The corrupt gun industry striking back

[demsrule4life]

Notice Of Lawsuit Served Against The Minneapolis Star Tribune And Fox 9 KMSP By Bills Gun Shop And Range.

For defamation and libelous misstatements regarding Bill's Gun Shop And Range in Robbinsdale, MN

http://newsroom.eworldwire.com/view_release.php?id=2124

[MrBenchley]

1. Wow...

a press release.

Wonder how quick he drops the suit when he realizes that the people he's suing will have the right to look at his business records?

Also, note that he wants to sue, while the corrupt gun industry and the GOP is pushing to deny citizens the right to sue him.

[demsrule4life]

2. My guess is that is exactly what he wants

[MrBenchley]

4. Surrrrrrrrrrrrre....

[Liberal Classic]

9. Just because you do not like his business...

Does not mean he does not have the right to protection under the law. As much as you hate it, firearms is a legal business, and as such the business owner has a right to pursue a libel suit.

In saying this, I am making no statements regarding the potential outcome. I am just chagrined at your apparent lack of empathy for someone who believes they have been slandered against, and wishes to see justice done in the courts. If the proprietor of a firearms business is as evil as you imply, why go throught the court system at all when more lethal remedies are at your disposal? Perhaps because the proprietor is not a murderer by virtue of the fact that he is in a line of work you disapprove of?

[MrBenchley]

10. Hahahahahahhahaha...

Yeah, that's pretty mcch the definnition of corrupt...somebody who insists nobody has the right to sue him, but runs to sue other people.....

[Liberal Classic]

15. Typical non-answer

I never said that no one has the right to sue the busiess owner in the article, nor did I speculate on the potential outcome of this case, furthermore I did not advocate limited liability.

All I was noting how blinded by hatred you are. To me it seems you are so biased that you can't bring yourself to give gun owners the benefit of the doubt: innocent before proven guilty and all that jazz. To you all gun owners and dealers are crooks and therefore unworthy of protection under law.

If someone insists he can't be sued, but sues others, that is not corruption that is hypocricy. You have a right to believe gun owners are corrupt and hypocritical and the like, and I'll defend to the death your right to express said opinion. But by the same token I have a right to rebut, even though it seems to me you would not extend me the same honor.

Cheers, Benchley.

[MrBenchley]

20. Hahahahahaha...

"To you all gun owners and dealers are crooks"
What was the title of this thread again? And how many crime guns did this bum furnish?

"I'll defend to the death your right to express said opinion. But by the same token I have a right to rebut, even though it seems to me you would not extend me the same honor."
Gee, that would be a lot less hilarious if it wasn't for the RKBA crowd's constant attempts to get the Guns in the News thread disrupted, suppressed, or eliminated.

I'm not disputing anyone's right to make whatever argument they want, even from as flimsy and idiotic a start as a press release.

[slackmaster]

22. I guess you missed the sarcasm

What was the title of this thread again?

Maybe the author should have put a smiley in the title.

Gee, that would be a lot less hilarious if it wasn't for the RKBA crowd's constant attempts to get the Guns in the News thread disrupted, suppressed, or eliminated...

Remember the "Defensive gun uses" thread and how you behaved? Pot, meet Kettle.

I'm not disputing anyone's right to make whatever argument they want, even from as flimsy and idiotic a start as a press release.

Your favorite propaganda sources are famous for their "press releases". Goose, meet Gander.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slackmaster]

16. First logical fallacy of the morning - a Straw Man

...somebody who insists nobody has the right to sue him, but runs to sue other people.....

The plaintiff has not made such an assertion.

[Withergyld]

11. S 659 does not prevent ALL lawsuits

"Also, note that he wants to sue, while the corrupt gun industry and the GOP is pushing to deny citizens the right to sue him."

