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.
Then explain if the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with militias, just why does the first part of it go, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..." So what's the matter? Were the writers of the U. S. Constitution just too liberal for you?
uhm
most of the writers of the constitution were actually conservative
Quote:
When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. – Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), US Founding Father, drafted the Declaration of Independence, 3rd US President of the United States
Quote:
""""That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and their own state, or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game; and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals ..."""-- James Madison
The justices' action allows a lawsuit filed by parents of Sandy Hook Elementary School victims to move forward at the state level, on the allegation that Remington Arms marketed the military-style rifle used in the mass shooting "for use in assaults against human beings."
Sounds like the Sandy Hook case is a done deal. All the plaintiffs have to do now, is produce copies of the ads where the gun manufacturer said "Just think of how many people you can kill with our guns! Now, don't you want to go out and buy one?"
How long do you think it will take for them to dig up those ads?
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court refused Tuesday to shield a major arms manufacturer from potential liability in the 2012 school shooting that left 26 students and educators dead in Newtown, Conn.
The justices' action allows a lawsuit filed by parents of Sandy Hook Elementary School victims to move forward at the state level, on the allegation that Remington Arms marketed the military-style rifle used in the mass shooting "for use in assaults against human beings."
The case tests the reach of a 2005 law passed by Congress to protect firearms manufacturers from being held liable for crimes committed by gun purchasers. That law was hailed by the National Rifle Association, but it included exceptions, including one for violating rules related to marketing and
I guess we will just have to buy imported guns now. Sig, H&K, and Beretta make great weapons.
It's kind of like when the trial lawyer's association drove all the vaccine manufacturers out the country.
As deep as my dislike for the US weapons industry runs - and that is pretty damn deep - this isn't a proper use of the legal process.
I disagree. No industry has been more pampered than the gun industry. They have refused time and time again to face the issue of gun violence. The Industry through the NRA have stymied efforts to market smart guns or to pass sensible gun control legislation.
Changes in an industry usually come in the US only after lawsuits have been filed and an industry financially hurt. You need to look at the automotive, tobacco, chemical, pharmaceutical, and other industries as well for example. Each one made changes after law suits were filed.
If you are going to market guns in a certain way be prepared to face the consequences.
The Supreme Court decision may or may not mean anything in the long run, but at least it gives some of the families some hope of restitution from these negligent manufacturers.
what did Remington have to do with the shooting???..... especially when the sicko's mother is the one who bought the weapons legally (and was the first killed)
I guess that will be determined in court, won't it?
The justices' action allows a lawsuit filed by parents of Sandy Hook Elementary School victims to move forward at the state level, on the allegation that Remington Arms marketed the military-style rifle used in the mass shooting "for use in assaults against human beings."
Sounds like the Sandy Hook case is a done deal. All the plaintiffs have to do now, is produce copies of the ads where the gun manufacturer said "Just think of how many people you can kill with our guns! Now, don't you want to go out and buy one?"
How long do you think it will take for them to dig up those ads?
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.
