Latest Breaking News

aikoaiko

(34,165 posts)

23. defendants knowingly violated federal gun laws" if true they might have a case.

Reply to Hissyspit (Original post)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 01:31 PM

Oct 2012

We'll see if it's true or if this is just a cynical legal device to go after businesses with deeper pockets.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

99 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Court Rules N.Y. Shooting Victim Can Sue Gun Maker, Distributor [View all] Hissyspit Oct 2012 OP

Groovy! graham4anything Oct 2012 #1

I fully agree gopiscrap Oct 2012 #2

definitely sue the NRA +10000 wordpix Oct 2012 #6

Sure the NRA only has about 4.5 million glacierbay Oct 2012 #19

You mean the "free-riders" who support and benefit from NRA's Hoyt Oct 2012 #81

Distributor, I can see. boppers Oct 2012 #3

Depends. Might be all responsible. AtheistCrusader Oct 2012 #4

I agree with you goclark Oct 2012 #44

I don't see why gun manufacturers should have more protection than others CreekDog Oct 2012 #35

The reason for the protection glacierbay Oct 2012 #36

ironically to protect people from other people with guns CreekDog Oct 2012 #37

No glacierbay Oct 2012 #38

No, I mean the guns --they're being sold to protect people from other people with guns CreekDog Oct 2012 #39

Wharfgarble. n/t PavePusher Oct 2012 #40

It they let everyone do this to every company all commerce would stand still Mojorabbit Oct 2012 #45

You can try to sue a car company or a car salesman for your car wreck. boppers Oct 2012 #46

It is along the same line I think Mojorabbit Oct 2012 #48

That's already how it works. boppers Oct 2012 #55

I was going to bring this suit abumbyanyothername Oct 2012 #5

So now I can sue Anheuser-Busch because a drunk ran me off the road? NT Trunk Monkey Oct 2012 #7

I personally think that a bar should be sued if there is an accident after graham4anything Oct 2012 #11

but the question is backwoodsbob Oct 2012 #16

The question was- was Joe Paterno guilty because of Sandusky? IMHO YES YES YES graham4anything Oct 2012 #20

I am not 100% sure about this Trunk Monkey Oct 2012 #18

Compassion... bitchkitty Oct 2012 #53

which means you lack compassion Trunk Monkey Oct 2012 #60

If he hit an artery, bitchkitty Oct 2012 #85

One can sue tobacco companies. Why not those who make and MARKET lethal weapons? Hoyt Oct 2012 #82

This message was self-deleted by its author reality24 Oct 2012 #8

Post removed Post removed Oct 2012 #9

I have a question gejohnston Oct 2012 #10

FFL licenses are (theoretically) held by scrupulous dealers. boppers Oct 2012 #47

better question is, why is the ATF turning a blind eye to it? gejohnston Oct 2012 #50

Because it would put most gun sales places out of business. boppers Oct 2012 #56

not buying it gejohnston Oct 2012 #58

"A Buffalo man who was shot..." greiner3 Oct 2012 #12

Good. Everyone in the food chain of a gun crime should answer for the crime. onehandle Oct 2012 #13

Very good. Kingofalldems Oct 2012 #14

Horseshit. krispos42 Oct 2012 #15

WOW fightthegoodfightnow Oct 2012 #17

The difference, is, of course, that I'm right and you're wrong. krispos42 Oct 2012 #21

Difference is that's an Argument fightthegoodfightnow Oct 2012 #25

Since this... PavePusher Oct 2012 #42

actually in many places across the country, parents are held responsible for minors crimes graham4anything Oct 2012 #52

And in NY, does the liquor store there parents purchased the booze... krispos42 Oct 2012 #61

So let me see if I'm getting this right. glacierbay Oct 2012 #64

You are an NRA talking point police man. You distract every anti-gun thread there is graham4anything Oct 2012 #65

Dodge. You did not address anything presented to you. PavePusher Oct 2012 #66

I believe in the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness & all are equal graham4anything Oct 2012 #69

