Sandy Hook families can sue gun manufacturers.

[OKTexas]

forks, knives, baseball bats, hand guns, hunting rifles, etc, all have other legal purposes.

there is no other legal purpose for assault weapons than massive deadly assault.

certain types of weapons should require higher regulation of who can own them and for what lawful purpose.

whoever applies for a legit lawful purpose should be required to achieve certain high standards of training, etc...

Would 20+ years in the military meet your high standards of training?

 

[Rustic]

Then you would know an "ar" is not a military grade weapon? It's just a sporting rifle...
Get your out of your ass and educate yourself... Lol

Sure, the AR15 is a "sporting rifle" if you want to either have instant deer ground meat, OR kill as many people as possible just for "sport"......

It's not military grade, That's for sure.
What is the difference between an ar15 sporting rifle and a military grade m16/m4??
Be specific... Hint: The difference is like night and day... Dumbass

 

[Centinel]

Then you would know an "ar" is not a military grade weapon? It's just a sporting rifle...
Get your out of your ass and educate yourself... Lol

Sure, the AR15 is a "sporting rifle" if you want to either have instant deer ground meat, OR kill as many people as possible just for "sport"......

btw, .223 is not really considered sufficiently powerful to harvest deer. I haven't heard anyone using anything less than .270, at least on the east coast, where the whitetails are typically larger than out west.

 

[TemplarKormac]

BTW, a gun can't kill. Bullets do.

As is the case where guns can't kill on their own, bullets can't kill on their own either. Unless some poor guy thinks it would be funny to swallow one and winds up choking to death on it.

So without the the murderer, the gun is harmless; without the gun, the murderer is harmless. Without the bullets, the gun is harmless; without the gun, the bullets are harmless. Thus demonstrates the fatal flaw in liberal gun control arguments.

Confusing perhaps, but it demonstrates that one break in that chain, either the murderer, the gun, or the bullets, will mean nobody is in danger of being sued, or shot dead.

 

[Rustic]

Then you would know an "ar" is not a military grade weapon? It's just a sporting rifle...
Get your out of your ass and educate yourself... Lol

Sure, the AR15 is a "sporting rifle" if you want to either have instant deer ground meat, OR kill as many people as possible just for "sport"......

Ha! Ground meat? You do know most ARs use a .22 caliber round?? Get your head out of your ass... Lol

 

[OKTexas]

How the hell would a gun manufacturer 5 states over have any idea who you are selling guns to in Chicago? Do you think the cattle rancher knows who is eating his steak at your restaurant? What is it with liberals and a general lack of logic?

Speaking of "logic".......Do you not comprehend that a gun manufacturer that sells assault weapons are selling those weapons UNAWARE that such a weapon may be used to kill as fast and as many people as possible?

You don't have a clue what an assault weapon is, so STFU.

 

[Rustic]

What would the plaintiff's case be? How are firearms manufacturers in any way responsible for Sandy Hook?

Simple......Such weapons of mass murder should NOT be manufactured......Aren't you within the same ilk that gets all pissy about N. Korea wanting to sell nuclear know-how to Iranians.

Please remove your head from your ass... Lol

 

[Rustic]

You know, it's quite sad that you're using those families and their dead children as tools to further your argument.

I doubt you truly care about them.

You can"doubt" all you want, but I both know one of those poor families and I've had friends killed needlessly by asasalt weapons.

Too bad you don't know what an so called "asasalt" weapon is... Lol
Dumbfuck

 

[Rustic]

Read up on Fast and Furious. All those guns used by those drug cartels to murder hundreds and/or thousands of innocents and not one word from liberals like you.

Cite where any of us are "defending" the federal government with the "fast and furious" debacle....and, BTW, the same gun manufacturers that you seem to love, made lots of profit with that little program.

Again... Please remove your head from your ass.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Damn, it stinks that this false flag crap just won't die. Whatever. Anyway, that Lanza got the guns was his mother's fault. Had she not been killed she would be the one who should face civil action as well as criminal charges. It was HER fault the boy got the weapon. Period. A law suit against Remington won't do anything but make them charge more for guns. In the end, they will lose. It's a shame that in this country acountability in flat out gone. I'm fat and is someone else's fault, I cut my finger, it's the knife makers fault because they made the knife sharp.

Fuck you. Fuck you big mother fucking time.

She liked to hunt. HOW THE HELL IS SHE RESPONSIBLE FOR HER FUCKED UP KID?..

First, she facilitated the murder of all those children by making the gun avaliable to her sick offspring. In most states had she not been shot she would have had charges brought and rightfully so. So fuck yo, fuck you big time. She is just as guilty for those dead kids as her son.deal with it.

Made it available? He stole the guns and killed her. There's not a state in the Union that would prosecute her even if they COULD prosecute a dead person. It's not like she handed him the gun and then stood there reloading for him.

