Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
On the most significant day of legislative activity on gun control since the high court ended the District's 32-year-old handgun ban in June, the council voted unanimously to ease some contentious firearms restrictions while the U.S. House of Representatives considered a more dramatic measure that would limit the city's power to regulate guns.
Seems the D.C. Council sees the "handwriting on the wall". Appears also that the Congress will get into relaxing the gun control bans next session as well -
The law does. The U.S. Constitution, the various state constitutions, U.S. statutes, and state and local statues establish certain rights.
To repeat:
That's called a tort. That's part of present-day law. Tough break for the perps, I guess. Why would consider a person's exercising his/her rights under the law to be like the act of a criminal? Or were you being facetious? (add a smiley, please)
Have a great day. Please check out the definition of a tort sometime.
No insults thanks I understand tort and tort reform.
So your telling me that you would go after me to gain money if someone unlawfully broke into my home and stole my weapon and used it against you to commit a crime?
By that same thinking you personally pass a law that requires me to lock my gun up....I'm hurt in the commission of a crime because I can't get to my gun....I get to sue the person that passed the law?
If you own an M-16 but don't have it properly secured in your home, then that weapon is stolen and used in a heinous crime, do you mind if I sue your arse off for damages?
very few actually own an M-16 as I stated, you must jump through hoop after hoop to be able to own a fully automatic weapon.
If you own an M-16 but don't have it properly secured in your home, then that weapon is stolen and used in a heinous crime, do you mind if I sue your arse off for damages?
Who defines "properly secured". I have guns all over the place here. If a person steals them it is entirely their responsibility what happens as it is illegal to enter my home without my permission and to steal.
Have a great day. Please check out the definition of a tort sometime.
Anti-gun individuals, groups and governments (such as NYC) wanted to sue manufacturers of firearms used in crimes. That didn't work out too well for them, and Congress made it quite clear it was an unacceptable practice by outlawing such frivolous lawsuits. I wouldn't suggest that the anti-gun people try the same thing on individuals who are victims of theft.
OK, I guess I would have to see you in court then. Let the jury decide. Too bad that the GOP and NRA have established a precedent that gun owners have such a low threshold of responsibility for securing one's own firearms. Gun manufacturers are still being sued for defective gun designs and malfunctions, just as for any other product used by individuals.
"Frivolous lawsuit" is a right-wing code word, you know. It means taking away someone's rights, you know. A judge decides what's frivolous, not the NRA!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
