Parkland Trio get their jobs back. The Community is safe?

[SavannahMann]

The three cops who were eventually fired because of their actions at the Parkland High School Shooting, have been ordered reinstated after an Arbiter sided with them. The complaint was that it took too long to fire the trio, and that was wrong, and they should be given their jobs back with back pay.

Florida officer fired for his response during Parkland shooting will get his badge back | CNN

One of the Florida sheriff's deputies who was fired for his response during the 2018 Parkland school shooting will be reinstated with back pay and retain his seniority.

www.cnn.com

Are any of you relieved that these fine officers are back on the job? Citizens do you feel safer knowing these folks will be patrolling your neighborhood? Cops, do you want them backing you up during a dangerous situation? What job could you assign them to that would not present a moment where they might have to take action? Crossing guard?

If you assume that there is no shame in cowardice. It is just the way that person is made up. Ok, fine. But that person should not be in a position where risking his life is part of the job. He should stay safe, in an office, or somewhere where the threat of violence is as low as possible.

 

[JoeB131]

I'd feel safer if we didn't live in a country where some fucking idiot doesn't think the Militia amendment means that a guy like Nick Cruz has a GOD GIVEN RIGHT to own MILITARY GRADE weaponry.

That they are making scapegoats out of law enforcement.

 

[SavannahMann]

I'd feel safer if we didn't live in a country where some fucking idiot doesn't think the Militia amendment means that a guy like Nick Cruz has a GOD GIVEN RIGHT to own MILITARY GRADE weaponry.

That they are making scapegoats out of law enforcement.

Actually, it does mean that anyone has a right to weapons. As for military grade, civilian weapons are not. But even if they were, you and I would have a right to them.

You call it the Militia Amendment. But all things make sense in context. Who was a member of the Militia? At the time when the Amendment was written, what was the Militia?

 

[Desperado]

I'd feel safer if we didn't live in a country where some fucking idiot doesn't think the Militia amendment means that a guy like Nick Cruz has a GOD GIVEN RIGHT to own MILITARY GRADE weaponry.

That they are making scapegoats out of law enforcement.

The United States Military does not and never has used AR-15

 

[SavannahMann]

I see someone found my response funny. So I will explain why I believe the statement to be true. First, it is the Militia. Who was in it when they wrote the Amendment? Answer all able bodied males from 18 to 45 years of age. Ok, it isn’t quite accurate. It was all able bodied white males. But it was amended to include all Males during the Civil War.

Militia Acts of 1792 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So the Well Regulated Militia was every able bodied man. What did they mean by Well Regulated? That is covered too. It meant when activated the Militia was to respond to Military type orders, and military type discipline. In other words, they were not be to be an armed mob. They were to be soldiers under the command of officers.

Well that has nothing to do with the world today right? Yes, and no. We would have to be invaded before we even tried the Militia thing again. But we do have a similar situation in law today. Under Posse Comitatus, the law that prevents the Army from acting as police, we have the ability of Police to form a Posse. In Georgia, it is this law.

2010 Georgia Code :: TITLE 17 - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE :: CHAPTER 4 - ARREST OF PERSONS :: ARTICLE 2 - ARREST BY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS GENERALLY :: § 17-4-24 - Duty of law enforcement officers to execute penal warrants; summoning of posses

law.justia.com

Every law enforcement officer is bound to execute the penal warrants given to him to execute. He may summon to his assistance, either in writing or orally, any of the citizens of the neighborhood or county to assist in the execution of such warrants. The acts of the citizens formed as a posse by such officer shall be subject to the same protection and consequences as official acts.

A police officer executing a warrant can form people into a posse. Those people are essentially deputized, and subject to the orders of the Police Officer. If it is an arrest warrant, and they are told to Search, they have to obey the laws that the cops would obey, absent the training, which would be difficult. However, it is still on the books, that individuals can be formed into a posse, and here is the thing, you have to obey the cop when he tells you to do it. You can’t refuse. If so, you are refusing a lawful order, and that is against the law.

So what do we know about the intent of the Founders? We know that they intended every single able bodied White man to be in the Militia. Later, our ancestors included every able bodied male. We know that this was further expanded with Suffrage, And women got their rights, finally.

We know that they expected the Militia to have military grade weapons. And if you say that the big weapons of the era were exempt, I say no. Cannon were available for public sale. How do you think the Privateers we used during the Revolutionary war, the war of 1812, and even the Civil War were armed? They purchased their cannons on the open market.

