On Oct. 9th, the U.S. District Court (Southern District of Ohio) ruled against Primus Group, LLC in their case against several AR-15 gun manufacturers. The court stated the plaintiffs had "no standing" to bring the case to them and dismissed it. The group filed the case shortly after the El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio shootings.Primus Group claimed weapons manufacturers like Smith & Wesson, Remington, SIG Sauer, Ruger and Colt (to name a few on the defendant list), misrepresent their product intentionally. They also claimed the companies were involved in racketeering and the rifle in question posed a threat to American lives. The legal proceedings document states Primus Group is an "entertainment venue."The manufacturers rebutted the initial complaint, stating the Group did not have a direct complaint for themselves, but attempting to represent the American people as a whole, which essentially means this case violated the 5th amendment. Primus then amended their statement saying the manufacturers' "failure to warn," negligent designs of their products, etc. They went on to state in their argument that because a mass-shooting 'could' happen at their establishment, they have "suffered injuries."Lastly, the Primus Group also stated the various manufacturers continue to manufacture weapons knowing the American public does not properly secure them, mass-shootings can happen before law enforcement can intervene, as well as saying they can build the weapons in a manner that would not allow high-capacity magazines.The defendants came back stating the Group did not provide actual, particular incidents of events that happened to them, instead they utilized generalizations, which may or may not actually happen. The manufacturers also stated banning weapons needs to take place at the legislature level and not in a local court room.Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the weapons manufacturers because the business entity did not have any actual injuries related to the mass shootings, nor could the provide substantial evidence of the fact the were losing business due to solely the sale of the rifles.The bottom line is, if you are going to attempt to present a legal court case, especially one of this degree- do your research and have a valid reason to present your argument. "Guns are bad" is not a valid argument. It just is not, especially if you are an "entertainment" business that has no connection to actual events that took place.This is basically hearing about a neighbor three streets over get shot and saying 'I think I heard the gunshot and I might have hearing damage, but I can't prove any of it.'Mass shootings are horrible events and the people involved should be held responsible to the full extent of the law, but please do not utilize them as a legal argument for your business if you had nothing to do with the people, location or weapons involved.Also, you can read the court document we found, here, to read the full case.