PDA

View Full Version : How can this be?



Singlemalt
11-21-2003, 06:08 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/11/20/gun.lawsuits.ap/index.html

Kato
11-21-2003, 07:21 AM
So the gun was sold legaly and then changed hands 4 times and they get sued? I'm confused.

I don't own a gun, I don't want a gun, I've never even shot a gun but I don't disagree with your right to own one.

It's just too darn easy to sue people in our country.

Kato

eg8r
11-21-2003, 08:20 AM
Kato, I totally agree with you. It is way to easy.

As far as suing the gun manufacturer, if this appeal goes through and they win, then I guess all the auto companies better watch out. Remember a short while ago when that woman drove over her husband in the parking lot after she found out he was cheating on her? Well, that guys family should be able to sue the auto manufacturer. They built the car and it was used to kill someone.

What a joke.

eg8r

Qtec
11-21-2003, 08:54 AM
As usual, you are way off the mark. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Auto's are made a means of travel that gets you from A to B.

Guns are made for killing.

There is a difference and you know it, but I dont expect you to admit it.

Q

Singlemalt
11-21-2003, 09:00 AM
Guns are made for killing?? You must be kidding me. People kill people no matter what the weapon of choice is.

Guns are not made for killing. Does personal defense mean anything to you?

Qtec
11-21-2003, 09:27 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Singlemalt:</font><hr> Guns are made for killing?? You must be kidding me. People kill people no matter what the weapon of choice is.

Guns are not made for killing. Does personal defense mean anything to you? <hr /></blockquote>


A gun is made as a weapon , a car isnt.

I am not totally against guns, but there must be a way to stop or at least make in difficult for criminals to get a hold of them.
Only the NRA is against gun control because they represent the gun makers and they want to sell more guns at any price.



Q

eg8r
11-21-2003, 09:34 AM
[ QUOTE ]
As usual, you are way off the mark.

Auto's are made a means of travel that gets you from A to B.

Guns are made for killing.

There is a difference and you know it, but I dont expect you to admit it. <hr /></blockquote> As usual...whatever. You have never seen the "mark". As far as my post it shows your comprehension issues have lead to you falling short of the mark.

You don't like it when I generalize however, in quite a dazzling display of hypocrisy, you do the same thing here. Is it true that ALL guns are made to kill? All cars are meant as a means of travel?

Anyways, besides that crap, you fully missed what I was trying to say. It is too easy to sue someone and given the public's mentality it is not too far off to believe they might try to sue more. Look at what happened with tobacco. They sued and won. What was next....Fat people suing McDonalds.

eg8r

SPetty
11-21-2003, 09:37 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>Only the NRA is against gun control ...<hr /></blockquote>No, that's not true. I don't have anything to do with NRA.

I believe that there is no way you're going to get the guns out of the hands of criminals. Therefore, I want the opportunity to "easily" own one or more guns in order to level the playing field, so to speak. I would be much more afraid if it was illegal for good citizens to own firearms; then criminals would be the only ones with guns!

bluewolf
11-21-2003, 09:37 AM
I have bullets and a gun which is unloaded. If an intruder broke into my house i would not have time to load it to protect myself.

So why do I have it? It is obviously not for defense. The answer is simple. I have it because one day the government will tell me I cannot purchase a hand gun.

I could walk out and buy a shot gun any time I chose but right now,at least in Maryland, I have to wait 14 days to get a handgun. What happened to the bill of rights and our right to bear arms? In Maryland, I cannot get a permit to carry a handgun. In, virginia I could if I passed shooting classes.

Geez, I know this is a can of worms, but I hate all of these rules the govt puts on us. Even the current level of taxation is against what many fought and died for in the American Revolutionary war.

Laura

eg8r
11-21-2003, 09:37 AM
[ QUOTE ]
A gun is made as a weapon , a car isnt. <hr /></blockquote> The criminal activity is not the manufacturing of the weapon, it is the use of the weapon. A car is just as much a weapon as a gun.