Even Machine Guns were readily available. Teddy Roosevelt used two Machine Guns in his attacks on San Juan that were purchased privately by a rich supporter of the Volunteers.

This is all history. It is established historical fact. So we can argue what we should do now, but we can’t argue that the words do not mean what the advocates say. Because those words were defined at the time. And often since. To redefine the words means we risk all our freedoms.

 

[Mac-7]

The three cops who were eventually fired because of their actions at the Parkland High School Shooting, have been ordered reinstated after an Arbiter sided with them. The complaint was that it took too long to fire the trio, and that was wrong, and they should be given their jobs back with back pay.

Florida officer fired for his response during Parkland shooting will get his badge back | CNN

One of the Florida sheriff's deputies who was fired for his response during the 2018 Parkland school shooting will be reinstated with back pay and retain his seniority.

www.cnn.com

Are any of you relieved that these fine officers are back on the job? Citizens do you feel safer knowing these folks will be patrolling your neighborhood? Cops, do you want them backing you up during a dangerous situation? What job could you assign them to that would not present a moment where they might have to take action? Crossing guard?

If you assume that there is no shame in cowardice. It is just the way that person is made up. Ok, fine. But that person should not be in a position where risking his life is part of the job. He should stay safe, in an office, or somewhere where the threat of violence is as low as possible.

What about “Officer Friendly“ who was fired for cowardice?

Is he one of the three?

 

[SavannahMann]

The three cops who were eventually fired because of their actions at the Parkland High School Shooting, have been ordered reinstated after an Arbiter sided with them. The complaint was that it took too long to fire the trio, and that was wrong, and they should be given their jobs back with back pay.

Florida officer fired for his response during Parkland shooting will get his badge back | CNN

One of the Florida sheriff's deputies who was fired for his response during the 2018 Parkland school shooting will be reinstated with back pay and retain his seniority.

www.cnn.com

Are any of you relieved that these fine officers are back on the job? Citizens do you feel safer knowing these folks will be patrolling your neighborhood? Cops, do you want them backing you up during a dangerous situation? What job could you assign them to that would not present a moment where they might have to take action? Crossing guard?

If you assume that there is no shame in cowardice. It is just the way that person is made up. Ok, fine. But that person should not be in a position where risking his life is part of the job. He should stay safe, in an office, or somewhere where the threat of violence is as low as possible.

What about “Officer Friendly“ who was fired for cowardice?

Is he one of the three?

Yes. All three including Peterson were ordered reinstated. They’re back on the force, and assuming they have to be re-certified for their annual training, will be back on the street in no time protecting themselves and serving something.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

^^^ Does this include the guy who remained outside the school building with his gun pulled out?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[Mac-7]

The three cops who were eventually fired because of their actions at the Parkland High School Shooting, have been ordered reinstated after an Arbiter sided with them. The complaint was that it took too long to fire the trio, and that was wrong, and they should be given their jobs back with back pay.

Florida officer fired for his response during Parkland shooting will get his badge back | CNN

One of the Florida sheriff's deputies who was fired for his response during the 2018 Parkland school shooting will be reinstated with back pay and retain his seniority.

www.cnn.com

Are any of you relieved that these fine officers are back on the job? Citizens do you feel safer knowing these folks will be patrolling your neighborhood? Cops, do you want them backing you up during a dangerous situation? What job could you assign them to that would not present a moment where they might have to take action? Crossing guard?

If you assume that there is no shame in cowardice. It is just the way that person is made up. Ok, fine. But that person should not be in a position where risking his life is part of the job. He should stay safe, in an office, or somewhere where the threat of violence is as low as possible.

What about “Officer Friendly“ who was fired for cowardice?

Is he one of the three?

Yes. All three including Peterson were ordered reinstated. They’re back on the force, and assuming they have to be re-certified for their annual training, will be back on the street in no time protecting themselves and serving something.

Thats sad news

 

[jillian]

I'd feel safer if we didn't live in a country where some fucking idiot doesn't think the Militia amendment means that a guy like Nick Cruz has a GOD GIVEN RIGHT to own MILITARY GRADE weaponry.

That they are making scapegoats out of law enforcement.

