A court in Connecticut ruled Wednesday that a suit against the company that manufactured the gun used in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting could go forward despite a 2005 federal law prohibiting such suits.
According to the Washington Examiner, the families of the victims filed suit against the manufacturer of the gun, Remington Arms Co., over the Bushmaster AR-15 used by Adam Lanza in the shootings, claiming that such a weapon should have never been made available to buyers.
Remington pointed to a 2005 federal law that disallows firearms manufacturers from being sued in such cases. However, the Connecticut Superior Court rejected that argument.
In her ruling, Connecticut State Judge Barbara Bellis allowed the suit to continue, denying calls for dismissal.
“We are thrilled that the gun companies’ motion to dismiss was denied. The families look forward to continuing their fight in court,” Josh Koskoff, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said in a statement.
Let’s for a second put aside the fact that this ruling is essentially throwing out both federal law and the United States Constitution. What would happen if we applied this logic to every product?
Your kid burned another kid with a curling iron? Well, clearly, nobody should have made a product that could be heated up to that temperature! What were they thinking?
A drunk driver ran over a pedestrian with their Chevrolet Suburban? Well, if Chevrolet didn’t built their cars so big, they wouldn’t have been that injured.
Your child played too many video games and became obese? Well, clearly, Sony shouldn’t have made the Playstation so enjoyable, now, should they have?
The sad thing is that, in the America of 2016, I can see all three of the above causing a lawsuit. But unlike any of those other examples, our right to bear arms is constitutionally protected under the Second Amendment.