Can Sandy Hook Families Hold the Gun Industry Accountable?

NOVA said:
Yeah....hush money......really working to keep it all a secret.....you're a fuckin' idiot and would make an excellent Kladd.......the only reason you're not on ignore is you're entertaining.....just like desh.....

and the giggles you both provide is all free.....

Poor pathetic JewHater......
Click to expand...

You got sussed, Fraud. It speaks volumes that you still call yourself a ' Navy vet '.
 
moon2012 said:
That ruling applied to Colorado and was a Supreme Court overturn. Notwithstanding, it's generally accepted that the state has a duty to defend its public.
Click to expand...
that ruling applied to ALL governments because it IS a USSC decision. Do I need to post them all for you? warren v. district of columbia, Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department, and DeShaney v. Winnebago County. Even the NYC attorney argued this in front of the courts when Joseph Lozito sued the NYPD for not protecting him during a subway knife attack AS THEY WATCHED from safety.

http://nypost.com/2013/01/27/city-says-cops-had-no-duty-to-protect-subway-hero-who-subdued-killer/

Only apathetic morons accept that the state has a duty to defend them.

moon2012 said:
No, I observe sanity with a great deal of clarity.
Click to expand...

no, you really don't.
 
moon2012 said:
NOVA;


True, with the exception of guns that are.

Poorer Fraud.
Click to expand...

No one in the entire world has ever seen a gun kill anyone, except maybe by mishandling, ....only people use inanimate objects to kill another.....guns, knives, cars, trucks, stones, hands, feet, pillows, etc. etc. etc....

I have a few guns for over 40 years and have yet to see them kill anybody or anything without assistance from the user.......

Why do you keep embarrassing yourself ? Forget your meds this morning ? At best, you keep us laughing.

Poor patheticmoon.....
 
SmarterthanYou said:
that ruling applied to ALL governments because it IS a USSC decision. Do I need to post them all for you? warren v. district of columbia, Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department, and DeShaney v. Winnebago County. Even the NYC attorney argued this in front of the courts when Joseph Lozito sued the NYPD for not protecting him during a subway knife attack AS THEY WATCHED from safety.

http://nypost.com/2013/01/27/city-says-cops-had-no-duty-to-protect-subway-hero-who-subdued-killer/

Only apathetic morons accept that the state has a duty to defend them.
Click to expand...

It's clear that you are confusing police protection with the Constitutional responsibilities of the state. That doesn't make you an ' apathetic moron '- it just makes you wrong.
 
NOVA said:
No one in the entire world has ever seen a gun kill anyone, except maybe by mishandling, ....only people use inanimate objects to kill another.....guns, knives, cars, trucks, stones, hands, feet, pillows, etc. etc. etc....

I have a few guns for over 40 years and have yet to see them kill anybody or anything without assistance from the user.......

Why do you keep embarrassing yourself ? Forget your meds this morning ? At best, you keep us laughing.

Poor patheticmoon.....
Click to expand...

The regurgitating of debunked beliefs is a hallmark of the low-brow. Suits you, Fraud.
 
moon2012 said:
It's clear that you are confusing police protection with the Constitutional responsibilities of the state. That doesn't make you an ' apathetic moron '- it just makes you wrong.
Click to expand...

the constitutional responsibilities of the state consist ONLY of protecting the rights of the people. not protecting them from crime or evil doers, bullies or thugs. thinking otherwise just makes you wrong....and an apathetic moron.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the constitutional responsibilities of the state consist ONLY of protecting the rights of the people. not protecting them from crime or evil doers, bullies or thugs. thinking otherwise just makes you wrong....and an apathetic moron.
Click to expand...

You'd better take another look.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
don't need to. I have followed this particular area of law for a decade. you don't have to, but you certainly should. if you end up suing a city/state/feds for failure to protect you, let me know how it goes.
Click to expand...


No, you really should. I haven't studied it at all but I already see that you're wrong;

THE FIRST DUTY OF GOVERNMENT:
PROTECTION, LIBERTY AND THE
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT

STEVEN J. HEYMAN*

Extract;

As I show in Part II, the right to protection was not merely a matter
of constitutional theory, but a doctrine with concrete legal meaning. In
the common law tradition, the protection of the law implied both the
recognition offundamental rights by law, and the enforcement of such
rights by government. The paradigmatic instance was the government's
duty to protect individuals against violence. By the middle ofthe nineteenth century, this duty was understood to include not only the enforcement of civil and criminal law with respect to injuries already committed,
but also the responsibility to prevent violence before it occurred

http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3172&context=dlj
Click to expand...

