Supreme Court: Parents of Sandy Hook May Sue Remington for AR-15 Marketing

If the Government was really serious about Public Safety, they would ban leftists from this great Country!

South Park said it best…BLAME CANADA! BLAME CANADA!

Been eagerly awaiting this one!

Wow, very well said, Scott. Again and again I enjoy watching you gentlemen. Your insights are eye openers for people like myself. You tend to open other avenues to look at things and situations to make better sense out of them.

Ephesians 6:12

Play the Trump card

Sick of this fucking hoax none of the parents have vied the bodies NONE !! That BS interview where the guy is LAUGHING and clowning around less than 24 hours after the shooting its sickens me . All the money drummed up for the ss called victims .

The left will stop at nothing! They want us patriots to surrender to their whims, it ain’t gonna happen! They want war, they are about to wake a sleeping giant!!!

The issue here is Adam Lanza did not buy any guns, his mother legally purchased firearms and he took them. Murdering his own mother and then committing the crimes, there seems to be nothing valid about marketing to youth and males when the firearms used were his ADULT Mothers. Sad but this is a mentally disturbed child that should have been diagnosed. Maybe parents should be looking into the mental wellbeing of their children and if they see that their children are not well, getting them the help they need.

So… trash a company's 1st Amendment rights to go after our 2nd Amendment right. Sickos. This is another travesty by the SCOTUS…. again. Mental midgets. As usual, Scott is right on.

Scott nails it. This lawsuit is about speech cloaked in anti 2A rhetoric.

In a new age of PC, SJW, Woke sensitivities, our SCOTUS have decided to legislate on FEELINGS rather than interpretation of the Constitution.

It is imperative that we restrict the rights of three hundred million people because of the bad actions of a couple hands full!

Cigarette manufacturers lied. They promoted the "health benefits" of cigarettes while they KNEW that cigarettes were killing people. Gun manufacturers haven't been lying about anything.

I will sue the government for every death they caused.

Very well stated and full of TRUTH ! Liberals want to sue God for making the stone that Cain used to bash Abel's head in . Insane world of irrational people called LIBERALS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They should sue Hollywood Hollywood is the one that makes he’s going to look like they do even though it’s not the gun that kills it’s the assholes I think I’m going to sue the Democrats because I always have the shits

WTF Well there goes our guns people are going to Sue all the gun manufacturers until they put them out of business what the fuck what the supreme court

This is how we lose the right to keep and bear arms: bankrupt the makers of firearms and ammunition. When the left loses at the ballot box, they use the courts. The floodgates are open.

By this logic Every Single Automobile manufacturer needs to be sued till the end of Eternity, for all their moronic advertising that shows people driving cars with Exactly the same crazy high speeds, wild stunts, and risky behavior we see on the highways already, except in the commercials, the guy drivers ALWAYS get luscious longing looks from lady underwear models in revealing dresses, and in many of the commercials, they end up in the hurtling vehicle with the bad-boy driver. We lose something like 35K to 50K humans Killed each year as a result of road accidents of all sorts. Don't hear about even a SINGLE lawsuit against vehicle manufacturers.
And this does not even begin to address the scores of times someone has decided to crush and smash pedestrians and bicyclists on the public streets, sidewalks, market places, and parks, just because they HATE'em or they believe this somehow Honors their Deity.
I haven't heard of a single municipality or state considering background checks for people renting 2-ton payload trucks, despite all the carnage they've done.

what if SCOTUS is working towards dismantling "incorporation" in the New Deal vein? Let States decide how evil they will be and let Citizens move their lives to Freedom States in response. I'm a Classical Liberal that knows that Roosevelt perverted SCOTUS which led to the idea that "incorporation" was something that could exist in law. It should not. You can already see by certain states that they also agree with me, they are beefing up their abortion laws to be ready for SCOTUS to kick the whole abortion issue to individual states.

It's a modern witch hunt. Because it pulls on heart strings the people think "we have to do something" then American nazi groups further their agenda

Actually the most effectively deadly mass shooting in all American History. This 90# weakling, Lanza, was more effective than multiple shooters with full-auto Thompsons in .45 caliber on the St. Valentine's Day massacre. A complete outlier. He was so good there are no pictures of dead bodies, body bags, or even bloody clean-up. The perfect setup to take on the Second Amendment and Gun Manufacturers. The school was bulldozed in less than a year so there could be no follow-up investigations to actually get to the truth of what really happened at Sandy Embellishment. The story we have is an embellishment of what really happened there.

It's about setting precedent for the next thing to come around.

Sue Monsanto and drug companies for illness and death.

Can production companies now be sued for movies that use guns

Too bad all the evidence of the government sponsored anti-gun event, code named “Sandy Hook” was completely and almost immediately destroyed following the operation.

Remington would have had a great opportunity to prove in court that it was a false flag.

Can't wait until McDonalds gets sued for making people fat. It fits the argument even more accurately

The specific thing they are going after is the marketing. Some of the marketing Remington was using was pretty stupid and crass. But of course you cannot differentiate for this like you could a gun injuring you at no fault of your own and then suing. And that's the problem. This is terrible precedent.

This suit is a PR showpiece.
You can sue. That doesn't mean you can win.

In trying to harm gun manufacturers the plaintiffs here are attacking the FIRST amendment which is the only one relevant here in that advertising a product which is legal to sell is protected speech.

If, it’s a public marketing issue case.. then leave the gun and manufacturing out of it. Face value! Freedom of speech in marketing seems to be on trial here.

Why aren't they suing the game companies that make games about killing people?

Gee it sure is a good thing that YouTube links to an article about Sandy Hook so you know the Official Narrative if a video ever mentions the event.

You should look up what the families of the Sandi Hook shooting have received since the shooting…. You should look up legislation that was passed that literally took away the public right to get any information on any one of the families involved… There's a cover up bigger than the cover up of the murder of my father and that was huge…..

It IS a gun rights case in that the left wants to use any loophole possible in the PLCAA and bankrupt the arms companies by endless litigation, just like they tried in the 90s. That’s why the PLCAA was passed in the first placed and, until courts force the petitioners to pay ALL court and legal costs, they will continue.

I think SCOTUS rejected their motion for this reason: had they ruled that the plaintiffs had no standing based upon the PLCAA, they would have validated the law without ever hearing arguments on the merits. By rejecting the motion, they force the case to percolate up through the system. Once it reaches SCOTUS again, then they WILL hear arguments on the PLCAA.

So does this mean they can sue activision for call of duty games? Can we sue BET for glorifying "gangsta violence."

The killer wasn't a customer of Remington. He tried to buy a rifle and failed the NICS or was turned down by the gun store owner. The guns he used were stolen from his mother's gun safe. To make Remington liable you would have to prove that Remington knew beyond a reasonable doubt that their product would be purchased legally by a person legally able to own firearms. Stored safely in a gun safe as per Connecticut state law requirements. That someone who was deemed unfit to legally purchase firearms would find a way to compromise the gun safe and specifically go after small children. In a sane world this would never happen…but we live in clown world. If we enact a Brazillian style truckers strike. Shut down the rails and cut the power grid we could have sanity restored in a year or less…no shots need be fired.

OK, this is a stupid law suit. No question.
But we shouldn't get too wrapped around the axle about SCOTUS denying certiorari in this case, because they deny cert in about 90% of cases that seek a hearing.
In denying cert, SCOTUS has rendered no opinion on any of the merits (or lack thereof) of the case.
Even the Connecticut Supreme Court noted that the plaintiffs likely have an insurmountable set of obstacles before them.

Sound and fury, folks, signifying nothing.

Satanic cults were in preschools. Shepherded by the CIA.