1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Supreme Court Turns Back NYC Gun Lawsuit

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by Jerbear, Mar 9, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jerbear

    Jerbear TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,588
    (WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court has turned away pleas by New York City and gun violence victims to hold the firearms industry responsible for selling guns that could end up in illegal markets.

    The justices' decision Monday ends lawsuits first filed in 2000. Federal appeals courts in New York and Washington threw out the complaints after Congress passed a law in 2005 giving the gun industry broad immunity against such lawsuits.

    The city's lawsuit asked for no monetary damages. It had sought a court order for gun makers to more closely monitor those dealers who frequently sell guns later used to commit crimes. (Read "The Future of Gun Control".)

    But the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that federal law provides the gun industry with broad immunity from lawsuits brought by crime victims and violence-plagued cities. The Supreme Court refused to reconsider that decision.

    The lawsuit was first brought in June 2000 while Rudy Giuliani was New York mayor. It was delayed due to the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and because of similar litigation in the state courts. (Read "Looking Kindly on Vigilante Justice".)

    The city refiled the lawsuit in January 2004, saying manufacturers let handguns reach illegal markets at gun shows in which non-licensed people can sell to other private citizens; through private sales in which background checks are not required; by oversupplying markets where gun regulations are lax, and by having poor overall security.

    The city said a state nuisance law makes it a crime to knowingly or recklessly create a condition endangering the safety or health of a considerable number of people. But the appeals court said New York's law does not qualify as an exception to federal law. It agreed with U.S. District Judge Jack B. Weinstein that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, signed by President George W. Bush in 2005, is constitutional.

    See "Crime in Middle America".

    Click to Print Find this article at:
    http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1883808,00.html


    Woo Hoo another anti gunlaw shot down.


    Jerbear
     
  2. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    Thank you GWB and the REPUBLICAN Congress!
     
  3. highflyer

    highflyer TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,474
    Enjoy it while it lasts. Obama and Pelosi get to appoint the new judges.
     
  4. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,254
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Time to sue car makers over drunk drivers. After all, they've had the technology to install breathalyzer interlocks, but chose instead to maximize their profits. And they don't even do background checks on their customers. What brazen recklessness. Think of all the children killed by drunks driving cars with high capacity fuel tanks and fully automatic transmissions.
     
  5. j2jake

    j2jake Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,289
    Careful Brian, your making way too much sense here, they will come for you. Jake
     
  6. Fast Oil

    Fast Oil TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    918
    And... you do not even have to be a us citizen to purchase an automobile.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.