It's unlikely a suit against the gun makers or gun show dealers over Sandy Hook could've ever won.
For the record personally, I think gun owners should be liable on deaths caused by their products, but couldn't get my head around supporting the less-progressive candidate to get that).
For any such suit to have prevailed under any possible legal situation, plaintiffs would have to have been able to prove that either the gun manufacturers or the gun shop owners or gun show dealers owners had some way of knowing how the guns they made or sold might be used. The gun makers had no personal contact with the eventual shooter or even with his mother, the actual purchaser of the guns, so there was no way they could have made any judgment about the purchaser. And it would have been nearly impossible for whoever sold the guns to the shooter's mother to guess that her son was capable of stealing the guns they sold and using them to kill innocent children.
We all grieve for what happened at Sandy Hook, for the children lost and the families forever scarred. But even if gun manufacturers and gun show owners could have been sued, a suit would not have been successful and threat of such a suit could never have prevented the sale of the guns to the killer's mother or the nightmarish events of that day.
= new reply since forum marked as read
