On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:17:11 GMT, Ignoramus15297
wrote:

On 21 Oct 2005 08:42:31 -0700, jim rozen wrote:
In article , Larry Jaques says...

Either read it again, this time with an -open- mind,

The whole thing sounds like a solution in search of a problem.
I heard that there have been a total of 47 such lawsuits, ever.

The gun lobby is starting to sound like Sarah Brady here,
whining for legislation they don't really need.

You do not need many lawsuits to destroy gun manufacturers -- you only
need a few very large judgments. Very large judgments were asked for by
plaintiffs. I am rather happy about this law.

i

To the best of my knowledge..there has been only ONE (1) judgement
against a manufacturer.

On the other hand...literally billions have been spent defending
against these lawsuits, which have time and time again been tossed
out of court. I can cite at least 5 small manufactures that simply
went tits up because of litigation costs.

When a small 20 man shop such as AMT is sued by the City of
Detroit..and the case drags out for years, there isnt any money in the
kitty for payroll and legal fees, even when the case is dropped by the
a city government, or found to have no legal merit.

And that in a nutshell..is exactly the tactics they employ. Bleed em
until you put them out of business, even when you know you have no
case. Hence the legislation.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner