True Story - but let's not juxtaposition glancing at a headline with actually having read some articles and discussions about the subject.
You should add Volokh Conspiracy to your favorites tab, maybe subscribe to Popehat.
General Sandy Hook families settle with Remington marking 1st time gun maker is held liable for mass shooting
- Thread starter La Paix
- Start date
You should add Volokh Conspiracy to your favorites tab, maybe subscribe to Popehat.
I do CSSA but that's because I have to for range insurance and for my range officer/ safety instructor/trainer certification.
M
member 1013
Guest
Have you ever seen ads similar to what’s been posted on here in Canadian magazines or wherever else they’d normally be?
Like about how tough a guy you'll be if you buy this gun? Not that I can remember. Usually when I get the Canadian gun mags I just toss them on the recycling bin.
what about alcohol, knife, or truck ads?
do they deserve the same level of scrutiny for liability?
I'd say GOA or SAF, but SAF and JPFO do a lot of work together since they are both headquartered out of Bellevue, WA. SAF is a bit more involved due to more funding / membership.
So when I saw this, admittedly not having followed the story, I went to my favorite right-wing gun site AR15.com to see what the no doubt nuanced response would be:
...
But there was nothing.
...
But there was nothing.
Mate if you're not even honest enough to concede that an AR-15 is not the same thing or designed for the same purpose as a bread knife or a car, then what is the point?
Alcohol isn't designed and sold for the purpose of killing.
Cars aren't designed and sold for the purpose of killing.
Knives aren't designed and sold for the purpose of killing.
Guns are. Anything you can do with a gun outside of killing, you are using it for a secondary purpose from what it was designed to do. That is not the same with cars, knives or alcohol.
??
That's a deflection. Design Intent has nothing to do with capability or capacity for harm, and no bearing on the way it's marketed
Design intent is also deliberately misleading due to the board definitions that can be applied. There are many guns designed only for target shooting. To say something incredibly facile like "Guns are designed to kill" would be like me pretending that a butter knife is the same as a broadsword because "Blades are designed to kill"
These would do fantastic in Afghanistan.Every month an American Rifleman magazine shows up on my doorstep and it will for life since I'm a lifetime member of the NRA.
The ads are so cheesy I wish I had cut out many of them to save over the years
View attachment 60901
View attachment 60903
weve been reminding people of the military basis of these guns for decades
@Filthy will be mad to see colt themselves call their rifle the civilian version of the M16...because it is.
View attachment 60905
View attachment 60904
View attachment 60906
One thing I would like to know, is why Adam Lanza didn't just buy his own guns. He was 20, was the age 21 in Connecticut?
And this is going to sound like a troll, but it's an honest question for the gun guys.
Why shouldn't Adam Lanza have been allowed to buy and collect his own guns before he shot up the elementary school? Is there any reason ahead of time? I don't expect an answer, but I wonder.
Same goes for Cho who killed 30-something people at Virginia Tech.
??
And this is going to sound like a troll, but it's an honest question for the gun guys.
Why shouldn't Adam Lanza have been allowed to buy and collect his own guns before he shot up the elementary school? Is there any reason ahead of time? I don't expect an answer, but I wonder.
Same goes for Cho who killed 30-something people at Virginia Tech.
??
If he'd had a responsible caregiver, his condition would have been properly diagnosed and he would probably have been prevented from purchasing firearms. At the very least, a protective order could have been issued if he had been under psychiatric care and the doctor had documented his mental deterioration.
But his mother was more focused on appeasement of Adam than on treatment, so I don't know if any of his diagnoses or medications would have precluded him from buying a firearm. His mom wasn't making him take his meds, and he hadn't been under psychiatric care for a couple years (IIRC) at the time of the murders.
Cho had been assessed a couple years prior to the shooting for suicidal thoughts, and IIRC was held for evaluation once. But there were only a couple interactions with counselors, and they basically just waved it off as "college kid under pressure" because he stated he had no intention of harming himself or anyone else.
In short, these are incredibly rare occurrences because there are so many safeguards in place.
But people make mistakes and sometimes the outcome of that mistake is tragic.
The thing that both of these shootings have in common is that killers (and possibly those around them) didn't avail themselves of the help they needed because of the stigmas associated with mental health challenges.
Last edited:
First off, thank you for the quality response that is something other than trolling, meaningless blanket statements, or gifs. ?
I don't understand why Lanza's mother would be involved at all. He was 20 years old, not 15. Clearly he is basically the definition of a person who should not be given access to AR-15s, but according to the pro-gun perspective - why not? He was a nonviolent adult with a clean criminal record who had never been institutionalised. Before he massacred 20 six years olds, why would Joe Biden have been okay to grab the guns out of his hands?
??
he lived with his mom, he was under her health insurance, he didn't have a job, she claimed him as a dependent. She lived with her adult child, it was probably a co-dependent relationship after the father left.
He's only "the definition of someone who should not be given access to an AR-15" in hindsight. There are literally MILLIONS of people with the same (or worse) underlying mental health issues as Lanza who manage to forego mass murder, and 10s of millions with access to the same, or more lethal, firearm that he had access to that forego mass murder.
If you really care about saving children's lives, you should get on board with banning swimming pools.
not really. The lawsuit was going nowhere, and probably was going to be dismissed eventually...it just means the next case will be adjudicated.
The lawsuit from Mexico is going to hit the same wall, but they sued 6 manufacturers, none of whom are currently in bankruptcy proceedings.
OPs title is simply misinformation.
big in Israel