There's still a question pending glacierbay Oct 2012 #70

I will let you keep a gun in your house, provided in advance I know you have one graham4anything Oct 2012 #72

I'm sorry glacierbay Oct 2012 #73

I have a freedom of choice to not enter your home with stockpiled guns graham4anything Oct 2012 #77

I never said you don't have the right to not enter my home glacierbay Oct 2012 #79

The NRA provides help and resources for the people on trial with guns graham4anything Oct 2012 #84

I see I'm not going to get a straight answer from you glacierbay Oct 2012 #87

This one is either deliberately distractive/disruptive, or not tracking well. PavePusher Oct 2012 #91

What he may be trying to do is get one of us to say something inflammatory glacierbay Oct 2012 #92

Interesting legal question here primavera Oct 2012 #93

you are exactly correct- Can I make this a new thread asking this question? graham4anything Oct 2012 #96

Lol! By all means, I'd be curious to see the responses. - n/t primavera Oct 2012 #97

No glacierbay Oct 2012 #98

Actually, that's not true primavera Oct 2012 #99

My goodness, you are quite the little Authoritarian-tin-pot-dictator-wanna-be, aren't you? PavePusher Oct 2012 #74

There's a question pending glacierbay Oct 2012 #68

It's called "proximate cause" versus "cause in fact"... primavera Oct 2012 #94

Before you call others irrational, check your own lips for froth. n/t Scootaloo Oct 2012 #57

Another great example of why the anti-gunnies fails aikoaiko Oct 2012 #24

Guns are Doing What? fightthegoodfightnow Oct 2012 #27

no gun ever saved anyone, the gunnies are always with the NRA talking points graham4anything Oct 2012 #71

I know youre frustrated with losing this culture war aikoaiko Oct 2012 #75

It's not my reason for being however- graham4anything Oct 2012 #78

Because the vast majority of crime doesn't happen at home glacierbay Oct 2012 #83

But if someone has a gun going into a place, a scanner letting someone know graham4anything Oct 2012 #86

WTF are you talking about glacierbay Oct 2012 #88

If there are no guns inside, then your gun is not needed to stop a gun attack. graham4anything Oct 2012 #89

Your not even making any sense now glacierbay Oct 2012 #90

Not true and you know it glacierbay Oct 2012 #76

Wharfgarble. n/t PavePusher Oct 2012 #41

Wow, a lot of people aren't reading past the headline. JoeyT Oct 2012 #22

defendants knowingly violated federal gun laws" if true they might have a case. aikoaiko Oct 2012 #23

So by extrapolating this ruling sarisataka Oct 2012 #26

Amusing fightthegoodfightnow Oct 2012 #28

While I do oppose sale tracking sarisataka Oct 2012 #29

Thank You fightthegoodfightnow Oct 2012 #30

I've had some spirited debates with you also glacierbay Oct 2012 #31

No Need to Aologize- No Offense Taken fightthegoodfightnow Oct 2012 #32

That is rather uncouth sarisataka Oct 2012 #34

There is an enormous difference... PavePusher Oct 2012 #43

We track people who buy explosives and nuclear materials. boppers Oct 2012 #49

"suspected criminals" and "lawful Citizens", you seem to be confused on those terms. PavePusher Oct 2012 #59

They'll have to prove a link between the manufacturer, distributor, dealer, seller and shooter NickB79 Oct 2012 #33

The BATF needs to start revoking licenses, and putting more people in jail for selling guns. boppers Oct 2012 #54

good! if our elected officials dont have the guts bowens43 Oct 2012 #51

That was already tried glacierbay Oct 2012 #63

"death merchants"? PavePusher Oct 2012 #67

Thank you for posting this here. I like when gun policy talk comes out of the gungeon. aikoaiko Oct 2012 #62

Blame the money path rebuke Oct 2012 #80

Did the gun malfunction? Operate in some way other than how it was intended? 4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #95