The negligence and wrongful death lawsuit, filed in Bridgeport Superior Court, asserts that the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle should not have been made publicly available because it was designed for military use and is unsuited for hunting or home defense.
This one should go nowhere.
Unsuited for hunting, home defense, huh? A kid kills his mother with one she owned and bought. The punk never bought the gun. How is Bushmaster liable for that little matter, that they didn't provide (nor did the FFL) the gun to the murderer?
Fail...
There is more than ample precedent for this to dismissed on summary judgment.
Going NOWHERE fast.
I've been looking for a reason to sue Bic for all my misspelled words when I was in school. Now I have it. Also going after my silverware company for making me fat.
Bushmaster did that by choice back then - they didn't have to. Also, that was 12 years ago. A lot has changed since then. I wouldn't be surprised if Bushmaster pushes the issue this time and allows it to go to court.Don't forget, Bushmaster paid up after the DC sniper thing a few years ago. It seems illogical, but I wouldn't be surprised if they had to pay again.
There are six exceptions, including lawsuits brought against a seller for "negligent entrustment," defined in the law as "the supplying of a qualified product by a seller for use by another person when the seller knows, or reasonably should know, the person to whom the product is supplied is likely to, and does, use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury to the person or others."