The United States Military does not and never has used AR-15

you trumpkins know nothing.
“Its military version was adopted by the United States Armed Forces as the M16 rifle. ... Colt continued to use the AR-15trademark for its line of semi-automatic-only rifles marketed to civilian and law-enforcement customers, known as Colt AR-15.
Manufacturer: ArmaLite; Colt's Manufacturing Company
Designer: Eugene Stoner (AR-10); Jim Sullivan; Bob Fremont
Mass: 6.55 lb (2.97 kg) with 20 round magazine

Wikipedia › wiki › ArmaLite_AR-15
ArmaLite AR-15 - Wikipedi”

 

[Desperado]

I'd feel safer if we didn't live in a country where some fucking idiot doesn't think the Militia amendment means that a guy like Nick Cruz has a GOD GIVEN RIGHT to own MILITARY GRADE weaponry.

That they are making scapegoats out of law enforcement.

The United States Military does not and never has used AR-15

you trumpkins know nothing.
“Its military version was adopted by the United States Armed Forces as the M16 rifle. ... Colt continued to use the AR-15trademark for its line of semi-automatic-only rifles marketed to civilian and law-enforcement customers, known as Colt AR-15.
Manufacturer: ArmaLite; Colt's Manufacturing Company
Designer: Eugene Stoner (AR-10); Jim Sullivan; Bob Fremont
Mass: 6.55 lb (2.97 kg) with 20 round magazine
View attachment 338575
Wikipedia › wiki › ArmaLite_AR-15
ArmaLite AR-15 - Wikipedi”

Are you trying to say that the US Military uses the AR-15 or that the AR-15 is the same as the M-16?

 

[Aletheia4u]

The three cops who were eventually fired because of their actions at the Parkland High School Shooting, have been ordered reinstated after an Arbiter sided with them. The complaint was that it took too long to fire the trio, and that was wrong, and they should be given their jobs back with back pay.

Florida officer fired for his response during Parkland shooting will get his badge back | CNN

One of the Florida sheriff's deputies who was fired for his response during the 2018 Parkland school shooting will be reinstated with back pay and retain his seniority.

www.cnn.com

Are any of you relieved that these fine officers are back on the job? Citizens do you feel safer knowing these folks will be patrolling your neighborhood? Cops, do you want them backing you up during a dangerous situation? What job could you assign them to that would not present a moment where they might have to take action? Crossing guard?

If you assume that there is no shame in cowardice. It is just the way that person is made up. Ok, fine. But that person should not be in a position where risking his life is part of the job. He should stay safe, in an office, or somewhere where the threat of violence is as low as possible.

It was a Psyop operation.
What parent will start advocating for gun control right after their own child's death. Because they shows it on T.V. series, of parents doing that. That doesn't mean it really happens. They uses T.V. series to condition our minds. To think the way they want us to think. All T.V.series are doing is controlling our thoughts.
That shooter looks and behaves like someone that is under a spell. Which his foster parents has the qualifications to treat him. The government is known to pick up undesirables to experiment on.



James, 48, is a decorated army veteran and a military intelligence analyst who served stints in the Middle East between 1988 and 1996. Kimberly, 49, is a neonatal intensive care nurse who cares for premature and ill babies.

Nikolas Cruz: ‘We had this monster living under our roof and we didn’t know.’

Nikolas Cruz was immature, quirky and depressed when James and Kimberly Snead took him into their Parkland home. But he was pleasant and seemed to be growing happier, they said. How the 19-year-old…

www.sun-sentinel.com

Parkland father interrupts Trump's speech, is removed from House gallery

The father of a Parkland shooting victim was removed from the House chamber gallery Tuesday night for shouting about gun control during President Trump’s State of the Union address, reports said.

www.foxnews.com

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, it does mean that anyone has a right to weapons. As for military grade, civilian weapons are not. But even if they were, you and I would have a right to them.

You call it the Militia Amendment. But all things make sense in context. Who was a member of the Militia? At the time when the Amendment was written, what was the Militia?

I doesn't matter. At the time it was written, guns were expensive and very few people owned them. It actually WAS a privilege.

It really didn't make sense at the time, which is why "militias" were eventually replaced by professional military and police forces.

It makes ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE NOW.

Well that has nothing to do with the world today right? Yes, and no. We would have to be invaded before we even tried the Militia thing again. But we do have a similar situation in law today. Under Posse Comitatus, the law that prevents the Army from acting as police, we have the ability of Police to form a Posse. In Georgia, it is this law.

Um, yeah, and we saw how awful of an idea that was with Ahmaud Abery... where a couple of rednecks shot an unarmed jogger. That's all kinds of fucked up.

We know that they expected the Militia to have military grade weapons. And if you say that the big weapons of the era were exempt, I say no. Cannon were available for public sale. How do you think the Privateers we used during the Revolutionary war, the war of 1812, and even the Civil War were armed? They purchased their cannons on the open market.

