Sandy Hook Families Sue Bushmaster

Families of at least nine victims of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut, filed a lawsuit on Monday seeking monetary, punitive damages and injunctive relief against the manufacturer of the rifle allegedly used in the shooting.

The wrongful death lawsuit claims that Bushmaster Firearms International, Remington Outdoor Company which owns Bushmaster, Camfour a distributor of Bushmaster products and Riverview Gun Sales, the gun shop that sold the rifle to the mother of the shooter, Nancy Lanza, “knew, or should have known” that the AR-15 “posed an unreasonable and egregious risk of physical injury to others.”

“As a result of selling AR-15s to the civilian market, individuals unfit to operate these weapons gain access to them… Despite that knowledge, defendants continue to sell the XM15-E52 rifle to the civilian market,” states the claim.

Drawing a comparison to how the military monitors the use and storage of the M16, an attorney for the family argued that there are no institutional requirements regulating the public’s use and storage of the AR-15.

“There is so much ample evidence of the inability of the civilian world to control these weapons, that it is no longer reasonable to entrust them to for that purpose,” Attorney Joshua Koskoff told the Wall Street Journal.

Meanwhile, the firearms industry trade association said that the lawsuit was without merit.

“It’s exactly the kind of lawsuit the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was designed to stop,” said Lawrence Keane, senior vice president and general counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

“Millions of people own them and do use them every day for lawful purposes,” added Keane.

A spokesman for Remington declined to comment on the case but according to a 2013 Washington Times article, George Kollitides, the chief executive of Remington, said that perpetrator of the act, Adam Lanza, was responsible for the shooting, not the rifle. “Any kind of instrument in the wrong hands can be put to evil use,” he said.

{ 26 comments… add one }
  • BOB Bacon October 30, 2017, 11:10 am

    Bushmaster should sue crisis actors.

  • BOB Bacon October 30, 2017, 11:08 am

    No one died at Sandy Hoax. Their lawsuit has no guts.

  • J unruh August 22, 2017, 4:33 pm

    Maybe we should take a public look at The shooters Internet history. Bet dollars to donuts there is a ton of porn and violent video games which contribute to objectifying women, depicting unrealistic relationships, glamorizing and desensitizing the shooter to violence and gore. If they are looking for a pay out there is much more available money with the video game industry. If we look at all of the recent mass shooters I think we will find the same thing. The jihadist use the same tools to convince there actors to commit violence what do you think all that talk about virgins in the after life is about.

  • ice August 21, 2017, 6:08 pm

    This is a BS suit just like the ALLEDGED SANDY HOOK SHOOTING IS BS. There were no Pics of victims being removed, No pics of BLOOD STAINS on walls or floors, The building was immediately demolished destroying any and all evidence that would prove or disprove the actual happening of this, The alleged rifle used was shown being removed from the trunk of the car allegedly driven by the shooter after the scene had been secured by police. The only weapons found inside the building were TWO HAND GUNS NOT AR 15 RIFLES.!! The school Building in Colorado Columbine is still standing and being used, The School Building in WA. State where students were killed is still standing and being used. Victims were shown being removed from both. SANDY HOOK was a FALSE FLAG SCENERO PUT OUT BY HUSSEIN OBAMA AND THE ANTI GUN CROWD IN AN EFFORT TO BAN THE PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF ALL FIRE ARMS.

  • gary May 19, 2017, 12:31 pm

    Well then the logic would follow that these AH\’s types should also sue the makers of the cars and trucks on the roads that kill people lets take a step further the knife makers and acid producers that are being used in crimes these days because guns just get too much publicity. As Startreks\’ Spock would say \’It\’s only Logical\’.

  • William payne February 1, 2017, 5:49 pm

    How many times did the guy cross paths with Dr.s and authorities and wasn’t stopped. You hear in more than a few cases where the FBI was brought in talked to the gunman before the big incident but was let go. ???

