"Supreme Court lets Sandy Hook shooting lawsuits go forward"

archives said:
So repeating your error ovwr again makes it correct? This ain't talk radio

Read, I know it is tough for you, but this is the very law the SCOTUS ruled doesn't apply

Want to try for three swings and misses in a row?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Cinnabar said:
And out the door goes rational and critical thinking and logic and reasoning when one take up a debate with a right winger, which is why I avoid responding to most of the posts. Their very existence It is also why the USA is going in the complete wring direction and why I advocate for a severing of ties to these knuckle-draggers. If you have to explain how a weapon designed for quick massive killing which has brought about the untimely death of little children in their classroom is different from an automobile or alcohol, you know you are arguing with a mouth-breather.
Click to expand...

If someone has to explain to you that nothing you call a weapon can actually do a damn thing unless SOMEONE misuses it, we don't want your kind of idiot around.

What you need to do in order for what you say to be given any consideration is to prove that someone killed by a drunken nut driving a car is less dead than someone killed by a nut misusing a gun.
 
Cinnabar said:
And out the door goes rational and critical thinking and logic and reasoning when one take up a debate with a right winger,
Click to expand...

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
 
PostmodernProphet said:
if this was the USSC there is no where to appeal it to......
Click to expand...

I can hardly believe they'd overrule a previous ruling, especially one this vital to our 2nd. Amendment.
Not just that, that opens a Pandora's box for just about every idiot who misuses a product to sue, wouldn't it?
 
archives said:
As I told you before, I don't give a rat's ass what toys you own, not our fault you are afraid some kid in a hoodie may walk down your street, and I don't have to take your toys away, if it came to that we have police officers in this country who enforce the law, I wouldn't waste my time on you nor anyone else like you, not worth the effort
Click to expand...

We don't give a rats ass what your OPINIONS are either. They are uneducated, lack factual content and are mostly full of bullshit. ;)
 
CFM said:
The SCOTUS also decided Brown vs. Board of Education (Desegregation) , Obergefell vs. Hodges (Faggot marriages), and National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (Obamacare). We all know how fucked up those decisions were.
Click to expand...


what we ?

you have Hitlers ghost in your pocket
 
CFM said:
The we that know it's time to stop catering to a bunch of whining minorities, faggots, and freeloaders.
Click to expand...

oh the KKK

Putin lied to you dude


you don't have numbers big enough to win a carnival dime toss let alone an election
 
Truth Detector said:
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.
Click to expand...

And three strikes you are out, law doesn't apply via the SCOTUS and holding gun manufactures responsible for the damage their product does has absolutely nothing to do with the Second Amendmant

Give it up, you took a ten count repeating the same lame post
 
Cinnabar said:
And out the door goes rational and critical thinking and logic and reasoning when one take up a debate with a right winger, which is why I avoid responding to most of the posts. Their very existence is why the USA is going in the complete wring direction and why I advocate for a severing of ties to these knuckle-draggers. If you have to explain how a weapon designed for quick massive killing which has brought about the untimely death of little children in their classroom is different from an automobile or alcohol, you know you are arguing with a mouth-breather.
Click to expand...

dude

most of them are russo bot holes
 
archives said:
And three strikes you are out, law doesn't apply via the SCOTUS and holding gun manufactures responsible for the damage their product does has absolutely nothing to do with the Second Amendmant

Give it up, you took a ten count repeating the same lame post
Click to expand...

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.
 
RB 60 said:
I can hardly believe they'd overrule a previous ruling, especially one this vital to our 2nd. Amendment.
Not just that, that opens a Pandora's box for just about every idiot who misuses a product to sue, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

this doesn't over rule a previous decision.....it was sent back on a procedural basis..
 
evince said:
oh the KKK

Putin lied to you dude


you don't have numbers big enough to win a carnival dime toss let alone an election
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with the KKK or Putin. Why would you think it's OK to cater to a bunch of whining minorities, faggots, and freeloaders?

304 - 227 is a big enough number to win the Presidency and cause the heads of the lefties to spin like a top.
 
archives said:
And three strikes you are out, law doesn't apply via the SCOTUS and holding gun manufactures responsible for the damage their product does has absolutely nothing to do with the Second Amendmant
Click to expand...

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.....
 
evince said:
because you cant fucking read and comprehend

the SCOTUS ( the highest court in the USA)


has basically said the NC scotus decision can stand
Click to expand...

perhaps you think I can't read but at least I'm aware its not a NC supreme court decision....the case is out of Connecticut, which is probably the state where the gun manufacturer is located.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
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.....
Click to expand...

Have you viewed the ADDs the gun manufacturers used to sell these things ?


they are very damning idiot
 
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
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top