Again, just because the DEAD SLAVE RAPISTS thought something was a good idea, doesn't make it a good idea.

They thought it was a great idea to bleed people when they got sick. Nobody tell Trump, that might be his next Covid-19 solution. They thought slavery was a good idea.

Does it make sense for Nick Cruz or Adam Lanza or Joker Holmes to be able to walk into a gun store and buy the same weapon our soldiers carry into war? Nope.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes. All three including Peterson were ordered reinstated. They’re back on the force, and assuming they have to be re-certified for their annual training, will be back on the street in no time protecting themselves and serving something.

As they should. Making these cops into scapegoats because they didn't take action until they assessed the situation in an uncertain scenario is the kind of political bullshit.

 

[SavannahMann]

Actually, it does mean that anyone has a right to weapons. As for military grade, civilian weapons are not. But even if they were, you and I would have a right to them.

You call it the Militia Amendment. But all things make sense in context. Who was a member of the Militia? At the time when the Amendment was written, what was the Militia?

I doesn't matter. At the time it was written, guns were expensive and very few people owned them. It actually WAS a privilege.

It really didn't make sense at the time, which is why "militias" were eventually replaced by professional military and police forces.

It makes ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE NOW.

Well that has nothing to do with the world today right? Yes, and no. We would have to be invaded before we even tried the Militia thing again. But we do have a similar situation in law today. Under Posse Comitatus, the law that prevents the Army from acting as police, we have the ability of Police to form a Posse. In Georgia, it is this law.

Um, yeah, and we saw how awful of an idea that was with Ahmaud Abery... where a couple of rednecks shot an unarmed jogger. That's all kinds of fucked up.

We know that they expected the Militia to have military grade weapons. And if you say that the big weapons of the era were exempt, I say no. Cannon were available for public sale. How do you think the Privateers we used during the Revolutionary war, the war of 1812, and even the Civil War were armed? They purchased their cannons on the open market.

Again, just because the DEAD SLAVE RAPISTS thought something was a good idea, doesn't make it a good idea.

They thought it was a great idea to bleed people when they got sick. Nobody tell Trump, that might be his next Covid-19 solution. They thought slavery was a good idea.

Does it make sense for Nick Cruz or Adam Lanza or Joker Holmes to be able to walk into a gun store and buy the same weapon our soldiers carry into war? Nope.

Guns were expensive. And everyone had one. In fact. The Congress passed a law that all militia members should have one and even called upon the War Department to procure sufficient weapons to arm anyone who did not have one of sufficient caliber.

Hunting was the only way for most people to keep food on the table. And hunting required a weapon. The same rifle they took a deer with could be used to kill an enemy.

When the nation was formed there was a prohibition against a standing army. In fact nearly a Century later the (incorrectly named) Civil War was fought with Militia. That was why they were called things like the Twentieth Maine. We now call such units the National Guard. Not exactly the same thing.

The Founders Intent is very clear. As is the language of the Amendment. Now the Founders also knew that thing may change. So they gave us an ability to Amend that document. We were free to change it. You are free to push for an amendment revoking the Second. Some my find it ironic to see you use the rights guaranteed in the first to get rid of the Second. But it is your right.

Where we screw up is in redefining the amendments to our desires. That redefinition diminishes all the rights. Look what has happened to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth. We have created so many exceptions that they are basically meaningless now. And it gets worse all the time.

We must vigorously defend all the rights. For everyone. Or we risk losing the little we have left.

 

[SavannahMann]

Yes. All three including Peterson were ordered reinstated. They’re back on the force, and assuming they have to be re-certified for their annual training, will be back on the street in no time protecting themselves and serving something.

As they should. Making these cops into scapegoats because they didn't take action until they assessed the situation in an uncertain scenario is the kind of political bullshit.

Policies and Procedures are guides developed by people who have considered each situation. In the 1970’s the policy was to wait outside and let the negotiations begin. That policy ended when the madmen began executing the hostages and the era of the mass shooter began.

The policies of the same era called in pilots to cooperate with Hijackers. That policy is dead and buried. Now it is to resist at all costs.

We expect our Police to take action. We expect them to follow the rules and policies. The officers were not fired because they were scapegoats. They were fired because they did not follow policy.

 

[JoeB131]

Guns were expensive. And everyone had one. In fact. The Congress passed a law that all militia members should have one and even called upon the War Department to procure sufficient weapons to arm anyone who did not have one of sufficient caliber.

