The gun company is arguing that the Connecticut Supreme Court erred in allowing a suit to proceed against it on the grounds that it marketed its Bushmaster rifle used in the killing of 26 as a weapon of war for use by civilians in combat-style missions. The state court threw out most of the grounds on which plaintiffs sued Remington based on the Lawful Commerce in Arms protections that have been in place since 2005, but it allowed the marketing claim to stand. Remington is arguing that the state court interpreted a part of the statute that allows for exceptions ... Log in to view full article.