Is There Hope For California's Gun Owners After All?

Todd

Virgin
Joined
Jan 1, 2001
Posts
6,893
Remember when Gian Luigi Ferri shot up a San Francisco law office in 1993? He killed eight people and wounded six more before killing himself. Two of his weapons were TEC-DC9 pistols.

The families of the victims sued Navegar Inc., the Miami-based manufacturer of those TEC-DC9s. A lower court allowed the suit to continue, but the California Supreme Court ruled 5-1 yesterday that victims cannot sue weapons makers for damages when criminals use their products illegally.

Yes, you read that right. A California court actually made a sensible ruling on guns! The court said the victims failed to prove that Navegar's marketing practices led Ferri to choose the TEC-DC9. In a state that's moving towards licensing and registering gun owners, the high court has provided some common sense. Maybe there's hope for California after all.

All you anti-gunners out there who think gun manufacturers should face liability for the misuse of their products...think about it. I know it's
hard for you, but sit down and noodle it out for a few minutes. By your logic...

...Drivers could sue cell phone manufacturers for causing car crashes.

...Victims of drunk drivers could sue liquor companies.

...Rosie O'Donnell could sue spoon manufacturers for making her so fat!

Gun control and logic just don't mix. Emotions dominate the gun control argument--do it for the children, save a loved one's life, and
whatnot. But the facts show that America is safer because its citizens are armed.

The easiest way to shut a gun grabber up is to use cold, hard facts.
http://cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,305097-412,00.shtml
 
Originally posted by Todd
The easiest way to shut a gun grabber up is to use cold, hard facts.
http://cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,305097-412,00.shtml
Sadly, you're laboring under a severe misconception here, Toddy. Were fact the only requirement, the second amendment argument would have become moot years ago and the Left would be silent on it or perhaps demanding the every citizen be armed.

The welfare state in the U. S. would have been disestablished and the government's quest to become ever more pervasive and invasive of the private lives of its citizens would have been reversed and would not be a concern today.

But the people who pursue totalitarian government are not swayed by fact, reality or reason. They pursue their beliefs with a religious fervor and rely on their faith in collectivism despite the damning truth of reality over centuries of history.

As far as California gun owners, they are still under assault by the state legislature and the idiot we have for a state atorney general. They keep trying to ban "assault weapons" and keep expanding the number and types of weapons that they draw into this category each year.
 
Back
Top