This is a little nugget I found over at the Brady Center. I won't add to their google-fu by linking to them but I'm sure most readers can find their home page without too much trouble. NOTE: this is the "Brady Center" not the Brady Campaign page.
"The Legal Action Project, along with the Center for Constitutional Litigation, filed a petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court on August 24, 2009, asking the Court to strike down a federal gun industry immunity law as unconstitutional.
The case, Adames v. Beretta, arises out of the accidental shooting death of 13 year old Josh Adames, who was killed by another boy as a result of a defective Beretta handgun.
On May 5, 2001, thirteen-year old Billy Swan found his father’s Beretta 92FS handgun and removed the magazine that contained its ammunition, believing that this action had unloaded the gun. But the gun did not contain one of several commonplace safety features that warned users when a round remained in the chamber or prevented the gun from firing when “unloaded” in this fashion. Believing the gun was unloaded, Billy pulled the trigger, and the bullet hidden in the chamber killed his friend Josh."
This truly shows their desparation and just how low they'll stoop.
1. The immunity law still allows lawsuits for defective firearms, as it should.
2. The Brady Center is now forced into taking the ridiculous position that a loaded gun that fires when the safety is off and the trigger is pulled is defective.
3. This implies that a loaded gun which does not fire with the safety off and the trigger pulled is functioning properly.
So much for common sense.
5 comments:
...It's also factually incorrect, in that the 92FS does contain at least "one of several commonplace safety features that warned users when a round remained in the chamber" a (crappy) loaded chamber indicator, in the form of a brightly-colored area at the top of the extractor.
Is this the case that the Court recently refuse to hear?
I came here to post what RobertaX already said. I believe this was even brought up in the original trial.
Besides, what are two 13-y-o's doing playing with a gun, ANY gun, unsupervised? If anything, blame & sue the parents for NOT teaching the children better, at the least.
Was the gun unsecured and loaded? If so, another hit on the parents. Or did the children have to pick locks and bypass security measures to get their mitts on the pistol?
Also now the Brady-Bunch is hopping in bed that mag disconnects are somehow "Safe". So simply dropping the mag "Unloads" a gun, according to them....what they fail to account for is failure of the disconnect AND of course the really scary bit is when Mr. Cluless unloads the mag and re-inserts it into the mag well for safe keeping.
So they want two logical disconnects in safey. #1: No magazine = Empty Gun
#2: Empty magazine MAY mean loaded gun.
How about you just pull back the slide and inspect the chamber, kid!
hell my 1911 has a witness hole in the chamber, I still do a press check before I toss it in my holster...even when I load it from a Barney mag where a mag with a single round goes in, and an empty mag goes out. Where'd that round go? Better press check to see!
Post a Comment