Boston.com reports a judge has accepted the latest case filed against the company that made the AR-15 pattern rifle used in the Sandy Hook School massacre.
The maker, now sold out to Remington, last had control of that gun when they shipped to a distributor. The distributor last had control when they sold it to a dealer. The dealer last had control of who had control of the AR015 clone when he sold it to Nancy Lanza, o serving every point of the law. Nancy Lanza lat had control of the gun when she locked it up, before her son murdered her to gain possession of the gun.
So we have at least three points of separation between the gun maker and the thief who used it to carry out a murderous attack on small children. An attack Newtown Police had been aware of for years.
The situation is precisely similar to a cr maker building a car and selling it to a major car rental, who in turn sells it to a used car dealer, who sells it to a respectable citizen, given the first three points of separation between the maker and the legal owner. Then th ecar is stolen, and used to plow into a group of people in a terrorist attack for a fourth point of separation between maker and the final user.
In either case, the gunmaker, Bushmaster, or the car maker have no control whatsoever over who uses a thief made of a lawful product they made.
Bloomberg has been through several courts in his search for a sympathetic judge, and has apparently found one. I expect an adverse verdict and an appeal to the Supreme Court.