The family of a victim and several survivors of the 2021 mass shooting at a FedEx facility in Indianapolis have initiated a federal lawsuit against companies that manufactured, marketed, and sold the high-capacity magazine used by the shooter. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, targets a gun distributor and multiple magazine manufacturers, alleging that these companies irresponsibly marketed and sold their products to young men who may be prone to violence.
The tragic incident occurred on April 15, 2021, when 19-year-old Brandon Hole, who had previously worked at the FedEx facility, opened fire on his former coworkers, resulting in the deaths of eight individuals and injuries to several others before taking his own life. Reports indicate that Hole had shown concerning behavior prior to the shooting, including browsing white supremacist websites and making threatening statements, which prompted his mother to contact law enforcement a year earlier.
The lawsuit represents the estate of Jaswinder Singh, who was killed in the shooting, as well as survivors Harpreet Singh and his wife Dilpreet Kaur, and Lakhwinder Kaur, who were injured. Each plaintiff is seeking a minimum of $75,000 in damages and has requested a jury trial. The defendants named in the suit include American Tactical Inc., a firearms importer and manufacturer, along with its president and director of marketing, as well as Schmeisser GmbH, a German firearms manufacturer, and 365 Plus d.o.o., a Slovenian company that produces firearms accessories.
According to the lawsuit, these companies were responsible for the manufacturing and sale of the 60-round high-capacity magazines that have been involved in numerous mass shootings over the years. The plaintiffs argue that the marketing strategies employed by these companies targeted impulsive young men, creating a dangerous consumer base. The complaint highlights the claim that the availability of such high-capacity magazines emboldened Hole, allowing him to fire continuously without the need to reload during the attack.
The lawsuit further alleges that American Tactical engaged in marketing practices that irresponsibly showcased the use of tactical gear and firearms in promotional videos, potentially appealing to individuals with militaristic fantasies. The complaint emphasizes the need for companies to implement reasonable safeguards when distributing such lethal products to the public.
While American Tactical declined to comment on the lawsuit, legal representatives for the other defendants have not yet responded to requests for statements. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which is assisting the plaintiffs, expressed its commitment to seeking justice for the victims and holding the responsible companies accountable for their marketing and sales practices.
The case underscores a broader conversation about gun violence in the United States and the responsibilities of firearm manufacturers in ensuring their products do not end up in the hands of individuals who may use them for harm. As the lawsuit unfolds, it could have significant implications for the gun industry and its marketing practices.