JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
What's the f'ing difference??????
Bullets (therefore firearms,) from inception, were designed to incapacitate.
Cars, from inception, were designed to replace the horse.

I dislike using the logic that, if something else can kill and often does, why cant we sue the manufacture then if someone is going to sue the firearms industry.

Lets just stick to the the fact that these are not military weapons. They may look like a military weapon; but we all know a Miata is not a Lotus. o_O
 
another leftist president and we will be finished as far as having any freedoms or gun rights.
But Republicans have more seats then ever. In the past three elections, Republicans have gained 913 state legislative seats.

Don't forget; the President needs a reminder as well. It is not the authority of the Presidents office to create law. That job belongs to the legislative branch.

Bernies NRA D- is an upgrade from the F he used to receive. Hilary likes to bash Bernie for being soft on gun control. I see Hilary as a far greater threat than Bernie, thats all I am saying.
 
k, here's the scary part,
Let's say it makes it on an appeal to the 9th district court.
They would more than likely stand with the plaintiffs given their penchant for stupidity.
Then it gets sent the the Supreme Court to uphold or deny,, bare with me now as this is where a decision from a lower gets down right dicey at this time,,
The Supreme Court is at this time evenly divided ,conservative/liberal.
In a split even divide which ends
In no decision, the lower courts decision stands.
Think about that one for a few minutes.

THIS:eek:
This could indeed set the stage yet again if the SC heard the case.
 
Bullets (therefore firearms,) from inception, were designed to incapacitate.
Cars, from inception, were designed to replace the horse.

I dislike using the logic that, if something else can kill and often does, why cant we sue the manufacture then if someone is going to sue the firearms industry.

Lets just stick to the the fact that these are not military weapons. They may look like a military weapon; but we all know a Miata is not a Lotus. o_O

I don't know, I think the whole point of the Second Amendment is for civilians to have military weapons.
 
Connecticut is in the 2nd District so that'd be weird or read, impossible, for an appeal from there to wind up here.

Thank you! You are correct. My mind went straight to the worst case senerio. But it could still happen in Connecticut as well, correct me if I'm wrong here Doc.
I find myself very apprehensive regarding the makeup of the SC at this time and any decisions they may address.
 
Ok, here's the scary part,
Let's say it makes it on an appeal to the 9th district court.
They would more than likely stand with the plaintiffs given their penchant for stupidity.
Then it gets sent the the Supreme Court to uphold or deny,, bare with me now as this is where a decision from a lower gets down right dicey at this time,,
The Supreme Court is at this time evenly divided ,conservative/liberal.
In a split even divide which ends
In no decision, the lower courts decision stands.
Think about that one for a few minutes.

Well it won't get sent to the 9th because it was filed in the 2nd. Even if it does go to the SC and gets a split court that means it applies only in the 2nd district. I doubt it will go that far.
 
Maybe the cell phones manufacturer needs to be used for causing all those texting and distracted driving accidents? There are just too many people who have too much time on their hands.
 
Yes Goose, I got that from docs correction, and appreciate it BUT,
Once the 2nd allows it to stand (if indeed they do) and the SC is a tied scenario, how long do you suppose it would take for any and all anti gun groups to smell blood and start a wave of lawsuits?

The Second Circus will push the anti's agenda, they are just as bad as the Ninth; they're the ones who said the NY "SAFE Act" and the gun control scheme in CT was constitutional. This may not bode well for us.


Ray
 
Once again, look at what the judge ruled. She didn't say that PLCAA does nor apply to this case. She ruled that it didn't apply to the motion the defendants filed, which was for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

I wouldn't be surprised that this was a tactic to run up attorneys fees that plaintiffs have to pay their own attorneys and may wind up also paying for defendant's attorneys.
 
This is a dog and pony show. It's just another thing to spread the word that guns are evil and keep bad things about guns in the news and in people's heads so when they do start passing junk control laws they will have the public opinion on their side.

I can hear Hillary now, see gun manufacturers won't take responsibility for their death machines we have to pass more laws!

While she's surrounded by men with guns.
 
Are they going to sue the bullet manufacturer too?
I mean, come on, it was the bullets that killed them, not the gun.

Or maybe that should be the arguement for the defense.

The mining company that pulled the aluminum ore from the earth?
The metals company that created the blanks?
What about the employee that put the weapon together on the manufacturing line?
The UPS driver who delivered the gun to the gun store?
The store that sold the gun? The sales associate that sold it?

Sue all of them? :mad:
 
You're absolutely right; apologies for the misinformation. I knew she had sued Porsche, but didn't know the award was from Roger Rodas.
Hey it's all good. I only knew that because one day I was really REALLY bored and read almost all of the news stories on my phone. I think it's because they claimed a defect in the automobile and there wasn't one, or it was they sued because of the lack of training and education before purchase.

Either way, the stupid logic applies to firearms as well.

It's the driver, not the alcohol. It's the person not the gun. The inanimate object is just that inanimate.
 
Ok, here's the scary part,
Let's say it makes it on an appeal to the 9th district court.
They would more than likely stand with the plaintiffs given their penchant for stupidity.
Then it gets sent the the Supreme Court to uphold or deny,, bare with me now as this is where a decision from a lower gets down right dicey at this time,,
The Supreme Court is at this time evenly divided ,conservative/liberal.
In a split even divide which ends
In no decision, the lower courts decision stands.
Think about that one for a few minutes.

It's a clear case of trying to put gun manufacturers out of business. The antis are not even trying to disguise their plan for disarmament. Hey, let's go after Boeing for all airplane crashes, how about Samsung for people killed by Galaxie texters..... and yes my high school driver's ed teacher because I got into a fender bender hot rodding!

Brutus Out
 
Again, this is why we can not have hillary or Berny become president. Crap like this will always pop up but only goes anywhere due to corrupt, idealogs who wish to push an agenda elected, or appointed as judges.

another leftist president and we will be finished as far as having any freedoms or gun rights.
I know you are being serious but please don't believe either of them actually care. They are just singing the song their choir wants to hear.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top