How long can you sustain?

[Esq.]

Despite the supposed legal protections for firearms manufacturers Remington has offered to settle with the Sandy Hook plaintiffs. We had a similar suit in Texas against Academy Sports-which thankfully, because we are not a shithole, was shut down.... We are seeing serious and sustained efforts to "Make gun manufacturers pay for the damage their products cause" etc... at both the Federal and State level, as well as several other lawsuits directed at firearms and accessory manufacturers. The effect of this- and, look, it's what I do for a living- suing people, will be to drive companies out of business. It won't matter if it's LEGAL to own/buy/use guns....there will be nobody MAKING guns or ammo for you to buy.

So, how long can you you sustain your right to keep and bear arms?

[grizzlyblake]

Doesn't that set the legal precedent for pretty much anything? My car gets hit by a F150 so I can sue Ford, etc.

[utahjeepr]

Doesn't that set the legal precedent for pretty much anything? My car gets hit by a F150 so I can sue Ford, etc.

We seriously need to start a wave of that shit. A "frivolous lawsuit counter assault".

"Some dude spilled milk and I slipped an fell. Big Dairy has to pay!"

I know it sounds stupid, but it's one way to apply pressure. Besides, we are running out of options short of just shooting these aholes in the face.

[Entryteam]

Doesn't that set the legal precedent for pretty much anything? My car gets hit by a F150 so I can sue Ford, etc.

AND.. what about the "damage" to the heart that hamburgers cause??? Should McD's pay?

[Honu]

AND.. what about the "damage" to the heart that hamburgers cause??? Should McD's pay?

but that is not the case ? the bread yes the fries are pure poison (industrialized oils) the sugar in everything else yes the actual meat NO and this is where the gov and doctors that are clueless lie about our modern food pyramid

[Honu]

double arrggggg

[Esq.]

Doesn't that set the legal precedent for pretty much anything? My car gets hit by a F150 so I can sue Ford, etc.

Normally, that would be a good argument. But there is no lobby group nor government agency that HATES FORD and wants to drive them out of business. It's not simply a legal issue. It's a POLITICAL issue, really a near Religious issue (Communism IS a religion) for the Left.

ANYTHING that they can use WILL be used to disarm Americans. ANYTHING. Public health, environmental, Lawfare, Legislation....they will use any and all means to achieve their ends. Logic consistency, fairness etc...has nothing to do with any of it.

That's why the Lawful Trade in Firearms Act was originally passed- several companies were bankrupted by litigation and Congress was pushed to act- and did....That was then, this is now... That has been circumvented as we see in the Remington case by activist State and even lower Federal Courts. The "gun companies" are TINY companies vs. Ford, GM and many other industrial companies. They have the "liabilities" of a Tobacco company as a business, but not the economic clout.

[sandsunsurf]

Similarly, but perhaps more scary are the cases where citizens are being charged for shooting a criminal. Today alone I read two news stories telling of the arrest of a victim for shooting the suspect. While there is arguably “more to the story” in both cases, it still worries me.

First: 7-11 clerk arrested for trying to stop two shoplifters, which results in him shooting at the criminals. He’s arrested for murder. I honestly don’t care if the clerk took things too far; don’t f-ing steal and you won’t get shot. The criminals should be at fault, not the clerk. https://www.star-telegram.com/news/s...253280283.html

Second: a female shoots a home intruder and is charged with murder. He was known to the female and attacked another man in the house. Probably a f-ed situation, but still- her house, her rules. https://dailycaller.com/2021/08/04/a...home-intruder/

[Esq.]

Similarly, but perhaps more scary are the cases where citizens are being charged for shooting a criminal. Today alone I read two news stories telling of the arrest of a victim for shooting the suspect. While there is arguably “more to the story” in both cases, it still worries me.

First: 7-11 clerk arrested for trying to stop two shoplifters, which results in him shooting at the criminals. He’s arrested for murder. I honestly don’t care if the clerk took things too far; don’t f-ing steal and you won’t get shot. The criminals should be at fault, not the clerk. https://www.star-telegram.com/news/s...253280283.html

Second: a female shoots a home intruder and is charged with murder. He was known to the female and attacked another man in the house. Probably a f-ed situation, but still- her house, her rules. https://dailycaller.com/2021/08/04/a...home-intruder/

Every way in which they can apply pressure will be exploited.

[Arik]

Similarly, but perhaps more scary are the cases where citizens are being charged for shooting a criminal. Today alone I read two news stories telling of the arrest of a victim for shooting the suspect. While there is arguably “more to the story” in both cases, it still worries me.

First: 7-11 clerk arrested for trying to stop two shoplifters, which results in him shooting at the criminals. He’s arrested for murder. I honestly don’t care if the clerk took things too far; don’t f-ing steal and you won’t get shot. The criminals should be at fault, not the clerk. https://www.star-telegram.com/news/s...253280283.html

Second: a female shoots a home intruder and is charged with murder. He was known to the female and attacked another man in the house. Probably a f-ed situation, but still- her house, her rules. https://dailycaller.com/2021/08/04/a...home-intruder/

The second story says the cops arrested the female and her friend after "New information developed. Im going to guess that maybe the intruder didn't break in but was maybe lured in?!?! Her house her rules ....up to a point!

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk