Multiple gun manufacturers win AR-15 lawsuit

Categories: Business, But True, News, Shooting

On Oct. 9th, the U.S. District Court (Southern District of Ohio) ruled against Primus Group, LLC in their case against several AR-15 gun manufacturers.  The court stated the plaintiffs had “no standing” to bring the case to them and dismissed it.  The group filed the case shortly after the El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio shootings.

Primus Group claimed weapons manufacturers like Smith & Wesson, Remington, SIG Sauer, Ruger and Colt (to name a few on the defendant list), misrepresent their product intentionally.  They also claimed the companies were involved in racketeering and the rifle in question posed a threat to American lives.  The legal proceedings document states Primus Group is an “entertainment venue.”

The manufacturers rebutted the initial complaint, stating the Group did not have a direct complaint for themselves, but attempting to represent the American people as a whole, which essentially means this case violated the 5th amendment.  Primus then amended their statement saying the manufacturers’ “failure to warn,” negligent designs of their products, etc.  They went on to state in their argument that because a mass-shooting ‘could’ happen at their establishment, they have “suffered injuries.”

Lastly, the Primus Group also stated the various manufacturers continue to manufacture weapons knowing the American public does not properly secure them, mass-shootings can happen before law enforcement can intervene, as well as saying they can build the weapons in a manner that would not allow high-capacity magazines.

The defendants came back stating the Group did not provide actual, particular incidents of events that happened to them, instead they utilized generalizations, which may or may not actually happen.  The manufacturers also stated banning weapons needs to take place at the legislature level and not in a local court room.

Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the weapons manufacturers because the business entity did not have any actual injuries related to the mass shootings, nor could the provide substantial evidence of the fact the were losing business due to solely the sale of the rifles.

The bottom line is, if you are going to attempt to present a legal court case, especially one of this degree- do your research and have a valid reason to present your argument. “Guns are bad” is not a valid argument.  It just is not, especially if you are an “entertainment” business that has no connection to actual events that took place.

This is basically hearing about a neighbor three streets over get shot and saying ‘I think I heard the gunshot and I might have hearing damage, but I can’t prove any of it.’

Mass shootings are horrible events and the people involved should be held responsible to the full extent of the law, but please do not utilize them as a legal argument for your business if you had nothing to do with the people, location or weapons involved.

Also, you can read the court document we found, here, to read the full case.


Know what we're sayin fam?

Average rating / 5. Vote count:


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

19 thoughts on “Multiple gun manufacturers win AR-15 lawsuit

  1. Drug manufacturers are not sued every time a person over doses. Soda companies are never sued when kids are diagnosed with Diabetes. Car manufacturers are not sued when adults drive drunk. Hell, airplane
    manufacturers are not sued when people die in plane crashes, they sue the airline but never the plane maker. Stop all that noise on gun manufacturers. Thats as stupid as putting a suicide disclaimer on bullet packaging, right Newsome you nut!

  2. The gun is a tool, placed in the hands of an individual, having loaded it, and having malice intent is on the individual. When I take my rifle hunting I intend to use this tool to kill my query. I aim it, I pull the trigger. It is my responsibility. The gun is as much a tool as an ax, a hammer, or a saw!!!! Simple as pie!

  3. They should be held accountable for training and brainwashing the youth. Their movies remove all respect for human life. There is no consequences for all the gunplay in movies. Jason Bourne shootout in airport. John Wick.

    1. Who is “they” , the movie producers, the directors, all of Hollywood? How about maybe the parents who don’t raise children to have respect for life? How about adults who go “off the rails”?

  4. We gotta keep the pressure on!! Keep winning these cases!! Most are brought about by emotion, yet missing fact as this case is!! Good Job!!!!

  5. The will of man to do harm is not removed with a lawsuit. Nor is it stopped by removing a specific item. Evil in the heart will emerge no matter how it is restricted.

  6. This is absolutely ludacris I own a couple ar15s and they’ve never walked out my door and hurt anyone I strongly suggest all these dimwitted buisness such as dicks Walmart and this premus group and all anti gun politicians back off our rights because the true american Patriot gun owners have had enough I will say that if any one attempts to disarm me by unconstitutional laws or unlawful force it will be met with violence my rights trump your dead any day all ways for I am still alive …I’d rather die on my feet than live on my knees we the people have had enough dont like them dont buy one but I will not comply with any gun control measure for they are illegal laws violating my 2nd amendment rights

    1. Michael, I am not sure what more you would like. I literally dropped a link to the case proceedings in the article. Thanks!

  7. Who is “they” , the movie producers, the directors, all of Hollywood? How about maybe the parents who don’t raise children to have respect for life? How about adults who go “off the rails”?

  8. my god can’t people remember GUNS DON’T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE period and AR don’t stand for assault rifle its the name of a manifacture armalite rifle model-15

  9. Their major failing was they needed to go judge-shopping and pick a court in the 9th District. Facts don’t matter there.

  10. Couldn’t have said it better. That’s like sueing a candy manufacturer because you have a cavity. You can’t sue a manufacturer if someone is irresponsible. No wonder there’s warning labels on everything. Personal responsibility stop blaming everyone else for what you do or have done. Thanks