since gun sales are soaring maybe remington will do well and be able cover

[Pop23]

the dupes think the answer to every killing spree is more guns.

The military thinks the answer to people getting mowed down on the battle field is more guns. Why are this situations different?

I guess you prefer more countries to have more nukes too? It’s good NK has nukes ! Makes for a safer planet , right ?

Comparing nukes to rifles isn't even an Apples to Orangutans comparison

Why not . A rifle to a perso = a nuke to a country .

The US has not been invaded by another country since we’ve had em.

You need an explanation?

 

[TNHarley]

Look it up

How about you do your work instead, putting in maximum effort instead of sending me on a wild goose chase?

I was on my phone. Its a simple google. But you are a leftist and expect someone else to wipe your ass.
Sandy Hook gun lawsuit gets its day in Connecticut Supreme Court - CNN
Sorry for the fake news website

 

[TNHarley]

All those bullshit lawsuits over sandy hook.
What kind of dumbass thinks a manufacturer is liable for what a crazy person does with their tools?
If i ever get attacked with a hammer, i am going to sue Stanley.
If i ever get hit by a drunk driver, i am going to sue chevy amd Jim Beam.
Do you idiots ever think about what your bedwetting is doing to society?

Guns have no purpose but to kill. That's why.

No shit.
Can you actually answer the question?

 

[The Derp]

It appears that turning law abiding citizens into criminals is the intent.

Well, you people are the ones supplying criminals with guns...so who should be responsible for that if not the gun owners?

 

[bendog]

All those bullshit lawsuits over sandy hook.
What kind of dumbass thinks a manufacturer is liable for what a crazy person does with their tools?
If i ever get attacked with a hammer, i am going to sue Stanley.
If i ever get hit by a drunk driver, i am going to sue chevy amd Jim Beam.
Do you idiots ever think about what your bedwetting is doing to society?

Remington's legal woes stem from it's once popular bolt action hunting rifle

Remington Model 700 trigger lawsuit settled in court

 

[pismoe]

No, because the NRA lies to boost sales. Idiots fall for it.

Examples?

No, because the NRA lies to boost sales. Idiots fall for it.

Examples?

A sad little attempt at propaganda, there.

Would you care to point out anything that wasn't true?

The NRA does not lie to boost gun sales.

----------------------------------------- all the regular gun owner and gun news follower has to do is watch the NEWS to see whats going on . To the extent that NRA reports the 'hogg' and other events in the news , well , good for them Bulldog .

 

[Skull Pilot]

It appears that turning law abiding citizens into criminals is the intent.

Well, you people are the ones supplying criminals with guns...so who should be responsible for that if not the gun owners?

Law abiding citizens are not supplying guns to criminals.

You're a computer user so you're supplying kiddie porn to your buddies now can we hold you responsible for that?

 

[The Derp]

[Only a fraction of the population are criminals

If criminals make up but a tiny fraction, why are you insistent on going to such drastic lengths to protect yourself?

 

[pismoe]

the dupes think the answer to every killing spree is more guns.

The military thinks the answer to people getting mowed down on the battle field is more guns. Why are this situations different?

I guess you prefer more countries to have more nukes too? It’s good NK has nukes ! Makes for a safer planet , right ?

------------------------------------- doesn't really matter but in the case of the 'norks' the USA is / may be following TRUMPS Decree of no nukes for the norks Timmy .

 

[Skull Pilot]

[Only a fraction of the population are criminals

If criminals make up but a tiny fraction, why are you insistent on going to such drastic lengths to protect yourself?

Because shit happens.

I have a very small chance of my house burning down but I still carry insurance for just such an occasion

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

It appears that turning law abiding citizens into criminals is the intent.

Well, you people are the ones supplying criminals with guns...so who should be responsible for that if not the gun owners?

Law abiding citizens according to you are the ones supplying criminals with guns? What a maniac you are.

 

[pismoe]

and its the 'norks' duty to try to beat out TRUMP and his Decree Timmy .

 

[OldLady]

All those bullshit lawsuits over sandy hook.
What kind of dumbass thinks a manufacturer is liable for what a crazy person does with their tools?
If i ever get attacked with a hammer, i am going to sue Stanley.
If i ever get hit by a drunk driver, i am going to sue chevy amd Jim Beam.
Do you idiots ever think about what your bedwetting is doing to society?

Guns have no purpose but to kill. That's why.

No shit.
Can you actually answer the question?

I worked for lawyers for awhile, so I'm not surprised about manufacturers being named in personal injury suits. It happens pretty routinely, although they are very rarely actually held liable. You would have to ask a lawyer for the "official" answer, but "deep pockets" is the actual answer.

I do see more sense in suing Remington than Stanley, though, since guns are manufactured to kill. Hammers are not.

Although I don't remember what exactly this is about, I read somewhere that it is to pressure gun manufacturers to put some kind of safety thingy on their guns? I don't remember exactly.

 

[miketx]

[Only a fraction of the population are criminals

If criminals make up but a tiny fraction, why are you insistent on going to such drastic lengths to protect yourself?

Because people like you won't punish them when caught. Instead you slap them on the wrist and try to disarm the rest of us so we will be at their mercy.

My God man, you got kicked out of one topic and here you are posting the same brain dead crap. You really do need mental help.

