Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Events in PA | Main | LA to consider criminalizing failure to report theft »

Bloomberg suits criticized

Posted by David Hardy · 25 September 2006 10:27 AM

The NY Sun has run an article that actually covers critics of the Bloomberg lawsuits.

· media

4 Comments

Bill | September 25, 2006 10:39 AM

"This is not litigation against dry cleaners or dishwasher repair people. This is litigation against an industry that makes products that kill people, but they don't ever want to be held liable."


By that logic, we should sue all the car manufacturers because they make "products that kill people, but they don't ever want to be held liable". Let's not forget the manufacturers of kitchen knives, swimming pools, ladders and baseball bats. Oh - we should sue the companies that manufacture copper wire, because it kills people who get electrocuted.

Kirk Parker | September 25, 2006 11:17 AM

Well, the article did contain this inaccuracy:

"A gun crime trace means that at some point after a gun left the store it was used in a crime"

Kirk Parker | September 25, 2006 11:19 AM

Oh, and this very questionable assertion:

"The investigators simulated 'straw purchases'"

I would say any reasonable reading of the events would conclude that they actually committed straw purchases.

Ken | September 25, 2006 3:21 PM

Well, if the investigators only simulated making straw purchases, then doesn't it follow that the dealers only simulated making straw sales? Admittedly, I'm an economist rather than a lawyer, but from my perspective it seems that if there's a sale, then there ipso facto there's a purchase.

BTW, a gun trace might also mean that the gun was stolen or lost, then subsequently recovered, with absolutely no criminal activity by any legal owner at any stage.