They finally get one right..

[dboat]

The Supreme Court of the US has really put out some stupid rulings lately, (see Guantanamo Bay) but they got this one right.. :tu:

June 26: In a landmark ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court has reaffirmed the right for individuals to own firearms, striking down Washington D.C.'s ban on handguns.
:gatling: although gattling guns might not be on the ok to own list. ;)

Dana

[98Cobra]

Well, I agree with you on this. But on the Gitmo ruling I think they got that one right as well. The one they actually missed was cutting the damages against Exxon for the Valdez disaster.

[dboat]

Well, I agree with you on this. But on the Gitmo ruling I think they got that one right as well. The one they actually missed was cutting the damages against Exxon for the Valdez disaster.

I dont think I know enough about the entire case to comment on the Exxon one.. they limited it to the $500 million that Exxon had already paid the folks.

Dana

[98Cobra]

They havent paid them a dime yet. They have kept this tied up in appeals for 19 years fighting it, and ended up only having to pay 1/10th of the original award amount. Meanwhile, one third of the plantiffs have died. If they had just paid the original amount, it would be equal to what they bring in in about 48 hours in today's economy.

Does that sound like justice?

[dboat]

In the aftermath of the disaster, Exxon spent around$2.1 billion in cleanup efforts. The United States charged the company with criminal violations of the Clean Water Act, 33 U. S. C. §§1311(a) and 1319(c)(1); the Refuse Act of1899, 33 U. S. C. §§407 and 411; the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U. S. C. §§703 and 707(a); the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, 33 U. S. C. §1232(b)(1); and theDangerous Cargo Act, 46 U. S. C. §3718(b). Exxon pleadedguilty to violations of the Clean Water Act, the Refuse Act, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and agreed to pay a $150 million fine, later reduced to $25 million plus restitution of $100 million. A civil action by the United States and the State of Alaska for environmental harms ended with a consent decree for Exxon to pay at least $900 million toward restoring natural resources, and it paid another $303 million in voluntary settlements with fishermen, property owners, and other private parties.

I got this straight from the Supreme Court documents.. so there have been some payments made to injured Alaskans.. there were other suits that were filed and then consolidated into this last suit.

Dana

[98Cobra]

Those payments were not part of the class action suit. If you dont opt into a class action, you are still free to sue on your own. I am talking about this:

"The 32,677 plaintiffs in the case have been waiting for their compensation since 1994, when a jury in Anchorage returned a $5 billion punitive-damages award against Exxon Mobil Corp. The company has been appealing the verdict since then. In 2006, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals cut the award to $2.5 billion. Exxon appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments in the case on Feb. 27.

Business groups such as the American Petroleum Institute and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce had hoped that the Supreme Court would use the Exxon Valdez case as a way to curb what they believe are large punitive damages against corporations.

Former Alaska governors, the current governor, the congressional delegation, supertanker captains, environmentalists, state lawmakers, Alaska Natives and experts in maritime law all joined with the 32,677 plaintiffs in asking that the Supreme Court uphold the $2.5 billion verdict."

Source: http://dendroica.blogspot.com/2008/06/exxon-valdez-award-reduced.html

Reaction from affected townspeople: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/42185.html

[dboat]

Those payments were not part of the class action suit. If you dont opt into a class action, you are still free to sue on your own. I am talking about this:

"The 32,677 plaintiffs in the case have been waiting for their compensation since 1994, when a jury in Anchorage returned a $5 billion punitive-damages award against Exxon Mobil Corp. The company has been appealing the verdict since then. In 2006, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals cut the award to $2.5 billion. Exxon appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments in the case on Feb. 27.

Business groups such as the American Petroleum Institute and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce had hoped that the Supreme Court would use the Exxon Valdez case as a way to curb what they believe are large punitive damages against corporations.

Former Alaska governors, the current governor, the congressional delegation, supertanker captains, environmentalists, state lawmakers, Alaska Natives and experts in maritime law all joined with the 32,677 plaintiffs in asking that the Supreme Court uphold the $2.5 billion verdict."

Source: http://dendroica.blogspot.com/2008/06/exxon-valdez-award-reduced.html

Reaction from affected townspeople: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/42185.html

ok, I didnt know about that part.. thanks

[L8 APEX]

Yep, the reduction on top of inflation means they got a 5 billion dollar judgement down to about 300 million and even less in todays dollars.:bs

[Moonshine]

Can't comment on the Exxon case.

Re. the Heller decision I'm still reading the SCOTUS ruling. It's a 150 page ruling.

[dboat]

Re. the Heller decision I'm still reading the SCOTUS ruling. It's a 150 page ruling.

On the heels of this ruling, Georgia is passing an open carry law, and folks want to open carry in Atlanta on the mass transit.. cant say I blame them..

Dana

[Chris94L]

Looks like Heller v. DC 2.0 will be on its way soon


WASHINGTON (WUSA) -- District residents can start registering their guns today. But at least one very high profile application was already rejected.
Dick Heller is the man who brought the lawsuit against the District's 32-year-old ban on handguns. He was among the first in line Thursday morning to apply for a handgun permit.
But when he tried to register his semi-automatic weapon, he says he was rejected. He says his gun has seven bullet clip. Heller says the City Council legislation allows weapons with fewer than eleven bullets in the clip. A spokesman for the DC Police says the gun was a bottom-loading weapon, and according to their interpretation, all bottom-loading guns are outlawed because they are grouped with machine guns.
Besides obtaining paperwork to buy new handguns, residents also can register firearms they've had illegally under a 180-day amnesty period.
Though residents will be allowed to begin applying for handgun permits, city officials have said the entire process could take weeks or months.



http://www.wusa9.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=74036&catid=158

[tiffo60]

Looks like Heller v. DC 2.0 will be on its way soon


WASHINGTON (WUSA) -- District residents can start registering their guns today. But at least one very high profile application was already rejected.
Dick Heller is the man who brought the lawsuit against the District's 32-year-old ban on handguns. He was among the first in line Thursday morning to apply for a handgun permit.
But when he tried to register his semi-automatic weapon, he says he was rejected. He says his gun has seven bullet clip. Heller says the City Council legislation allows weapons with fewer than eleven bullets in the clip. A spokesman for the DC Police says the gun was a bottom-loading weapon, and according to their interpretation, all bottom-loading guns are outlawed because they are grouped with machine guns.
Besides obtaining paperwork to buy new handguns, residents also can register firearms they've had illegally under a 180-day amnesty period.
Though residents will be allowed to begin applying for handgun permits, city officials have said the entire process could take weeks or months.



http://www.wusa9.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=74036&catid=158

so there only allowing revlovers?

[dboat]

so there only allowing revlovers?


sounds that way unless its a top loader? :rolleyes: