|
Abstract
|
Here's a consumer product being marketed to men, of all ages, and the imagery being used in the advertising is all militaristic, from the choice of the typeface down to the images. . . Now, if you're a disaffected young man. . . who sees violence as an answer to his problems, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to see how that might appeal to a person like that.
On December 14, 2012, a twenty-year-old man with a history of mental illness entered Sandy Hook Elementary School armed with a cache of weapons designed for military combat.2 He clutched an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle in his hands, with two semiautomatic pistols and hundreds of rounds of ammunition clinging to his body.3 The guns and bullets he carried were all legally purchased.4 Within four and a half minutes, the shooter hunted down and murdered twenty first-graders and six staff members in a building dedicated to public education.5 Law enforcement discovered eighty shell casings littered on the floor of a single classroom,6 reflecting both the shooter's mania and the lethality of the weapons he carried.7 Investigations later revealed that the shooter had intentionally chosen high-capacity magazines, leaving less dangerous weapons at home.8 Overall, he fired at least 154 rounds of high-capacity ammunition.9
Gun violence has remained a persistent public health crisis in the United States, with eighty-five gun-related deaths occurring each day.10 The problem has only grown more imminent in the last ten years; between 2014 and 2017, the number of gun-related deaths increased by thirty-two percent.11 By contrast, the rest of the developed world has largely avoided the scourge of gun violence.12 In the wake of the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary, the nation collectively mourned the senseless murder of innocent children. The heinous events captured the attention of the media and public to an unprecedented degree and, to many, felt like a tipping point in the national discourse surrounding guncontrol.13 Nevertheless,intheeightyearssinceSandyHook,theU.S. Congress has failed to pass any laws limiting access to high-capacity assault rifles. Faced with legislative inaction, the families of the Sandy Hook victims have sought relief through the American judicial system, filing suit in Connecticut state court against the manufacturer and seller of the guns used in the shooting. In March of 2019, the Connecticut Supreme Court struck a major blow against the gun industry by denying the defendants' motion to dismiss a claim filed under the state's unfair trade practices law.14
This Comment considers the implications of the Connecticut Supreme Court's recent decision in Soto v. Bushmaster Firearms Int'l, LLC, where the Sandy Hook plaintiffs stunned the legal world and successfully circumvented a federal statute that precludes nearly all civil claims against the gun industry.15 Specifically, this Comment will explore the majority's reasoning in Soto and whether it can serve as a guide for future tort claims against gun sellers and manufacturers. Part II of this Comment provides historical context for the decision in Soto, discussing the statutory landscape for gun-related litigation and prior civil suits against gun manufacturers. Next, Part III analyzes the majority's decision in Soto, emphasizing those areas in which the Connecticut Supreme Court disagreed with the lower courts. Finally, Part IV argues that the use of certain images and themes in gun advertising may provide a cognizable cause of action in other states with robust unfair trade practice laws. This Comment concludes with recommendations for the future of litigation against the gun industry in a post-Soto world....
Language: en |