Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Does Bernie want to protect all corporations from liability suits? Or just the gun industry? [View all]Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)121. Completely unrecommended.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
143 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Does Bernie want to protect all corporations from liability suits? Or just the gun industry? [View all]
DanTex
Oct 2015
OP
How many bills have been introduced to protect various corporations from liability suits?
Autumn
Oct 2015
#1
That's my question. Does he generally favor corporations, or just corporations that either make
DanTex
Oct 2015
#3
I'm guessing it's a little of both, but this is a complicated topic. A lot of the ALEC work is done
DanTex
Oct 2015
#8
Yes, for some lawsuits, the rules for gun companies are still the same as for other industries.
DanTex
Oct 2015
#49
They decided that the claims were not allowed due to PLCAA. Not sure how this could be
DanTex
Oct 2015
#108
Name one case where a lawsuit was thrown out of court against another manufacturer
DanTex
Oct 2015
#57
You're claiming that unlawful misuse is grounds for dismissal outside the gun industry.
DanTex
Oct 2015
#69
Of course I have. Read the text of the law, it only grants immunity to the gun industry.
DanTex
Oct 2015
#89
You still have not cited an instance of unlawfull misuse by another manufacturer.
HooptieWagon
Oct 2015
#112
You have not cited a single instance where a lawsuit against anyone other than a gun
DanTex
Oct 2015
#113
Very strange that you claim that a legal exemption exists, but you can produce neither
DanTex
Oct 2015
#116
If you're actually a tort lawyer, maybe you should read up on the cases that actually were filed
DanTex
Oct 2015
#134
I currently have no one on Ignore but you're testing the limits of that decision.
Jim Lane
Oct 2015
#135
Again, if you are actually a tort lawyer, then you know that unlawful misuse is not
DanTex
Oct 2015
#137
Perhaps, the above discussion of "liabilty law", vis a vis, properly brought suits/improper verdicts
1StrongBlackMan
Oct 2015
#100
So if I poison someone's cat with Raid bugspray, S.C. Johnson & Son is liable?
Scootaloo
Oct 2015
#52
How about if I get my arm stuck in a vending machine? Segea's gonna pay my bills, right?
Scootaloo
Oct 2015
#58
Now, let's say I eagerly vote for a war that kills over a million and displaces millions more
Scootaloo
Oct 2015
#70
You can also change the subject when you're losing an argument. That's also probably fun.
DanTex
Oct 2015
#71
I wasn't aware we were arguing. I'm asking you questions. How about this one?
Scootaloo
Oct 2015
#74
Depends what the courts decide. Unless you're a gun manufacturer, the you don't have to worry
DanTex
Oct 2015
#82
Probably not. I don't take you as the kind of person who would intentionally profit from
DanTex
Oct 2015
#90
Some faulty innuendo there, hoss! But - you expect yourcandidate to appeal to anyone who cares
djean111
Oct 2015
#7
I'm not sure what Clinton Foundation smears have to do with Bernie's history of siding
DanTex
Oct 2015
#9
You are linking Bernie to gun violence. And attempting to paint Bernie as one who always sides
djean111
Oct 2015
#13
Maybe he's trying to deflect attention from Clinton's vote to cluster-bomb children.
HooptieWagon
Oct 2015
#16
That's because he sided with corporations on a legal immunity bill that stymied lawsuits
DanTex
Oct 2015
#17
It's linking Hillary to her approval of the use of cluster bombs on innocent victims
Autumn
Oct 2015
#23
OK, feel free to start an OP on that. Here I'm discussing Bernie's largesse towards the gun industry
DanTex
Oct 2015
#27
I am responding to your post Dan. That's the reason why OPs are posted Dan. To get responses
Autumn
Oct 2015
#34
Thanks for the response. I've heard the Clinton Foundation smears many times, and don't find
DanTex
Oct 2015
#35
You are so welcome Dan, and I really hate to burst your bubble but facts are not smears Dan.
Autumn
Oct 2015
#48
The Smith and Wesson case would have been. The NRA really didn't like that one, and it
DanTex
Oct 2015
#24
Gee, the gun industry could have just hired you as their defense lawyer instead of going to
DanTex
Oct 2015
#26
It's so surprising you are utterly unable to answer the simplest of questions on this.
jeff47
Oct 2015
#28
No, it's the reality. The fact that the lawsuits were succeeding tells you everything you
DanTex
Oct 2015
#41
I just posted a huge list of things that Smith and Wesson changed. Do you want me to cut and paste
DanTex
Oct 2015
#91
Good question. I think he was wrong to vote for these liability protections for gun makers.
hrmjustin
Oct 2015
#40
I've noticed a lot of people trying to change the subject on this OP. Wonder why that is?
DanTex
Oct 2015
#76
Interesting that he singled out the gun industry for immunity. It's actually nothing like the
DanTex
Oct 2015
#96
Those are strange predictions about what would happen in the absence of this law.
DanTex
Oct 2015
#106
The only exception is Bernie siding with any corporation, look at his history .
orpupilofnature57
Oct 2015
#126
You do know that McDonalds was sued for selling a faulty product, right?
last1standing
Oct 2015
#132
The pretzel logic of the OP and the surreal level of intellectual dishonesty the OP demonstrates in
Bluenorthwest
Oct 2015
#141