[ QUOTE ]
I am not totally against guns, but there must be a way to stop or at least make in difficult for criminals to get a hold of them. <hr /></blockquote> Do you think more stringent laws against private ownership will take care of this? Do you think suing the manufacturer will do this?

eg8r

eg8r
11-21-2003, 09:39 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I would be much more afraid if it was illegal for good citizens to own firearms; then criminals would be the only ones with guns! <hr /></blockquote> Exactly. Take a look at England. They are dealing with these issues right now.

eg8r

Singlemalt
11-21-2003, 09:50 AM
Amen on the right to bear arms. Lucky for us here in NC that you can obtain a permit to carry a handgun.

Wally_in_Cincy
11-21-2003, 10:01 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> As usual, you are way off the mark. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Auto's are made a means of travel that gets you from A to B.

Guns are made for killing.

There is a difference and you know it, but I dont expect you to admit it.

Q <hr /></blockquote>

Do you think a woman should not be able to carry a gun in order to fend off a rapist or a stalker?

SPetty
11-21-2003, 10:17 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>Guns are made for killing.<hr /></blockquote>Do you think a woman should not be able to carry a gun in order to fend off a rapist or a stalker? <hr /></blockquote>Whether the words used are "personal defense" or "fend off a rapist", the idea is that the gun is intended to be used to kill, or at the very least, maim. You should not be brandishing a firearm unless you fully intend to use it.

eg8r
11-21-2003, 10:20 AM
[ QUOTE ]
You should not be brandishing a firearm unless you fully intend to use it. <hr /></blockquote> I am only referring to law abiding citizens...I believe most of the people with concealed weapons permits fully intend on using their guns if they feel they need to defend themselves.

eg8r

Singlemalt
11-21-2003, 10:21 AM
Often (or at least in some documented cases for sure) killing or maiming someone as you say is not even necessary. Sometimes just the display of a gun would be enough for an attacker to then leave.

Personal defense does not always equal to having to fire a gun to kill or maim someone.

SPetty
11-21-2003, 10:29 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Singlemalt:</font><hr> Sometimes just the display of a gun would be enough for an attacker to then leave.<hr /></blockquote>Yes, sometimes the bad guys run away, but you can't count on that. You must be prepared to use your weapon to do its job, or you shouldn't have the weapon.

Qtec
11-21-2003, 10:36 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Is it true that ALL guns are made to kill? <font color="red"> Eh......Yes! </font color> All cars are meant as a means of travel? <font color="red"> Eh.....Yes! </font color>

Anyways, besides that crap, you fully missed what I was trying to say. It is too easy to sue someone and given the public's mentality it is not too far off to believe they might try to sue more. Look at what happened with tobacco. <font color="red"> The Tobacco companies deliberately enhanced their product to get people 'hooked'. Even when they knew that their product killed thousands of people every year. They decieved the puplic and deserved to be punished. </font color> They sued and won. What was next....Fat people suing McDonalds.
<hr /></blockquote>

Its the lack of responsibility and cold heartedness from mayjor companies who have brought this on themselves. Remember the GM scandal when they decided to sell cars that could explode when hit from the side.It was cheaper to settle the law suits than to refit all the cars!

I find it astounding that the police sell guns.Dont you?

Q

Rod
11-21-2003, 10:44 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
A gun is made as a weapon , a car isnt. <hr /></blockquote> The criminal activity is not the manufacturing of the weapon, it is the use of the weapon. A car is just as much a weapon as a gun.

&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
I am not totally against guns, but there must be a way to stop or at least make in difficult for criminals to get a hold of them. <hr /></blockquote> Do you think more stringent laws against private ownership will take care of this? Do you think suing the manufacturer will do this?

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>


Well never let it be said a plane isn't a weapon. Those 757's and 767's made short order of the WTC and Pentagon, plus a few thousand lives. /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

Wally_in_Cincy
11-21-2003, 10:48 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SPetty:</font><hr>
You should not be brandishing a firearm unless you fully intend to use it. <hr /></blockquote>

I agree. You would be prepared to use it to fend off an attacker I assume.

Wally_in_Cincy
11-21-2003, 10:51 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr>

Well never let it be said a plane isn't a weapon. Those 757's and 767's made short order of the WTC and Pentagon, plus a few thousand lives. /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif <hr /></blockquote>

Well obviously we need some sensible "plane control" laws /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

when planes are outlawed only outlaws will have planes

Cueless Joey
11-21-2003, 10:53 AM
Lemme get this right.
Gun manufacturers sell only to licensed dealers (FFL cariers).
Dealers sell to the public. Joe Public might sell his guns to somebody ( depending on the state's law, here in Cali it HAS to go through a dealer). Then the buyer commits a crime with it. So the gun manufacturer is liable?
Hey, why don't we just bomb Colombia? Fukkers make the cocaine that causes more crime here than anything else.
Hell, they manufacture it. While we're at it, let's bust any chemical company selling to Colombia.

ras314
11-21-2003, 10:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>
I am not totally against guns, but there must be a way to stop or at least make in difficult for criminals to get a hold of them.
Only the NRA is against gun control because they represent the gun makers and they want to sell more guns at any price.
<hr /></blockquote>

Hogwash. The NRA promotes stiffer punishment for crimes committed with firearms. While the bleeding heart liberals seem to believe what a wonderful world this would be without guns. The most prominent of which have armed bodyguards. Face it, there have always been violent criminals and always will be, guns or not.

Besides the NRA doesn't sell many guns. But does have an effective "gun lobby" to try to defend the people of this country's consitutional rights.

Cueless Joey
11-21-2003, 11:00 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ras314:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr>
I am not totally against guns, but there must be a way to stop or at least make in difficult for criminals to get a hold of them.
Only the NRA is against gun control because they represent the gun makers and they want to sell more guns at any price.
<hr /></blockquote>

Hogwash. The NRA promotes stiffer punishment for crimes committed with firearms. While the bleeding heart liberals seem to believe what a wonderful world this would be without guns. The most prominent of which have armed bodyguards. Face it, there have always been violent criminals and always will be, guns or not.

Besides the NRA doesn't sell many guns. But does have an effective "gun lobby" to try to defend the people of this country's consitutional rights. <hr /></blockquote>
That's right.
Who advocated the 3-strikes law for YEARS before Polly Klaas was murdered then Feinstein rode the bandwagon?
THE NRA?
Who advocated the Truth in Sentencing Law?
The NRA has lobbied for stiffer penalties for the usage of guns in crimes.
The Trial Lawyers of America are the scums who want the criminals to keep committing crimes.
The NRA would like to have a database of all criminals in this country and want to place a network of computers on all gun stores. Guess who's against that?

ras314
11-21-2003, 11:10 AM
I've always maintained there ought to be a law against breaking the law. Then there wouldn't be any need for new anti-gun laws. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

UWPoolGod
11-21-2003, 11:27 AM
Yeah screw "cruel and unusual punishment". I say cut the hand off a thief, kill the murderer the same way as he committed the crime. Heck the sniper should have to walk around living his life wondering when he is going to get a bullet through the back of his head. That would make me paranoid as hell.

Cueless Joey
11-21-2003, 11:36 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ras314:</font><hr> I've always maintained there ought to be a law against breaking the law. Then there wouldn't be any need for new anti-gun laws. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif <hr /></blockquote>
No freakin' kidding Ras.
How does one person KILL another person and go to jail for 20 yrs?
I say to TAKE a life, you lose your life?
How can I not SHOOT the fukk out of anyone INVADING my home?
An ex-cop told me, go to L.A., buy a black market gun, take it to the boonies and shoot some rounds with it then keep it. Somebody invades your home? Shoot the fukker b/c almost 100% sure he is a repeat offender/career criminal.
Shoot him and throw the gun at him. They won't even investigate b/c they hate burglars.
This was my teacher who used to be an LA cop.
Really though, we ought to bomb illegal drug manufacturers.

ras314
11-21-2003, 11:44 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SPetty:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Singlemalt:</font><hr> Sometimes just the display of a gun would be enough for an attacker to then leave.<hr /></blockquote>Yes, sometimes the bad guys run away, but you can't count on that. You must be prepared to use your weapon to do its job, or you shouldn't have the weapon. <hr /></blockquote>
SPetty, I like your attitude. Guns are a hobby of mine and I don't feel much need for self defense because of where I live. But if in a life threatning situation I don't believe in trying to scare the threat away.

ras314
11-21-2003, 12:04 PM
Cueless,

There was a case in this area where a woman shot a man breaking into her home. There was no trial, but the sheriff spent some time convincing the woman she did the right thing. Most people are going to experience a guilt trip over killing a person regardless of the circumstance.

