Remington Settles with Sandy Hook Families $73 Million

Help Support CattleToday:

jltrent

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Messages
6,906
Reaction score
3,980
Location
Virginia
Remington, a gun manufacturer that designed the rifle Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter Adam Lanza used to kill 26 victims in Connecticut in 2012, has agreed to pay a $73 million settlement to victims' families.

The now-bankrupt gun maker, which had initially offered families a $33 million settlement in July, also agreed to allow families to release documents they had obtained over the course of their lawsuit against Remington showing how the manufacturer marketed the AR-15-style rifle on Dec. 14, 2012.

Remington, one of the nation's oldest gun makers founded in 1816, filed for bankruptcy for a second time in 2020 and its assets were later sold off to several companies. The manufacturer was weighed down by lawsuits and retail sales restrictions following the school shooting.

Four insurers for the now-bankrupt company agreed to pay the full amount of coverage available, totaling $73 million, the plaintiffs said
 
About the Sandy Hook Lawyer - Josh Koskoff

One advertisement for the AR-15 Bushmaster rifle used to kill 20 first-graders and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., read: "Consider your man card re-issued." Another said: "Forces of opposition, bow down."​
In a case that's earning much media attention and, predictably, generating both political polarization and emotional intensity, attorney Josh Koskoff JD'94 is leading a lawsuit against Remington, the manufacturer of the Bushmaster.​
Long before Josh Koskoff enrolled at Suffolk Law, he was drawn to a vision of the law shaped by his father and grandfather—trial lawyers in Connecticut who once represented the Black Panthers in New Haven​
The manufacturers have a strong defense. That's partly because in 2005, Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), a law intended to shield gun manufacturers from blame when their weapons are used in a crime. Among other arguments, proponents of the PLCAA argued that it was necessary to protect the gun industry from the high costs incurred in defending unfounded lawsuits.​
Koskoff was stunned to learn about the PLCAA, and one thing he hopes to accomplish by filing these suits, he says, is to "shatter the perception" among lawyers, judges, and the firearms industry itself that gunmakers can't be held accountable for reckless behavior.​
 
Last edited:
Here is how someone explained it to me

It's important to see this thing for what it is. Remington is as defunct as the Hindenburg. No longer exists. This case did not involve Remington, any more than it involved a dodo bird. It couldn't. This case involved insurers, who, as members of the big bank, big tech, big pharma, big government conglomerate, were more than happy to roll over in this kangaroo court to set precedent to aid their peers in their quest. Which is to do an end run around the constitution and usher in the great reset. Because fascists, like Brandon and Castro's son in Canada can't achieve their goals while the second amendment stands.
 
Remington, a gun manufacturer that designed the rifle Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter Adam Lanza used to kill 26 victims in Connecticut in 2012, has agreed to pay a $73 million settlement to victims' families.

The now-bankrupt gun maker, which had initially offered families a $33 million settlement in July, also agreed to allow families to release documents they had obtained over the course of their lawsuit against Remington showing how the manufacturer marketed the AR-15-style rifle on Dec. 14, 2012.

Remington, one of the nation's oldest gun makers founded in 1816, filed for bankruptcy for a second time in 2020 and its assets were later sold off to several companies. The manufacturer was weighed down by lawsuits and retail sales restrictions following the school shooting.

Four insurers for the now-bankrupt company agreed to pay the full amount of coverage available, totaling $73 million, the plaintiffs said
How can a gun manufacturer be responsible for the act of a mentally disturbed person? It is like blaming a manufacturer of a pen company for someone failing an SAT test.
 
How can a gun manufacturer be responsible for the act of a mentally disturbed person? It is like blaming a manufacturer of a pen company for someone failing an SAT test.
You can't sue a brewery for making the substance which caused a dui, but you can sue a gun manufacturer for making a gun that was used in a shooting.

"Logic"
 
What bothers me is that these issues have been politicized instead of looking at why they are happening. Get rid of the blame game and the polarization and look at causes and consequences. The easy thing is to fall into the traps the media provides. They never offer solutions though.
True news media is not supposed to offer solutions. Just the facts and all the facts.
'Solutions', is for op-ed pieces.
 
As a society we are shifting the blame from those who earned it to those who don't. If you leave the keys in your vehicle and it is stolen and causes damage, the owner is liable, at least in Illinois. What the heck is wrong here? It's the same with this lawsuit. Justice has been perverted.
 
You can tho, sue a bar owner or bartender for serving a drunk person too much. (of course, you can sue for just about anything else in the world too)
True but the bar didn't make the alcohol being served (unless they did), but in this case they sued the company that made the gun, but not the one that sold the gun. See the difference.
 
Sadly enough, IMO it's going to set a precedent. Every time someone wins a big lawsuit, they always say, It's not about the money.
I wonder if they'd feel the same if the company they sued admitted fault, but there was no cash settlement?
 
True news media is not supposed to offer solutions. Just the facts and all the facts.
'Solutions', is for op-ed pieces.
Maybe I should have said they always stand in the way of solutions... It's their job to stir up controversy instead of allow (dare I say, encourage?) people to work together.
 
Remington screwed all firearm manufactures and owners with this deal. Yes I'm sure it would have cost more to fight it than the settlement.

Now they have set the precedence that gun manufactures can be sued even though there's laws protecting them from the very thing.

I'm sure Soros will be spending millions to sue the gun manufactures as much as possible.
 
Remington screwed all firearm manufactures and owners with this deal. Yes I'm sure it would have cost more to fight it than the settlement.

Now they have set the precedence that gun manufactures can be sued even though there's laws protecting them from the very thing.

I'm sure Soros will be spending millions to sue the gun manufactures as much as possible.
I will never buy another Remington. The only ones I have now were made in the 30's thru 50's.
Never cared for the 870 or their rifles. Browning and Winchester pretty much rule here.
 
Anybody notice that mass shootings weren't an issue until corporal punishment was removed from schools, participation awards made common, and drugs given to young boys to control their behavior?

Correlation may not be causation, but ya gotta wonder.
In response to this,it really chaps my hide that the manufacturer is responsible for a criminals actions. What about alcohol manufacturers, car manufacturers, etc.?
 
True but the bar didn't make the alcohol being served (unless they did), but in this case they sued the company that made the gun, but not the one that sold the gun. See the difference.
Exactly. This is like being able to sue budweiser for a store selling alcohol to a person legally then they drive drunk and kill some one.

They just made every manufactor of any thing who sells it legally responsible for any thing that person does with that product.

If some one buys a car and drives it through a crowd of people... sue Ford, sue GM, sue the manufacturer.

Makes no sense at all.
 

Latest posts

Top