Gun Gripes #217: "Sandy Hook Parents to Sue Remington"

Published on December 2, 2019
Duration: 17:38

This video discusses the Connecticut Supreme Court's ruling allowing Sandy Hook parents to sue Remington, manufacturer of the Bushmaster AR-15 used in the shooting. The hosts argue this ruling circumvents the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) by focusing on advertising practices under state fair trade laws. They express concern that this sets a dangerous precedent, potentially leading to the financial ruin of gun manufacturers and impacting the broader firearms industry.

Quick Summary

The Connecticut Supreme Court allowed Sandy Hook parents to sue Remington by finding an exception to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). This exception focuses on how firearms are advertised, particularly marketing military-style guns to civilians in ways that could encourage harm, thus potentially violating state fair trade laws. This ruling is viewed as a dangerous precedent that could financially cripple gun manufacturers.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Introduction: Sandy Hook Parents Sue Remington
  2. 00:51The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA)
  3. 01:33Manufacturer Safety Efforts and Warnings
  4. 02:25Analogy: Drunk Driver and Car Manufacturers
  5. 03:02Financial and Societal Dangers of Lawsuits
  6. 03:30Victims and Manipulation Concerns
  7. 04:42Operation Chokepoint Connection
  8. 05:33Supreme Court Exception to Federal Law
  9. 06:16Common Sense of PLCAA
  10. 06:41Bloomberg's Influence and Funding
  11. 07:40Financial Disparity in Advocacy
  12. 08:11Infectious Nature of Lawsuits on Other Industries
  13. 08:44Country of Laws vs. Justice System
  14. 09:31Interpretation of Law and Political Motives
  15. 10:33How the Law Was Circumvented
  16. 10:42Connecticut Supreme Court Ruling Details
  17. 11:21Narrow State Court Decision on Advertising
  18. 11:42State Fair Trade Laws as a Loophole
  19. 12:26Fresh and Sketchy Ruling
  20. 12:42Dangerous Precedent and Slippery Slope
  21. 13:35Keeping an Ear to the Ground
  22. 13:52The Underlying Reasons for Legal Actions
  23. 14:15Support for Tyranny vs. Self-Preservation
  24. 14:30The Big Picture: Second Amendment Community
  25. 15:06Right to Self-Preservation
  26. 15:38Limiting Access to Tools for Free People
  27. 16:03Unseen Gun Use for Self-Defense
  28. 16:20Be a Force Multiplier
  29. 16:36Logic and Common Sense
  30. 16:44Support and Merch

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA)?

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), enacted in 2005, is a federal law that shields gun manufacturers, dealers, and distributors from liability when their products are used in crimes. It prevents lawsuits against them for criminal or unlawful misuse of firearms.

How did the Connecticut Supreme Court allow Sandy Hook parents to sue Remington?

The Connecticut Supreme Court allowed the lawsuit by finding an exception to PLCAA. They ruled that gun manufacturers could be sued based on their advertising practices, specifically if they market military-style guns to civilians in ways that could be interpreted as encouraging harm, thus falling under state consumer protection laws.

What are the potential consequences of this ruling for gun manufacturers?

The hosts express concern that this ruling sets a dangerous precedent, potentially leading to numerous lawsuits against gun manufacturers. This could result in significant financial burdens, driving companies out of business and increasing the cost of firearms for consumers.

How does this ruling relate to 'Operation Chokepoint'?

The video suggests this legal challenge is part of a broader strategy known as 'Operation Chokepoint.' This operation aims to pressure the firearms industry by making it difficult for them to operate, including through financial services and now, potentially, through crippling lawsuits.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Iraqveteran8888

View all →