High Court Rejects Challenge to NRA’s Signature Law

High Court Rejects Challenge to NRA’s Signature Law

This is a discussion on High Court Rejects Challenge to NRA’s Signature Law within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Ken Klukowski : High Court Rejects Challenge to NRA?s Signature Law - Townhall.com In 2005, the National Rifle Association of America enacted a law that ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: High Court Rejects Challenge to NRA’s Signature Law

  1. #1
    Member Array Samwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    South Carolina, First to Secede
    Posts
    208

    Thumbs up High Court Rejects Challenge to NRA’s Signature Law

    Ken Klukowski : High Court Rejects Challenge to NRA?s Signature Law - Townhall.com

    In 2005, the National Rifle Association of America enacted a law that probably saved the American gun-making industry from bankruptcy. And just this last week, the Supreme Court rejected a constitutional challenge to this landmark legislation, ensuring this law stays on the books to preserve America’s culture of lawful firearm ownership.

    For years, opponents of the Second Amendment sought to eliminate gun rights by eliminating guns. Anti-gun groups, working with big-city mayors like Michael Bloomberg of New York City, devised a scheme to rid America of firearms.

    They filed product liability suits, alleging that firearm manufacturers should be held liable for any injury caused by a firearm. And not just a gun made by that particular gun-maker; the suits go after every gun-maker for every gun injury.

    This approach was based on the legal strategy used against Big Tobacco. It’s a liberal theory called market-share liability. Because smokers use cigarettes of different brands, a person who gets lung cancer after twenty years of smoking isn’t sure how much of that cancer is traced to any particular tobacco company.

    So the courts adopted a theory from the infamous Clinton-Reno-Holder Justice Department, saying that every tobacco company should be held liable for whatever percentage of cigarettes they sell in the market. So for example, if Camel accounts for 30% of all cigarettes sold, then Camel is liable for 30% of the damages in any injury lawsuit.

    The gun-grabbers pushed the same theory here. They said that gun makers should be held liable for any injury, and that because it’s often unknown what gun model caused an injury (if the firearm is never recovered), then every gun-maker must pay according to how many guns they sell in this country.

    Holding gun-makers liable for the actions of criminals is absurd. That’s like holding Bic accountable for arsonists, or Buick for drunk-driving crashes, or Craftsman for an assault perpetrated with a hammer.

    A gun is a tool like any of these other items. If properly made and lawfully sold, there should be no liability.

    But these anti-gun fanatics, with the help of the Brady Center, almost succeeded. They brought nationwide suits in the most anti-gun jurisdictions in the nation, and were heading towards a massive judgment what would have driven gun-makers into bankruptcy. Along the way, legal costs for gun makers had already mounted into the hundreds of millions of dollars, putting all those companies on the ropes.

    In response, the NRA made stopping these predatory lawsuits its top legislative priority. Every anti-gun Democrat, to please their trial-lawyer bosses, worked furiously to stop the bill, and succeeded for years.

    But 2002 and 2004 saw historic victories for pro-gun candidates, mostly Republicans. Consequently, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was finally passed and signed into law in 2005 to stop these junk lawsuits.

    Anti-gun forces immediately pressed their court cases, arguing that the new law didn’t apply to current cases, despite the fact that the law was explicitly retroactive to cover all lawsuits. They only found one New York federal judge willing to go along with them, who was promptly reversed on appeal to the Second Circuit.

    The only way left to stop this law from fulfilling its promise to keep America’s firearm heritage alive was to have it struck down as unconstitutional.

    Predictably, that’s exactly what anti-gun forces tried to do next. Alleging one ridiculous theory after another about how this federal law violated the U.S. Constitution, three lawsuits were pushed all the way through the legal system to the U.S. Supreme Court. In March of 2009, the Court refused to grant certiorari to review Lawson v. Beretta and City of New York v. Beretta (the latter being the pet-project of the rabidly anti-gun Mike Bloomberg).

    And last week on Dec. 14, the Supreme Court rejected what will hopefully be the last such ridiculous suit, Adames v. Beretta.

    The right to bear arms is essential to liberty itself. It’s an insurance policy, enshrined in the Second Amendment of our Constitution to make sure America would always remain the Land of the Free.

    For 138 years, the National Rifle Association has fought to protect this right for future generations. This 2005 tort-reform law is one of the NRA’s greatest achievements in protecting our Second Amendment rights.

    They’re doubtless celebrating this victory at NRA headquarters, as well they should. And it’s welcome news for all of us who are among America’s 90 million gun owners.

    Merry Christmas, firearm owners. Don’t forget to thank the NRA for this long-awaited Christmas present.
    Samwolf

    "One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms."

    -- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, 1840


  2. #2
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    45,074
    In 2005, the National Rifle Association of America enacted a law...

    Mmmmmm......am I reading this correctly?

    While thrilled at the outcome, I doubt that the NRA enacted any laws...am I correct?
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  3. #3
    Member Array Samwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    South Carolina, First to Secede
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by retsupt99 View Post
    In 2005, the National Rifle Association of America enacted a law...

    Mmmmmm......am I reading this correctly?

    While thrilled at the outcome, I doubt that the NRA enacted any laws...am I correct?
    Reporters aren't what they used to be. So many poorly worded stories.