Very few people had them. In fact, to fight the revolutionary war, we had to get them from France.

The reason the National Rifle Association was passed was because during the Civil War, few people knew how to use guns, and the NRA was started to encourage marksmanship. (That was before the crazies took over.)

The Founders Intent is very clear. As is the language of the Amendment. Now the Founders also knew that thing may change. So they gave us an ability to Amend that document. We were free to change it. You are free to push for an amendment revoking the Second. Some my find it ironic to see you use the rights guaranteed in the first to get rid of the Second. But it is your right.

Um, no. There are all sorts of ways we can get the Gun Crazies under control without fixing the Militia Amendment. We can start by allowing the victims of gun violence to sue gun makers and sellers. Then they'll be a lot more selective who they sell to. We can work to overturn the craziness that is the Heller Decision. We can also use the power of the purse. If you are a gun manufacturer and you are selling to the crazies, you don't get to enjoy government contracts. Since 40% of gun sales are STILL to government agencies, that's a big slice of the pie.

Where we screw up is in redefining the amendments to our desires. That redefinition diminishes all the rights. Look what has happened to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth. We have created so many exceptions that they are basically meaningless now. And it gets worse all the time.

Okay. Still not a good reason to let Nick Cruz own a fucking machine gun.

A wise man said,"The Constitution is not a suicide pact". There's simply no value to letting an average citizen own a gun. NONE. Not one. You aren't stopping crime and you aren't going to overthrow a bad government. You aren't going to form a militia and fight off Native Americans or invading armies anymore.

Policies and Procedures are guides developed by people who have considered each situation. In the 1970’s the policy was to wait outside and let the negotiations begin. That policy ended when the madmen began executing the hostages and the era of the mass shooter began.

The policies of the same era called in pilots to cooperate with Hijackers. That policy is dead and buried. Now it is to resist at all costs.

We expect our Police to take action. We expect them to follow the rules and policies. The officers were not fired because they were scapegoats. They were fired because they did not follow policy.

Uh, no, the current policy is to assess the situation and wait for backup. These guys followed procedure just fine. The problem was that the politicians who let a guy like Nick Cruz own a machine gun because they were so terrified of the NRA needed scapegoats, and these cops were selected.

 

[gipper]

Guns were expensive. And everyone had one. In fact. The Congress passed a law that all militia members should have one and even called upon the War Department to procure sufficient weapons to arm anyone who did not have one of sufficient caliber.

Very few people had them. In fact, to fight the revolutionary war, we had to get them from France.

The reason the National Rifle Association was passed was because during the Civil War, few people knew how to use guns, and the NRA was started to encourage marksmanship. (That was before the crazies took over.)

The Founders Intent is very clear. As is the language of the Amendment. Now the Founders also knew that thing may change. So they gave us an ability to Amend that document. We were free to change it. You are free to push for an amendment revoking the Second. Some my find it ironic to see you use the rights guaranteed in the first to get rid of the Second. But it is your right.

Um, no. There are all sorts of ways we can get the Gun Crazies under control without fixing the Militia Amendment. We can start by allowing the victims of gun violence to sue gun makers and sellers. Then they'll be a lot more selective who they sell to. We can work to overturn the craziness that is the Heller Decision. We can also use the power of the purse. If you are a gun manufacturer and you are selling to the crazies, you don't get to enjoy government contracts. Since 40% of gun sales are STILL to government agencies, that's a big slice of the pie.

Where we screw up is in redefining the amendments to our desires. That redefinition diminishes all the rights. Look what has happened to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth. We have created so many exceptions that they are basically meaningless now. And it gets worse all the time.

Okay. Still not a good reason to let Nick Cruz own a fucking machine gun.

A wise man said,"The Constitution is not a suicide pact". There's simply no value to letting an average citizen own a gun. NONE. Not one. You aren't stopping crime and you aren't going to overthrow a bad government. You aren't going to form a militia and fight off Native Americans or invading armies anymore.

Policies and Procedures are guides developed by people who have considered each situation. In the 1970’s the policy was to wait outside and let the negotiations begin. That policy ended when the madmen began executing the hostages and the era of the mass shooter began.

The policies of the same era called in pilots to cooperate with Hijackers. That policy is dead and buried. Now it is to resist at all costs.

We expect our Police to take action. We expect them to follow the rules and policies. The officers were not fired because they were scapegoats. They were fired because they did not follow policy.

