[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section” _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row admin_label=”row” _builder_version=”4.16″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ custom_padding=”|||” global_colors_info=”{}” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Text” _builder_version=”4.16″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”]

On Tuesday, Remington reached a $73 million settlement with the families of Sandy Hook families. A 20-year-old used the company’s Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle in the tragic shooting death of 20 first-graders and six school officials back in 2012.

In the years since the shooting, all eyes have been on this lawsuit because of the devastating impact it could have on the firearms industry as a whole.

Even though the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act protects gun manufacturers and dealers from being held liable for crimes committed with their products, a Connecticut Supreme Court ruled the Sandy Hook families could sue Remington for their marketing practices.

According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the firearms industry trade association, the court should have never upheld the lawsuit to begin with.

“The plaintiffs never produced any evidence that Bushmaster advertising had any bearing or influence over Nancy Lanza’s decision to legally purchase a Bushmaster rifle, nor on the decision of murderer Adam Lanza to steal that rifle, kill his mother in her sleep, and go on to commit the rest of his horrendous crimes,” the NSSF said in a statement to the Associated Press.

The NSSF is correct. The lawsuit should have never been upheld but it was. And Remington deciding to settle with the families is all wrong.

This settlement opens up a HUGE can of worms for the firearms industry and Second Amendment supporters alike. A settlement is often looked at as a form of guilt, meaning Remington gave gun control advocates a win.

Every single time a shooting takes place, there are calls for manufacturers and dealers to be held responsible for the tool used to carry out the attack. We never see these calls when drunk drivers kill someone with a car or a domestic abuser attacks someone with a knife. This phenomenon only happens with firearms.

The PLCAA was put in place to protect firearms manufacturers from this very ordeal and Remington caved, plain and simple. This case simply skirted that law.

Was Sandy Hook a tragedy that should have been prevented? Absolutely!

Was Remington responsible for a crazed person shooting innocent school kids? No way!

By agreeing to this settlement, Remington admitted they did something wrong. They admitted that their product – not Adam Lanza – was responsible for gunning down innocent elementary school children.

And now the people that are going to pay the ultimate price for this decision are law-abiding gun owners… because gun control advocates will use this to their advantage. They will cite it every time they call for an assault weapons ban or high-capacity magazine. They will use it for fundraising efforts. And they’ll base even more anti-Second Amendment legislation around it.

Congratulations, Remington. You turned your back on your customers, your industry, and most importantly, the very amendment that gave your company the right to exist. Pat yourself on the back for a job well done.

Get More News!