  • Tim N January 25, 2015, 9:49 pm

    One more thing. After reviewing my comment, I realized I phrased something improperly. Obviously I know Nancy Lanza was killed. I meant to say that had she survived, she may or may not have faced legal repercussions. Cut and paste can be a real hassle sometimes…

  • Tim N January 25, 2015, 9:45 pm

    This is a lawsuit that I think will go nowhere legally, but is more designed as an attempt to garner more bad press for the gun industry. The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act will be hard to overcome, and the attorneys for the plaintiffs must know this. The possible liability here actually rests with Nancy Lanza. Notice I said “liability,” and not “culpability.” There’s a big difference. At least in N.C., she could be in serious legal trouble for not properly securing her firearms. However, Adam Lanza was not a minor when he stole her guns and committed the crime, so Nancy Lanza may not even be in any trouble at all. The fact is that a psychologically troubled Adam Lanza stole his mother’s guns, and then proceeded to commit a heinous crime. The real issue here is the lack of proper treatment for his mental illness, which he did not receive. He could have walked in that school with a pipe bomb, a knife, a crossbow, anything, and caused an equivalent level of pain and suffering. I feel greatly for the families of the victims. Their loss is unimaginable. However, unfortunately, they are seeking blame in the wrong place. Lobbying for better access to mental health, and better state and federal budgetary support for mental health facilities, is really what they should be doing.

    • NAVYVET October 21, 2016, 4:01 pm

      If your going to murder someone do it in Massachusetts and make sure they are a passenger in your car and also make sure your legally drunk
      Reason being you maybe elected as senator of that state and the car manufacturer will be held accountable NOT the driver
      It worked for Ted Drive them one way Kennedy it may work for you also

  • Dwight E Lxxxjoy January 22, 2015, 6:43 am

    Might as well take a shot at suing the trucking company and driver that delivered the weapon to the Sport Store . The
    Mc Donald ‘s window person that passed the coffee out to the truck driver that was on break that drove the truck …
    The Mc Donalds window guys mother for giving birth to him and the driver the driver that got ….SEE WERE THIS IS GOING . Years ago I travelled to build custom horse barns in Sandy Hook and several other towns in that area . They had a real life problem with the deer over running everything and eating countless flower beds …They did not sue them 9THE DEER )
    they hired a man with a rifle and bow & arrows to kill them …..Make up your minds people

  • Kevin G December 26, 2014, 12:15 pm

    im so sick of these cry babies at Sandy Hook! sure it was a bad deal what happened and im sorry for all the families loss but them and the media need to get over it already! why would ANYONE sue the manufacturer of a gun that killed someone? we dont sue car manufacturers when a drunk driver kills somebody or a silverwear company for making a person fat. God made the heavens and Earth and rocks are a part of that so did Goliath’s wife or mother sue God when David killed him with a stone? It just sounds stupid doesnt it?

  • CavScout62 December 24, 2014, 11:08 am

    Let’s forget for the moment that SandyHoax never occurred. Let us travel back in time to the “scene of the crime”. According to the TopCop who did the talking points on the boobtube for this little act, the shooting was all done with a HANDGUN and a Bushmaster XM-15 was found in the trunk of the shooters car. Where are the grounds for the lawsuit?

  • Joe Davtyan December 23, 2014, 1:16 am

    If you will be in the jury would you give her a chance? Republicans said NO, liberals said YES. IF she win then next time she may sue the forks manufacturers, because forks can poke out her stupid tooth. A writing pen can kill a person. Stupid TSA airport people took my nail clipper and the nails file. We need to learn PROFILING from Israelis. They are at the war for 65 years. http://www.GateStoneInstitute.org

  • Larry December 22, 2014, 10:30 pm

    Exactly what can a loaded to the gills AR15 do without a human’s touch? Absolutely nothing. If someone is so far gone in the head that they want to kill a bunch of people it’s going to happen regardless of choice of weapon.

  • Joe McHugh December 22, 2014, 10:23 pm

    The family survivors of the dead children are both in denial and despicable. Does that sound like a case of blaming the victims?
    The parents were more enablers than victims. They were too cheap to insist that the school system employ armed security people at the main entrances of the Sandy Hook School. Worse they wouldn’t support a policy change that would have allowed any willing teachers and staff of that school to carry handguns during school hours.

    OK, ready for a really insensitive question? If the parents of those dead children could go back in time and attend a meeting about whether or not to allow adult school employees to carry handguns that they would be well trained on, would they have pushed for elimination of the “Gun Free” policy at that school? If one teacher or staff member had a handgun and was appropriately trained on its use, they could have mounted a defense that was somewhat better than raising their hands and pleading that the crazy not to shoot the children.

    What did the crazy do when finally confronted by an armed policeman? He shot himself because he obviously feared the armed policeman! And now the parents are seeking compensation for their own folly. As if the money would assuage their subconscious guilt about putting their children in harm’s way. Yup, crazies are drawn to gun free facilities where no one can shoot back. They seldom attack police stations.

    What those parents are really trying to do is shift the blame to others for their own culpability. They can’t face the fact that they contributed to the deaths of their children by banning guns from the hands of good people. You know, like the teachers and staff of the Sandy Hook School. The only answer to a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy or gal with a gun.

    Shootout at the OK Corral? As opposed to what? Each six-year old was shot at least two times until he or she stopped twitching. Those little kids would have had a better chance with an armed teacher or principal than being in a “Gun Free” building, and every body with at least two brain cells knows it.

  • Russ December 22, 2014, 8:27 pm
  • Greg December 22, 2014, 6:49 pm

    So lets sue the City and County of Sandy Hook on the grounds that they did not have the shooter committed as insane and unfit, several shrinks in the area deemed him a nut case and no way to help him, The gun MFG and the gun shop are not in any way responsible, why are the not suing the family members? But some bleeding heart judge will award them millions…

  • Steven December 22, 2014, 3:30 pm

    It looks to me that the old adage of tell people a story enough times they will believe it . It doesn’t matter what they see themselves in the first place. If you will recall that when we were all watching the full coverage of the news uninterrupted on the scene report. We all watched the police open the back of the suspects car and found the AR-15. This was after the scene was secure. The comments at that time from the news media and the police was we are lucky that he never took thi

  • Danilushka December 22, 2014, 2:10 pm

    A federal statute enacted in 2005 called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which was backed by the National Rifle Association and signed by then-President George W. Bush. The measure was specifically designed to shield makers of rifles and pistols from liability suits. Lawmakers considered the debate about suing handgun manufacturers, as they considered the expiring assault weapons ban, and they decided in their wisdom (or fear of NRA retribution) to protect the firearm industry.

    The lawyers bringing the Sandy Hook suit must know they will run headlong into the liability-shield law, and they think they have a solution: an exception in the law that allows suits based on the theory of “negligent entrustment.” This takes us deep into the legal weeds, but the simplified version is that under the shield law a defendant can still be held liable for entrusting a dangerous product to another party who then causes harm to a victim or victims. But it is unlikely to prevail given the mother who bought the rifle passed all checks. the fact she failed to secure it from her psychopathic son was unknowable by the retailer who sold here the gun let alone the manufacturer and distributors. Frivolous law suit. I hope they families pay big on damages for initiating this de facto attempt at gun control outside the legislative process in violation of the Constitution. I feel for their grief, but denying us our right is not justified.

  • David December 22, 2014, 2:02 pm

    No way. stupid woman judge, bet she never has used or even held a gun. So can I sue milk makers because I’m lactose intolerant

  • sunaj December 22, 2014, 12:28 pm

    I’m thrilled-Sandy Hook was a false flag event that never happened as reported on the Zionist controlled media propoganda outlets,
    this case will permit the facts of this farce to come out-bring it on baby:)

  • roger mason December 22, 2014, 6:50 am

    there are no grieving parents to sue anybody
    because no children died at Sandy Hoax. anyone
    with an I.Q. over 50 knows the whole thing was
    another DHS scam to ban guns. 20 children
    and 6 adults did not die. no one died. just google
    “Sandy Hook Scam” or “Sandy Hook Hoax”
    and you’ll see thousands of pages of real world
    proof.

    • GI Joe December 22, 2014, 3:14 pm

      You are making a bad joke, correct? I mean no one can be stupid enough to believe this, can you be?

  • M. Cabrera December 17, 2014, 7:09 pm

    Lets look at the percentage of all AR type rifles in the U.S.that are used in violent crime, & compare that to the percentage of Ford automobiles that are involved in deadly accidents. I’m sure we will find that a much higher percentage of Fords have killed people in the U.S. than ARs. I am sure therefore that we will have to sue Ford because they“knew, or should have known” that the Ford automobile “posed an unreasonable and egregious risk of physical injury to others.”.

    • Tom Owen December 22, 2014, 7:19 am

      Absolutely! If guns are “evil” then the automobile which is “used” to kill 35~50,000 Americans each year must be a tool of the Devil himself! (sarcasm, sort of).

      • Rick December 22, 2014, 8:01 am

        They need to be careful what they ask for. We could be suing manufacturers of knifes, auto’s, pencils, pens……get the idea??????

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend