Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: IbJensen

Should be noted (as always) that the company that owns the patent on this technology is the primary customer of the law firm that authored the legislation in the States.

What better way to sell a product that nobody wants by passing a law requiring that product.

Can you say conflict of interest? I knew you could.


5 posted on 04/20/2009 2:37:01 PM PDT by Domandred (Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Domandred
This is a case of a company inventing a technology that nobody wants and trying to force adoption using political cronies. It's every bit as stupid as "microstamping" cartridges with chambers and firing pins. That's another loser. Ditto for "ballistic databases". All are failed technologies. All are easily defeated. They do nothing except drive up the cost of firearms and ammunition.
14 posted on 04/20/2009 2:43:50 PM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Domandred

What better way to sell a product that nobody wants by passing a law requiring that product.

Can you say conflict of interest? I knew you could....

Here in Texas, people do not need helmets to ride motorcycles.

Legislation was passed at the urging of the bicycle helmet mfg. So you need one for a bike but not for a Motorcycle.


15 posted on 04/20/2009 2:45:34 PM PDT by Hang'emAll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Domandred
Should be noted (as always) that the company that owns the patent on this technology is the primary customer of the law firm that authored the legislation in the States. What better way to sell a product that nobody wants by passing a law requiring that product. Can you say conflict of interest?

I can say it three times:

Conflict of Interest.
Conflict of Interest.
Conflict of Interest.

I figure the horrible truth deserves to be repeated.

24 posted on 04/20/2009 2:52:58 PM PDT by TheThinker (Obama giggles at America's problems.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Domandred
"Should be noted (as always) that the company that owns the patent on this technology is the primary customer of the law firm that authored the legislation in the States... What better way to sell a product that nobody wants by passing a law requiring that product."

That is a bvasic tenet of mine. Since lawyers are technically officers of the court, they belong to the judicial branch of government, and their participation in the legislative or executive branches (other than as staff counsel) is at it's very core, a conflict of interest.

39 posted on 04/20/2009 3:13:10 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson