a couple of things that might intrerest readers


June 27, 2005, 07:04 PM
In the July 11 issue of Shotgun News, on page 11 thereof, find The Knox Report, nowadays written by Jeff KNox, Neal's son.

The current piece is entitled Et Tu ISRA, this last standing for Illinois State Rifle Association, which along with The NRA, if Knox is correct, has managed to really stick it to Illinois Gun People, as well as possibly giving a large boost to the national push for "closing the gun show loophole", which so far as I previously knew, did not exist.

Once again, perhaps it's time to inquire concerning what it is that winds the NRA up, perhaps the same question being put to the ISRA, both of whom seem to have been SNOOKERED, to their everlasting shame, not to mention to the detriment of gun owners everywhere, again assuming that Knox has got it right.

Second item of interest is, or could be described as USSC DID IT AGAIN. In a ruling that came down today, in the Grockster case, Grockster being one of those file sharing outfits, whose software allows users to "share files", the shared filed sometimes containing copywrited materials, which is, it turns out, a violation of copywrite law. In any event, The Court held that Grockster is responsible for violation of copywrite laws by others, these "others" having used Grockster software.

Re this, one wonders as to the following. How long might it be before GM for instance, under the same ruling, is held liable for the fact that some idiot got into their Buick, and while dead drunk, operated said vehicle, causing injury, mayhem and possibly the death of others. Forget about the fact that GM has absolutely no control over the action of the drunk driver, who by the bye was in violation of the law while driving drunk. If GM can be held liable under the strained thinking herein involved, Grockster has been, then how long might it be before Smith & Wesson or any gun maker will be also?

So dear readers, when one views The Courts ruling on the New London Eminent Domain case, combined with the foregoing, it strikes me that the need for immediate and ongoing contact with your elected things becomes paramount.

If you enjoyed reading about "a couple of things that might intrerest readers" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
June 27, 2005, 07:12 PM
1. Copyright. As in, the right to control who makes copies of your work.

2. If you read the whole story, you'll see that SCOTUS said that Grokster was in trouble because they promoted themselves as being useful for illegal activities (copyright violations). Your comparison with Buick doesn't hold, and with guns only holds against manufacturers or retailers who market their products as tools with which to break the law. When you find a firearms manufacturer taking out ads that say "Buy a Kimber; rob a bank," you just let me know.

June 28, 2005, 01:00 PM

The points you make are certainly interesting and even TECHNICALLY CORRECT, however consider the following, if you will. Looks as if this court ruling might well turn out to be yet another example of LAWYER WELFARE ACTION.

As to the liklehood of yet additional frivilous suits being brought, while to date, none have been sustained, ALL had to be defended againsdt, whicjh likely ate up a whole lot of dollars that could have been otherwise used productively.

Alas, the lawyers ate them. Anbother possibility, mentioned during news comment is the following. As a result of this ruling, lawyers might come to control technical innovation, I suspect not a good thing for technical innovation.

Thanks for your input.

Henry Bowman
June 28, 2005, 01:49 PM
lawyers might come to control technical innovation, All your base are belong to us. :evil: :uhoh:

June 28, 2005, 04:41 PM
Just wanted to apologize for my tone of keystroke. I was a little on-edge from correcting a lot of misunderstanding of various SCOTUS verdicts, and I let that bleed through as incivility. I'm sorry about that.

I'd say I'm feeling much better now, but I'd be lying.

June 29, 2005, 03:08 PM

No offense taken. Other than that, I have been known to get a trifle waspish myself at times.

I like that be cruel, make a person think line.

I still think that this court ruling could spell trouble, as I described, the parties involved in such actions being whom and what they are.


June 29, 2005, 03:16 PM
I would like to know why each Shotgun News issue arrives in my mailbox at least a week after it hits the Barnes and Noble bookstand :cuss:

Maybe my USPS Mail-lady is reading it first :evil: in which case good for her!

If you enjoyed reading about "a couple of things that might intrerest readers" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!