Following the settlement reached between the Sandy Hook families and what remains of the old Remington, victims and families of high profile shootings — usually backed by gun control industry attorneys — now see what they think is a way to skirt the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Their new tack is to claim “misleading advertising” somehow convinces would-be killers to buy their firearm and shoot innocent people with it.
The latest target of this ploy is Smith & Wesson.
The Highland Park killer — the dress-wearing incel who shot dozens of parade-goers from a rooftop on July 4 — used a Smith & Wesson M&P 15 rifle. Yesterday, survivors and family-members of those who were killed sued Smith & Wesson in an Illinois court (lawsuit here).
From the AP . . .
The group’s strategy mirrors the approach used by relatives of victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook school killings, who in February reached a $73 million settlement with the firearm company that produced the rifle used in that attack. That was believed to be the largest payment by a gun-maker related to a mass killing and hinged on the families’ accusation that Remington violated Connecticut consumer protection law by marketing its AR-15-style weapons to young men already at risk of committing violence.
The suit names not only Smith & Wesson for making the weapon the shooter used, but also Buds Gun Shop for selling it as well as Red Dot Arms in Lake Villa, Illinois for transferring the firearm. The shooter and his father are also named in the suit.
Advertising text also billed the rifle as “capable of handling as many rounds as you are” and providing “pure adrenaline.” One ad shows the M&P 15 on a dark background above the phrase “kick brass” in a bold red font and capital letters.
“The advertisements and marketing tactics described above demonstrate that Smith & Wesson knowingly marketed, advertised, and promoted the Rifle to civilians for illegal purposes, including to carry out offensive, military style combat missions against their perceived enemies,” [Highland Park survivor Liz Turnipseed’s] attorneys argue.
The lawsuit claims that Smith & Wesson’s advertising uses “military, patriotic, and law enforcement themes” and the company’s ads are similar to first person shooter video games such as Call of Duty which the killer allegedly played.
Plaintiffs also cited Smith’s ads portraying its firearms as the choice of “on-duty service members.”
The plaintiffs claim Smith’s ads “deliberately — and misleadingly — show the weapons being used not in a civilian context but by what are made to appear to be members of the U.S. military on active military duty.” They then criticize Smith & Wesson for its lack of military sales.
In other words, the plaintiffs claim Smith & Wesson makes “weapons of war” that aren’t sold to the U.S. military.
Maybe most surprising is the fact that the plaintiffs’ attorneys seem to be confused about not only the features of Smith’s semi-automatic M&P 15 rifle, but the laws surrounding their sale. They claim that . . .
Smith & Wesson violated both the NFA and the Gun Control Act (“GCA”) by manufacturing, transferring, and selling these weapons without filling out the appropriate transfer forms, getting approval of the forms by the ATF, paying occupational and transfer taxes or registering the firearms.
The plaintiffs attorneys have a high opinion of themselves.
“There’s certainly a long path, and it’s an uphill battle,” [attorney Ari] Scharg said. “But I think this is the most important case in the country being litigated right now … and we’re going to see it through to the end.”
This will take years to litigate and will cost Smith & Wesson millions of dollars to defend…which is, of course, the point.
So are they going to sue Call of Duty and Microsoft?
Of course. Attorney’s will not be satisfied until everyone on earth suffers the same miserable existence they do. You shall love nothing, and be loved by noone.
They should be suing the little freaks parents for creating and developing a mass murderer.
Beat me to it. I figured someone else would have already said this by the time I scrolled down. I was late to the party on this page today, lol.
Next time, Haz, next time.
crimo the crap.
Now is the time for S&W to “stand its ground.” Otherwise this will be a strategy of the disarmament industry of a death by a thousand cuts, and some very deep cuts at that.
Yes it was S&W ads and no way could it be the obvious demoCrap planted between the ears of another clearly insane twerp. The lawsuit is without merit. What happens when Remington attorneys failed to blame Gun Free Zone Signs for inviting a lunatic into a knowingly defenseless school.
I guess someone in Wakesau Wi will sue ford now? Does this make my M&P 15 worth more money now? When are they going to execute the pink haired faggot? I must have missed the ads that inspire mass murder.
Smith & Wesson needs to be told in very clear terms that their company will be blacklisted by gun owners again if they settle this case.
Typically these cases are handled by their insurance carriers, and under most policies, the insured doesn’t have the right to object to a settlement within policy limits. Moreover, the insurer’s duty to defend is unlimited, such that the cost of defense can exceed the policy limit, and insurers don’t like it when that happens, so they settle to avoid the massive expense. Keep that in mind if the case settles. That was the circumstance in the Remington case. The bankrupt portion of Remington was represented totally by its carriers who thought it prudent to settle rather than litigate.
