Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As a Connecticut resident, I disapprove. The states opinion on guns as turned to anti-gun. So many people are afraid of guns here. All in all though, the manufacturer is not responsible for what the consumer does with the product. Those guns were LEGALLY owned anyway. Why don't we focus on that a majority of gun owners are being punished by something they didn't do. CT has passed the strictest gun laws in the nation. Our governor has tried gun confiscation which didn't work. I'm sick that society is run in a way that if one person does something bad then EVERYONE else has to suffer even if they had nothing to do with it.
How many people live on anti-depressants or pills to make them handle reality?
I have been reading on this and it seems that the attorneys are being very creative. The suit alleges that the Remington company was marketing their guns to the wrong element by using video game placement and marketing to promote violent individuals to buy their gun. But they also are saying the gun is too dangerous and should only be allowed in the military and law enforcement. On the latter I think they are totally dead in the water. If its legal then either make it illegal or shut up. On the marketing I don't really see how marketing it as a "manly " gun or as used in a video game that actually uses a virtual M4 full auto weapon as irresponsible. You video game nuts had better get in on this because I am telling you your video games are next.
Funny thing is..... from the beginning, the people and the Sheriff, were to have the weapons, not the military and certainly not the government. (we just fought a weaponized government intent on oppression)
There was not to be a standing government army. The people were to be called upon in times of conflict.
You can actually sue a pressure cooker company but their primary use is cooking, not so with guns and manufacturers enjoy a legal shield not available to most companies. Hand guns are a larger problem but these rifles are very popular in mass murders, no matter where you draw the line it will be questioned but a normal person doesn't need 20 round clips.
I don't see them winning this case but the fact is that the gun companies do promote the ability of the guns though marketing.
The primary use of the AR is for target practice , home defense and competition. It always amazes me how people just don't know or want to know. There is no gun that did not get its design DNA from some military firearm. Bolt actions, look to Paul Mauser designs for the German Austrian military, Lever actions, Look to the Henry rifle designed for the Civil war. Flint locks look to the Brown Bess and other guns of the day. From the first hand cannon to todays M4. To put a line on how many rounds a mag can hold is just stupid. First off it will create a black market for these mags and criminals will get them anyway. There are literally many more millions of mags compared to guns in the USA. Ban them all? Ya that will work, NOT.
A magazine is a steel square box. How hard is it for a 3d printer to make up one or for someone with a metal break to bend up one? About 10 mins work. The same follower will work in a 10 round mag or a 50 round mag. The public has shown time and again that they can get around bans by being clever, such as the bullet button in Cal. mags that are compliant that can be easily changed like the 30 round attached 1022 mag.
It's a semi-auto long rifle the same as a 740 Remington which shoots a .30 caliber round not a .223. Ya know, with a high cap detachable mag and range of 1000 yards.
With that logic EVERY single thing that has been used by the military could fall under that. Which includes, knives, shoes, tooth brushes, toilet paper. Every weapon ever invented has been used by the military at some point.
This judge is simply kicking the can down the road. Spineless.
The M16 holds a lot more rounds of ammo than that rifle you pictured. A BETA Mag holds 100 rounds.
LOL, I'm sure a skilled killer could take out the enemy with toothbrushes and toilet paper.
This is a great example of the lack of personal responsibility that is running rampant in this country lately. No one wants to be held for their own actions, instead, we want to sue everything in sight. The one and only person responsible for what happen on that day was Adam Lanza. That's just not good enough for this country anymore. Payday is just around the corner.
If he was wearing Levi jeans, maybe there is another opportunity for a lawsuit. What about the gas station used to fuel the vehicle to get to the school. ................ heck, what did he eat for breakfast?
There are several ways but you have to have a lot of money and have a FFL07 to do it. They must also be registered to the ATF.
pft!
You do realize, nothing is illegal until you get caught.
Government has no business knowing what I have to defend myself, unless they have an intent to control me or harm me. If that were the case, I am not free with liberty, but in bondage to my master, the government.
Wait a minute....
You and I are slaves, for government.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest
Ridiculous. If he had used a Ford truck to run over his victims could the families sue Ford?
They could and likely would have. Lawyers aim suits at where the $$$ is, not necessarily for where the guilt lies. Auto manufacturers are a very popular target, regardless of where the actual problem lies.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.