Can't say for sure anyway else, but it can and has happened here. And the feds can make a case if they wanted to. Adam Lanzas mom is probubly pretty lucky she ain't around to find out, oh, and seeing that she did not properly secure the guns, she would have been the one who should have been held liable monitarily, not the gun companies.

Really? Your state prosecuted someone for being so "irresponsible" as to be murdered and subsequently robbed?

 

[Rustic]

You have been exposed as a liar. How dare you lie about something like that?

The ONLy thing exposed here is your biased stupidity....and like a cat who gets tired of playing with a dead mouse, I've got better things to do then read your imbecility.

Go play with your guns......

 

[Rustic]

 

[OKTexas]

One of the problems is that many times good people who own guns become bad people when something sets them off. We see this happen frequently, and I'm not sure what the answer to preventing this is.

How about we just make it illegal...........................oh wait!

 

[Crixus]

Damn, it stinks that this false flag crap just won't die. Whatever. Anyway, that Lanza got the guns was his mother's fault. Had she not been killed she would be the one who should face civil action as well as criminal charges. It was HER fault the boy got the weapon. Period. A law suit against Remington won't do anything but make them charge more for guns. In the end, they will lose. It's a shame that in this country acountability in flat out gone. I'm fat and is someone else's fault, I cut my finger, it's the knife makers fault because they made the knife sharp.

Fuck you. Fuck you big mother fucking time.

She liked to hunt. HOW THE HELL IS SHE RESPONSIBLE FOR HER FUCKED UP KID?..

First, she facilitated the murder of all those children by making the gun avaliable to her sick offspring. In most states had she not been shot she would have had charges brought and rightfully so. So fuck yo, fuck you big time. She is just as guilty for those dead kids as her son.deal with it.

Made it available? He stole the guns and killed her. There's not a state in the Union that would prosecute her even if they COULD prosecute a dead person. It's not like she handed him the gun and then stood there reloading for him.

Can't say for sure anyway else, but it can and has happened here. And the feds can make a case if they wanted to. Adam Lanzas mom is probubly pretty lucky she ain't around to find out, oh, and seeing that she did not properly secure the guns, she would have been the one who should have been held liable monitarily, not the gun companies.

Really? Your state prosecuted someone for being so "irresponsible" as to be murdered and subsequently robbed?

Not as dramatic as all that. A hood rat was taking a nap and two kids were playing with his gun. One shot the other. All this talk about the guns being in a safe, sooo, where did he get the gun to shoot his mom and steal her guns? And if he was crazy, why were they so easy to get to? The mother at a minimum was grossly negligent.

 

[turtledude]

[

Can't say for sure anyway else, but it can and has happened here. And the feds can make a case if they wanted to. Adam Lanzas mom is probubly pretty lucky she ain't around to find out, oh, and seeing that she did not properly secure the guns, she would have been the one who should have been held liable monitarily, not the gun companies.

I doubt it. she had no warning he was going to commit capital murder. He had not been adjudicated mentally incompetent nor did he have a criminal record nor was he a fugitive or under indictment

 

[Rustic]

 

[Rustic]

 

[OKTexas]

Being able to sue people who didn't do anything is setting a HUGE precedent.
If I get hit by a drunk driver, you goddamn right I am about to sue Jim Beam and chevy. Their SOLE purposes are to be driven and get drunk.
You limp wristed statists are a DRAIN to our country.
No.
Fuckin.
Shit.

Dependent upon the limitations of this, it might be a good thing, or it could be a very bad thing. If this is a case where gun manufacturers and gun sellers become open to civil suits every time someone is killed by a gun, then we have a big problem. On the other hand, if lawsuits are limited to cases where there was true negligence on the part of the seller or manufacturer, then this would make sense. It seems to me that sellers are the ones who will need to show the most caution, as selling a gun to someone with a criminal record who is not permitted to buy or own a gun, or to someone who was just released from the loony bin, is where this will play out the most.

What "negligence" are you referring to?

It's pretty difficult to see how you would get negligence on the part of the manufacturer, but it is very easy to see how you could have negligence on the part of a seller.

Not if they follow the law. If they don't then it's up to the ATF to revoke their license.

 

[Rustic]

 

[OKTexas]

it also exists in the minds of those who blindly put corporate profits over concerns for public safety.

And THAT is what this is really all about. Its why the NRA has paid so much money to R congress slime.

It is astounding that all these people put corporate profit over the lives of children but that's what they care about.

There are 310 million guns in the United States, hundreds of millions more in the rest of the world. And you're going to keep them from criminals how exactly?

You're the ones murdering children, all you do is prevent people from protecting themselves. Honest citizens follow the law. The funny thing about criminals is they don't follow the law. You didn't see that one coming. But there was a hint. They are criminals ...

Societies that do not allow guns have a much smaller problem with criminals getting guns. Sure, they can in some cases, but it is very difficult.

Tell that to the folks in Paris.