Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: AKS\/\/ulfe on March 02, 2004, 02:01:08 PM
-
I think I just saw the most retarded statement evar.
MSNBC (the cable TV channel, not the web site) had a question of the day regarding "Should gun mfgs be sued for violent crime?"
I only caught three of the responses because I was outdoors grilling some burgers. First one was a fine reply, stating things about gun safety and education. The third one was a good reply as well, stating that it isn't the weapon - its society thats at fault.
The second one though, damn... This person stated, "Gun mfgs should be sued for producing an unsafe product. Food mfgs can be sued for producing unsafe food, and automobile mfgs can be sued for unsafe automobiles."
Now, I know there will be people who have problems understanding just how rediculously stupid that statement is - so I'll break it down.
A weapon is, first of all, designed to be unsafe - but not to the owner/purchaser of the weapon, but to those who force the owner to use it. In the case of a responsible owner anyway. The only way its unsafe to the owner and innocent people is blatant misuse and poor gun safety training on that person's behalf.
Food - if you use it as its not intended, it will harm the one who purchased it and potentially other people who its fed to. Blatant misuse (ie: undercooking, or choking to death because your a retard that can't chew) of food, well - there simply is no lawsuit against the food manufacturer. If the food comes packed with poison or spikey metal balls, THEN there is a case for suing the manufacturer.
Autombiles - SUVs are well reknowned for flipping in extreme manuevers at extreme speeds. Blatantly using it out of its envelope will be an instant loss in a court case. If it has some defect that causes it to explode, then you've got a case.
In all three cases, being a responsible, safe and educated gun owner/cook/automobile driver - there is no way for the product to be unsafe unless there is a defect or it is misprepared.
So the fact of the matter is - unless the gun explodes when you fire a round, then its not unsafe. The only thing unsafe in violent crimes is the owner/operator of the weapon, so they are the responsible party and the only one that can be sued.
-SW
-
Very simple....never eat or drive your firearms....they want a warning label????
-
Warning, firearms can be painful when ingested. This applies to ammunition also.
-
car mfg's should have to pay for all speeding tickets, after all , they made a car that will vilolate the speed limits.
let me explane lawsuits;
if you fall down your neighbors steps, you sue your neighbor.
if your neighbor falls down your steps , they sue you.
if you fall down your own steps, you sue your builder.
-
Originally posted by john9001
car mfg's should have to pay for all speeding tickets, after all , they made a car that will vilolate the speed limits.
let me explane lawsuits;
if you fall down your neighbors steps, you sue your neighbor.
if your neighbor falls down your steps , they sue you.
if you fall down your own steps, you sue your builder.
it should be:
if you fall down your neighbor's steps, your neighbor laughs at your dumb prettythang.
if your neighbor falls down your stairs, you laugh at his dumb prettythang.
and if you fall down your own stairs, you look around to make sure nobody saw you..... then laugh at your own dumb prettythang
if everyone wasn't so sue happy, this country would be a much better place.
-
What a load of crap. Hell, Ford got away with the flamable Pinto. They even had internal documents showing they would rather suffer the law suits than pay the cost to fix them with a recall.
Granted, firearms may enable some persons to commit homicide. Heck, I would not want to engage in hand to hand combat. I suck at it. Been well trained in it, but I just am not good at it. So your average citizen may be inclined to "Shoot" someone as opposed to enaging in close combat.
But the intent still lies with the person commiting homicide, not the tool used.
Drive by shootings: Sue the auto manufacturer too! No vehicle, no drive by :)
-
What's sad are the courts that allow these kinds of lawsuits to happen. That's right there with all the numbnuts suing the saw manufacturer because they cut off their finger. I don't see the logic in that ... the saw did exactly what it was supposed to do :lol
-
Originally posted by Stoned Gecko
What's sad are the courts that allow these kinds of lawsuits to happen. That's right there with all the numbnuts suing the saw manufacturer because they cut off their finger. I don't see the logic in that ... the saw did exactly what it was supposed to do :lol
It's partly because judges and a large number of legislators are Lawyers. Just as Doctors usually recommend more medicine and treatment and management always recommends more management , lawyers are going to ensure every problem is solved through the law.
If you are professional hammer-wielder you make sure all problems are solved with a hammer.
-
This is when I think they would have a case....
6:00 News....
Anchor..We take you now to Reporter Sue Mebuttoff for a late breaking story just in....Sue?
Reporter....This is Sue Mebuttoff reporting from the scene...
A 9mm Glok committed murder today in South Central L.A.. The glok , authorities said , fired on citizens as they passed by it's house where the door was left open.