Singlemalt
11-21-2003, 12:15 PM
Well said! I was not implying that one should not use the firearm when attacked, was only trying to say that sometimes you don't always have to. BUT, you most certainly should be ready to do so.

eg8r
11-21-2003, 12:17 PM
I am ignoring you answers on the cars and guns. You obviously do not want to put any thought into them.

[ QUOTE ]
The Tobacco companies deliberately enhanced their product to get people 'hooked'. Even when they knew that their product killed thousands of people every year. They decieved the puplic and deserved to be punished. <hr /></blockquote> There is a warning on the outside of the pack of cigs. No one was deceived.

[ QUOTE ]
Its the lack of responsibility and cold heartedness from mayjor companies who have brought this on themselves. <hr /></blockquote> LOL, why do you even waste your time typing senseless crap like this?

[ QUOTE ]
I find it astounding that the police sell guns.Dont you?
<hr /></blockquote> I don't know anything about this. I thought they demolish the guns that are taken. Oh well, it makes more sense to sell them. Nope, I don't think it is astounding. Even if the gun was part of a crime, the gun did not commit the crime the person did.

eg8r

Ralph S.
11-21-2003, 12:25 PM
This seems absolutely ludicrous to me. The gun may have been the weapon, but it took a person to pull the trigger. Common sense says the gun maker should not be liable. All this is going to do is open the door for more frivolous lawsuits, clogging the court systems that much more. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Cueless Joey
11-21-2003, 12:28 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ras314:</font><hr> Cueless,

There was a case in this area where a woman shot a man breaking into her home. There was no trial, but the sheriff spent some time convincing the woman she did the right thing. Most people are going to experience a guilt trip over killing a person regardless of the circumstance. <hr /></blockquote>
I hope she gets over it.
Taking a life isn't easy but these criminals do it unconciously. She should think this way, she took out a scum that would surely commit more crimes later.

ras314
11-21-2003, 12:38 PM
Seems to me if a manufacturer can be sued for producing a gun that was used in a crime, they ought to be rewarded for making one that operated as intended and saved lives.

Maybe the amount that was saved from apprehending the attempted perpetrator and the cost of convicted them.

Ras~~~getting a little radical

Wally_in_Cincy
11-21-2003, 12:55 PM
quote Q.....
I find it astounding that the police sell guns.Dont you?
<hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> I don't know anything about this. I thought they demolish the guns that are taken.
<hr /></blockquote>

They might sell them in TX or somewhere, to responsible owners.

Hell in the inner city they buy them back. That's a joke. Guys bring in a rusty inoperative gun and get $50 for it.

Then they spend it on weed and 40's /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Kato
11-21-2003, 01:53 PM
Answering to nobody in particular.

Say I'm at home and someone breaks into my house and that person has a knife. The easiest way to defend myself would be with a gun. A baseball bat would be better than a knife but it would be confining. A knife against a knife would be ridicuous. Now if my home invader had a gun then my only defense would be a gun and suprise.

One of these days I'll probably buy one. Luckily I don't have anything to steal /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Kato

Rod
11-21-2003, 02:40 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Luckily I don't have anything to steal

<hr /></blockquote>

What nothing to steal? What if they took you? /ccboard/images/graemlins/mad.gif What if it was a couple of good looking large breasted women to boot? LOL Oh OK guess you wouldn't need a gun, just more time. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Kato
11-21-2003, 03:40 PM
If they came for me I'd just go. Who am I to say what a couple of hot babes do to me? Hey, I'm willing to sacrifice myself for the good of my gender /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Kato~~~~is hoping this scenario happens on a daily basis /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif