Lawful commerce in arms
Seems a stretch to me to sue a gun maker for the failings of state and local laws. But lawyers do lawyer things. Doubt much comes of it. I’m not a lawyer.
4 Responses to “Lawful commerce in arms”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
October 8th, 2012 at 4:13 am
Beemiller (I just realized, sorry if this is old news to everyone else) is also known as “HI-POINT.”
It is well known that Hi-Point pistols are striker-fired, but do not have a firing-pin-block. I wonder if the lawsuit was initiated because of this?
October 8th, 2012 at 7:52 am
Seems the appellate judge decided that the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act which forbids that type of lawsuit really does not mean what it says.
It just means it will take longer and cost more for the manufacturer and distributor to get out from
under. Or is that the strategy, to make it cost
so much that settling becomes cheaper?
Too bad judges enjoy absolute soverign immunity.
stay safe.
October 8th, 2012 at 3:55 pm
How is it that a judge can write something as patently stupid as that and still find her way to the courthouse?
They don’t specify the laws that are broken, but it’s clear that laws were broken? WTF?
October 8th, 2012 at 9:08 pm
While I am not a Hi-Point fan, I don’t see them causing anything. That said, I do think I smell a straw man in the barn. Still, not the manufacturer’s fault. I blame the dweeb that thinks he can avoid the middle man.