Lead Investagator Wesson "It just had a bad morning and decided to fire on them" "We have no idea what happened earlier but we're questioning the Gloks owner Mr. Smiith as to what may have caused this shooting"
A spokesperson from the GLOK company declined comment.
THis is the first shooting of this type in history. We spoke to a Gun Physcoligist and she had these comments.
"It's a classic case of misuse by the owner. The GLOK in this case , not being used by the owner enough had had enough. GLOKs need love , oil , and the occasional firing to be happy. It's just simple case of neglect. I blame the Owner and charges should be filed on him as well."
Authourities are also catching wind of several Shotguns and 3 high powered rifles that maybe looking to cause harm as well.
They seem to think this maybe the beginnings of a new and ruthless gang of GUNS that will be calling themselves "The Misused"
Spokesperson for the Police department said that until that have more information that this is all they can say at this time.
This has been a tregedy of epic proportions and a landmark case of Guns gone carzy. The GLOK was taken to the central station where it will be formally charged. If convicted the GLOK could face being dismatled and melted. This is the most severe penalty for a gun.
Gun activist are already arriving to be at the GLOKs side and try to rally support for the quote" Misused Firearms of of America Scoiety". Supporters of the GLOK say that People should'nt judge til they have heard all the facts of the case. Famed Lawyer Johnny Remmington it is rumored may be lead council for the accused GLOK.
This has been Sue Mebuttoff live at the scene,,,Back to you Lee Tagator.........
-
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
the gun store and the gun maker have already been sued at least once here in FL after a murder
yes, it is retarded but typical in our "it's not my fault" world we live in today..
-
they just passed a bill not allowing lawsuits against gun mfgs for silly reasons. It was tacted onto the assult weopon ban.
-
nooooo froggie... the assault weapons ban was tacked on to the mfgs bill. Most bills in the U.S are like a beetle poll... they have about 4 or more parts that have nothing to do with each other... the women and liberals and democrats will point to this bill and say that it means that everyone is agaisnst assualt weapons even tho there is no defenition of assualt weapons.
lazs
-
No, the bill wasn't passed because of the "Riders" on it that were banning different types of guns.
-
Oh yea your right laz, it didnt get passed.
Silly thing about the the assult weopon ban is that i can still walk down to a gun show fill out no paper work, not have a background check,and buy a tek-9 and go columbine on people.
So why not just allow all gun sales go with no regulation.
So many loopholes and powerfull guns you can get anyways.
-
Froggie:
You seem to be a bit confused about the so-called gun-show loophole
Full article is at: http://www.cato.org/dailys/01-10-00.html
Read the excerpt below.
January 10, 2000
The Facts about Gun Shows
by David B. Kopel
David B. Kopel is an associate policy analyst at the Cato Institute.
"Close the gun show loophole," demands Handgun Control, Inc. The major obstacle to Congress's complying with HCI's wishes appears to be the desire of many Democrats to preserve gun shows as a campaign issue in the 2000 election. But if the voters learn the facts about gun shows, they will discover that there is no gun show loophole, no gun show crime problem and no reason to adopt federal legislation whose main effect would be to infringe on First and Second Amendment rights.
Despite what some media commentators have claimed, existing gun laws apply just as much to gun shows as they do to any other place where guns are sold. Since 1938, persons selling firearms have been required to obtain a federal firearms license. If a dealer sells a gun from a storefront, from a room in his home or from a table at a gun show, the rules are exactly the same: he can get authorization from the FBI for the sale only after the FBI runs its "instant" background check (which often takes days to complete). As a result, firearms are the most severely regulated consumer product in the United States -- the only product for which FBI permission is required for every single sale.
Conversely, people who are not engaged in the business of selling firearms, but who sell firearms from time to time (such as a man who sells a hunting rifle to his brother-in-law), are not required to obtain the federal license required of gun dealers or to call the FBI before completing the sale.
Similarly, if a gun collector dies and his widow wants to sell the guns, she does not need a federal firearms license because she is just selling off inherited property and is not "engaged in the business." And if the widow doesn't want to sell her deceased husband's guns by taking out a classified ad in the newspaper, it is lawful for her to rent a table at a gun show and sell the entire collection.
If you walk along the aisles at any gun show, you will find that the overwhelming majority of guns offered for sale are from federally licensed dealers. Guns sold by private individuals (such as gun collectors getting rid of a gun or two over the the weekend) are the distinct minority.
Yet HCI claims that "25-50 percent of the vendors at most gun shows are unlicensed dealers." That statistic is true only if one counts vendors who aren't selling guns (e.g., vendors who are selling books, clothing or accessories) as "unlicensed dealers."
