The gun industry's PLCAA armor is further cracked by a new two-fer!

Not long ago I posted about the Sandy Hook Lawsuit against Remington in the deaths of 20 first grade children and six of their teachers. The post was about a legal victory against the gun industry and how others are using the same legal tactic; going after gun makers for the way they market their deadly product. https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215687099

Two other suits are pending!

Victims of a 2014 Dayton, Ohio mass shooting are suing the manufacturer of the 100 round drum magazine that allowed the shooter to fire 41 times in 32 seconds killing 9 and wounding 17 others. Citing negligent entrustment and public nuisance in the suit they claim that :

We have a victory for gun sense! It's complicated, but stay with me.

We have finally found a chink in the gun industry's armor. Hang with me while I wade through the details.

The PLCAA (Protection of Legal Commerce in Arms Act) was signed into law in 2005. It was the ILA's (the legal arm of the NRA) answer to a a number of cities bringing public nuisance* law suits against gun makers for their failure to control the flow of guns into their populations. The law effectively shields the gun makers from any responsibility for the sales, distribution and use or misuse of their product. No other product has such widespread protection from responsibility for their product. NONE.

In 2014 the families of Sandy Hook children brought suit against Remington Arms, the manufacturer of the gun used by Alan Lanza to murder 20 children and 6 caregivers for the sale of that weapon. It was immediately dismissed under the PLCAA.

Their attorneys appealed on different grounds, again it was dismissed. Finally the attorney's found s clause in the Connecticut constitution that protects against false and damaging advertising and filed yet again under that statute. They sued claiming that the rifle was marketed to vulnerable young men as a bolster to masculinity. It was appealed all the way to the State Supreme Court where it was ruled a viable suit with standing.

Plaintiffs asked for discovery to include all internal and external documents and communications regarding marketing. Remington responded with 6000 pages of junk which the plaintiffs appealed. REMINGTON RESPONDED WITH AN OFFER OF $33 MILLION TO MAKE IT GO AWAY! There must be some really nasty shit in those documents, doncha' think?

Since their success in bringing the suit the victims of the San Diego Synagogue shooting have brought suit on the same grounds and the state of New York has re-written their public nuisance laws to include guns and gun dealers specifically making it possible to reach across state lines to hold gun dealers accountable (74% of recovered crime guns come from outside the state).

Aside from that the Remington offer, accepted or not, will make banks and insurance companies rethink the gun industry as a client.

What this means is WE WON! No matter what happens next is secondary. The gun industry is NO LONGER BULLET PROOF.


* A public nuisance is any action that interferes with the rights and well being of a society or a group within society. Think about a cigarette store next to a high school or a topless bar near a church.

The legal battle between Good and Evil

Remington offers $33 million to Sandy Hook Elementary School families

She is 8 years old.

"We must never allow people to get away with murdering our children,"

said D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser.

Yet, over the weekend there were 12 (count 'em, TWELVE) mass shootings leaving 11 dead and 49 injured.

We allow this to happen. The gun lobby isn't invincible. Politicians are more afraid of US than they are of losing contributions. We have votes. They only have money.

Even Republicans don't want to be shot or have their children taken from them. When will WE learn to USE our votes?

I get so tired of writing this stuff and weeping.

Maybe it's just me . . .

These two guns are what police to use in training.




This is a gun marketed by a popular manufacturer.


As are these. All real guns.
?1579146170&size=1024



These, on the other hand are non lethal bb guns marketed by toy makers and the likes of Daisy.
?1545886356741



Am I the only one that sees a problem here? Police are conditioned to see blue guns as harmless but gun makers provide blue guns to the public?

Shouldn't toys look like toys and guns look like guns to reduce the confusion out on the street?

Your unseen gun violence tax.

I bet the industry is more concerned about discovery . . . than it is about losing . . .

There is reason for hope in the fight against the gun industry and gun culture but it takes an achingly long time to see progress.

We all remember Sandy Hook. In 2014 they filed a lawsuit against Remington. It bounced from appeals court to appeals court until the Connecticut Supreme court ruled it can proceed. Seven years in the making.

In 2019 a San Diego Synagogue sued Smith and Wesson after one of their products was used to kill one and wound three in a shooting. This year courts ruled that the suit can proceed. Three years in the making.

However, the lawsuit that has gun makers shaking in their collective boots is Gary Indiana vs Glock, Smith & Wesson, and Beretta. The Gary suit alleges that the nation’s largest handgun manufacturers have turned a blind eye to the diversion of guns into the criminal market. They are seeking 25 years of marketing and sales information. The suit is now poised to move to discovery. In September a judge will decide if the manufacturers have to turn over that 25 years of communications, marketing strategy and information on gun trafficking.

Yet more mind fuckery and mental masturbation.

So I'm in this discussion about real guns that look like toy guns and toy guns that look like real guns and the number of people that police shoot because of the confusion.

Think of it. Is that a toy that looks real or a real gun that looks like a toy or a . . . Ya' got a tenth of a second to decide.

So anyway the thread splits to those shot holding a replica gun and the children who would play with the real gun looking like a toy.

In come the gunners! So how do you explain away the people needlessly killed and the police officers saddled with the guilt of killing someone holding a toy?

The preferred way to diffuse the anguish of human life lost is to simply minimize it. “It's only a couple of dozen a year.” Really? Having a bb gun that looks like the real thing is more important than a couple of dozen dead people a year? Apparently so to gunners. But that's just the way gun violence is diminished in their own minds. Point out this set of deaths and it's only a few percentage points of the whole so not worth being concerned about. Dismiss this % and move to the next category and its % and before ya' know it all 40,000 dead and 150,000 injured are accounted for as not enough to spend time on. Voila! Gun violence dismissed!

They did the same with the possibility of a child playing with a real gun that looks like a brightly colored toy. Considering that between 40 & 50 TODDLERS under 4 shoot themselves or others every year what affect do you think the toy look-alike will have on those numbers? Answer? Almost nil. Not nil but almost nil. Not zero but close to 0 which means at least one and you're not prepared to limit it there. Again, not enough death to deprive a gunner of a brightly colored Glock that looks like a plastic toy.

Fun fact! Most toddler's injures are to themselves because their index fingers are too short to reach the trigger or too weak to pull it so they use their thumbs which turns the gun around. The gun is pointing at the child's chest or face when it fires.

So okay gunners, fair warning. File this heartless unfeeling argument right next to the one about deflection. I will call you out every time you attempt to use this molding pile of feces to justify your fetish. I will tell you in no uncertain terms that you've just admitted to all of DU that you could not give a shit about human life and the grief guns cause as long as no guns are harmed.