Good old Remington… There’s literally a federal law to prevent this, CT courts ignored it, and SCOTUS refused to look at it. Results, Remington decided to settlement. This is very bad precedence and makes no sense at all when the kid had no part in the purchase to begin with. This will open the flood gates to more to be sure, and now that they know SCOTUS will ignore states that have decided the federal laws don’t apply them:
Sandy Hook families agree to $73M settlement with gun maker
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — The families of nine victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School have agreed to a $73 million settlement of a lawsuit against the maker of the rifle used to kill 20 first graders and six educators in 2012.
Remington, which made the Bushmaster AR-15-style rifle used in the massacre, also agreed to allow the families to release numerous documents they obtained during the lawsuit including ones showing how it marketed the weapon, the families said Tuesday.
The families and a survivor of the shooting sued Remington in 2015, saying the company should have never sold such a dangerous weapon to the public. They said their focus was on preventing future mass shootings.
There has to be a legal reason that this went down the way it did. After the Aurora shooting here they went after the ammo or dealers and the families ended up owing the gun guys that they sued. Is the claim that they marketed it as a being used to kill people or something like that- that is the carve out in the protection law that congress passed. Even with out the law, the law of common sense should make this a non-starter. If I were Budweiser or GM, I’d be a little worried. Any car that is marketed based on speed or power and then is involved in a high speed crash that kills, how is that any different- or really less? Fast car and bad beer aren’t protected in the constitution…
Isn’t Remington bankrupt or under new management? Is that $73M payable over a thousand years?
You could add zeros that and it would ease my suffering of having my kid killed in school by a POS under those circumstances, where yet again, parenting sucked, adults failed to protect children adequately, and the blame placed on the tool used vs real caused. Your mileage may vary. My BP goes up if I think about Parkland, being the poster child event for all that, and a call for more gun control was all they could come up with.
The Sandy Hook shooter did not own a Bushmaster AR-15, his Mother did. She was shot four times in the face by him with a .22-caliber rifle. She had purchased that .22 rifle in the years prior to the shooting, as well as an AR-15, and several other handguns that the Sandy Hook shooter stole, and would use later that day.
Remington did not settle with anybody, their Insurance Company did.
When the news broke, all the anti-2A media organizations were stating that Remington accepted liability for the shooting, but after a few hours all those dishonest headlines were changed to reflect the real truth, Remington did not settle with anybody, their Insurance Company did.
Is that a distinction without a difference? If the insurance rates go up for all these manufacturers that gets passed on to us. Money is going out and of course half that money is going into the lawyers pockets to find other lawsuits now.
At least it isn’t Remington itself settling. But yeah, it’s not all great news. They shouldn’t have been awarded a dime. The Lanza estate should have been sued for housing an assault weapon in the form of a violent, mental defective.
On the flipside, given all the shit I’ve suffered as a result of doing the right things…some days I just wish I had taken the money like everyone else. Only a severe desire to have little or nothing in common with those people has kept me honest.
My thought too, and why would the insurance company settle? There’s a difference sure, but does not seem as important a difference as it’s being made out to be here. This will open the gates for more lawsuits in some states, the impact on the companies will be the same, hence a distinction without a difference.
The only Remington I have ever bought was 22lr only as a last resort, and UMC Center Fire.
I will choose others from here on out.
ETA
Depending on further evidence.
" Quote Originally Posted by Evil Black Rifle View Post
The Sandy Hook shooter did not own a Bushmaster AR-15, his Mother did. She was shot four times in the face by him with a .22-caliber rifle. She had purchased that .22 rifle in the years prior to the shooting, as well as an AR-15, and several other handguns that the Sandy Hook shooter stole, and would use later that day.
Remington did not settle with anybody, their Insurance Company did.
When the news broke, all the anti-2A media organizations were stating that Remington accepted liability for the shooting, but after a few hours all those dishonest headlines were changed to reflect the real truth, Remington did not settle with anybody, their Insurance Company did. "