For decades, advocates of the gun industry have developed the myth that guns do not kill people. Sure, putting a gun in a locked case won’t kill anyone, but a human wielding one or more military offensive weapons and a large magazine is far more than without a gun. You can kill far more people faster. Jeez. Guns make it possible to kill Americans with unmatched margins in any other developed country. A large-scale proceedings settlement on Tuesday could help dent these margins.
A family of adults and children killed in 2012 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut is represented by Remington, a weapons maker that manufactured military weapons used to kill 20 first graders and 6 adults, for $ 73 million. Reconciliation has been reached. The most morbid and protracted sequelae of the killing 10 years later include how firearm makers and the National Rifle Association stick to turning this tragedy and the suffering of their parents into a celebration of gun rights.
That is why the settlement on Tuesday is so important. Gun victims are ultimately standing up for their rights, rather than challenging the way mass murder devices are sold as a statement of masculinity and protection of Article 2 of the Constitutional Amendment. The firearms maker’s mission is not about the Constitution. It’s about maximizing profits. And they do it by promoting the gun using macho, military images and assault rifles in association with patriotism and the advocacy of freedom.
The reconciliation on Tuesday made a big hole in that nonsense. Family members who lost their loved ones in the 2012 massacre were restricted by federal law from being held liable for bloodshed caused by the product. However, nine families tried different tactics. With ads such as “Consider reissuing your male card,” Remington challenged how to appeal to anxious young men.
The proceedings led to an objection leading up to the US Supreme Court, which refused to hear the proceedings and implicitly confirmed that the proceedings were justified. Representatives of the gun industry argued that there was no evidence that such marketing campaigns had any effect on the behavior of confused shooters. It was the shooter’s mother who bought her weapon, and he killed her before going to her school rampage. Therefore, it is a fair matter whether marketing has had any impact on the tragedy.
Nonetheless, the family who filed the proceedings filed a proceeding so strong that Remington’s insurance company felt it was best to resolve it rather than risk a dispute in court. After the shooting of Sandy Hook, Remington flooded the proceedings and filed for bankruptcy. As expected, the gun industry is trying to argue that this result does not represent any kind of concession by the firearms manufacturer itself, as the insurance company has made a settlement decision.
of course not. The industry remains as unreasonable as ever in the defense of mass slaughterers and the mass marketing behind them. However, if such a proceeding is even more successful, firearm manufacturers can immediately consider reissuing a bankruptcy card.
St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Remington’s Reconciliation sends a message that the victim also has rights
Source link St. Louis Post-Dispatch: Remington’s Reconciliation sends a message that the victim also has rights