I find it a hard sell for me to believe a gun manufacturer can be held liable for the actions of people who use the product. As usual, the weapon used is intentionally mislabeled in order to confuse the ignorant. According to plaintiffs attorney, discovery is needed in order to find out how this "military" weapon got into civilian hands. If this is to be believed, then perhaps the military needs more stringent regulations to prevent that from happening.
If this suit is upheld, then every manufacturer of every product used in conjunction with the commission of a crime must be held liable for that use. It's just not fair to single out certain products because some people don't like them.
https://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-news-sandy-hook-gun-ruling-20190314-pwcw3qncazb7zkitbbkocmplka-story.html
If this suit is upheld, then every manufacturer of every product used in conjunction with the commission of a crime must be held liable for that use. It's just not fair to single out certain products because some people don't like them.
https://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-news-sandy-hook-gun-ruling-20190314-pwcw3qncazb7zkitbbkocmplka-story.html