• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sandy Hook families can sue gun manufacturer Remington, lower court ruling overturned

Can somebody explain the purpose for special exemptions for gun manufacturers freeing them from the normal suits that a made of a product would be subject to?

I refer to the 2005 law passed by congress Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
 
KLATTU said:
This suit is a complete joke. Liberal activist judges strike again. Embarassing.
Click to expand...

Well some people think that there should be an exemption for the emotionally distraught to file bogus lawsuits for what appears to be grief relief. I have no problem with them filing the suit as long as they make the defendants whole again. What I have a problem with are leftwing anti gun judges who are pandering to the anti gun voters in their state while crapping all over the rule of law and the federal law that prevents this nonsense. A law that was passed so leftwing scumbags in office cannot do an end-around the 2nd Amendment using bogus lawsuits to bankrupt gun makers.
 
TurtleDude said:
Let us examine what is being argued about



So she knows that the suit is doomed to be rejected

Then we get this sort of internally contradictory stuff




In other words-being a victim gives you some sort of right to file a suit that is legally untenable: a suit that costs the blameless defendants lots of money in defending it.

Then the argument deteriorates into a bit of emotional nonsense about gun makers



and: screw the law, the gun makers need to lose money to make the parents feel better even though she admits the case is not legally sound




Above is another contradiction-if the Supreme Court is going to toss the suit-bogus comes to mind. She seems to think that people should be able to file suits so they "feel better" and I said if they do, they need to pay the defendants, if there is no legal basis for liability.

As the lack of a rational argument becomes more and more apparent-and noted-we get this nonsense:



With the last post being a personal attack in an attempt to cover up for an irrational argument:



BOTTOM LINE-if you file a suit that is legally infirm, you should pay the costs of the people you sue.
Click to expand...

Most of your derping is nonsense. As far as your last line, who argued something else?
 
tres borrachos said:
Most of your derping is nonsense. As far as your last line, who argued something else?
Click to expand...

YOU DID-when I suggested that the plaintiffs be forced to pay for the cost of the law suit, you started whining about that.
 
ataraxia said:
OK, public health specialists should be dismissed on public health issues. Climate change specialists should be dismissed on climate change. Infectious disease specialists should be dismissed on vaccination recommendations. Evolutionary biologists should be dismissed on evolution. We should only listen to Fox News for the real facts. Because they are the only ones without any nonsense. Got it.




A tool is a tool. You don’t get to define words in the English language too.

The N. Koreans need tools for personal defense too.
Click to expand...

The 2nd amendment isn't really a public health issue. It's like asking engineers to perform brain surgery and doctors to build a bridge. Both are very competent in their own fields, but inadequate when they venture off of what their profession trained them to do.
 
JustHanging said:
Actually his reply was spot on, and exposed your reasoning for the nonsense it was. Maybe try reading your post, and then his reply again? Hopefully you will be able to understand why his post was so spot on.
Click to expand...

Wrong. The reply was silly and nonsensical.
Nuclear arms are not an equivalent.
 
SoCal said:
It could be a health issue in less than two years when President O'Rourke declares it is...
Click to expand...
No. A person making a false claim is still making a false claim.
 
tres borrachos said:
That's because the topic is your precious guns. Why care about parents of dead 6 year olds. Must protect the gun manufacturers! Parents, move on! It's all about da gunz.
Click to expand...

Uh, no. We're simply pointing out the flawed logic in suing a company for the misuse of it's product. Should we sue Ford for advertising it's Taurus as suitable for racing and someone decides to use it to ram into a group of school children? As callous as it may sound, no law should be based on appeal to emotion.
 
haymarket said:
Can somebody explain the purpose for special exemptions for gun manufacturers freeing them from the normal suits that a made of a product would be subject to?
Click to expand...

Example?

I refer to the 2005 law passed by congress Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
Click to expand...

To keep sue happy anti gun organizations from banning guns by proxy.
 
Maccabee said:
Example?



To keep sue happy anti gun organizations from banning guns by proxy.
Click to expand...

Why do gun company manufacturers get special treatment that other companies do not get?
 
haymarket said:
Why do gun company manufacturers get special treatment that other companies do not get?
Click to expand...

Because previously, gun control organizations had been constantly suing gun companies with frivolous suits, thus creating the act. There is no organization blaming and constantly suing car manufacturers for the actions of drunk, texting, or reckless drivers.
 
Maccabee said:
Because previously, gun control organizations had been constantly suing gun companies with frivolous suits, thus creating the act. There is no organization blaming and constantly suing car manufacturers for the actions of drunk, texting, or reckless drivers.
Click to expand...

If everything you say is true - and it is notable you FAILED to provide any verifiable evidence for your claim of alleged fact - why should gun makers get extra legal protections that other companies do not get under the law?
 
haymarket said:
If everything you say is true - and it is notable you FAILED to provide any verifiable evidence for your claim of alleged fact -
Click to expand...

Mainly because you didn't asked me to provide a source. But since you asked...


FACT CHECK: Are Gun-Makers 'Totally Free Of Liability For Their Behavior'? : It's All Politics : NPR

why should gun makers get extra legal protections that other companies do not get under the law?
Click to expand...

Never said that they should. If there's a sudden lawsuit streak against [insert industry here] for frivolous claims, then they should be afforded the same protection.
 
haymarket said:
Why do gun company manufacturers get special treatment that other companies do not get?
Click to expand...

Because of those members of Congress that they have bought and paid for? Yep. That's it.
 
haymarket said:
And that is unfair in legal coverage. The law should be the same for all.
Click to expand...

Then petition the government to have it apply to everyone. I'm not against it. No one is stopping you.
 
Maccabee said:
Then petition the government to have it apply to everyone. I'm not against it. No one is stopping you.
Click to expand...

I am asking why they get special protection in the first place?
 
haymarket said:
I am asking why they get special protection in the first place?
Click to expand...

Like I said, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Had this been any other industry, the results would be the same.
 
Maccabee said:
Like I said, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Had this been any other industry, the results would be the same.
Click to expand...

So tell me about special protection from lawsuits in other industries.
 
haymarket said:
So tell me about special protection from lawsuits in other industries.
Click to expand...

Once you tell me about the organizations who mount frivolous lawsuit upon frivolous lawsuit against the other industries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom