This is setting a really bad precedent, Remington Arms didn?t do anything wrong. It?s like suing Craftsman for misuse of one of their hammers
The thing to know here is that the main part of the lawsuit was thrown out years ago. They weren't sued for making dangerous weapons. Apparently however, Remington violated a state of Connecticut law banning deceptive marketing. This is being run in the media as a major win for anti gunners but it's really not. This case was about marketing/advertising violations. The rest of the gun companies will now shift their marketing strategies to only hunting and self defense. Perhaps this will put an end to the "tacticool" military wannabe advertising.
Link to AP News article about the shooting:
https://apnews.com/article/sandy-hook-school-shooting-remington-settlement-e53b95d398ee9b838afc06275a4df403
As a father of six, I can't imagine the emotional toll loosing a child in such a tragic way must torture your soul. While I think this lawsuit was ill-conceived, and will have no meaningful impact on the quality of our society, if it brings those families some peace I guess I can't really begrudge them their settlement. Insurance is to help us deal with unexpected and tragic events and hopefully this insurance settlement will provide that help to these families.