Grouse

Wednesday, July 7, 2021 NSSF to Challenge New York Public Nuisance Lawsuit Law NEWTOWN, Conn. – The National Shooting Sports Foundation® (NSSF®) will challenge to overturn the law signed by New York Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo that would allow civil lawsuits by municipalities against the firearm industry for the criminal actions by non-associated third parties. The law is in contravention to federal law, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), and the legal foundations of tort law. “This law is unconstitutional, plain and simple. It is abhorrent that Governor Cuomo is rehashing a decades-old failed playbook that was rejected by courts in the 1990’s and early 2000’s,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “Governor Cuomo is, again, blameshifting for his administration’s failures to prevent crime by pointing fingers at firearm manufacturers that have been working with federal, state and local authorities for real solutions.® This law is based on the same legal understanding that would allow victims of drunk drivers to sue Ford and Budweiser for the criminal actions of an individual. This law is not legal accountability. It is political posturing.” Gov. Cuomo signed the law after repeating the same debunked talking points churned out by President Joe Biden. Gov. Cuomo claimed the firearm industry is the only industry immune to lawsuits. That worn-out myth was discredited by The Washington Post and Fact Check.org. Politifact called them “False” in 2015 when failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton attempted to pass along the debunked information. Gov. Cuomo knows this history and the record of courts dismissing these lawsuits before PLCAA was passed with a broad bipartisan consensus in 2005. Gov. Cuomo, when serving as President Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, got involved when he organized dozens of local housing authorities to bring their own lawsuits against gunmakers and threatened the industry with “death by a thousand cuts.” This was his admission these lawsuits lacked legal foundation and amounted to harassment through litigation. Legal Professor Victor Schwartz, who literally wrote the textbook on tort law, former law professor and law school dean and the current co-chairman of the Public Policy Group of the law firm Shook, Hardy & Bacon, recently authored an op-ed setting the record straight on PLCAA. He wrote, “The PLCAA remains a commonsense law that protects against unsound attempts to change radically a fundamental liability law principle.” Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, wrote in The Hill of the PLCAA, “The bill saved the industry some litigation costs, but the industry would have prevailed in such actions anyway if they were tried. Product liability and tort actions against manufacturers have uniformly and correctly been rejected by the courts.”

New York: Cuomo Declares Gun Violence State of Emergency Remember when Gov. Andrew Cuomo told everyone the SAFE Act was going to make New York streets safer? Well that didn’t work out too well and neither will his latest attempt to deflect attention from years of failed criminal justice policies. Today, the Governor announced he is declaring a gun violence state of emergency. How can there be a gun violence state of emergency in New York when the state has, arguably, the harshest gun laws in the country? The answer is simple: Gov. Cuomo and the Democrat controlled Legislature have not only failed to fix the problem, they have made it worse! Their catch-and-release “bail reform” and defunding of law enforcement has resulted in New York crime hitting historic levels, and somehow he can blame—with a straight face—gun manufacturers. The Governor has spent his entire tenure coddling criminals and harassing law-abiding New York gun owners. It should come as no surprise that crime has spiraled out of control. Gov. Cuomo indicated he is signing S.7196, by Sen. Zellnor Myrie (D). That bill would make it easier to sue gun manufacturers, despite federal protections adopted years ago under the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Instead of taking responsibility for failed legislation coming out of Albany, the scapegoating continues.

It is a blatant violation of 2nd A rights to force people to pay a fee to exercise them. It is also governmental abuse to deny a right to someone who cannot afford to pay a tax to exercise that right. Just more proof Democrats have no respect for the Constitution, individual rights, self defense, the Rule of Law or freedom in general. The fact the nation's Democrat party doesn't chastise it's minions when they do things like this, proves the entire party feels the same way.

Another hyperbolic false accusation starts your post. "Everyone and anyone" is being used here to imply you are supported by more people than you are. I call people who support unconstitutional ideas and far left, Marxist ideology, a leftist. BTW, that is not a liberal. Liberals support the US Constitution and freedom, but take it to extremes. But at least they believe in Constitutional rights and letting people exercise them. For example, they are against oppressive gun control. Anyone who supports taking away rights, or silencing free speech, enlarging the scope and power of government to control the people, or taxing political opponents to buy the votes of their base, is a leftist, whether they find the moniker insulting or not. Anyone who voted for Democrats in 2020, or supports Biden now, is a leftist, whether they realize it or not, because all the things they are promoting or doing to this country right now are right out of the Marxist rule book. The term "right leaning" itself implies a person is not consistent in their political ideology, sometimes supporting the Constitution and sometimes opposing it. The Rule of Law under the Constitution is not fluid. The Constitution is a legal document. It is not subject to interpretation, and it says what it says and doesn't say what it doesn't say. Support for any misguided interpretation of it, to suppress rights, or create "rights" not originally in it, which are really government granted privileges that can be taken away by the same government that granted them, is leftist. I won't shy away from defending my positions. I'm willing to have a civil debate about anything I post with anyone who cares to be civil and put forth a compelling argument, and I'll do it without being lewd, crude, or devolving into hyperbolic imagery or analogy. But I find people who defend leftist ideology are not capable of civil debate, preferring to be vague with their position and resorting to personal attacks when frustrated with facts, because their position will not hold water. I'm sorry if some people find the term "leftist" offensive, but I find leftist ideology to be more than that. It's dangerous.

That's a completely false accusation. I challenge you to prove it. When do I ever stoop to derogatory comments unless responding to the same? And if I do go derogatory, I'll tell you exactly why I'm doing so with facts. These hit and run insults are the sign of a coward. I debate. I don't stoop to low class innuendo or personal attacks. I will attack opposing viewpoints and opinions with a civil post, unless the other person stoops to personal attacks, or snarky insults, when they cannot support their opinions. The difference between me and them is I will always support my opinions with data and stats to verify them, and some people just can't handle losing a debate because they can't do the same. I'm always open to civil debate and will defend my positions professionally. Few leftists will ever do the same. They are too filled with hate and delusional moral superiority to do likewise.

One has to remember anyone who disagrees with a leftist will be labeled something derogatory by that leftist, without any explanation as to why that label applies to you. Why? Because you disagree with the things they have been told to swallow by their handlers. They can't defend their derogatory labeling with any semblance of reason or logic. They just exhibit contempt for you because you refuse to comply with their beliefs. It's a totalitarian mindset. Not one open to civil debate.

Weird stuff happening on this forum today. Triple post.

Double post

Unfortunately we have a lot of unelected "lawmakers" working in bureaucratic agencies, that have the power to pass laws affecting all of us. That's one of the reasons we need to be very wary whenever the govt decides to grant such power to an agency where nobody is held accountable by the people. The BATFE is probably the worst agency there is.

But not a "shooting" war.

"I guess Nike's attitude towards genocide in China is 'Just Do It.'" —Senator Tom Cotton

Lots of folks who don't hunt enjoy using trail cams. Will they be banned for recreational wildlife photography too? This is why laws require a lot of debate prior to passing. Lawmakers often have no clue what unitentional harm their laws will do until they pass them.

I bet there are more Chinese spies in Democrat's beds than in all of South Korea. But hey, living with blinders on is a choice, and the left is all about choice if it supports their agenda. If it doesn't, you're a racist, bigot, homophobe.

This is not about saving raptors. It's about harassing gun owners.

How about the leftist plan to do away with ALL borders and national sovereignty to install one world government? Who do you think will be running that government? China has no plans of going to war with the US, but do plan on running the world.