The great thing about law is that your gut feeling for justice is usually upheld by it.
 
moon2012 said:
No, you really should. I haven't studied it at all but I already see that you're wrong;

The great thing about law is that your gut feeling for justice is usually upheld by it.
Click to expand...

the numerous court opinions heavily outweigh your source from an education facility. sorry, but you're still wrong.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the numerous court opinions heavily outweigh your source from an education facility. sorry, but you're still wrong.
Click to expand...

Again, your references all refer to state cases and the police. You need to provide evidence that Americans have no rights to protection under the Constitution.

Oh yes- " apathetic moron." was it ? You're clearly another arrogant twat .......and you're not trying to tell me about Constitutional rights- you're arguing with this guy;

https://www.kentlaw.iit.edu/faculty/full-time-faculty/steven-j-heyman


Maybe you'd better take up the banjo.
 
Last edited:
moon2012 said:
Again, your references all refer to state cases and the police. You need to provide evidence that Americans have no rights to protection under the Constitution. Good luck.
Click to expand...

um. no. every case i've posted has dealt with a so called right to police protection, all of which have failed because every court has said that the police owe no single individual any protection, outside of certain circumstances related to being in state custody.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
um. no. every case i've posted has dealt with a so called right to police protection, all of which have failed because every court has said that the police owe no single individual any protection, outside of certain circumstances related to being in state custody.
Click to expand...

Again, your references all refer to state cases and the police. You need to provide evidence that Americans have no rights to protection under the Constitution.

Oh yes- " apathetic moron." was it ? You're clearly another arrogant twat .......and you're not trying to tell me about Constitutional rights- you're arguing with this guy;

https://www.kentlaw.iit.edu/faculty/...teven-j-heyman


Maybe you'd better take up the banjo.
 
moon2012 said:
Again, your references all refer to state cases and the police. You need to provide evidence that Americans have no rights to protection under the Constitution.
Click to expand...
that is not how the constitution works. it's not how any constitution in this country works. unless a constitution specifically tasks a government with a duty to protect people (which all i've ever seen is that it mandates a government to protect the rights of the people) then the government does not have that responsibility.
 
I don't believe that you should hold the gun industry responsible for gun related crimes. We don't hold car companies or beer companies responsible for drunk driving accidents. We don't hold companies that make knives accountable for violent stabbings. We don't hold utensil making companies responsible for food poisoning. The gun is just a tool. We should hold the person that committed the crime accountable and anybody else that willfully helped commit the crime.
 
moon2012 said:
Then you'd best read the expert whom you scorned;
https://www.kentlaw.iit.edu/faculty/full-time-faculty/steven-j-heyman
Click to expand...

ok, so I have two options.

1) accept federal court decisions that spell out what the constitution affords me in the ways of police protection and what it doesn't.
2) a harvard professor of constitutional law (similar to obama) whose supposed opinions are diametrically the opposite of what the courts have said...

gee, I think i'll have to side with the courts on this one.
 
CFM said:
Yes those manufacturers did. They made those guns without the ability to grow arms/legs, load by itself, and shoot by itself. Unless you can show me where one has done all three of those things, it's the PERSON misusing it that is the problem.
Click to expand...

Using the liberal definition here; does that mean that if the person shot doesn't die, then can the weapon's manufacturer be sued for making a defective item?? :dunno:
 
Superfreak said:
Killing an innocent person is definitely a misuse of the gun.

The nonsense that guns must be used to kill PEOPLE is absurd. Most people use guns for either target shooting or hunting. Not killing other people, especially innocent people.
Click to expand...

Can you imagine the overall death rate, if all those guns were used for what the liberals want to make believe they are only used for.
 
NOVA said:
No one in the entire world has ever seen a gun kill anyone, except maybe by mishandling, ....only people use inanimate objects to kill another.....guns, knives, cars, trucks, stones, hands, feet, pillows, etc. etc. etc....

I have a few guns for over 40 years and have yet to see them kill anybody or anything without assistance from the user.......

Why do you keep embarrassing yourself ? Forget your meds this morning ? At best, you keep us laughing.

Poor patheticmoon.....
Click to expand...

moon2012 said:
The regurgitating of debunked beliefs is a hallmark of the low-brow. Suits you, Fraud.
Click to expand...

Well then debunk what I posted, Jew hating fool.

I can't wait.

Poor Assholemoonie....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top