Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis heard arguments brought to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit against a rifle maker Remington Arms over the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre.
Advertisement
In Newtown, gunman Adam Lanza used a Bushmaster rifle legally purchased by his mother to kill the 26 victims.
The maker of the assault rifle used to kill 26 children and educators at a CT school in 2012 argued on Monday that attempts to limit the sale of such weapons to civilians are best left to lawmakers and not families of the victims who sued the company.
Josh Koskoff, attorney for the plaintiffs, told the court that advertising for the rifle was targeted “particularly [to] younger men who were military wannabees”.
“That was created to be used in combat by our military to assault and kill enemies of war in the fields of Vietnam and more recently in the streets of Falujah and there it was lying not on a battlefield, but on the floor of Vicky Soto’s first grade classroom”, said Josh Koskoff, attorney for the Sandy Hook families. Vogt asked, using cigarettes as an example.
“[AR-15s] endured as the US military’s weapon of choice for more than 50 years – so what was it doing on the floor of an elementary school?” And while it hasn’t started yet, if discovery were to proceed, the Sandy Hook families would gain access to gun industry marketing materials that they feel make their case the gun companies valued profits over public safety.
“After this disgusting tragedy in Newtown it’s really not the role of this court (to decide) whether civilians as law-abiding people are not appropriate owners of this gun”, Vogts said in Superior Court in Bridgeport, Conn.
He added that a change in the law moreover “fuels argument that these are legislative issues”.
But the lawyer for the plaintiffs, families of nine of the victims who died in the attack, argued that the AR-15 assault rifle should never have been sold to the gunman’s mother because it had no civilian objective. The firearms transaction documents show Nancy Lanza had a valid gun permit until October 2015. He killed his mother before going to the school, where he fatally shot himself as police arrived.
Remington is not the only company involved in the lawsuit. “The legal shield they are invoking in the court house”.
Christopher Renzulli, who represented the distributor, Camfour, echoed Remington’s defense.
Bushmaster Firearms LLC, the manufacturer of the gun used in the massacre, initiated the hearing and sought to have the civil suit against them dropped.
However, the defense argues that the manufacturers are protected by the Protection of Lawful Commerce Act, passed in 2005, which does not allow for manufacturers to face charges over the criminal use of weapons.
Koskoff is arguing that the PLCAA does not protect the defendants in the case due to a “negligent entrustment” exception along with the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, according to the Associated Press.
Advertisement
The judge did not say when she would rule on the gunmaker’s request to toss the lawsuit.
