Families of Sandy Hook Victims Sue Remington for ‘Causing’ the Shooting


There is nothing the left won’t do to disarm the civilian population. The new gun grab being attempted in court right now could not come at a more pivotal time. We need guns more than ever right now! I for one live in the region of the U.S. with the 2nd highest trafficking rights in the entire country. It is really a crisis of epidemic proportion! A lot of people I know won’t even go out grocery shopping with their kids without carrying, and an extra set of eyes.

But, instead of fighting modern day slavery, human trafficking, the biggest sexual assault crises plaguing our country, leftists are instead trying to finally cash in on a false flag that happened 5 years ago.

A lawyer for the family members of victims of the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting argued gun companies were negligent to market a dangerous military-style weapon to civilians in court on Tuesday.

Family of the victims were in court once again to fight an uphill battle to hold gun companies accountable for marketing and selling the AR-15-style rifle used to kill 20 children and six adults in December 2012. They have put a spotlight on gun companies’ macho, militaristic advertising for these rifles.

“Remington may never have known [Sandy Hook shooter] Adam Lanza, but they had been courting him for years,” Josh Koskoff, an attorney for the Sandy Hook plaintiffs, told a packed Connecticut supreme court hearing on Tuesday morning.

“The weapon he needed for his mission that day was never in doubt,” Koskoff said, explaining the Bushmaster AR-15 style rifle the shooter used had been marketed as “the uncompromising choice when you demand a rifle as mission-adaptable as you”

Lawyers for the gun company offer a much stronger legal case for common sense and our constitutional rights.

Lawyers for the gun companies emphasized that the seller was not responsible for the shooting, which was done with a rifle that had been legally purchased by Lanza’s mother.

“No matter how tragic, no matter how much you wish those children and their teachers were not lost, their families had not suffered, the law needs to be applied dispassionately,” James Vogts, the attorney for Remington Arms, a major gun manufacturer, told the court. “The sellers of the firearm used by the criminal that day are not legally responsible for his crime and the harm that he caused.”

Vogts defended the marketing slogans for the Bushmaster XM-15 E2S rifle, saying that a slogan like “force of opposition, bow down” could be referring to self-defense in the home.

“To protect myself and my family, I would want to choose a firearm that would force whatever opposition I was confronted with to bow down,” he said.

The lawsuit is being closely watched by the US firearm industry and the National Rifle Association, and has become rallying point for gun control advocates.

Head on over to the next page to learn what legal experts are predicting in regards to this case involving Sandy Hook, and the odds of other similar arguments being presented in other states.

Next Page »



Share

1,223 Comments

Leave a Reply

Pin It on Pinterest