Sandy Hook lawsuit gets an unexpected boost

Discussion in 'Politics and Current Events' started by Shane3, Mar 15, 2019 at 1:20 AM.

  1. Shane3

    Shane3 Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

  2. btown1110

    btown1110 Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Not a lawyer but it's beyond stupid. It's a state court so it means next to nothing but theoretically this now means that you can sue GM if you have a family member killed in CT by a drunk driver just because they were in a Chevy.
     
  3. padrehorn11

    padrehorn11 Member Who Talks

    I'm not a lawyer, but I know that Law is crazy. At least to us rational beings.
     
    TexasPalladin likes this.
  4. calvin farquhar

    calvin farquhar Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    It's basically breaking a, they said mean things in their advertising therefore they are responsible, lawsuit. It's beyond stupid and I doubt it goes anywhere. But, I'm not a lawyer and the more activists judges you get on the bench the greater the chances you'll lose rights or see stupid **** like this succeed.

    Remember when we were just talking about AOC suggesting the bank was responsible for any oil spills on the Dakota pipeline. Same type of thing.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2019 at 6:48 AM
    TexasPalladin likes this.
  5. JG

    JG Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    I am a well known advocate of significant changes to the way we allow sales and possession of firearms in this country.

    That said...

    This is stupid.

    Change the 2nd Amendment (I would), and change the laws. But until you have enough consensus to do that (probably the 12th of Never), this kind of thing is just a stupid way to harrass gun manufacturers. The suit should be tossed out.
     
  6. TexasPalladin

    TexasPalladin Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Thank You.

    Semper Fi
     
  7. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Not the same. The purposes and uses of cars and assault-style weaponry are fundamentally different universes.

    You want to get into the same universe, imagine the car would only steer into objects when driven.
     
  8. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    I agree to an extent. The laws need and will be changed once the Dems regain control of all thres necessary offices, much like when thy passed the tepid assault weapons ban in the late 90s that caused the current incarnation of the NRA we have today.

    That said, I have zero problem with an assault weappn manufacturer being sued into oblivionwhen one of their products is used in its functional capacity.
     
  9. msflash

    msflash Member Who Talks

    Lawfare.
     
    TexasPalladin likes this.
  10. SAhornfan

    SAhornfan Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Define "assault weappn".
     
    PFD, 40A and TexasPalladin like this.
  11. calvin farquhar

    calvin farquhar Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    He can't. He's a typical emotional reactionary dumbass that thinks banning guns will lead to criminals no longer being criminals. Those guys love to use emotion to trample on your rights usually through judicial fiat. If we're lucky RBG will drop dead and its 6-3 on SCOTUS so we know they'll toss their ****ty laws on guns out on their ass.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2019 at 9:29 AM
    TexasPalladin and fdub206 like this.
  12. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Well our government "defined" about 30 of them about 20 years ago. I'd start there and expand it as much as possible to get as many of those things off our streets.
     
  13. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Stay classy, whale vagina.

    As for having emotion, yes, I do, proudly so. Perhaps you should try having some. And give me a ****ing break, countries that ban those kinds of weapons are demonstrably safer.

    Dispute that. Droid.
     
  14. Duke Silver

    Duke Silver Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Yeah. You have no idea how this argument cuts.
     
    PFD likes this.
  15. Duke Silver

    Duke Silver Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Did shootings go down?
     
    PFD likes this.
  16. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Yes. Ones related to the banned weapons did. It's like a ****ing magic trick.
     
  17. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Oh, here comes the Argument Cutter. Made of Diamand Dust are ya?
     
  18. Duke Silver

    Duke Silver Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    I don’t think that’s right.
     
  19. Duke Silver

    Duke Silver Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    God you’re ****ing lame.
     
    TexasPalladin likes this.
  20. calvin farquhar

    calvin farquhar Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    No they didn't dip****.

    It's not. They even allowed the "assault weapons" ban to expire because it did nothing. Meanwhile, gun ownership has skyrocketed while murders and violent crime dropped. Weird isn't it.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2019 at 10:41 AM
    PFD and TexasPalladin like this.
  21. calvin farquhar

    calvin farquhar Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Wrong again, but hey, at least you defined "assault weapon".
     
  22. calvin farquhar

    calvin farquhar Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    He's emotional.
     
    Duke Silver likes this.
  23. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    The findings were largely either uncertain or with small decreases, remembering it only lasted a short period.

    In 2004, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violenceexamined the impact of the Assault Weapons Ban. Examining 1.4 million guns involved in crime, "in the five-year period before enactment of the Federal Assault Weapons Act (1990–1994), assault weapons named in the Act constituted 4.82% of the crime gun traces ATF conducted nationwide. Since the law's enactment, however, these assault weapons have made up only 1.61% of the guns ATF has traced to crime.

