In the event of a deadly shooting, usually gun manufacturers are safe from being held liable. Federal law protects them from lawsuits over the illegal use of the weapons they produce, under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Families of the Highland Park shooting victims are pointing to an exception to the law in a newly filed lawsuit against gun manufacturer Smith & Wesson.
Lawyers representing the victims of the Highland Park shooting are suing the manufacturers based on marketing tactics that violate state law. Wednesday’s lawsuit alleges Smith & Wesson “knowingly advertised its weapons, including the M&P-model rifle used by Crimo, to appeal to ‘militaristic fantasies’ of troubled young men.”
A similar lawsuit has already been settled in court earlier this year. In February, a landmark $73 million settlement between Remington Arms and families of those killed in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting marked the first settlement of its kind. The families alleged Remington violated Connecticut’s Unfair Trade Practices Act, which prohibits the use of unfair or deceptive acts in commerce, very similar to the suit against Smith & Wesson.
“Each of these lawsuits develops good legal precedent that allows future victims to bring cases,” said Erin Davis, senior counsel at Brady Legal told the Wall Street Journal.
Families of victims are going after the retailer where the shooter allegedly bought his rifle too, Budsgunshop.com LLC and dealer Red Dot Arms Inc. The lawsuit claimed the retailer knowingly sold an assault weapon to a resident of an area where they are banned. The families also sued the shooter himself and the shooter’s father. The lawsuit claimed the father was negligent for helping his son get a firearms license despite allegedly knowing his son had a history of making violent threats. The gun manufacturers have not made a public statement regarding the suit.
