Gun Control & RKBA

Ohioblue22

(1,430 posts)

24. Maybe your correct there's just no way to make them

Sat Oct 15, 2016, 10:23 AM

Oct 2016

Safe so you understand now why they should be banned . They are just too dangerous and there is no incentive for manufactures to do improve the safety of their product . We just need a correct version of an improperly interpreted 2nd amendment ruling.

but there is little point debating since neither of us are in charge . My original point is that the protection law should go they are not doing enough to improve safety and they fight like hell to squash any attempt at legislating safety. So let them be sued

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

143 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

"Connecticut Judge Dismisses Newtown Lawsuit Against Gun Maker" [View all] krispos42 Oct 2016 OP

As predictable as ants in a dove field.... Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #1

I have never heard that saying before underpants Oct 2016 #26

First time I've heard it too. NaturalHigh Oct 2016 #52

Be sure where you place your killed doves -- the ants find them, fast. Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #113

Yea that protection needs to go Ohioblue22 Oct 2016 #2

Why is that? n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #3

Trumped up lawsuits? JonathanRackham Oct 2016 #4

The person to whom I responded... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #5

Why? Because it gives this ONE industry in our country immunity against law suits and BlueCaliDem Oct 2016 #27

The law allows you to sue gun manufacturers hack89 Oct 2016 #35

Not quite. branford Oct 2016 #36

Glad to see you posting again Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #40

Thanks. branford Oct 2016 #44

Bullshit. What's not fair is that arms manufacturers are allowed to kill our kids with impunity stone space Oct 2016 #97

How many drunk driving victims have auto manufacturers killed? friendly_iconoclast Oct 2016 #107

Post removed Post removed Nov 2016 #148

But... discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2016 #149

re: "Bullshit" discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #109

I would like to learn more about the "Arms manufacturings killing kids and crying like a victim." Littlepawkitty Oct 2016 #116

It's easy if you accept the NRA as the mouthpiece for them... fleabiscuit Oct 2016 #117

So... Littlepawkitty Oct 2016 #118

So... fleabiscuit Oct 2016 #119

they are not fighting the technology, gejohnston Oct 2016 #120

Non Sequitur. fleabiscuit Oct 2016 #121

A bit Littlepawkitty Oct 2016 #123

the technology doesn't exist gejohnston Oct 2016 #126

Microstamping is already being used. fleabiscuit Oct 2016 #127

Where Littlepawkitty Oct 2016 #128

not on ammuntion, gejohnston Oct 2016 #129

Used for what? beevul Oct 2016 #136

I suggest you read up a bit discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #139

And this is why we get nowwhere Travis_0004 Oct 2016 #132

"able to be overridden by legal authority" Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2016 #145

Once more... Littlepawkitty Oct 2016 #122

Again... fleabiscuit Oct 2016 #124

The guns weren't defective Littlepawkitty Oct 2016 #125

Less than 100 kids under 15yoa are killed by gun accidents each year... Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #141

Results discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #142

Even the virulently anti-gun WaPo owns up to a figure of 84 accidental deaths in 2015... Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #143

CDCs WISQARS goes to 2014 discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #144

The "doubt" about CDC research serves more as a tip-off to the gross slant an article takes... Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #147

There are 6 exceptions Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #39

(A) Please point to a suit or instance where... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #45

I'm not on trial here, pal. You don't get to do deposition here with me. Awful, huh? BlueCaliDem Oct 2016 #48

thanks for the non sequitur discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #49

Post removed Post removed Oct 2016 #50

"The PLCAA is on trial" ? branford Oct 2016 #51

Did someone say you were? beevul Oct 2016 #54

Do you even know what the PLCAA says? Littlepawkitty Oct 2016 #137

federal laws don't necessarily supersede state laws, gejohnston Oct 2016 #60

Yes, it does - according to Article VI of the U.S. Constitution. Always. BlueCaliDem Oct 2016 #62

it was without merit because gejohnston Oct 2016 #63

Unless you've seen all the evidence that Plaintiff planned to introduce, neither you nor I can say BlueCaliDem Oct 2016 #75

I know the evidence, gejohnston Oct 2016 #78

Thanks for your opinion. I wasn't asking for it, but thanks anyhow. BlueCaliDem Oct 2016 #80

What evidence? branford Oct 2016 #85

I'll take "what this guy said" Littlepawkitty Oct 2016 #140

False. Remington or any other gun seller is subject to product liability actions. Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #114

Why? Nancyswidower Oct 2016 #6

Because until they can get sued the won't do a thing about making them safer Ohioblue22 Oct 2016 #9

no it isn't gejohnston Oct 2016 #12

Maybe your correct there's just no way to make them Ohioblue22 Oct 2016 #24

They fight like hell about mandates for technology Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #28

I'm all for choice but but kids don't get to have heroin Ohioblue22 Oct 2016 #31

You can own a tank Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #33

Yes, you can indeed own a tank. beevul Oct 2016 #55

The technology does work. deathrind Oct 2016 #81

Gun rights proponents see the technology as a threat branford Oct 2016 #89

no. gejohnston Oct 2016 #29

Please spare me the false equivalence examples Ohioblue22 Oct 2016 #32

I do not think lawn darts Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #34

Lawn Darts aren't mentioned in Holy Scripture, huh? stone space Oct 2016 #61

Post removed Post removed Oct 2016 #86

Why are you posting Libertarian propoganda here on DU? stone space Oct 2016 #91

Post removed Post removed Oct 2016 #93

Not interested on your Libertarian propoganda videos. Go away. stone space Oct 2016 #94

Right depends on interpretation. the 2a only applied to a militia if it was needed to secure a free Ohioblue22 Oct 2016 #100

It is rather clear that the Founders intended everyone to be "the militia" discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #101

Parts of the Constitution don't go extinct hack89 Oct 2016 #104

The Second Amendment is not the issue. branford Oct 2016 #37

there is no false equivalence. gejohnston Oct 2016 #57

You make good points. deathrind Oct 2016 #83

Safe? Straw Man Oct 2016 #53

Good Lord! The product pumped bullet after bullet into child after child. stone space Oct 2016 #58

That was the individual that did that. beevul Oct 2016 #66

What is it you find funniest about children's bodies being pumped with bullets from an AR-15? stone space Oct 2016 #68

What is it you find honest about falsely attributing the source of my humor? beevul Oct 2016 #70

You chose a post about bullets being pumped into children and laughed. stone space Oct 2016 #84

The NRA was not a defendant in the Sandy Hook lawsuit branford Oct 2016 #87

Fuck the NRA, fuck the PLCAA, and fuck the NRA's sexual predator candidate. stone space Oct 2016 #88

You obviously missed the point of my entire post. branford Oct 2016 #90

It's the NRA that is trying to force a sexual predator on America. stone space Oct 2016 #92

You appear to be confusing the First and Second Amendment and branford Oct 2016 #95

Significant numbers of people disagree with the NRA on their support of sexual assault. stone space Oct 2016 #96

Uh-oh. Sounds like a clams casino moment. Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #115

Thats a very poor attempt at spin. Heres why. beevul Oct 2016 #102

Clearly you don't understand what "product liability" means. Straw Man Oct 2016 #108

re: :...your persistent distortion of logic is starting..." discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #110

The small-caliber competition rifle that the Newtown shooter stole from his mother.... benEzra Oct 2016 #23

I *mostly* agree. branford Oct 2016 #38

Further wasted effort, distraction and pandering discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #99

A little good news in these dark days... ileus Oct 2016 #103

Dec 1969 #