$30,000 to make up 400 pages of lies? Nice work if you can get it!
However, most lies are constitutionally protected speech, and the way to defeat them is to refute them, not litigate them.
Also, I don't know where you live, but if you live in a state w/o a Conceal Carry, contact me and I will put you in touch with people who are looking to get CCW in whichever state you are in. I am working Illinois very diligently, having come from a state with (theoretically) worse gun control laws -- New York -- that let me have my CCW.
Hang on a tick: Isn't this the a-hole who is being roundly censured by his peers as an academic fraud and outright liar???
And they are giving him MORE money???
WTF!!!
What is this "former boss" business? What happened between you and David?
How could a person, with enough brain power to keep their heart beating, possibly feel "comfortable with the quality" of Bellesiles's previous work? The man's a proven Agenda Liar. There's no two ways about it.
OH! It's because Grossman is in on the Anti-Gun Agenda.....how stupid of me not to realize that.
This situation is exactly the same as saying "We know Bellesiles raped and murdered a child but, we are comfortable with him being our babysitter."
Who would sue whom? And under what theory?
They understood that one can destroy individuals and orginizations by bankrupting them via legal means--whether or not you prevail in court.
I have also said I'd join a class-action lawsuit against the usual suspects in a heartbeat.
Are there no pro-Second-Amendment lawyers who will take the case pro bono?
--Boris
Surprisingly, I found your book at the 86th St. Barnes and Hovel on the Upper East Side. I was shocked they even stocked it since it wasn't the standard liberal schlock. (Even though they had just one copy and I got it.) The true story about the massacre of the naked kids in the snow (Chicago area, I think) gave me nightmares, as well as the one about the kids in California who couldn't protect themselves against their psycho neighbor because of inane and meddling storage laws. I applied for a gun permit in December (I live in anti-gun NJ) and will feel better once I finally get it and have it readily accessible. Thanks so much for your incredible work on this book, and your continued efforts.
What about "no-questions-asked" so-called "gun buybacks"? I understand no paperwork is prepared and yet a handgun or rifle is transferred from one owner to another. Does it matter that the transfer is to a city or police dept.? Do police depts have to complete paperwork on weapons purchased through distributors?
I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that anyone and everyone involved in no-questions-asked "gun buybacks" is committing a federal crime (a felony?). What would it take to "scare" police into thinking twice about this practice?
--Boris
I like the idea of taking the offensive with counter-suits and agressive reaction suits. In the past we have assumed that common sense would prevail only to learn that the liberal media had contaminated the jury pool, liberal judges had permiated the judiciary, and welfare-accustomed jurors willing gave away billions of dollars to underserving claimants, with a large portion of it going to the lawyers and then the politicians. Common sense is a rarity, making an agressive counter offensive a desirable move.
As far as Bellesiles is concerned, common sense would again disprove his premise on its face. When you consider that this country before the Civil War, and even after it, was basically frontier peopled by pioneers who fed themselves from the bounty of wildlife as well as the crops they grew, who faced hostile Indians unfriendly to the encrouchment into their world, where the population was widespread and lawmen were few, it is rediculous to propose that few of them had guns. Does he think they outran the deer, wrestled the bears, choked the buffalo, threw sticks at the wolves, or any other outrageous-to-assume methods? Is he not aware that a lively trade of selling guns to the Indians existed? In the Civil War does he think all firearms were government issued? It was not necessary, especially in the South, because almost everyone had their own firearms.
His argument is bogus but no more so than the reasons for banning asbestos, smoking, DDT, CFCs, the internal combustion engine, etc. All are part of a plan to destroy America and all demcoracies (I know, we aren't), with America and Israel in the crosshairs at the moment. Fight them hard and get in their faces. They are liars! Sue their asses off.
Stay Safe !
Really? I wonder what kinds of gun regulations there were in 1602 in "America"?
Maybe I read this wrong. I bet they are paying him $30,000 to study gun regulations for the next 400 years.
The ACLU has already provided us with the model for a lawsuit. There was a civil lawsuit against the KKK members who had created an 'atmosphere resulting' in the deaths of individuals by racists.
The murderers were not even members of the KKK if memory serves, but were familiar with their racist literature.
Clearly a civl liability case could be made against those promoting gun control in a given state by those who have sufferred from a robbery, rape, or the murder of a loved one. After all there is clear statistical evidence that a given number of robberies, rape, or murders would not occur if gun control were not existent in those states.
A class action civil lawsuit for all those who had been robbed, raped, or had a loved one murdered should be made. Those who work to keep the populace unarmed should bear direct responsibility for their disgusting actions that impact the well being of their fellow citizens in such a negative manner.
Sue them. Sue them into bankruptcy. No organization should be able to effectively promote crimes of aggression against the citizenry of this country and get away scott free.
RileyD, nwJ
Some of us suggested lawsuits against HCI, and various municipalities, etc a couple years ago. I'm for it. Make those a-holes pay costs and think twice about using the courts in that manner.