Skip to comments.
Court Refuses To Block Lawsuit Against Gun Manufacturers
nbc30.com ^
| October 3, 2005
| NA
Posted on 10/04/2005 11:41:23 AM PDT by neverdem
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-64 next last
1
posted on
10/04/2005 11:41:26 AM PDT
by
neverdem
To: neverdem
"a D.C. law that says gun manufacturers can be held accountable for violence from assault weapons."
What does it matter whether the gun you're shot with is an assault weapon, or a simple .45 revolver?
2
posted on
10/04/2005 11:45:12 AM PDT
by
Brilliant
To: neverdem
Yet, despite these kind of outrageous rulings, we still can't get open originalists appointed to the court.
Sooner or later, it's the Republican party that is going to have to be pinned with blame for the actions of the courts since it refuses to change the direction of it.
To: Grannyx4; TapTap
4
posted on
10/04/2005 11:46:31 AM PDT
by
LongElegantLegs
(also enjoy the occasional kick of a puppy.)
To: neverdem
If gun makers are responsible for who their products are aimed at,why aren't baseball bat makers,auto makers or knife manufacturers responsible for who their products are "aimed" at?
To: Gay State Conservative
Better yet, how about auto manufacturers being sued for injuries by drunk drivers. That would be a better case.
6
posted on
10/04/2005 11:48:53 AM PDT
by
BobCNY
To: neverdem
The Senate voted in July to shield firearms manufacturers, dealers and importers from lawsuits brought by victims of gun crimes. Action is pending in the House. I wonder what else is in the senate version if the normally pro-gun GOP House hasn't passed it.
7
posted on
10/04/2005 11:49:27 AM PDT
by
1Old Pro
To: Gay State Conservative
Start prosecuting bars and alcoholic drink manufacturers and DWI and DWI deaths will go down. Same stupid logic. Nobody accepting responsibility.
To: neverdem
This is going to be VERY bad - there is nothing now between a HUGE DC jury award. Can you imagine what the DC jury award is going to be?
9
posted on
10/04/2005 11:49:42 AM PDT
by
Fido969
("And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).)
To: neverdem
"No due process issue is raised by legislation that seeks to redress injuries suffered by district residents and visitors resulting from the manufacture and distribution of a particular class of firearms whose lethal nature far outweighs their utility," Judge Michael Farrell wrote.
I always thought that their utility arose from their "lethal nature". Love my Bushmaster.
10
posted on
10/04/2005 11:50:05 AM PDT
by
SJSAMPLE
To: neverdem
11
posted on
10/04/2005 11:50:13 AM PDT
by
dts32041
( Robin Hood, stealing from the government and giving back to tax payer. Where is he today?)
To: neverdem
No car accidents without car makers
lawyers will really hit the deep pockets.
If only cars had safety features that prevented speeding, recognized red lights and stop signs, and automatically prevented driving with faulty equipment and alcoholic drivers they would be safe. A big lawyer wealth distribution scheme is on the way. - remember lawyers always fight until your last dollar.
To: neverdem
If gun manufacturers can be held liable for misuse of their legally manufactured and sold products, then the same is true of car manufacturers. Every law broken by a driver is the fault of the car company that manufactured the car. You can't cherry pick manufacturer liability.
This is a poor start of the new session of the Supreme Court.
13
posted on
10/04/2005 11:54:26 AM PDT
by
Myrddin
To: neverdem
This article is written to upset conservatives.
The Court did not DECIDE anything other than not to hear this case.
Sad as it is, the Supreme court cannot hear all the cases presented to it.
14
posted on
10/04/2005 11:55:22 AM PDT
by
msnimje
(Hurricane KATRINA - An Example of Nature's Enforcement of Eminent Domain)
To: dts32041
I think a better case to be made is when considering "No new taxes" and leaving Iraq with Saddam in power.
15
posted on
10/04/2005 11:56:59 AM PDT
by
TheDon
(The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON!)
To: 1Old Pro
As I understand it, several "poison pill" amendments have been tacked on, including a functional ban on centerfire rifle ammunition.
16
posted on
10/04/2005 11:58:16 AM PDT
by
jonascord
(What is better than the wind at 6 O'clock on the 600 yard line?)
To: Gay State Conservative
Add to the list: cement blocks, guitar strings, good sewing scissors, kitchen knives, leatherman tools, exacto knives, and large rocks from the garden. And oh, socks filled with quarters. Nun chucks. Oak tree branches. We should all just have our arms pinned down at all times and no harm will occur.
17
posted on
10/04/2005 11:59:20 AM PDT
by
little jeremiah
(A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, are incompatible with freedom. P. Henry)
To: msnimje; neverdem
The Court did not DECIDE anything other than not to hear this case. SCOTUS is just letting the trial take place. It is not precluding any appeals that might be generated after the case is heard.
18
posted on
10/04/2005 11:59:21 AM PDT
by
Paleo Conservative
(France is an example of retrograde chordate evolution.)
To: msnimje
The Court did not DECIDE anything other than not to hear this case. It's not the most informative article.
19
posted on
10/04/2005 12:00:21 PM PDT
by
TheDon
(The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON!)
To: neverdem
SCOTUS is irrelevant.
They have Prostituted themselves to the world and it is time that they be eliminated as a Part of Government.
3 monkeys with a dart board and a handful of darts could make better decision.
20
posted on
10/04/2005 12:01:08 PM PDT
by
Leatherneck_MT
(3-7-77 (No that's not a Date))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-64 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson