Family of Sandy Hook victims call on Bass Pro Shops to stop selling assault rifles

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

Credit: Google

NEWTOWN — The families of nine Sandy Hook victims sent a letter to Bass Pro Shops, calling on the outdoor retailer to stop selling assault rifles.

The letter, sent Thursday, was sent to John L. Morris, the CEO and founder of Bass Pro Shops.

In it, the letter states:

“From the shelves of your stores, a would-be mass shooter can select a Bushmaster AR-15 just like the one that robbed our clients of their children; a DPMS AR-15 just like the one turned on holiday revelers in San Bernardino; a Sig Sauer MCX just like the one that gunned down 49 young people at a club in Orlando; Colt AR-15s just like the ones recovered in Las Vegas after the rampage that left 58 concertgoers dead; a Ruger AR-556 just like the one used to slaughter 25 people while they worshipped together in Sutherland Springs; a Smith & Wesson M&P AR-15 just like the one used fifteen days ago to kill and terrorize high schoolers in Parkland; and many, many more. We ask you to confront that fact and grapple with its consequences.”

Morris had said that, at the heart of Bass Pro Shops, is conservation. But, the families of the Sandy Hook victims say that conservation shouldn’t be limited to rivers, streams, and lakes, but to also conserve life and prevent injury, decay, waste, or loss.

The letter states that “while Bass Pro Shops continues to sell the weapons of war that are routinely used to commit mass murder.”

The letter sent on behalf of the families of Daniel Barden, age 7; Dylan Hockley, age 6; Benjamin Wheeler, age 6; Noah Pozner, age 6; Jesse Lewis, age 6; Vicki Soto, age 27; Lauren Rousseau, age 30; Rachel D’Avino, age 29; and Mary Sherlach, age 56.

These same families have also brought a lawsuit against Remington Arms Co., the manufacturer of the weapon used in the Sandy Hook massacre, for marketing a weapon of war like the AR-15 to the civilian population, creating a foreseeable risk of the exact type of violence that claimed the lives of their loved one. That case is currently pending before the Connecticut Supreme Court.


Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.