 

[Skull Pilot]

All those bullshit lawsuits over sandy hook.
What kind of dumbass thinks a manufacturer is liable for what a crazy person does with their tools?
If i ever get attacked with a hammer, i am going to sue Stanley.
If i ever get hit by a drunk driver, i am going to sue chevy amd Jim Beam.
Do you idiots ever think about what your bedwetting is doing to society?

Guns have no purpose but to kill. That's why.

No shit.
Can you actually answer the question?

I worked for lawyers for awhile, so I'm not surprised about manufacturers being named in personal injury suits. It happens pretty routinely, although they are very rarely actually held liable. You would have to ask a lawyer for the "official" answer, but "deep pockets" is the actual answer.

I do see more sense in suing Remington than Stanley, though, since guns are manufactured to kill. Hammers are not.

Although I don't remember what exactly this is about, I read somewhere that it is to pressure gun manufacturers to put some kind of safety thingy on their guns? I don't remember exactly.

Gee I guess I and millions of other gun owners are using their guns for the wrong purpose.

 

[The Derp]

Fortunately the people who will not commit murder far outnumber those that do

So if there's such a remote chance that you will be a victim of murder, why are you going to such drastic lengths and putting yourself at so much risk by having a gun?

yet you want to disarm the people who will not are are the least likely to commit murder

Them committing murder is but one of many reasons why people shouldn't be armed. The most predominant reason is that all guns in the hands of criminals were supplied by "responsible gun owners" who bought them to protect themselves from criminals. 230,000 guns are stolen every year from "responsible gun owners", and those guns end up in the hands of criminals, which fuels the gun crimes.

You are adding to the supply of available guns for criminals to steal when you bring that gun into your house.

So the irony is that you buy a gun to protect your home from criminals armed with guns they stole from homes.

If you can't see the stupidity of that, then it's willful ignorance at this point, and it boils your argument down to the simple fact that you just want a gun, not that you need it.

 

[The Derp]

FYI I never served in the military because the fucking government sent my Dad to his death in the skies over Vietnam for absolutely nothing but a game of political brinksmanship that we lost

Fair enough.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

All those bullshit lawsuits over sandy hook.
What kind of dumbass thinks a manufacturer is liable for what a crazy person does with their tools?
If i ever get attacked with a hammer, i am going to sue Stanley.
If i ever get hit by a drunk driver, i am going to sue chevy amd Jim Beam.
Do you idiots ever think about what your bedwetting is doing to society?

Guns have no purpose but to kill. That's why.

No shit.
Can you actually answer the question?

I worked for lawyers for awhile, so I'm not surprised about manufacturers being named in personal injury suits. It happens pretty routinely, although they are very rarely actually held liable. You would have to ask a lawyer for the "official" answer, but "deep pockets" is the actual answer.

I do see more sense in suing Remington than Stanley, though, since guns are manufactured to kill. Hammers are not.

Although I don't remember what exactly this is about, I read somewhere that it is to pressure gun manufacturers to put some kind of safety thingy on their guns? I don't remember exactly.

Gee I guess I and millions of other gun owners are using their guns for the wrong purpose.

The Leftists would prefer if everyone armed themselves with something else....like a feather boa or whatever

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Fortunately the people who will not commit murder far outnumber those that do

So if there's such a remote chance that you will be a victim of murder, why are you going to such drastic lengths and putting yourself at so much risk by having a gun?

yet you want to disarm the people who will not are are the least likely to commit murder

Them committing murder is but one of many reasons why people shouldn't be armed. The most predominant reason is that all guns in the hands of criminals were supplied by "responsible gun owners" who bought them to protect themselves from criminals. 230,000 guns are stolen every year from "responsible gun owners", and those guns end up in the hands of criminals, which fuels the gun crimes.

You are adding to the supply of available guns for criminals to steal when you bring that gun into your house.

So the irony is that you buy a gun to protect your home from criminals armed with guns they stole from homes.

If you can't see the stupidity of that, then it's willful ignorance at this point, and it boils your argument down to the simple fact that you just want a gun, not that you need it.

"The most predominant reason is that all guns in the hands of criminals were supplied by "responsible gun owners" who bought them to protect themselves from criminals. 230,000 guns are stolen every year from "responsible gun owners", and those guns end up in the hands of criminals, which fuels the gun crimes."

 

[TNHarley]

All those bullshit lawsuits over sandy hook.
What kind of dumbass thinks a manufacturer is liable for what a crazy person does with their tools?
If i ever get attacked with a hammer, i am going to sue Stanley.
If i ever get hit by a drunk driver, i am going to sue chevy amd Jim Beam.
Do you idiots ever think about what your bedwetting is doing to society?

Guns have no purpose but to kill. That's why.

No shit.
Can you actually answer the question?

I worked for lawyers for awhile, so I'm not surprised about manufacturers being named in personal injury suits. It happens pretty routinely, although they are very rarely actually held liable. You would have to ask a lawyer for the "official" answer, but "deep pockets" is the actual answer.

I do see more sense in suing Remington than Stanley, though, since guns are manufactured to kill. Hammers are not.

Although I don't remember what exactly this is about, I read somewhere that it is to pressure gun manufacturers to put some kind of safety thingy on their guns? I don't remember exactly.

So purpose makes them liable? Thats silly.
What about hunting knives then?
Do you not see how ridiculous this notion is?