Was the gun obtained legally by the shooter? What possible responsibility for damages does the manufacturer bear?

... I should say, this will continue to hurt him and cost him the nomination.

Oh well.

I believe the answer is YES......

of burning bridges, bombing them, then burning them again.

I am about as hardcore liberal on guns as you get (feel free to verify my post history in the subject). I wouldn't give two shits If guns never existed. As much as it breaks my heart about those poor babies that were killed, This is not how you address it. If a person gets drunk and kills someone with their Honda civic, you don't go after Honda.

If you care about guns, work through Congress to make them illegal. Pull them from the shelves. Put the companies out of business. A lawsuit for a product they legally sold in good faith is absurd.

should YOU be able to sue the Ford Motor Co.?
.
.
.
.
.
I don't think so.
Bernie is right on this issue.
Making a manufacturer responsible for the misuse of its products is a non-starter,
but that won't stop the Hillary Screamers.
BTW: Regardless of what Hillary says on the Campaign Trail Hillary will NEVER push for this kind of legislation....EVER.
So it is a non-issue in this election, no matter HOW much the Clinton fans lust for it.

I am a rural gun owner, and support reasonable gun legislation.

political football 4 years after the fact eta the current lawsuit is over the AR-15 model only

The US Government is the single largest purchaser of firearms and ammunition in this country. They literally buy millions of firearms and billions of rounds of ammo every year. It is not in the government's best interest to have their suppliers sued out of business.

Weren't these firearms legally purchased under Connecticut's firearms laws at the time? To me, the State Government would be more responsible/liable than the manufacturer.

Auto manufacturers don't get successfully sued when their vehicle is involved in drunk driving fatalities, Zippo or Bic doesn't get sued when someone commits arson and starts the fire with their product, do the liquor companies get successfully sued when a frat boy overdoses on booze?

The current law isn't going anywhere anyway, not with the Congress.

Not just Bernie, right? In fact, 14 Dems voted in favor. In any event, the notion that a manufacturer should be held liable for the criminal misuse of their product is laughable. Is anyone trying to sue a knife maker because some criminal stabbed another?