Your good news of the day: #2A victory: Bushmaster granted immunity in Sandy Hook case

This afternoon, a judge issued a ruling in a lawsuit that arose out of the Sandy Hook crime , Soto v. Bushmaster, that held the defendants were entitled to immunity from the suit.

The defendants in the case originally asked the court to dismiss the complaint under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which was enacted in 2005 to prohibit frivolous suits against firearm makers for criminal acts committed with their products by unaffiliated third parties. 

In April, the court in the Soto case issued a highly technical ruling that found the defendants had filed the wrong type of motion to invoke the protections of the PLCAA. The court at that time expressed no opinion on the merits of either the complaint or the defenses.

The defendants renewed their claim of immunity under the PLCAA, this time by filing “motions to strike” the plaintiffs’ claims.

Here is the relevant language from the case under the PLCAA that the judge used:

Congress, through the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act … has broadly prohibited lawsuits “against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms … for the harm solely caused by the criminal or unlawful use of firearm products … by others when the produced functioned as designed and intended.” … The present case seeks damages for harms … that were caused solely by the criminal misuse of a weapon by [the perpetrator of the Newtown slayings]. Accordingly, this action falls squarely within the broad immunity provided by the PLCAA.

Note that Hillary has already suggested that if elected, she would issue an executive order - essentially an act of wrongful and unconstitutional legislation from the executive - that gun manufacturers would be liable for the acts of people who acquire their products.  Another reason that Trump, for all his legion of faults and stupidities, would do a better job as president than she would.