General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: How Bernie Sanders Helped Derail a Promising Legal Fight Against Gun Violence [View all]thucythucy
(8,069 posts)for purely PR or political reasons get punished by the courts. At the very least, a plaintiff bringing such a case would be docked court costs and required to pay the defendant's attorney fees. A plaintiff who is a repeat offender could be found in contempt of court, which would entail fines or even, in extraordinary cases, jail time.
I'm afraid your concern about the poor gun manufacturers being victimized by unscrupulous attorneys and plaintiffs is misplaced. One heard the same arguments about the poor helpless tobacco industry, until it was proved that they indeed colluded to misinform the public, target minors, and as a result contributed to the premature deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans. It's fortunate the tobacco lobby didn't have the foresight to push through legislation protecting them from "baseless nuisance lawsuits." Otherwise we'd be back to the days when "scientists disagree" about whether tobacco smoke causes cancer.
To sum up, your argument seems to be--these cases were so bogus there's no doubt that the gun manufacturers would have won. Which is why they needed extraordinary, unprecedented protections from Americans seeking their day in court.
I'm glad though that you finally answered the question. Blanket protections for breweries, toxic waste manufacturers, and presumably any other industry, no. Blanket protection for the gun industry, yes. It's a shame so many people buy this industry line.