Uh, no, the current policy is to assess the situation and wait for backup. These guys followed procedure just fine. The problem was that the politicians who let a guy like Nick Cruz own a machine gun because they were so terrified of the NRA needed scapegoats, and these cops were selected.

Why do you want to take away rights? The constitution clearly states all Americans have the right to be armed and your beloved corrupt government can’t do anything about it.

If you want to be a serf to government that’s your prerogative. Don’t force your opinions on others. Didn’t your mommy tell you that?

 

[SavannahMann]

The Founders Intent is very clear. As is the language of the Amendment. Now the Founders also knew that thing may change. So they gave us an ability to Amend that document. We were free to change it. You are free to push for an amendment revoking the Second. Some my find it ironic to see you use the rights guaranteed in the first to get rid of the Second. But it is your right.

Um, no. There are all sorts of ways we can get the Gun Crazies under control without fixing the Militia Amendment. We can start by allowing the victims of gun violence to sue gun makers and sellers. Then they'll be a lot more selective who they sell to. We can work to overturn the craziness that is the Heller Decision. We can also use the power of the purse. If you are a gun manufacturer and you are selling to the crazies, you don't get to enjoy government contracts. Since 40% of gun sales are STILL to government agencies, that's a big slice of the pie.

So what annoys you is that the gun makers have the same protections as anyone else. If I tried to sue HP and Best Buy saying the Hacker who stole my money and posted illegal porn online claiming to be me used their computer and they should have known not to make or sell it to this guy the lawsuit would be thrown out as frivolous.

If I tried to sue Fiat Dodge claiming that they should have known not to sell such a powerful car as the Dodge Hellcat to a man who would drink and then race around at 180 Miles an hour. Same thing. Frivolous and out the door I go.

You can sue Gun makers and sellers for the same reasons you can sue other companies. If Remington makes a defective product. They can be, and are sued. Taurus for example was sued a few years ago by several people because their PT 111 series of pistols had a flaw. They paid out a lot of money in damages. They even lost a class action lawsuit.

Recall for defective Taurus pistols ends Feb. 6

If you own one of the potentially defective Taurus pistols you only have until Tuesday to get in on the class action settlement.

www.nbc26.com

The law you object to merely offers the same protections to the makers of guns that the manufacturer of any other product has. Protection from frivolous lawsuits. If Dodge makes the Hellcat and some idiot buys it and does as I described. Dodge will never be in court explaining that they make the car and the dealer sells it. They do not ship direct to the customer.

The Dealer will never be in court explaining they followed the law and sold the car and reported the sale to the DMV and the Tax Commissioner.

But you want gun makers to suffer through this. Not because you want justice for the victims. Not because you want to hold the guilty accountable. But because you want to bankrupt the companies with frivolous lawsuits.

Collectively if we are being honest. More people will die from the Ford Pick Up Truck than will die from the Bushmaster AR.

Yet no one is arguing that we should be able to sue Ford because Drunks drive and kill people or cause life changing injury.

 

[JoeB131]

So what annoys you is that the gun makers have the same protections as anyone else. If I tried to sue HP and Best Buy saying the Hacker who stole my money and posted illegal porn online claiming to be me used their computer and they should have known not to make or sell it to this guy the lawsuit would be thrown out as frivolous.

Actually, if they were specifically designing computer to be hacked easily, and marketing directly to hackers, you'd have a pretty good case. Quite the contrary, almost every computer now comes with free anti-virus software.

You can sue Gun makers and sellers for the same reasons you can sue other companies. If Remington makes a defective product. They can be, and are sued. Taurus for example was sued a few years ago by several people because their PT 111 series of pistols had a flaw. They paid out a lot of money in damages. They even lost a class action lawsuit.

Quite the contrary. The victims of the DC Snipers DID sue the gun makers and sellers, because they made it too easy for a convicted felon and a minor to acquire weapons they had no business having. They got quite a large judgment, too. THAT'S when congress stepped in and passed a law preventing that kind of lawsuit from happening again.

Judge OKs Settlement in D.C. Sniper Lawsuit

A judge has signed off on a $2.

www.foxnews.com

The law you object to merely offers the same protections to the makers of guns that the manufacturer of any other product has. Protection from frivolous lawsuits. If Dodge makes the Hellcat and some idiot buys it and does as I described. Dodge will never be in court explaining that they make the car and the dealer sells it. They do not ship direct to the customer.

The Hellcat isn't specifically designed to kill people. Guns are.