Into the Night
Contributor
dude
most of them are russo bot holes
Turing test failure.
dude
most of them are russo bot holes
this doesn't over rule a previous decision.....it was sent back on a procedural basis..
the trial court still has to find if the gun manufacturers ARE responsible.....all this says is that the plaintiffs cannot be barred from trying......the plaintiffs have a long way to go before winning.....
Have you viewed the ADDs the gun manufacturers used to sell these things ?
they are very damning idiot
Alcohol's primary purpose is to cause domestic violence and accidents ... often resulting in the deaths of innocents and doing great damage to children. The manufacturers need to be held responsible for all the families alcohol has destroyed.
PUBLIC LAW 109–92—OCT. 26, 2005
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-119/pdf/STATUTE-119-Pg2095.pdf
CASE CLOSED.
to be honest, the OP is very confused.....can't tell if they are referring to the Connecticut SC or the USSC......
The Connecticut Supreme Court had earlier ruled 4-3 that the lawsuit could proceed for now, citing an exemption in the federal law.
my mistake
Its Connecticut not SC
I admit my mistakes unlike you
they are being sued for targeting their product to people who feel bad about themselves and need a gun so they can be real men and that their guns can kill more people
trying to say you can kill more house invaders is not the same as plain ass saying they have more killing power
that is the shit they were saying in their adds
they are fucked
There is no error. We have the second amendment and we have the legislation. The Supreme Court cannot make up laws from the bench any more than a State Supreme Court or Appeals Court. The Appeals Court got it right. SCOTUS, not so much.
PUBLIC LAW 109–92—OCT. 26, 2005
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-119/pdf/STATUTE-119-Pg2095.pdf
CASE CLOSED.
What is logical about claiming that the illegal use of a product makes the manufacturer liable for damages caused by that illegal use? The precedent that would set would devastate our economy. It is moronic.
An underage youth steals his mothers legally acquired weapon, murders her with it, then a bunch of young children and then himself; and it's the gun manufacturers fault?
119 STAT. 2095PUBLIC LAW 109–92—OCT. 26, 2005 states this is asinine and a farce.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-119/pdf/STATUTE-119-Pg2095.pdf
PUBLIC LAW 109–92—OCT. 26, 2005
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-119/pdf/STATUTE-119-Pg2095.pdf
CASE CLOSED.
Second Amendment
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
CASE CLOSED.
they actually think the gun has some kind of right that needs protecting
because without their metal penis replacements they are incomplete as men
they are blaming the manufacturer and their evil ads
lying shit piles
If knife manufacturers started advertising their knifes make killing to prove your manhood easier they would get sued too
cheating is not winning
the police will be there any day
they are being sued for targeting their product to people who feel bad about themselves and need a gun so they can be real men and that their guns can kill more people
trying to say you can kill more house invaders is not the same as plain ass saying they have more killing power
that is the shit they were saying in their adds
they are fucked
This unfortunate screen grab depicts Bushmaster revoking someone's "man card" for being intimidated by elementary school students.
from that link
The Connecticut Supreme Court had earlier ruled 4-3 that the lawsuit could proceed for now, citing an exemption in the federal law.
my mistake
Its Connecticut not SC
I admit my mistakes unlike you