Are the ads to blame?
Nov 15, 2017, 6:01 AM | Updated: 6:01 am
(AP Photo/Jessica Hill, File)
(AP Photo/Jessica Hill, File)
For an ad to be effective, you have to know your audience. In the case of the Bushmaster rifle that Adam Lanza used in the Sandy Hook shootings the ads couldn’t have been more perfect for a young man determined to shoot a lot of people.
RELATED: Why the silence suddenly broke
“This is their words: Forces of opposition bow down, you are single-handedly outnumbered.”
Attorney Josh Koskoff stood before the Connecticut Supreme Court Tuesday to argue that Remington should be held accountable for deliberately marketing its guns to angry young men.
“It was, and I’m quoting, ‘the uncompromising choice when you demand a rifle as mission-adaptable as you are.'”
To which Remington’s attorney argued, that’s just business:
“Well, obviously, all product manufacturers are trying to capture market share through advertising and otherwise.”
He also points out Adam Lanza didn’t buy the gun himself – his mother did. And, of course, there’s the federal law that restricts lawsuits against gunmakers.
But the Sandy Hook families think they can get around those restrictions by proving that Remington knew its weapons were ending up in wrong hands and didn’t care. All they’re asking is that the court let the lawsuit go forward.
Weirdly, if Lanza had used a slingshot, the victims’ families could have sued the slingshot maker. There’s a precedent for that.
Furthermore, last May, the State of New Jersey filed suit against a gun-maker whose guns kept jamming when the state police tried to use them.
But as the law stands now, you cannot sue a gunmaker whose weapon works as advertised. And, unfortunately, at Sandy Hook, it definitely did.
-
Tune in to KIRO Newsradio weekdays at 5am for Dave Ross on Seattle's Morning News.
