This site uses cookies to improve your experience and to provide services and advertising. By continuing to browse, you agree to the use of cookies described in our Cookies Policy. You may change your settings at any time but this may impact on the functionality of the site. To learn more see our Cookies Policy.
OK
Dublin: 13 °C Monday 14 October, 2019
Advertisement

Sandy Hook families renew push to have gun makers held responsible for their children's deaths

Families were back in court today – last year a lawsuit was thrown out of court.

A woman and a little girl leave a bouquet of flowers at a makeshift memorial near Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012.
A woman and a little girl leave a bouquet of flowers at a makeshift memorial near Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012.
Image: Hartford Courant

FAMILIES OF VICTIMS in one of America’s worst mass shootings pushed again today to hold gun manufacturers responsible for the 2012 massacre that killed 20 small children and six adults.

The killings at the Sandy Hook elementary school in Connecticut — which claimed the lives of mostly children aged between six and seven in less than five minutes shortly before Christmas — shocked America and reignited the national debate about gun control.

But moves to even modestly tighten gun control laws floundered and a lawsuit brought by some families of the victims against the manufacturers of the semi-automatic gun used in the crime was thrown out by a judge last year.

Today, those families were back in court, asking Connecticut’s highest state court to reverse the decision, looking to hold the makers of the AR-15 Bushmaster liable for wrongful death and negligence.

Judges on the Connecticut Supreme Court heard arguments from lawyers representing the families, gun manufacturer Remington, the Connecticut shop that sold the weapon to the shooter’s mother and Massachusetts-based arms distributor Camfour.

Public safety

The families say 20-year-old killer Adam Lanza would never have been able to carry out his 264-second attack if he had not had access to a high-capacity weapon which had been “specifically engineered” for military use in combat.

US corporations, argued the plaintiffs, have a duty to look out for public safety.

“What we have here is the conduct of a corporation that thought it was above the law and still thinks its above the law,” said lawyer Joshua Koskoff.

In dismissing the suit last October, a judge cited federal law protecting gun manufacturers from litigation if their products are used during a crime.

“The law needs to be applied dispassionately,” said lawyer James Vogts, representing Remington.

Millions of Americans all across the country own the same type of weapon for legitimate hunting, target practice and home defence purposes, he said.

“The manufacturer and the sellers of the firearms used by the criminal that day are not legally responsible,” Vogts said.

Read: One year on, Sandy Hook marks the anniversary of school massacre>

  • Share on Facebook
  • Email this article
  •  

About the author:

AFP

Read next:

COMMENTS (28)

This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic. Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy here before taking part.
write a comment

    Leave a commentcancel