Friday, April 15, 2016

Sandy Hook families case against gun makers will go forward.

Courtesy of CT Mirror:  

A Connecticut state judge's decision Thursday allowing a lawsuit to go forward against the maker of the Bushmaster rifle used in the Sandy Hook killings focused attention on a law that Connecticut lawmakers – and now Hillary Clinton – hope to repeal. 

Remington Arms, maker of the Bushmaster rifle used to kill 20 first-graders and six staff members at Sandy Hook, is relying in its defense of the suit on a law Congress passed in 2005. Known as the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, or PLCAA, it protects gun manufacturers and dealers from liability when crimes are committed with their products. 

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., is hoping Congress repeals the law so it can't be decisive in the lawsuit, though there is virtually no chance of a repeal in the present Congress. 

The families of some of the children killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School won a victory Thursday when Connecticut state Judge Barbara Bellis rejected the gun companies’ motion to dismiss the case citing PLCAA. She said the immunity granted the gun makers and dealers does not strip her court of jurisdiction to hear the case. 

“It’s a very positive step, possibly historic,” Blumenthal said. “I think we should be very glad and grateful that the Sandy Hook families have demonstrated this courage and strength.”

Good news for the Sandy Hook families, and for Americans as a whole.

Not such good news for Bernie Sanders who voted in favor of the law.


  1. Anonymous3:02 PM

    No matter if they win or lose I am glad they are getting their day in court. I also feel this will continue to keep the issue alive with the public.

  2. Anonymous3:04 PM

    I hope the Sandy Hook families' lawsuit succeeds but worry, if it doesn't, the families may be required to pay Remington Arms' legal fees.

  3. Looking at those sweet little faces makes my heart weep.

  4. Anita Winecooler5:29 PM

    Guns make schools safe? I'm glad this is going forward, and I hope something good comes of it. Look at those faces closely, they're frozen in time and the faces of innocence denied because of one person's right to bear killing machine.

  5. No company or entity, including governmental, should be exempt from prosecution if they have endangered the public or committed what would be considered a crime against society by a reasonable person.

    All this exemption stuff is so much crap. And that includes factory farms that don't allow videotape. What do they have to hide?

    Personally, I think Monsanto should be sued for polluting farms with GMO pollen that it can't control. Whoever decided Monsanto could sue farmers who are the victims of their crops are polluted by Monsanto's GMO seed is an idiot.


Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.