guns of any type and caliber) shall (absolutely) not be infringed!
    The 2nd amendment is crystal clear and only an idiot can’t understand it!
    Everyone must be vigilant at all times, you must know what is going on around you at all times no matter where you are.
    Schools must monitor who is coming into the building, they know who belongs there and who doesn’t, they must not let anyone else in then they must lock the school down with doors opening only from the inside and they must require that any visitors call ahead and direct them to a meeting point. Before anyone says this is too much trouble ask yourself how much is too much trouble to save one life! A properly secured door will 100% stop bad guys!

    The government can’t protect you, only you can protect you! You must be vigilant 24/7!

  3. Nancy says

    Really? How about the car manufacturer who built the car that that drunk driver was driving that killed an innocent teenager, or the company that made whatever alcohol the driver drank way too much of before getting behind the wheel of that “killer vehicle”. Let’s not make people responsible for their own actions.

  4. Jerry Lambert says

    It truly would be a dangerous precedent, Rose O’Donnell will sue the silverware company because their flatware made her fat, or McDonald’s for causing some bodies heart disease

  5. Bruce says

    Idiots coupled with greedy lawyers-why we need tort reform in this nation. Do we sue Smirnoff for drunk driving deaths when a driver kills someone after drinking their product? That would be my argument for dismissing this case.

  6. Neill says

    Guess we can sue McDonald’s because we are fat too.

    1. Neill says

      And car manufacturers when people killed in car accidents, or breweries if a drunk driver, or knife manufacturers when someone is stabbed to death. PEOPLE…it is the criminal, HUMANS, that are at fault. Stop laying the blame where it doesn’t belong……

  7. lee bell says

    They have some pretty sorry lawyers if the lawyers didn’t tell them that according to the law you CANNOT sue gun companies for what people do with them. It’s against the law and has been for a while. The only way you can sue a gun company is if the gun was defective. Any lawyer that tries to bring this to court should be automatically disbarred.

  8. Gerry says

    So, I guess I could sue all fast food places for the deaths they “cause” from high fat foods causing heart attacks? NOBODY wants to take responsibility for anything they do these days!

    Are these parents suing for money? if so I think that is sick. They would be profiting from the deaths……..but I guess so are the news outlets, websites, newspapers, etc. that run the stories on the subject. This case cannot be allowed to proceed or it would set president for people to sue ANYTHING that could cause death…. Crazy..

    G.

  9. Mead Carlson says

    Typical lawyers just looking for cash. The shooter was responsible, not them anufacturer. They don’t sue car makers , liquor manufacturers, knife companies etx. This is crap.

  10. Cliff says

    Suing “gun manufacturers” for the intentional misuse of their product is like suing FORD or Chevy for some whack-job running over people, or spoons and forks for making people FAT….FACT… Firearms do NOT “load themselves” and run out to do destruction. If that were the case, I would be dead long ago, as I have loaded guns right by my bed, and too this day none of MY guns have “attacked me”. I know how IDIOTIC this sounds, but THIS is the INSANE “mind set” of COMMUNIST CORRUPT LIBERALS, hell-bent on DISARMAMENT of LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS for “easy “takeover” of the “sheelples” by “deep state” government operatives. ALSO the CORRUPT, Left-wing so-called “media” have pushed , uneducated, “low information” people into a frenzy, and if ANYONE is “responsible” THEY ALL should be sued THEMSELVES, for pushing LIBERAL COMMUNIST propaganda and inciting riots. ARMED CITIZENS are FREE, UNARMED CITIZENS are “subjects” of the “crown” to be CONTROLLED by a TYRANNICAL “government” (or “ELIMINATED” when they choose to do so)

  11. RJ says

    This not only affects gun owners and manufacturers, but also any manufacturer of any product whether it is used legally or not. How about suing General Motors, Ford or Toyota for that car accident? Or General Electric for the stove you forgot to turn off? Or drug manufacturers when the medicine doesn’t work? Or the politicians who passed the laws (City of Chicago for gun control) when their laws don’t work? I hope these judges can see beyond their political bias’s.

  12. Frank Borke says

    SO, does that mean that people will sue auto makers because their car was used in a particular death. OR, the knife manufactures can be sued for a particular knife death? OR, a cell phone company can be sued because a person was texting with their phone and caused an accident?
    DUMB, DUMB, DUMB.

  13. Frank W Brown says

    More total CRAP from IDIOTS, cars kill so sue ford, knives kill so sue cutco, doctors kill so sue the AMA!

  14. Gerry says

    Total f****** BS !!!!! The manufacturers make weapons — they don’t squeeze the trigger. More libtard BS to try and destroy our 2nd amendment. This should have been thrown out of the first court but I can picture some libtard puppet judge agreeing with it instead of following the law.

  15. FCH says

    How can they tell a gun manufacturers that they are responsible for the person pulling the trigger? How can they even sue them? Why was this not tossed out of court? Why are they not sueing the person who pulled the trigger??

  16. sargentrage says

    What happened to the law that you could not sue for the action of another person using a fire arm. against the maker of Sid firearm

  17. Bruce Andrews says

    The only people that are to blame are the shooter, the parents of the shooter, the school administration and school board and the state plus all those liberals that voted for gun free zones and restrictions on gun ownership by good citizens taking away there GOD given RIGHTS to protect themselves. The gun manufacture is in no way responsible for what that gun is used for after it leaves their control. No more so than a car manufacturer is responsible for deaths that incur by accident not related to any malfunction on the manufacturer’s part.

  18. Mott D Dorn says

    OK! Lets start to sue Ford, GM and all for the deaths caused by cars! This is stupid, It’s not the weapon but the nut holding it!