    I'm sure the NRA backed, supported, and lobbied for this law, I doubt they enacted it.
    Samwolf

    "One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms."

    -- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, 1840

  4. #4
    Ex Member Array BikerRN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    State of Discombobulation
    Posts
    5,253
    The error of the reporting having already been noted for the less astute among us, I am happy with the decision rendered.

    Biker

  5. #5
    VIP Member Array rodc13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    2,753
    The reporter obviously never saw Schoolhouse Rock.

    "I'm just a bill . . . "
    How a Bill Becomes a Law
    Cheers,
    Rod
    "We're paratroopers. We're supposed to be surrounded!" Dick Winters

  6. #6
    Member Array Beretta8045's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    108
    Alleging one ridiculous theory after another about how this federal law violated the U.S. Constitution...
    I love it.

    Antis arguing in the name of the Constitution. Makes me want to and at the same time.
    Proud NRA & MCRGO Member

    "The handgun would not be my choice of weapon if I knew I was going to a fight....I'd choose a rifle, a shotgun, an RPG or an atomic bomb instead."

  7. #7
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,588

    Wink

    "Anti-gun groups, working with big-city mayors like Michael Bloomberg of New York City, devised a scheme to rid America of firearms."

    Can we still sue Mayor Bloomberg for being directly liable and responsible for all crimes committed in NYC?

    If "gun crime" can go back to the manufacturer then "New York City Crime" should go right back to the Mayor.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Array jem102's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    East TN
    Posts
    1,025
    Quote Originally Posted by QKShooter View Post
    "Anti-gun groups, working with big-city mayors like Michael Bloomberg of New York City, devised a scheme to rid America of firearms."

    Can we still sue Mayor Bloomberg for being directly liable and responsible for all crimes committed in NYC?

    If "gun crime" can go back to the manufacturer then "New York City Crime" should go right back to the Mayor.
    WOW! I like that one, this is something the victims rights people should consider.
    Who is John Galt?

    Sometimes there's justice, sometimes there's just us...

  9. #9
    Member Array Samwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    South Carolina, First to Secede
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by QKShooter View Post
    "Anti-gun groups, working with big-city mayors like Michael Bloomberg of New York City, devised a scheme to rid America of firearms."

    Can we still sue Mayor Bloomberg for being directly liable and responsible for all crimes committed in NYC?

    If "gun crime" can go back to the manufacturer then "New York City Crime" should go right back to the Mayor.

    Works for me.
    Samwolf

    "One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms."

    -- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, 1840

  10. #10
    Senior Member Array stanislaskasava's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    1,121
    Hmm... so if I drink beer for 30 years and develop liver cancer, I should sue all the breweries for their share of the damages? Who would I sue if I was driving [a Toyota] drunk [Jack Daniels] , smoking a cigarette [Marlboro], texting on my cell phone [Nokia], and crash into a utility pole [Ma Bell], while shooting [Smith & Wesson] out the window? I know somebody owe's me cash for my injuries.

    I'm really not buying the idea that liability should go back to the manufacturer for a consumer's abuse of a legal product. Once you buy it, you are the only person who determines what to do with it.

    The scariest thing about this article is the fact that juries have bought this logic before. Juries are made up of regular citizens -- this doesn't say much about our ability to recognize when we are being mislead.

    Thank God we have the NRA to enact landmark laws that preserve our culture.

  11. #11
    Member Array LethalStang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Asheville, NC
    Posts
    473
    Personal responibility and accountability has gone out the window a long time ago. What a shame.
    Quote Originally Posted by rottkeeper View Post
    If you are living your life worried about being a victim all the time and not enjoying life to the fullest, you are already a victim...
    -You don't know what you don't see-

    1*

    NRA Member

  12. #12
    Member Array mikcap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    99
    And Bloomberg just (barely) got (bought) himself a 3rd term. Helps me understand that "Republican" doesn't mean much. NYC is not going to change for a long, long time. Thank God some of the rest of the country has it's head on straight.

  13. #13
    Member Array mikcap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by LethalStang View Post
    Personal responibility and accountability has gone out the window a long time ago. What a shame.
    This is something I realize about 50 times a day.

  14. #14
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta8045 View Post
    I love it.

    Antis arguing in the name of the Constitution. Makes me want to and at the same time.
    Well, the 2nd Amendment and freedom of Speech is the 2 they pick on the most. LOL.

    Glad it turned out the way that it did.

  15. #15
    Distinguished Member Array lacrosse50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    SW Ohio
    Posts
    1,283
    This is why I'm a life member. I know that people of like mind must band together to fight for their rights. The NRA has done, and continues to do, an excellent job of defending our rights. I'm glad the Supreme Court has upheld this particular win.
    The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools.
    -Herbert Spencer

    NRA Life Member

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Court held on the High Seas
    By DaveH in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: December 2nd, 2010, 08:20 PM
  2. High Court’s Big Ruling For Gun Rights
    By basher052 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 28th, 2010, 11:40 AM
  3. High Plains Shotgun Challenge
    By Ram Rod in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: January 22nd, 2009, 01:28 AM
  4. CA High Court case on Stadium Pat Downs
    By packinnova in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: January 7th, 2009, 08:41 PM

Search tags for this page

can u sue the gun makers if you are shot by a unknown person in tennessee

Click on a term to search for related topics.