Friends I’ve been wondering why there were no lawsuits. Well then again I figured maybe with no/a few victims that might explain it. Then again that may explain why there are only 9 + 1 teachers family suing out of 26. First off there are laws protecting gun makers from such suits so it should be throw out. If not I’m kinda curious as to what might slip out.
Also I don’t know if you ever saw this piece from Dean Garrison’s D.C. Clothline, but I have never seen it and it has an awesome transcribed interview and you-tube with By Jim Fetzer (with Sofia Smallstorm and Paul Preston) That is worth the read. Link is here.
D.C. Clothline Story
————————–———————————————————–
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — The families of nine people killed in the Newtown school massacre filed a lawsuit against the maker and sellers of the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle used in the shooting, saying the gun should not have been sold for civilian use because of its overwhelming firepower.
The lawsuit alleging wrongful death and negligence was filed in state court and announced on Monday — the day after the second anniversary of the shooting, which left 20 children and six educators dead and became a rallying point for gun-control efforts.
Just thought I’d throw that in from a screen capture I found.
In addition to Bushmaster, the defendants are Camfour, a firearm distributor, and Riverview Gun Sales, the now-closed East Windsor store where the gunman’s mother purchased the Bushmaster rifle in 2010. Messages seeking comment from the defendants were not immediately returned.
The complaint says the gun allows shooters to inflict “unparalleled civilian carnage.”
“In order to continue profiting from the sale of AR-15s, defendants chose to disregard the unreasonable risks the rifle posed outside of specialized, highly regulated institutions like the armed forces and law enforcement,” the plaintiffs wrote in the complaint.
The so-called AR-15 rifle was first built by Armalite for military use, but the design was later acquired by Colt, which in the early 1960s began marketing the semi-automatic AR-15 rifle as the civilian version of its fully automatic M-16
Many other companies have since begun manufacturing and selling AR-15-type rifles. The weapons are popular in shooting competitions due to the light weight of the gun and ammunition and the weapon’s accuracy.
Bill Sherlach, whose wife, Mary, was killed in the shooting, said he believes in the Second Amendment but also that the gun industry needs to be held to “standard business practices” when it comes to assuming the risk for producing, making and selling a product.
“These companies assume no responsibility for marketing and selling a product to the general population who are not trained to use it nor even understand the power of it,” he said.
(Sorta like selling a Chebby to a illegal with no license or insurance. Let’s sue Chebby? Or hey the guy was drinking Budweiser’s too man so he was drunk and driving. We sue Bud and Chebby. Hell let’s sue the damn Clydesdale too.)
A 2005 law shields gun manufacturers from most lawsuits over criminal use of their products, but it does include an exception for cases where companies should know a weapon is likely to be used in a way that risks injury to others. A lawyer for the Newtown families, Katie Mesner-Hage, said the lawsuit appears to be the first of its kind against a manufacturer to claim that exception.
~Steve~
