Implications Beyond Connecticut: Today [Thursday] the Connecticut Supreme Court revived a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the rifle used in the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, the company that distributed the gun, and the store that sold it to the perpetrator's mother. The court agreed with the trial judge that the plaintiffs, a survivor of the attack and relatives of nine people murdered at the school, could not sue under a theory of "negligent entrustment." But it said they could sue under the theory that Remington, which owns the company that makes the Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle used by Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza, violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA) by marketing the gun, a variation on the Colt AR-15, in a way that emphasized its "militaristic and assaultive qualities." … “The defendants unethically promoted their assault weapons for offensive, military style missions by publishing advertisements and distributing product catalogs that (1) promote the AR-15 as ''the uncompromising choice when you demand a rifle as mission adaptable as you are,' (2) depict soldiers moving on patrol through jungles, armed with Bushmaster rifles, (3) feature the slogan '[w]hen you need to perform under pressure, Bushmaster delivers,' superimposed over the silhouette of a soldier holding his helmet against the backdrop of an American flag, (4) tout the 'military proven performance' of firearms like the XM15-E2S, (5) promote civilian rifles as 'the ultimate combat weapons system,' (6) invoke the unparalleled destructive power of their AR-15 rifles, (7) claim that the most elite branches of the United States military, including the United States Navy SEALs, the United States Army Green Berets and Army Rangers, and other special forces, have used the AR-15, and (8) depict a close-up of an AR-15 with the following slogan: 'Forces of opposition, bow down. You are single-handedly outnumbered.'” The lawsuit argues that such messages would appeal to a troubled young man like Lanza, that they may have influenced him to choose the XM15 from among his mother's guns when he attacked the elementary school, and that the attack would have been less deadly if he had used a different gun. All of those claims are questionable, and it is hard to see how a reasonable jury, even if it found the Bushmaster ads distasteful, could conclude that they were "a proximate cause" of mass murder. But thanks to this ruling, the plaintiffs will have a chance to make that case... (Amazing! Will the plaintiffs really argue to a jury that it wasn't that the “militaristic” advertising led the mother to purchase that sort of rifle but that it is responsible for her deranged son's choice of which of her guns to steal?)

http://reason.com/blog/2019/03/14/la...of-the-rifle-u

--

Illinois Man Charged in Connection with Tennessee Shooting: The father of a man accused of killing four people at a Tennessee Waffle House is facing a weapons charge in Illinois. Jeffrey Reinking was charged Thursday in Tazewell County Circuit Court with the unlawful delivery of a firearm. Prosecutors allege that he gave his son, Travis Reinking, an AR-15 in November 2017 despite knowing he had been a psychiatric patient at a hospital within the last five years. Authorities say 30-year-old Travis Reinking used the gun in last April’s attack at the restaurant in Nashville. Police say he opened fire at the Waffle House and that more people likely would have been killed if not for a quick-thinking patron who wrestled the gun away from him...

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...affle-house-s/

--

Maryland Students Miss the Point: On Thursday morning, a curious scene emerged on Pennsylvania Avenue: Between the throngs of tourists snapping photos of the Washington Monument and commuters rushing to work, high school students pushed their way toward the White House. At 9 a.m., hundreds of teenagers from the District and suburban Maryland and Northern Virginia left their classrooms and headed to the U.S. Capitol to protest gun violence [sic]... The focus of Thursday’s demonstration was federal legislation requiring universal background checks for firearm sales that awaits a vote in the Senate, following House approval... “We are here today because we have to be, because we have been failed by every institution that didn’t protect us,” Dani Miller, co-president of the Maryland group MoCo Students for Change, told the crowd. Miller’s group organized Thursday’s demonstration... (Almost ever rapid mass murder in recent history cleared a background check to purchase firearms, with a few stealing them from a relative who had. And, with Maryland having some of the most severe infringement in the nation, Baltimore leads the nation's large cities in criminal homicides, most of which involve firearms.)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...439_story.html

--

Advancing in New Mexico: The Legislature has passed a gun control bill aimed at ensuring that people under protective orders for domestic violence relinquish their firearms. A 38-31 vote of the House on Thursday sent the measure to New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham for likely approval.Federal law already prohibits gun possession and purchases for people subject to a protective order in some instances and bans ownership for convicted abusers. The bill passed by legislators was designed to create clear procedures for people to give up their weapons or have them taken away. Repeated revisions to the bill by lawmakers added a required “credible threat” finding by a court before a gun must be surrendered. A similar initiative [sic] was vetoed in 2017 by Republican Gov. Susana Martinez. (Again, what is to stop a person disarmed by such a measure from acquiring another firearm illegally or turning to alternative weaponry?)

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...rnor-in-new-m/

--

Brewing in Oregon: Senate Bill 801 has been scheduled for a hearing on March 27th at 1PM in Hearing Room B in the Capitol. The Senate Committee on Education is hearing the bill. The bill allows (but does not require) public and private schools to have a 30 minute class on firearm safety and accident prevention for first graders. The class must be taught by a teacher, administrator, law enforcement agent or “first responder.” None of these people are required to be firearms instructors. “First responder” is not defined in the bill... it does not have a prepared curriculum so this is left up to whoever is teaching the class. While supportive of safety training for children, we believe that people who teach firearms safety should have a background in teaching firearms safety. There are probably not a lot of first grade teachers with this kind of training. This bill has enormous potential and the people behind it are dedicated to keeping kids safe, but it needs some work. We [Oregon Firearms Foundation] look forward to amendments to make this well intentioned bill truly effective. (It's unclear which side of the aisle generated this bill bit it looks as though someone intended for the curriculum to include some version of NRA's simplistic Eddie Eagle program.)

https://www.oregonfirearms.org/gun-s...ed-for-hearing

Meanwhile: Two sets of parents have filed suit against Portland Public Schools in federal court, accusing officials of violating their children’s civil rights by helping facilitate protests advocating gun control after the shooting in Parkland, Florida last year. The Oregonian/OregonLive reports the suit, filed by lawyer and Multnomah County Republican Party Chairman James Buchal on Wednesday, represents two Portland couples on behalf of their three children. The parents are suing to recoup attorney fees and more than $8,500 one says he paid Portland schools for records related to a student walkout and last year’s March For Our Lives. They want a judge to declare the district’s alleged support for those events as a violation of the First Amendment...

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...ated-our-civi/