It looks like the case which is being pursued focuses on the marketing of the weapons. Marketing is a powerful, proven effective force often with large financi

It looks like the case which is being pursued focuses on the marketing of the weapons. Marketing is a powerful, proven effective force often with large financial backing, and it's possible that it doesn't always have the end consumer's interests at heart. Based on that it seems reasonable to allow cases like this to be heard, to determine whether the manufacturer could have been more careful to prevent harm, or whether they mislead consumers. I'd personally be more scared of a world in which there was no prospect for the public to hold court hearings about the content of potentially damaging and/or misleading advertising.