Remington had no say in the matter.
Ssshhhh… you’re going to make them put away the pitchforks
Two words: Hillary Holes.
S&W can suck it just like Rustington.
At least they did sue the shooter.
Anyhow, cell phones enable millions of crimes yearly, from hits to drug deals to child porn to bullying…
Cell phones cause wrecks, crashes suicides, divorces, possibly cancer…
So! Three day wait, background check, minimum age (36?), pysch eval, and interview to establish need. Remember, nobody wants to take your phone, we are just trying to save lives with sensible regulations.
Hopefully, I will have passed my bar exam by this happens. Cha-ching!!!! Gonna sue EVERYBODY!
What ever happened to individual responsibility? Oh, I know! It’s been negated by the scumbag lawyers that will reap huge profits, regardless of out come.
The shooter is always the responsible party, yet it’s always the fault of others.
This is the consequence of participation trophies.
While I agree with you re the ultimate responsibility, I think you’re missing the point here. This is not about holding the shooter accountable, or not. It’s also not about holding accused “enablers” accountable.
Rather, this is an attempt to destroy the gun industry through lawfare. Consider who is funding the lawsuits, whose lawyers are filing it, and so forth.
The “illegal” advertising doesn’t show shooting people, or say kill your enemies, or make sure to kill children, parade goers at a patriotic parade, grocery store shoppers, etc, but the mass shooters are able to read between the lines and figure out the “real” meaning in those ads. Fortunately those highly trained lawyers can also read between the lines as well to catch S&W in their evil plans to send guns to criminals to harm the innocent
This is because lawyers know criminals only obey explicit instructions and warnings, so the guns and ads need big warnings on them “Not to be used for illegal purposes, killing children, or crimes.”
I would cut off all sales to Illinois Law enforcement, and governmental agencies every time a lawsuit like this took place.
Only sell to civilians.
The only way to stop this litigation train in its tracks is for all the U.S. firearms manufacturers to ban together and say they will no longer sell, service, or maintain any firearms to federal and state agencies until PLCA is updated to eliminate these lawsuits.
If they don’t do this now they will all ultimately get picked off and perrish. Got to take the windburn now when they are strong rather than later.
Gun consumers will reward the industry if they take this position. Obviously we punish any mfg that won’t join the booycott.
This can be laid on Remington’s door step,
They should have never settled their case, & fought it out to the Finnish.
I myself knew that this was going to happen again when Remington caved.
“a valmet in a helmet?”
to find one would be swede. denmark your location.
Frankly the entire thing gauls me no end. Italy up the score and moore is certainly to flemish the record. Teutonics and a scotch are enough to get me manspaining it all right to the finnish. Russian along doesn’t help anything though, gotta czech my speed and anglo. Gotta go now, getting hungary, maybe a bavarian n swiss n romanian on rye and some greecey fries on the side to polish it off isreal good. Or maybe yugoslovian with a good bowl of borscht? See you on the far side of the gracht where the dark, heavy ones are…
At the time of the settlement, I don’t think there was much of Remington left – just the name, and the insurance companies. So there was, basically, nobody left there to fight.
But, yes, that outcome certainly emboldened the antis.
Remington went out of business because they were mismanaged and drained of capital by Cerberus Capital. After they went under, the insurance company, representing the bankrupt company agreed to the settlement and payout, for some weird reason. This case would have never succeeded on appeal with any judge who knows and wishes to enforce the law.
Smith & Wesson isn’t going to settle or go out of business. Hopefully S&W counter sues all the opposing parties for 100’s of millions of dollars and wins. The case should be removed to Federal Court (from IL state court), as should have happened to the Remington case (CT Court), because the parties reside in different states and the amount sought is over $10 Million USD. Like the Remington case, justice requires a summary dismissal with prejudice, as the case has zero legal legs to stand upon.
It’s always possible that activist judges on the federal level will refuse to apply the law and leave the case in state court.
See above. The cos of litigation exceeded the policy limit.
Imaging suing a gun company by saying you’re appealing to wanna-be cops and saying those sorts like to perform mass shootings. Amazing
Let’s just sue Burger King for feeding the S&W workers lunch too
Because that’s the logic they got here
Seems like a pretty good racket as long as there aren’t any penalties for losing. File the suit, collect donations from like-minded idiots and political groups, lose your case and laugh all the way to the bank.
I should start a “help me end gun violence” GoFundMe. Have no plan, make no promises. Just take in the donations. Then I can afford to heat my home this Winter.
So, you haven’t received your utiliy bill yet? Mn. bills have an insert explaining the winter cutoff rules, that the utilities can’t cut off service nor charge you more than 10% of your net income, and you automatically qualify if you are on any assistance program… the rest of us got a loan application.
