Sandy Hook Victims To Sue Remington
Categories: News
We’re going to put this disclaimer out there before we go being assholes. We’re not trying to be assholes, we’re trying to be rational about this whole thing. It’s rare that an attorney will give you so much insight into their way of thinking regarding a case, but here we have it, plain as day. This is what is believed by Josh Koskoff, the attorney representing the families in the case against Remington. They (the families) want the marketing strategies…ok…so you can see that a young man with mental health issues stole a firearm and committed a grievous crime?
“These families weren’t the target audience for Remington. The Sandy Hook shooter was their target. He was in the crosshairs of their marketing campaign, and he knew a lot about what that gun could do.”-Josh Koskoff
Really? The target of Remington was a mentally unstable young man? Despite the fact that his mother had purchased the weapons for herself and he stole them to commit this atrocity? Look, what happened was horrific, but going after Remington and their marketing strategy when someone stole their guns, instead of purchasing them…Remington didn’t market to the young man, Remington marketed to his mother.
It’s well documented that Adam was troubled and had researched other school shootings as well as suicide methods. Look, we’re not psychologists here, but honestly…the idea that any firearms manufacturer would purposely market to people that are this troubled is beyond asinine.
If our Ford truck gets stolen and used to run over a mob of people, are we going to start asking why Ford marketed to the guy who stole our truck? They didn’t.
Stating that young men like Adam Lanza were in the crosshairs of their marketing campaign is beyond juvenile. Think of how much sense that makes. Market weapons to troubled individuals, who then commit atrocious acts of violence, then Remington profits somehow? Remington has had financial woes in the recent past and this attorney thinks the marketing team at America’s oldest firearm manufacturer wanted someone like Adam to gain access to their guns? So new laws could be written and they could profit less…seems like a bad marketing strategy to us.
Think about the whole idea behind that quote. It assumes that Remington wanted someone like the Sandy Hook shooter to have access to the rifles, because that’s such a solid business plan. Maybe they could get away with saying young men were in the crosshairs if it weren’t so widely known that the shooter had extreme mental health issues.
It’s a tragic event without a doubt, but this attempt, even if you get the marketing strategies…what are they going to find? We’re pretty certain it’ll be nothing of consequence.
Just another tragedy trying to turn it into a big paycheck. The whole thing is a waste of time. Remington is not at ft in any way.
Its a lawyers argument in an effort to win a case. Nothing more. They want to get paid and if they can destroy Remington or the gun industry while doing it even better. But it a loosing bet. This will go the the SCOTUS and fall flat.
This is the most rediculous waste of a court room that has ever been!! What on earth is going through this attorneys mind???
I can’t believe that these judges went and okayed these actions, it is an outrage that these families are allowed to sue Remington, yes what happened was atrocious but the lawsuit is just showing how ridiculous this is becoming with frivolous lawsuits
THIS WHOLE THING IS SO DISGUSTING AND THOSE PEOPLE WHO LOST THEIR BABY’S SHOULD GO AFTER THE LOW LIFE DISGUSTING POLITICIAN AND THE GUN MANUFACTURERS. NONE HAVE STOUD UP FOR ANY KIND OF GUN CONTROLS AND THE MURDERING GOES ON.
So one more parent that wants to put blame on everyone else. When the true crime was the parents buying and letting there unstable boy have access to it. Shame on you as parents and shame on you trying to put that back on Remington.. Guns don’t kill people,people kill people. !!
Grammer and English language just murdered by this fella^.
Richard the smartest part of you slid down the crack of your mommas ass! I cant believe you was the fastest sperm…..smh
Really? The manufacturers didn’t sell a firearm to the shooter. The shooter is a proven, documented person with mental illnesses. The shooter is a thief who stole the firearm. The shooter planned the killings. The shooter pulled the trigger multiple times – an action he made based on his own choice, not by force from the gun manufacturer. The shooter is a murderer. This is not specific to one mass shooting, it can be said in most cases such as this horrific tragedy. Casting blame after the fact doesn’t help anyone and certainly can’t incite change.
Richard M. Crooks, you’re an idiot.
How many alcohol or car manufacturers are sued by drunk driving victims? The tool used isnt the issue? How about suing the mental health professionals and family who let this disturbed kid wall freely
I think you’re lost, why are you on this website?
Oh Richard, caps lock makes us very much want to examine the merits of your argument…Upon further inspection, we’ve come to the conclusion that there are no merits to your argument. Have a nice day.
Your a f!$!ING idiot Dick. That like say people can start suing fork and spoon companies because they get fat, because its easier to stuff your face
With that logic auto makers have more blood on their hands than gun manufacturers. Look up the statistics
Keep in mind that this is far from over. The court only agreed that they could sue. It did not say they could win. Even if they did this will have to hit several Federal Courts and ultimately the Supreme court. This case from what I have read has a very weak argument as it would have severe implications on free speech and commerce.
Nobody needs riffles in their home. Those families lives changed that day forever. This will probably end badly Remington has a chance to figure out weapons like this cannot be sold. Poor hunters cant go out and kill but, they will probably protest. For some reason people in the US feel entitled. How will we know what to do inless we start with the company that makes them. They need to be held accountable they chose to manufacture and sell wespons maybe if they had children murdered they would think of it differently. I am just 1 person, that never felt the need to own s weapon. Maybe hearing the children crying for their mommies screaming terrified . Maybe watching them being murdered that day. Comparing a weapon made specifically to kill is no comparison to the Truck speechigh
Cj, you’re more than entitled to your decision to not be armed. But, I for one, would rather be armed with the ability to do something about it.
That is so supid, this stupidity shouldn’t even be allowed in a courtroom.
The murdering continues because the federal government and medical industry doesn’t look into the mental health care that has been discontinued widely across the nation. The only thing that will remedy the gun violence is arming those whom are mentally stable teaching them how to recognize and disarm the threat and target the mentally unstable to be able to treat them. GUN CONTROL DOESN’T WORK!!!!
WHERE THERE IS A WILL THERE IS A WAY that is hard wired into every humans brain.
Really? The manufacturers didn’t sell a firearm to the shooter. The shooter is a proven, documented person with mental illnesses. The shooter is a thief who stole the firearm. The shooter planned the killings. The shooter pulled the trigger multiple times – an action he made based on his own choice, not by force from the gun manufacturer. The shooter is a murderer. This is not specific to one mass shooting, it can be said in most cases such as this horrific tragedy. Casting blame after the fact doesn’t help anyone and certainly can’t incite change.
Why aren’t they suing Glock or Sig Saur? Last time I knew Remington didn’t make the weapons that were used in the school. The Bushmaster was used on his mother, then placed in the trunk of his car where it stayed until the police found it as they were doing their sweep after they had found him dead holding a Glock 9mm and a Sig Saur 9mm. With Police response times, and general common sense Adam Lanza did not use that Arma-lite Rifle 15 Inside that school, there wouldn’t have been time to go in kill everyone and then return the rifle to the car before the police got there (unless you believe in time travel or being able to Bend space and time.) The other argument I have is that, I don’t care how stupid, or crazy you are, once you start shooting there is no way you re going to leave to place your weapon in your car outside (where the cops are). Just to grab 2 semi auto pistols and go back inside for the express purpose of killing your self. you would either save a bullet from the AR15 or once you got to the car you would shoot yourself in the parking lot.
I left my gun out for the last week it never harmed anyone and it never moved to sue any company for any product because of being used in the wrong way is ridiculous you can take away firearms from civilians but criminals will always have them one way or another it sad to see people getting shot because of one person and bad feeling but all of my Remington have never been used in any wrong actions it about the people who have been mislead not the product.