The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: shooter32 on December 17, 2009, 11:12:41 AM
-
December 17 : 2009
Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Final Case Against Gun Makers
NEWTOWN, Conn. -- The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday handed Beretta U.S.A. and the firearms industry another victory by rejecting the Brady Center's appeal of Adames v. Beretta U.S.A. Corporation challenging the constitutionality of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).
The PLCAA is the 2005 federal law passed by Congress in response to the flood of reckless lawsuits brought by the Brady Center on behalf of anti-gun mayors seeking to hold members of the firearms industry liable for the criminal or unlawful misuse of their products.
This is now the third time this year the Supreme Court has denied a challenge to the PLCAA backed by the Brady Center. In March 2009, the Brady Center was also involved in the appeals of Lawson v. Beretta and City of New York v. Beretta, both of which the Supreme Court refused to hear. Monday's Supreme Court decision in the Adames case is another stinging setback to the Brady Center's failed anti-gun political agenda to destroy the individual right of Americans to keep and bear arms -- a right the Supreme Court declared last year in Heller was protected by the Second Amendment.
The Adames lawsuit was filed by the Brady Center on behalf of a family seeking to hold Beretta responsible for the tragic shooting death of their son, caused solely by the criminal acts of a teenage boy who gained unauthorized access to his father's unsecured service pistol. The case was originally dismissed by a Chicago trial court, subsequently reinstated in part by the Illinois Court of Appeals, and then ultimately found to be barred under the PLCAA by the Illinois Supreme Court. By its decision yesterday, the Supreme Court found it unnecessary to consider the Illinois Supreme Court's well-reasoned decision that held the PLCAA was both constitutional and clearly applicable to this lawsuit.
Representing Beretta in the case was Craig Livingston of the Livingston Law Firm, who after being notified of the Supreme Court's rejection of the appeal remarked, "And so ends a long legal battle -- from the trial court in Chicago, through the Illinois appellate courts, and all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court -- which served only to confirm what has been known since May 5, 2001, namely that this tragic shooting death was caused not by any defect in a Cook County Corrections Officer's Beretta pistol, but rather by its reckless misuse on that fateful day by his teenage son."
Lawrence G. Keane, senior vice president and general counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms industry, applauded yesterday's Supreme Court rejection of the Brady Center's appeal, stating, "Frivolous and unsupported lawsuits such as Adames that attempt to force manufacturers of firearms to pay for the crimes of others over whom they have no control are precisely what the PLCAA is designed to stop."
About NSSF
The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 5,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen's organizations and publishers. For more information, log on to www.nssf.org.
Media Contact:
Ted Novin (203) 426-1320 or tnovin@nssf.org
-
That's cool :)
But expect Bardy to keep bring em up. :(
-
Of course they will. Look, the Brady bunch are an interest group now, Brady inc.. They are not so much about the public interest (as they perceive it) as about their own. Look at MADD. They achieved everything that Carry Lightner, their founder, wanted. Public awareness campaigns, stiffer penalties etc. Yet they don't go away and keep pressing for more laws. Why? Because to say "Hey, we've won, lets go home", means giving up political power and fat paychecks. It ain't going to happen.
FQ13
-
I don't think Carry Lightner even agrees with MADD anymore.
-
I don't think Carry Lightner even agrees with MADD anymore.
Nope, they kicked her out because she said they'd gone too far. Its run by bureacrats protecing their paychecks.
FQ13
-
Hang it in your ass, Brady Bunch!
-
Nope, they kicked her out because she said they'd gone too far. Its run by bureacrats protecing their paychecks.
FQ13
Part of the reason they gave CANDY Lighner the boot was her 3 convictions for ...............................
Drunk Driving ;D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candy_Lightner
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Did_Candy_Lightner_the_founder_of_MADD_get_a_DUI
-
The continuation of these lawsuits that the Brady Bunch KNOW are baseless is simply an attempt to hurt firearms manufacturers financially. WHile the Brady Bunch is using other people's money (donations) to pursue this vendetta, the firearms manufacturing companies are forced to use their own money to defend themselves from these frivilous lawsuits. And even when they win, the gun folks are forced to shell out big bucks just to defend themselves.
At some point I'd like to see the firearms industry sue the Brady Bunch to recover some of their losses from these frivilous lawsuits.
-
Thankfully, George Bush appointed a Conservative majority, narrow, but there nonetheless. Imagine if the majority was the other way?
Heller would be overturned and BHO would be throwing every anti gun ban he could think of for ratification with the SCOTUS's approval.
Appeals wouldn't matter, as the SCOTUS would shoot them down and literally legislate from the bench and Repeals to the 2nd Amend. would be part of BHO's second term....
Scary as hell isn't it? How close do you think we are?
-
Might it have been better if SCOTUS had accepted the case and made a decision favoring our side, so The Brady Bunch couldn't bring it up anymore?
-
Scary as hell isn't it? How close do you think we are?
6-3, same as Roe. I hate to sound like a cynic but the only constant in Constitutional law is that 5 is a bigger number than 4.
FQ13
-
Might it have been better if SCOTUS had accepted the case and made a decision favoring our side, so The Brady Bunch couldn't bring it up anymore?
Apparently it would not stop the Brady bunch, the day Candidate Rudy was addressing last years NRA convention the SCOTUS tossed out a NY suit filed by Mayor Rudy.