Remington has “broad immunity” under the law
In 2012, the families of the Sandy Hook victims sued Remington Arms for selling a perfectly legal weapon in a perfectly legal way. The lawsuit argued that the sale of the a weapon that has “no reasonable civilian purpose” made Remington responsible for wrongful death. On Friday, a Connecticut judge dismissed the Sandy Hook families’ suit against Remington Arms.
A Connecticut judge on Friday dismissed a lawsuit filed by the families of some of the 26 young children and adults killed at the Sandy Hook Elementary school in 2012, saying the maker of the rifle used in the attack had “broad immunity” under federal law.
The lawsuit, filed in December 2014 and seeking unspecified financial damages, said the AR-15 military-syle assault weapon used in the attack in Newtown, Connecticut, should never have been sold to the gunman’s mother, Nancy Lanza, because it had no reasonable civilian purpose.
Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis sided with Remington Arms, the North Carolina-based maker of the rifle known as the Bushmaster that 20-year-old Adam Lanza used in his rampage at Sandy Hook. The 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act protected Remington from being sued for the use of its products in an illegal manner, Bellis ruled.
“The present case seeks damages for harms, including the deaths of the plaintiffs’ decedents that were caused solely by the criminal misuse of a weapon by Adam Lanza,” Bellis wrote in a 54-page decision. “This action falls squarely within the broad immunity provided by PLCAA.”
An attorney for the families vowed to appeal the decision.
“While the families are obviously disappointed with the judge’s decision, this is not the end of the fight,” attorney Josh Koskoff said in a statement. “We will appeal this decision immediately and continue our work to help prevent the next Sandy Hook from happening.”
Watch the report:
The Sandy Hook families won a $1.5 million settlement from the shooter’s mother’s estate in 2015.DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.