  19. Alan says

    Notwithstanding the grevious loss suffered, it appears that Remington, the maker of the rifle ILLEGALLY USED, had no way of controlling the use of it’s LEGALLY manufactured and distributed products, as the case with auto makers or any other item properly manufactured and distributed, that might later be used ILLEGALLY.

    It could be held that nothing above said mitigates the loss suffered by the families of the victims. That said however, it remains that Remington, the manufacturer bears no responsibility for the ILLEGAL use of it’s products.

  20. Joseph says

    This is absolutely this dumbest thing I have ever heard of. The gun was manufactured according to all laws. Sold according to all laws. This mentally disturbed idiot stole it from his mom , killed her first, then went berserk! How can you hold Remington liable for that. You shouldn’t any more than the builder of the school for erecting a school that let a tragedy happen. This is more play by Democrats and liberal retards wanting to disarm Americans. Perhaps we would all be safer if we just locked up all the insane liberals and MSM!

  21. Kenneth Boyd says

    So , I can sue the stupid commentators for their STUPID posts ?

  22. Joseph says

    Since the company manufactured a legal item and the item worked as it was designed to do, then all manufacturers of ANY product can be sued . If the product works as designed and is NOT defective then where does the person have a right to sue a manufacturer? The manufacturer produced a legal product BUT someone who chooses to use the product in an ILLEGAL action is the one responsible. If cases like this are allowed, without proof that the product was defective and malfunctioned, then companies that produce legal products are subject to these STUPID law suites where the actual person is not being held responsible for their actions. If there are NO defects in the product just how in the world can the company be held responsible of the actions of the person using a legal product? Cars, knives, baseball bats, hammers, scissors, ETC., the list is enormous. By the way can people be sued for lack of COMMON SENSE ?

  23. DaveM says

    Ridiculous! What is next? The poor guy who chocks on a hotdog gets to sue the hot dog maker? The girl who gets an infection from three year old makeup? This krap has got to stop!

  24. mike tilley says

    If US Judges are going to play this game then other countries should be able to sue the US if they are attacked by the US and receive harm in any form.

  25. Gordon Liddy says

    so if this goes all the way and makes it to court wit a jury, does this mean that people can sue companies that produce alcohol in the deaths of family members killed by a drunk driver?

  26. Walkin O'Shea says

    This is just a pure money grab by the parents. Of course liberals by the droves will be rushing to support their cause. Everyone including them know this is hypocrisy. Sad how parents will try to enrich themselves off the backs of their dead children.

  27. Arizona Don says

    The Connecticut supreme court will never give suing the gun manufacturer the green light. Think what a precedent such a thing would set. Car manufacturers would then be sued for accidents and stoves for heating things to hot. However, if it should the Connecticut supreme court will not be the final word.

  28. Joe Mazzeo says

    Are these people so dumb, you may as well take car dealers and car manufacturers companies and sue them in the same way. We all understand what happened and how this person used his to kill children but if you make gun owners and makers for how other people miss use their guns you might as well open the flood gates to sue car dealers and manufacturers for people who were killed in car accidents .

  29. Charles Ardinger says

    This case will die for lack of merit. Any product that is used for the commision of a crime would make the manufacturer liable for damages. A ladder that used to get into a home to rob it would make the manufacturer of the ladder libel. A shoe used to kick someone would make the manufacturer of the shoe libel for damages. There would be no end of litigation. Any product can be used to harm someone. You can not hold the manufacturer responsible for the decisions of the users.

  30. Tom says

    Then that should mean every time a drunk crashes and or kills somebody we can sue. The distiller, or. Brewer, the automobile mfg even tho they have no control over it when purchased, and the stupid list could go on , oh. And mite as well sue the bullet mfg also, the gun powder mfg and the brass casing mfg this whole thing is ridiculous,

  31. David says

    It’s time for Remington to sue these idiots for a million each, the shooter is the criminal, not the gun.

  32. frank pienkosky says

    if i’m not mistaken…this case centers around advertising and how the gun was marketed….

  33. cheap proxies says

    Elite Private proxy go shopping DreamProxies.com – the actual best private proxies you can get regarding most competitive selling prices!

  34. minecraft says

    I’m extremely inspired together with your writing abilities as well as with the
    layout to your weblog. Is that this a paid subject matter
    or did you customize it your self? Either way keep up the excellent high quality
    writing, it is rare to peer a great blog like this one nowadays..

  35. minecraft says

    Hello, I read your blog like every week. Your writing style is awesome,
    keep doing what you’re doing!

  36. minecraft says

    These are in fact wonderful ideas in regarding blogging. You have touched some good factors here.
    Any way keep up wrinting.

  37. minecraft says

    excellent issues altogether, you simply gained a brand new reader.

    What could you recommend about your publish that you just made some days ago?
    Any certain?

  38. minecraft says

    You ought to take part in a contest for one of the greatest websites online.
    I will highly recommend this site!

  39. minecraft free download 2018 says

    Sweet blog! I found it while searching on Yahoo News. Do you have any
    suggestions on how to get listed in Yahoo News? I’ve been trying
    for a while but I never seem to get there! Thanks

  40. Your mode of explaining the whole thing in this post is actually
    nice, every one can without difficulty be aware of it, Thanks a
    lot.

  41. tinder dating site says

    It’s perfect time to make some plans for the future and it is time to be happy.
    I’ve read this post and if I could I want to suggest
    you few interesting things or advice. Perhaps you can write next
    articles referring to this article. I desire to read even more things about it!

  42. tinder dating site says

    Wow, incredible blog layout! How long have you
    been blogging for? you make blogging look easy.
    The overall look of your website is excellent, let alone the content!

  43. I’m not sure exactly why but this web site is loading very
    slow for me. Is anyone else having this problem or is it a problem
    on my end? I’ll check back later on and see if the problem still
    exists.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.