This document is a role play between students, based on the decision Soto vs Bushmaster. The goal is to elaborate a detailed argument.
[...] She would probably vote to accept the case in the US Supreme Court. Note: here is what Guisburg thinks about the Second Amendment and the right to own a gun for civilians: "The Second Amendment has a preamble about the need for a militia . Historically, the new government had no money to pay for an army, so they relied on the state militias. And the states required men to have certain weapons and they specified in the law what weapons these people had to keep in their home so that when they were called to do service as militiamen, they would have them. [...]
[...] What she could ask: In past cases, some courts have used a narrow judgement on this exception to the PLCAA immunity, relating it to the "specific context". Is the specific context of this case satisfactory to bring the immunity exception to judges? (lien: https://www.daypitney.com/insights/publications/2019/03/20-soto-bushmaster-sandy-hook-stunning-victory) The appellants argues that the advertisings were specifically addressed to "young, white men". What in the advertising makes the appellants think so? Did the marketing material affect the specific rifle or extend the risk to other similar products? [...]
[...] Beretta USA Corp. in which the City of New-York sued the gun industry for public nuisance caused by the negligent merchandising of the gun industry, in which the question was to be examined in appeal, there is a clear evidence that the question of wrongful marketing of the gun industry has already been brought into question and leads to a clear decision that will make precedent for all courts in the U.S. (lien du City of New-York v. Beretta cas" https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2500396/city-of-new-york-v-beretta-usa-corp/) . [...]
[...] Supreme Court roleplay Objectives, structure, expectations Side: Appellant / appellee Soto vs. Bushmaster Argument "Negligent entrustment" Reasoning: The theory of "negligent entrustment" −which refers to a dangerous instrument being entrusted by someone or a company to someone who should not use it, the person or the company can be held responsible if any harms follow the use of the instrument− can be used in our case, Soto v. Bushmaster Firearms International, LLC, as the semiautomatic XM15-E2S used in the mass shooting is a military grade weapon that should not be sold to civilians, as it represents an "entrusting" of the rifle to anyone who use it outside recreation or hunting purposes. [...]
APA Style referenceFor your bibliography
Online readingwith our online reader
Content validatedby our reading committee