The Supreme Court yesterday rejected an appeal from Remington Arms and allowed the parents of the Sandy Hook school shooting victims to sue the gunmaker.
What does it mean?
Gunmakers so far have been able to get away from paying for their sins by citing a 2005 federal law named Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act which prevents most lawsuits against firearm makers when their products are used in crimes. The NRA (fuck ’em, by the way) and the Republicans (10 Red states & 22 GOP lawmakers) were also pressuring the Supreme Court to rule in Remington’s favor.
However, yesterday the SC decided the parents should be able to sue Remington for its part in the Sandy Hook tragedy – which means, although it’s still early, yesterday’s ruling could potentially offer a blueprint for victims of other mass shootings to take the firearm manufacturers to court.
What does the lawsuit say?
Parents of the Sandy Hook victims argue that:
- Remington should’ve never sold dangerous guns like Bushmaster AR-15 rifles to the public.
- Remington knowingly marketed and promoted its guns to young, at-risk males such as placing them in violent video games.
All valid points, right?
Time for corporate giants to pay up
Speaking of litigations against powerful companies, the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, who have been hit hard by warmer seawater temperatures, are suing 30 major fossil fuel companies to pay for the damages for their part in global warming. Corporate giants like big oil, big pharma, and firearm makers, armed with lawyers and lobbying $ have been able to stay above the law but the tides are slowly turning it seems and we’re all for that.
“We no take no shorts, tell ’em we want more. Now it’s time to settle the score.” – Snoop