In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
BLOOMBERG GUN LAWSUIT GETS THROWN OUT
RODAN
Member Posts: 13 ✭✭
It has been nine years in the making, but an end has finally come to a whole lot of stupidity and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City is not happy.
Last Tuesday the U.S. Supreme Court denied a review of his request to continue a lawsuit that sought to hold firearms manufacturers responsible for the criminal misuse of firearms. That decision effectively ends his attempt to bankrupt lawful arms makers with frivolous lawsuits.
The high court actually dismissed all similar lawsuits pending anywhere in the country. The decision was based on the legitimacy of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which was specifically designed by Congress to protect the arms companies from these silly suits.
Silly suits? Yes, all of them were. It was like New York suing Chrysler because someone drove a Dodge truck and had an accident while they were drunk. If attempting to hold the maker of any lawful product liable for what someone else did with that product is not silly, then I do not know what might qualify. On March 10 common sense and fairness again prevailed in the Supreme Court.
Len Lisenbee is a Daily Messenger outdoors columnist. Contact him with questions or comments at lisenbee@frontiernet.net.
Last Tuesday the U.S. Supreme Court denied a review of his request to continue a lawsuit that sought to hold firearms manufacturers responsible for the criminal misuse of firearms. That decision effectively ends his attempt to bankrupt lawful arms makers with frivolous lawsuits.
The high court actually dismissed all similar lawsuits pending anywhere in the country. The decision was based on the legitimacy of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which was specifically designed by Congress to protect the arms companies from these silly suits.
Silly suits? Yes, all of them were. It was like New York suing Chrysler because someone drove a Dodge truck and had an accident while they were drunk. If attempting to hold the maker of any lawful product liable for what someone else did with that product is not silly, then I do not know what might qualify. On March 10 common sense and fairness again prevailed in the Supreme Court.
Len Lisenbee is a Daily Messenger outdoors columnist. Contact him with questions or comments at lisenbee@frontiernet.net.