The lawsuit seeks changes to the changes companies’ safety standards, with the plaintiffs calling the platforms “defective and unreasonably dangerous.”

  • HelixDab
    link
    fedilink
    11 year ago

    Also listed is Vintage Firearms, the store that sold the shooter the gun, and RMA Armament, the online retailer the shooter used to purchased body armor.

    Assuming that Vintage Firearms and RMA Armament complied with the applicable ATF regulations, I’m not sure how they’re responsible in any way, unless the point is to use lawsuits to bankrupt a legal business for acting in a legal way. It would make as much sense as suing Ford for manufacturing and selling a vehicle that was used to intentionally run over pedestrians. It’s unreasonable to expect that a firearms retailer is going to be able to ascertain the future actions of every single person that purchases a firearm.

      • HelixDab
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        Likely, yes. Which is why the PLCAA was originally passed. While I’m certain that people who believe they are on the political left don’t see why this would be a problem, it’s easy to apply the same principle to any business that someone on the right disagrees with, in order to eliminate business models that social/economic regressives disagree with.