    Mass shootings
    In 2019, DiMaggio concluded the ban was associated with a reduction in mass-shooting related homicides during the 1994 to 2004 time period.[38] Another study from 2015 found a small decreases in the rate of mass shootings followed by increases beginning after the ban was lifted.[28] The report by the Australian Institute of Criminology also found that all mass shootings in Australia occurred before the 1996 National Firearms Agreement which placed tight control on semi-automatic and fully automatic weapons.[28] However, since the report's publication, there have been mass shootings in Australia.[39]

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban
     
  24. kennoisewater

    kennoisewater Member Who Talks

    Way over the line.
     
    PFD and Duke Silver like this.
  25. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Lol. Yeah, "letting" it expire in 2004. Use your noggin and tell me the political landscape in 2004??

    You don't get to pull the wool over my eyes calvin.
     
  26. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    You're callused.
     
  27. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Where?

    There are lots of definitions numnuts starting at barrel length to stock to grip. I see little difference. Ban them all.
     
  28. calvin farquhar

    calvin farquhar Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Not at all. I'm just smart enough to know you don't use emotion to create law. It leads to bad law based in misinformation. What's next, you going to say something about walking on the graves of dead children.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2019 at 10:42 AM
    TexasPalladin likes this.
  29. TexasPalladin

    TexasPalladin Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Psst...
    It's been statistically proven that the "Assault" Gun ban had no major impact on the frequency or severity of gun violence.
    And FTR Hip.
    You have absolutely no idea what a "Assault Weapon" is.
    Could it be.
    A. A gun?
    B. A pencil?
    C. A rolled up magazine?
    D. A vehicle?
    E. A rental truck?
    F. A passenger jet?
    G. A knife?
    H. Everyday common items that we use?
    I. A pressure cooker?

    If you answered all of the above?
    You would be correct.
    The greatest "Assault Weapon" in the world is between your ears.

    And this is the reason I refuse to debate the subject with people like you.
    Due to your preconceived ideas based on emotional and political ideology?
    You are incapable of having a honest and intelligent debate on the subject.


    Semper Fi
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2019 at 10:50 AM
  30. calvin farquhar

    calvin farquhar Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Hahahahaha holy **** you aren't smart at all. There is no such thing as an assault weapon. It's made up. Following your logic the headphones I am wearing are an assault weapon if I used them to assault someone. But your ban them all mantra isn't a surprise. Authoritarian assholes that like to dictate how others live their lives are like that.

    PS-you'll never get to eat your fruits and nuts when the world ends because a bad guy with an illegally owned gun will kill you because your dumbass gave your up. But keep on being you and stay out of my life. You won't be like an emperor when the world ends, you'll be the slave.
     
    TexasPalladin likes this.
  31. calvin farquhar

    calvin farquhar Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Opinions vary.
     
  32. kennoisewater

    kennoisewater Member Who Talks

    No. You stated quite clearly that you want Justice Ginsburg to die. I don't care what your politics are, that's way over the line.
     
    Burnt Orange and Hiphopster like this.
  33. calvin farquhar

    calvin farquhar Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    I quite clearly didn't state that, I just said we'd be lucky if it happened. But, again, opinions vary.
     
  34. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Bad law is doing nothing in the aftermath of Columbine. Aurora. Sandy Hook. Orlando. Las Vegas. Sutherland Springs. Santa Fe.

    Wise countries enact laws when they've had enough. They react with emotion. And laws.

    And they see undeniable changes. That's called wisdom, based on an emotional response. Or in our case, about 62 of them.
     
  35. calvin farquhar

    calvin farquhar Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    You can do something that doesn't involve taking away someones rights. I don't know, enforce current law vigorously maybe. Emotion based reactions to events are the worst creating ****ty laws. Your undeniable change is pie in the sky bull****.
     
    TexasPalladin likes this.
  36. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Have your pencil discussion with someone else interested in joining your fallacious argument Super Bowl.

    There are broad definitions of what constitutes an assault weapon. I don't give a damn where the argument lands. They are practically useless and dangerous weapons in the hands of average citizens. Keep them, in any iteration, where they belong. In the hands and under the jurisdiction of the armed services.
     
  37. TexasPalladin

    TexasPalladin Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    Actually it is, but only in that they weren't manufacturing several types of firearms.
    So people just used different firearms and assorted weapons to either kill each other or themselves.
    But it had no significant impact on the numbers, frequency and severity of murders.
    People who are both determined and creative will always find a way to kill each other.

    Semper Fi
     
    PFD and Duke Silver like this.
  38. calvin farquhar

    calvin farquhar Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    And people who just want to protect themselves from those guys are the ones harmed.
     
    TexasPalladin likes this.
  39. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    What about the rights of 6 and 7 year olds not to be shot and turned into puddles of unrecognizable tissue sitting in their classrooms? Do they have rights? From LEGALLY purchased firearms being used on them?

    The FOH.
     
  40. Hiphopster

    Hiphopster Member Who Talks (A Lot!)

    I have managed to protect myself, sans being armed, for 44 years. So have millions upon millions of others.

    And if our society were not based on archaic understandings and misinterpretations of legal gun ownership as spelled out in the 2nd amendment, millions of others might be able to live free in their homes and cities too.
     
    Burnt Orange likes this.

Share This Page