Denver congresswoman Diana DeGette says that 70 percent of guns used in crimes come from gun shows. The true figure is rather different, according to the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the U.S. Department of Justice. According to an NIJ study released in December 1997 ("Homicide in Eight U.S. Cities," a report that covers much more than homicide), only 2 percent of criminal guns come from gun shows.
That finding is consistent with a mid-1980s study for the NIJ, which investigated the gun purchase and use habits of convicted felons in 12 state prisons. The study (later published as the book Armed and Considered Dangerous) found that gun shows were such a minor source of criminal gun acquisition that they were not even worth reporting as a separate figure.
....................
-
Hiya Hooligan. :D Havent flown with the BKs in a while. Sure miss winging with you guys.
:)
-
You still flying? Next time you are online find a BK and tell them you need a reinvite. I will email the squad mailing list tonight and let them know to expect you.
Hooligan
-
I am not confused about it.
-
Originally posted by Hooligan
You still flying? Next time you are online find a BK and tell them you need a reinvite. I will email the squad mailing list tonight and let them know to expect you.
Hooligan
Actually no. My account is not activated at the moment and wont have time to play ah for a while. When I do come back and play ah again, I'll look you guys up of course.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
the gun store and the gun maker have already been sued at least once here in FL after a murder
yes, it is retarded but typical in our "it's not my fault" world we live in today..
It is typical for those who would deny us our freedom, just because they can. I seriously question any court's sanity, that would even consider such lawsuits. New Orleans tried to sue the gun manufacturers for gun related crimes there. I think the case was dismissed.
Nevertheless, lawsuits are expensive to defend, and that is the main strategy nowadays for anti-freedom people to take away our rights. Thankfully, through the efforts of the NRA, there are level headed people who are defending our rights. It's not only Second rights, but more recently First rights concerning Campaign Finance Reform, where Lieberman and McCain backed a bill saying no mention of a political candidate can be made 6 weeks prior to an election by special interest groups or organizations. Of course the media was not held to these standards. They could do as they please, giving millions of dollars of publicity to their choice of issues and candidates. They wanted to be completely one sided about the issue(s). I'm surprized no one has brought this up on these boards.
This bill was soundly defeated, but it gives you an idea of what the antis are trying to do, even going so far as compromising the First Amendment. You can thank the NRA for guarding that...I doubt the ACLU had anything to do with it.
Les
-
Enough expensive lawsuits and gun makers will be getting out of the business. Even if the cases are thrown out. The sue them to death philosophy.
Next attack will be to keep raising the taxes on firearms to make them too expensive to buy. Ala cigarettes.
Behavior control by lawsuit and taxes. The liberal way.
-
Attention, Attention. Your legal system is irrevocably screwed. I reccommend shooting a laywer a day until the madness ends.
-
Originally posted by ET
Enough expensive lawsuits and gun makers will be getting out of the business. Even if the cases are thrown out. The sue them to death philosophy.
Next attack will be to keep raising the taxes on firearms to make them too expensive to buy. Ala cigarettes.
Behavior control by lawsuit and taxes. The liberal way.
That tax would be used to underwrite firearm registration and later inspections. It has been suggested $100 tax on a box of rifle ammo, making a $20 box cost $120. An "arsenal tax" for more than 1000 rounds of ammo (could be 2 bricks of .22 for plinking.) And agreeing to unannounced inspections of your arsenal any time the ATF sees fit.
Don't know about you, but I don't feel comfortable with a system like that. I don't want middle of the night knocks on the door at random to inspect my "arsenal."
Les
-
froggie... where do you live that you can go in and just buy and walk out with a handgun with no background check?
dowding actually said somthing sensible and adult! good plan dowding but we need to declare war on em first and then offer bounties.
lazs
-
I'm seeing a student lawyer at the moment and she hates the compensation culture as well, so she gets immunity.
-
The founders gave us the 2nd amendment to prevent this tyrany!
Arsenal tax, inspections? 3am door knocks are not far behind. Heck, with the "Patriot" law, they can grab you in the middle of the night, and no one will know what happened to you. Does this sound familiar to anyone? ATF already behaves like a Gestopo. Ruby Ridge and Waco are good examples.
Registration, an infringment of the 2nd which Congress is forbidden to do, is just a tool for confiscation. The UK is a prime example.
-
what about australia? you don't suppose they used those regestration lists to help em confiscate peoples guns now do you?
lazs
-
In fact, they did. The UK gun laws were enabled in the 1920's with the sole purpose of confiscation to prevent Marxist insurection.