Is This an End Run For the Second Ammendment????

originally posted by: UpThenDown
a reply to: lakenheath24

so consensual sex on pornhub between paid actors somehow equates to i could not help but rape her, pretty sure thats not a great example you just stated

Hopefully not, but yes this is that slippery wet curvy nice smelling couldn't help myself slope that is happening. Smart on them for making it harder for us regular folks.

But the repercussions will be palpable.

After watching the super bowl kids decided to go buy a football and get injured.

a reply to: UpThenDown

What about the other examples? Or are you a one trick pony?

a reply to: Bigburgh
AS per the article, Remington has went bankrupt twice in 7 years. Lets see if this expands further...that is the danger.

a reply to: lakenheath24

Yes I saw that.

They'll comply for now.


Edit: I wouldn't get cocky on my end, as anything is possible. Remington might go away and never be again. Somebody might step in though.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: alldaylong

Indeed.

It was wrong then, too.

I dunno..was it? they hid the negative effects/info, and on that basis only, I might disagree with you on cigs.

Remington, I don't agree with the ruling at all.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: alldaylong

Indeed.

It was wrong then, too.

It was wrong?

Why was it wrong? Scientists knew as far back as 1939 that the burning of tobacco products produced benzopyrene, a carcinogen, yet big tobacco companies continued to flaunt their products as safe. They also knew precisely how addictive the nicotine was, so that even if people knew better, it would be nigh impossible for them to stop using their product.

Firearms companies on the other hand have never purported that their product is anything other than deadly and in my eyes, should never have even seen a day in court.

100% agree!

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: alldaylong

Indeed.

It was wrong then, too.

It was wrong?

Why was it wrong? Scientists knew as far back as 1939 that the burning of tobacco products produced benzopyrene, a carcinogen, yet big tobacco companies continued to flaunt their products as safe. They also knew precisely how addictive the nicotine was, so that even if people knew better, it would be nigh impossible for them to stop using their product.

Firearms companies on the other hand have never purported that their product is anything other than deadly and in my eyes, should never have even seen a day in court.

It's all in the methodology .
Pumping an average of 10 packs of cigarettes directly into strapped down rhesus monkeys' lungs through 1" plastic tubes 24x7 .
To get he tobacco lobbyists out of Congress and install the oil lobbyists as the power behind the charade ...

That's how they work to a goal .

A story for another day .
Goth knows people...

a reply to: alphabetaone

I agree


When can folks start suing the US govt for the 80s crack epidemic, the 90s and earls 00s heroin epidemic and the current fentanyl epidemic?

As they are directly responsible for imports of these illicit substances?

a reply to: Gothmog

WTF has this got to do with the OP?

a reply to: lakenheath24

I guess most people understand that when replies dont mention every part of your posts it means we agree, score 1 for you

but that particulr example was horse sh##e my equine friend

a reply to: UpThenDown

So that one example poo-poos the entire OP?


Seems a bit obtuse and irresponsible to 2nd amendment supporters.

a reply to: lakenheath24

I have to register with the Independent to read tbe rest. What it blatant that is, Remington settled for $73 million dollars.

TextRemington Arms agreed to pay $73m to settle a liability lawsuit brought by the families of Sandy Hook victims, marking the first time a gun manufacturer has been held liable for a mass shooting.

Remington being held liable for those death is a huge deal.

What next for Remington? Or what next for any manufacturer?

Why haven't the parents of Sandy Hook elementary school not sued the Feds for clearing Adam Lanza On the Background Check? Adam Lanza was already known to have mental illness.

a reply to: lakenheath24

So can Ford be sued when someone dies from speeding in a Mustang cuz the car is advertised as a Sports Car to go faster than the speed limit?

The case seems to suggest that yes, yes they can.
Maybe the good side to this is that advertisers will have to be more honest?

Can't say that I agree with this ruling. I'm not sure what I think. I mean if a bulldozer ad shows someone driving through homes in a neighborhood and having a great time. Then some dummy buys the bulldozer and drives through my house or your house. Is the ad at fault? When do we just blame stupid people for being stupid?
But I just lost my house. And the dummy has no money. Am I #ed because of random dummy? But then I guess that's what home insurance is for. But I can't afford that. would insurance even pay out to random bulldozer attack?

Yeah this is something to think about. Can't let my love for the 2ed make me emotional and cloud my judgement.

originally posted by: DINSTAAR

The 2nd amendment doesn’t grant you the right to bear arms,

Actually, it kinda does.

originally posted by: DINSTAAR

Your right is yours when you exercise it.

If you have to exercise a right to enjoy the benefits of a right....then it isn't a right, but a privilege....and privilege's can be taken away, i'll have to disagree with this one too.

originally posted by: Bigburgh
Why haven't the parents of Sandy Hook elementary school not sued the Feds for clearing Adam Lanza On the Background Check? Adam Lanza was already known to have mental illness.

Furthermore, why haven't they sued (or maybe they have and ive forgotten) Lanza's mother for leaving firearms around her son knowing full well his mental instability?

I mean......rifle safes are a thing lady! LOL

a reply to: alphabetaone

The mother is dead, first victim.

To BB:
Lanza didnt buy any guns, they were all owned by the mother.

a reply to: alphabetaone

You mean the lady he shot dead before taking the firearm out of the house?

=================

On topic no its not an end run, and actually isnt even a strong precedent, considering the gun sales the last few years and the price of firearms it wont even put a big dent in their bottom line.

last I heard Remington is behind on production so a lot of money will be made in the not to distant future.

originally posted by: UpThenDown
a reply to: lakenheath24

so consensual sex on pornhub between paid actors somehow equates to i could not help but rape her, pretty sure thats not a great example you just stated

Makes about as much sense as Remington being blamed for the school shooting.

No, just lots of AK's since China and Russia won't let their mfgs be sued. And smuggling is no problem now that the southern border is open!