I got the %*@#&! loan app along with the propane pre-buy app.
Isn’t marketing covered by the 1st Amendment?
Lawyers representing the leftover “Brand” of Remington, no longer a company decided to settle. Smith and Wesson, a viable existing company will not do so and stand on PLCAA as an affirmative defense. Big Difference!
Apparently, smoking Marlboros makes you a cowboy, and able to ride horses. Buying Old Spice deodorant makes women throw off their clothes and lie prone at your feet. Gun ads depicting KNOWN features of the guns (reasonably accurate, relatively high rate of fire, low recoil) make you Psycho Rambo. And buying a Corvette magically endows you with the driving skills of an F1 driver. It would apparently never occur to Leftist/fascist idiots that the people they believe were “victimized” by advertising were . . . mostly adults, and allegedly possessed of agency.
They always suspect/accuse you of what THEY actually do. Deranged Leftist/fascists shoot or run over people for their political beliefs, burn cities, loot “corporate” stores (often actually owned by small businesses), and kill cops. The law clearly protects gun manufacturers against liability for INTENTIONAL illegal use of a legal product by the user. Like all manufacturers, gun makers remain liable for damages caused by defective design/manufacture. How does a manufacturer control deranged thoughts of an end user??
maybe they should sue the manufacturers of the POS that was pulling the trigger
👍
Too logical for lawyers.
they will see it through to the end.
If it were to go in front of a real honest judge the end would come quickly.
“This is bs case dismissed.”
Once AGAIN lawfare from sleazy mouthpieces. I haven’t shot anyone with my Smith & Wesson rifle. And I was informed that Blythes Gunshop,Griffith,Indiana no longer sells gunz to Illinois residents. I’ve bought 9 gunz from them & thousands of rounds of ammo. And more. Blamed for the crimes of other’s…and Chiraq going after Indiana gunshops.
Just shut up and let the law decide. But this kind of advertisment campaign in most of the civilised WOULD be considered as an invitation to violence and it would be banned and that banning would have overwhelming public support.
I was an Sergeant Armouer and Smallarms Instructor in the Royal Air Force and served in the UK Infantry Reserves and brought up my kids as a single parent father BUT I would not allow even a TOY GUN in my house.
I did teach my son the basics of shooting and the ethics with an Air Rifle but that was it. It did NOT stop my sone joining and obtaining a Commissiin in the Royak Air Force and serving his time in GULF 2 as an HONOURARY CAPTAIN in the SAUDI DEFENCE FORCES [and no he’s not a Muslim!].
You’re so full of s*.
You fascists loves you some censorship.
Al, take your own advice.
That picture is how I imagine Dacian looking like…
While lurking near a junior school.
Then the federal government as INDIVIDUALS SHOULD BE ABE TO BE SUED
That’s what Scientology did to the IRS.
the left always gets their way
from changing the language and tearing down statues to having no bail for criminals
etc etc
WHY??
B/C WE ALLOW IT
dont forget
criminals need to be sued in CIVIL COURT
whether they have money or not
same with alllll these “teens”
SUE THE PARENTS
NO MONEY?
LEGAL TO TAKE AT LEAST 50% OF ANY TAX “INCOME” THEY RECIEVE
That thing is the recruiting poster child for the ss/antifa. Batshit crazy and willing to do murder.
Prob dacian’s main squeeze.
Frankly, this article, not advertising make me want to buy a S&W AR-15.
One word “countersuits”. Against the lawyers representing the survivors and family members along with any organization supporting the lawsuit or footing the lawyers’ bills.
If this happens, I swear lawsuit’s against the auto companies, hammer manufacturers, and knife manufacturers have to be next. The the products I just named account for thousands of innocent peoples deaths every year, and if this is where we are going, EVERYONE should be fair game.
I am going to buy a new Ford F150 with the military grade aluminum alloy body. When I am told it is military grade I expect it to be faster, stronger and able to repel Javelins on the fly. I should be able to drive down a hot range to check my targets without anything penetrating the body. If one single rounds goes thru, I am suing Ford!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDdDQQ8uLhY
Looks like they have a slam dunk case against Smith and its advertising propaganda.
I think you received a slam dunk from the nurse in the maternity ward.
So in 2014 S&W mimicked a Call to Duty screenshot from 2019 that hadn’t happened yet? How did they do that, are they secret time travelers?
Plus it is a different looking weapon, with different optics, different angle of perspective and different background.
With this kind of “evidence” the case should be thrown out of court.
in related news:
the first openly trans officer
in the us army
just arrested
for passing classified military secrets
to the russians
Why did you even mention his sexual orientation (as if we all did not already know.)
Comments are closed.