Judging Freedom - Barring Defects, You Cannot Hold Manufacturers Responsible for Misuse of Products

Episode Date: February 15, 2022

Remington Arms agreed Tuesday to settle liability claims from the families of five adults and four children killed in the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, according to a new court filing, marking the first time a gun manufacturer has been held liable for a mass shooting.    Remington agreed to pay the families $73 million.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Judge Napolitano here on Judging Freedom. Today is Tuesday, February 15, 2022. It's about 325 in the afternoon here on the East Coast. And Remington, or the insurance carriers for Remington, or the bankruptcy estate for Remington, the rifle manufacturer, has just announced a settlement with the survivors of the Sandy Hook tragedy, in which the manufacturer of the weapon used by the crazy person that slaughtered all those beautiful young children will pay $73 million. Sandy Hook was a tragedy of unspeakable magnitude. Unfortunately, we have these tragedies in the United States. There was a similar one at the Marjory Stoneham High School in Florida, and they seem to be popping up year after year. Some crazy kid gets a gun, and he kills other children. I don't diminish the tragedy at all, but I do believe that if

police officers were armed in school, there'd be a lot fewer of these tragedies. The kids would think twice before they bring a gun in school, or there'd be the ability to use force to stop the kid at the time. The same is the case for all these mass shootings. They all end the same way. They end when the killer is killed or when the killer is arrested by people carrying guns. Only guns can stop guns. And guns in the hands of good people, trained people, moral people who believe in the value and dignity of human life is our greatest safeguard against crazies and even against totalitarians in the government. But what is not a safeguard is suing people that are not responsible for the killing. For Remington to be in the case, the Supreme Court of Connecticut had to change the law, which it did. A change so radical that in my view,

it violates the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which guarantees due process. But this case will never see the Supreme Court of the United States because the case has been settled. I mean, for Remington to be made to pay because a crazy person got his hands on a Remington rifle and slaughtered innocents. It's like Mercedes paying because somebody driving a Mercedes-Benz had an accident and killed somebody else. Unless there is a design or manufacturing defect that contributed to the victim's harm, there is no sound legal or moral basis to hold the manufacturer in the case. It's tough for me to say that because I know how these people have suffered. Two of the mothers whose children were slaughtered

write for a Catholic publication that I read every day. Whenever I see their names, I get emotional and I pray for them, for their children and for their broken hearts. But that is no basis to change the law. And if we change the law to make it easier for plaintiffs, even sympathetic plaintiffs, even plaintiffs that are perfectly innocent, even plaintiffs that are as innocent as angels, if we make it easy for plaintiffs to sue and collect from people who had nothing whatsoever to do with the incident that resulted in the tragedy, we will undermine our legal system. Judge Napolitano, judging freedom.