Under S 659 lawsuits could still be filed for the following reasons:
"(i) an action brought against a transferor convicted under section 924(h) of title 18, United States Code, or a comparable or identical State felony law, by a party directly harmed by the conduct of which the transferee is so convicted;

(ii) an action brought against a seller for negligent entrustment or negligence per se;

(iii) an action in which a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product knowingly and willfully violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product, and the violation was a proximate cause of the harm for which relief is sought;

(iv) an action for breach of contract or warranty in connection with the purchase of the product; or

(v) an action for physical injuries or property damage resulting directly from a defect in design or manufacture of the product, when used as intended."
http://www.heritagefund.org/common/legal/docs/S659.pdf
(I tried a link to Thomas but the colon on the end of the URL was doing weird things.)

[slackmaster]

21. You think Adam Richardson, Esq., isn't smart enough to know that?

He is a a real live lawyer, donchaknow?

:dunce:

Also, note that he wants to sue, while the corrupt gun industry and the GOP is pushing to deny citizens the right to sue him.

That, as most of us know, is a crock of baloney.

[Superfly]

3. Good for him

I hope this suit ends favorably for the plaintiff.

[beyurslf]

5. Libel?

Does his attorney know how hard libel is to prove?

[Superfly]

6. Well, if it's a news program...

there will be actual recordings of the alleged libel, at least.

[Withergyld]

8. The other was a Newspaper

So hardcopies are also available

[MrBenchley]

12. This is hilarious...

And it's wonderful to see such an inane attempt to squash the freedom of the press at the same time that the RKBA crowd is proclaiming they need their popguns to defend freedom.

[Superfly]

13. Suuuuuurrrrrreeee.....

the anti-RKBA crowd's awe-inspiring desperation is really showing today. Sad, so sad.

[Withergyld]

14. The issue is NOT freedom of the Press,

The issue is truth in journalism.

Keep trying to spin it into something else.

[MrBenchley]

18. The issue is freedom of the press

and the hypocrisy of the scummy gun industry.

[slackmaster]

24. The press is not free to print willful lies

That are intended to harm a legitimate business.

[RoeBear]

26. Come on Slack...

...you know it's ok to slander and libel all you want if you direct it towards the gun industry.
:vomit:

oops it's :puke:

[slackmaster]

19. Freedom of the press has limits just like all other freedoms

The freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. All freedoms carry responsibilities, all freedoms have the potential for exploitation and abuse.

Laugh all you want, I'm quite sure your opinion will have zero effect on how the legal system handles this case.

[slackmaster]

17. The hard part about proving libel is establishing intent to cause harm

Proving that someone knowingly made a false statement in a libel case can be quite easy.

In any defamation case the tough sell is proving that the defendant meant to damage the plaintiff, as opposed to just being stupid.

[fishbone]

7. I wish them success!

It looks like this gambit to hold firearms manufactures responsible for what people do with the weapons is backfiring, I'm glad to see. I've seen a lot of pending legislation in the news lately where they are passing laws specifically to prevent such lawsuits. I'm glad to see it.

fishbone

[beevul]

25. I have been to Bills in person twice...

when I lived in MN. It sure doesn't look shady in person. My brother in law bought a handgun there a couple of years ago. They did the NICS check, etc.

In the 2 times there, I saw nothing indicating anything but a well run business.


A little OT, but one year...the year that the furbie or the tickle-me-elmo was big, and causing all the troubles with people fighting in the stores and internet prices of 600$ or better...one of the local radio stations...kqrs I think, did a fund raiser for toys for tots (IIRC) and auctioned off a chance to open fire at the stuffed critter in question with a belt fed .50 cal machine gun at the range in Bills Gun Shop. They tied the stuffed critter to thier "urban assault vehicle" (promo vehicle) and dragged the stuffed critter around the twin cities for a couple hours. Then they took it to bills, where a mild mannored, middle-aged lady opened fire on the critter. She paid like 5000 dollars for the privelage of wiping out furbie or elmo- whichever it was.

With all the BS going on because of how crazy that stupid stuffed animal was making some people, it was pretty satisfying , even just to listen to. And worth a chuckle or 3.