Gun marketing to pinheads might be dangerous to your financial health!

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-sandy-hook/u-s-supreme-court-will-not-shield-gun-maker-from-sandy-hook-lawsuit-idUSKBN1XM1W8

SCOTUS will not stop victims of the Sandy Hook maniac from suing gun maker Remington Arms for some of the damages caused by their product. Hooray!

Even though gun maker lobbyist – the NRA – managed to get a federal law passed exempting gun makers from such liability, there is an exception. If the gun maker knowingly broke the law in marketing their guns, their exemption is forfeit. In Connecticut it is against the law for advertising to promote violent, criminal behavior. The plaintiffs argue that Remington advertising did exactly that.

21 thoughts on “Gun marketing to pinheads might be dangerous to your financial health!

  1. SCOTUS declined to overrule the Connecticut Supreme Court as the question at hand is one of fact, not law.

    The allegation was that advertising for the AR variant in question was in itself provocative toward Lansa’s actions.

    That is a very large stretch as there is no evidence Lanza ever saw the advertising. but it is a question of fact, not law, so it is properly a matter for a jury, though such a finding by a jury could be appealed after the fact. but the jury gets to take a stab at it first.

    Like

    1. I would imagine even if Lansa the son didn’t see the advertising, Lansa the mom did. Gee, too bad neither one made it to be able to clear that up for us . . . it’s almost sad they didn’t, but not much.

      Liked by 2 people

        1. You don’t know that.

          Mom was as bat-crap crazy as her son was. Otherwise, she would have sought help for him when he holed himself up in a windows-blacked-out room for days at a time, rather than buying him MORE guns. She may have driven her son to the gun shop and helped him get JUST the right weapon as the really cool firearms ad displayed.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. That’s a pretty harsh judgment of a woman who shouldered a difficult burden.

            Mrs Lanza thought the discipline and focus of target shooting would help with Adam’s illness. For a while it seemed to help. Connecticut law prohibited her from storing her firearms at the range where they shot, so she kept them(except for a handgun she kept in her bedside table) in a safe in her home so Adam could not get to them without her supervision. She kept the key for the safe on a chain around her neck.

            She made one mistake, thinking he would not kill her in her sleep to get the key.

            Her ex husband ran away from a difficult child, and she did her best to love her son and help him in life. Unless you have walked a mile in her moccasins….(tribute to Elizabeth Warren)

            Like

          2. Wow. You will go to any extreme to take up for the most dangerous weapons on the shelves.

            This mother got herself killed and 20 first-graders (and others) slaughtered because buying gun after gun for her sick son wasn’t helping. Oh, yeah, and her son killed himself, too.

            I’m one of the folks who believe these weapons are too dangerous to be on the streets. The entire Lansa family pretty much says so, too.

            Liked by 2 people

          3. Well, I’m one of those people who believes that because people that judgmental and heartless may gain the power over others they lust for, it is necessary for me to be well armed to deter them.

            People that sure of themselves are too dangerous to not be countered.

            Like

          4. “People that sure of themselves are too dangerous to not be countered.”

            Slightly off topic, but I am guessing you are NOT talking about Trump. But if the shoe fits…

            Like

    2. If the gun maker broke the law in the way that it promoted those death machines then it is no longer exempt from torts. The plaintiffs are not claiming that it was the ads that provoked Lanza but that the guns themselves are too dangerous to sell.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. If that is their claim, they will lose as that would be covered by the Federal law. The only claim the court is allowing is that the ads encouraged MISUSE of the rifles.

        Aside from that, Remington is only one of about 500 manufacturers making AR type rifles, and Remington can only expose its own products.

        BTW, they’re not death machines, they’re sport utility rifles.

        Like

          1. Sport Utility Rifle is a whole lot more descriptive than “death machine”

            Perhaps Paul would be happier if we stepped down to AR-10s as that would be 5 AR’s less deadly than an AR15?

            (Mr Green will get that inside joke)

            Like

          2. Don’t drag me into this one…. I’m just reading along…with the exception of later quotes (I didn’t see this part of the thread the first time through.)

            And those weapons have one utility…to kill, maim, or inflict as much damage as possible in as short amount a time as possible.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. I find “Sport Utility Rifle” to be absurd. Of course, you feel the same way about “Death Machines” even though they are machines designed for no other purpose than to kill people.

            Let’s compromise and call them, oh, I don’t know, how about “Assault Rifles?”

            Liked by 2 people

        1. It DID reach the Supreme Court after going through lower courts. It came to them for action. By not accepting it, they confirmed earlier rulings that UNDER THE LAW, Remington could be sued. The facts, as you have said, will now be heard by a jury and the defense will have to convince them why anybody needs such dangerous weapons outside of warfare.

          At the very least, this case might encourage these merchants of death to re-think the kinds of advertising and promotions they do. That they have been deliberately marketing to inadequate and insecure males – the people most likely to murder a spouse or go on a rampage – is beyond question. They should stop.

          Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s