M
member 1013
Guest
Why are you such a salty sailor
General Sandy Hook families settle with Remington marking 1st time gun maker is held liable for mass shooting
- Thread starter La Paix
- Start date
evidence of chaos?
not salty at all. mildly amused at this giant circle jerk of confirmation bias.
Alright I'm out. Since your assumption and position are more personal targeting instead of that I just couldn't easily find the original mexican lawsuit document, its clear you aren't really interested in what I have to say/think about the topic.
So right back at you. You aren't posting it because you only read news headlines too and don't have it.
posted a nice, fairly unbiased article reporting on the filings.
Both.
M
member 1013
Guest
Sure bud. I totally believe u!
Lol
@BeardOfKnowledge IIRC you’re a NRA member? Do these ads make it to your doorstep too or does the marketing strategy change up here?
@BeardOfKnowledge IIRC you’re a NRA member? Do these ads make it to your doorstep too or does the marketing strategy change up here?
So you didn't actually look up the lawsuit like I did...where I couldn't find what's probably a spanish language government document...
But still thought it was normal to tell me:
I am not, sir.Lol
View attachment 60909
no, you have to have an account to access the court filings. That's why none of the articles link to it.So you didn't actually look up the lawsuit like I did...where I couldn't find what's probably a spanish language government document...
But still thought it was normal to tell me:
point being, you didn't even seek to become informed or understand both sides of an issue before casting your lot.
M
member 1013
Guest
You read all 139 pages bruv? I want a report on my desk by 4:30.
He was. Trump wasn't as pro-gun as many of his consituents assumed he was.
135.
M
member 1013
Guest
Americans disgust meLol
View attachment 60909
Did you just post this and then post the court filings without an account access?
Why would you say that when you didn't even seek to become informed?
Trump was only ever Pro-Trump
Apologies.
i've read several articles with direct quotes from the filings, going back to last year...but the filing itself always came up as needing an account...NEXUS, IIRC.
then this morning I found one article that linked to their own republication of the document.
And straight from the actual brief:
The Government has strong domestic laws that make it virtually impossible for criminals to lawfully obtain guns in Mexico. Mexico has one gun store in the entire nation and issues fewer than 50 gun permits per year. 5. Defendants undermine these stringent laws, and wreak havoc in Mexican society, by persistently supplying a torrent of guns to the drug cartels.
Defendants design, market, distribute, and sell guns in ways they know routinely arm the drug cartels in Mexico. Defendants use reckless and corrupt gun dealers and dangerous and illegal sales practices that the cartels rely on to get their guns.
They therefore must monitor and discipline those distribution systems to comply with not only U.S. law, but also the substantive law of Mexico, including its tort law.
@Filthy I hope my colt advertisement haunts your dreams tonight
just to reiterate, the OP is wrong.
Remington was not held liable for anything.
Their insurers agreed to settlement which included a cash payment and the release of the discovery documents.
i'll be interested to read some of the internal communications about their marketing practices, but I don't expect it to be any more shocking than if Annheiser-Busch, Raytheon, or Pfizer was forced to release their internal communications regarding their respective strategies and the harm potential of increased sales.
Remington was not held liable for anything.
Their insurers agreed to settlement which included a cash payment and the release of the discovery documents.
i'll be interested to read some of the internal communications about their marketing practices, but I don't expect it to be any more shocking than if Annheiser-Busch, Raytheon, or Pfizer was forced to release their internal communications regarding their respective strategies and the harm potential of increased sales.
Last edited:
I'm just giving you shit because you're being so salty...perhaps you're not the only one that had a hard time finding the actual pdf.
the lawsuit has nothing to do with Mexican firearm laws. It has everything to do with whether or not the manufacturers violated Sec 922 in their marketing and sales, e.g. knowingly marketing to bulk straw-purchasers.And straight from the actual brief:
The Government has strong domestic laws that make it virtually impossible for criminals to lawfully obtain guns in Mexico. Mexico has one gun store in the entire nation and issues fewer than 50 gun permits per year. 5. Defendants undermine these stringent laws, and wreak havoc in Mexican society, by persistently supplying a torrent of guns to the drug cartels.
Defendants design, market, distribute, and sell guns in ways they know routinely arm the drug cartels in Mexico. Defendants use reckless and corrupt gun dealers and dangerous and illegal sales practices that the cartels rely on to get their guns.
They therefore must monitor and discipline those distribution systems to comply with not only U.S. law, but also the substantive law of Mexico, including its tort law.
I don't recommend it. They are shit.