Supreme Court Allows Sandy Hook Families' Case Against Remington Arms To Proceed

[JoeB131]

Wow, aa deranged lunatic like you says the numbers are crap....I'll notify the democrat media...

Guy, you use bulllshit numbers all the time like 12 mass shootings (the numbers are in the hundreds) and 600 million guns (the actual number is 300 million).

Even your claim that there are 18 million AR 15's out there is wrong... the actual number is probably 5 million.

AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia

 

[2aguy]

Wow, aa deranged lunatic like you says the numbers are crap....I'll notify the democrat media...

Guy, you use bulllshit numbers all the time like 12 mass shootings (the numbers are in the hundreds) and 600 million guns (the actual number is 300 million).

Even your claim that there are 18 million AR 15's out there is wrong... the actual number is probably 5 million.

AR-15 style rifle - Wikipedia

Moron, I don't claim anything....Mother Jones lists all of the mass public shootings going back to 1981...you doofus...using the actual definition of mass public shootings, not every squabble between gang bangers, you dope......and they put the number at 12 for 2018. And actual numbers show a least 17 million AR-15s in private hands, it is the most popular rifle in the country, you dope...

US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation

2018... 12

2017: 11 ( 5 according to the old standard)

2016....6

2015....4 ( obama's new standard....7)

2014....2 (4)

2013....5

2012....7

2011....3

2010....1

2009....4

2008....3

2007....4

2006....3

2005...2

2004....1

2003...1

2002 not listed so more than likely 0

2001....1

2000....1

1999....5

1998...3

1997....2

1996....1

1995...1

1994...1

1993...4

1992...2

1991...3

1990...1

1989...2

1988....1

1987...1

1986...1

1985... not listed so probably 0

1984...2

1983...not listed so probably 0

1982...1

 

[JoeB131]

Moron, I don't claim anything....Mother Jones lists all

Tiny Dick, all the wishing int he world doesn't make your numbers true.

Can't wait for Remington to get shredded in court.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Tiny Dick…

You should stop projecting your sexual inadequacies on others. It only makes you come across as even more stupid and pathetic than you otherwise would.

 

[JoeB131]

You should stop projecting your sexual inadequacies on others. It only makes you come across as even more stupid and pathetic than you otherwise would.

Naw, guy, I'm not the one who needs military grade weapons to make up for my short comings and lives in fear the ATF will "emasculate" me... that's you guys.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Joe, do you know why gun owners are up in arms (pun intended) over all this? They’re not worried about being “emasculated” by having their guns being taken away by the government, they’re simply worried that the government will take their guns, a Constitutionally protected right.
They’re worried about government overreach, excessive bureaucracy, excessive government power and precedents.

Gun owners and gun control advocates both know that if ARs are banned, it won’t stop there. Gun control advocates won’t admit it of course but deep down where the worms are squirming through the muck, they know it to be true and in fact, desire it.

 

[2aguy]

You should stop projecting your sexual inadequacies on others. It only makes you come across as even more stupid and pathetic than you otherwise would.

Naw, guy, I'm not the one who needs military grade weapons to make up for my short comings and lives in fear the ATF will "emasculate" me... that's you guys.

The anti-gun wishful thinking that fewer Americans now own guns....so that they can use that to convince weak politicians to ban them.......

Notice....joe....that the three letters are not "NRA", they are "NBC....."

NBC Poll: Does Gun Ownership Increase Or Decrease Safety? Anti-Gun Activists Won't Like The Results.

nearly 6 in 10 Americans believe that getting guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens increases safety.

"In the poll, 58 percent agree with the statement that gun ownership does more to increase safety by allowing law-abiding citizens to protect themselves," NBC News reports. "By contrast, 38 percent say that gun ownership reduces safety by giving too many people access to firearms, increasing the chances for accidental misuse."

------

NBC notes that the overall result is a "reversal" of the findings of a 1999 survey that found that 52 percent of respondents believed gun ownership reduced safety. The more positive perspective on gun ownership is partly reflected in gun ownership trends: "47 percent of American adults say they have a firearm in the household, which is up from 44 percent in 1999."

 

[2aguy]

Joe, do you know why gun owners are up in arms (pun intended) over all this? They’re not worried about being “emasculated” by having their guns being taken away by the government, they’re simply worried that the government will take their guns, a Constitutionally protected right.
They’re worried about government overreach, excessive bureaucracy, excessive government power and precedents.

Gun owners and gun control advocates both know that if ARs are banned, it won’t stop there. Gun control advocates won’t admit it of course but deep down where the worms are squirming through the muck, they know it to be true and in fact, desire it.

A ban on AR-15 rifles is the gateway to banning all other semi-auto rifles, shotguns and pistols.......since they all operate the same way, one shot per pull of the trigger.....then they will come back for the actual military weapons......bolt action deer rifles, and pump action shotguns....and finally, they will come for the revolvers.....

 

[JoeB131]

Joe, do you know why gun owners are up in arms (pun intended) over all this? They’re not worried about being “emasculated” by having their guns being taken away by the government, they’re simply worried that the government will take their guns, a Constitutionally protected right.
They’re worried about government overreach, excessive bureaucracy, excessive government power and precedents.

Gun owners and gun control advocates both know that if ARs are banned, it won’t stop there. Gun control advocates won’t admit it of course but deep down where the worms are squirming through the muck, they know it to be true and in fact, desire it.

I'm amused you guys really think this is about what a bunch of slave rapists wanted... or that anyone would buy that

Realistically, I'd be fine if all privately owned guns are banned because there is NO GOOD REASON for you to own a gun if you aren't a cop or a soldier. Realistically, I'd be fine with just keeping military grade weapons out of the hands of the Adam Lanzas and Nicholas Cruzes of the world.

As I've pointed out, for the small fraction of you that are gun nuts, the REST of us have to live with active shooter drills, metal detectors, and a prison industrial complex.

The anti-gun wishful thinking that fewer Americans now own guns....so that they can use that to convince weak politicians to ban them.......

Guns have been in decline for quite a while..>the problem is that there are more and more nuts like you who need to stockpile them.

 

[2aguy]

Joe, do you know why gun owners are up in arms (pun intended) over all this? They’re not worried about being “emasculated” by having their guns being taken away by the government, they’re simply worried that the government will take their guns, a Constitutionally protected right.
They’re worried about government overreach, excessive bureaucracy, excessive government power and precedents.

Gun owners and gun control advocates both know that if ARs are banned, it won’t stop there. Gun control advocates won’t admit it of course but deep down where the worms are squirming through the muck, they know it to be true and in fact, desire it.

View attachment 294904

I'm amused you guys really think this is about what a bunch of slave rapists wanted... or that anyone would buy that

Realistically, I'd be fine if all privately owned guns are banned because there is NO GOOD REASON for you to own a gun if you aren't a cop or a soldier. Realistically, I'd be fine with just keeping military grade weapons out of the hands of the Adam Lanzas and Nicholas Cruzes of the world.

As I've pointed out, for the small fraction of you that are gun nuts, the REST of us have to live with active shooter drills, metal detectors, and a prison industrial complex.

The anti-gun wishful thinking that fewer Americans now own guns....so that they can use that to convince weak politicians to ban them.......

Guns have been in decline for quite a while..>the problem is that there are more and more nuts like you who need to stockpile them.

12 million dead men, women and children, murdered by socialists like you joe, would disagree about gun ownership and the government.........as would the 1.1 million Americans who use their legal guns each year to save lives from rape, robbery and murder....

 

[JoeB131]

12 million dead men, women and children, murdered by socialists like you joe, would disagree about gun ownership and the government.........

One more time. There were a shitload of guns in Nazi Germany... just no one wanted to put his life on the line to save a Jew.

Trust me,when the ATF comes for you... your neighbors won't be rushing out to save you, either. They'll probably be glad you are being taken away because you were frightening them.

 

[2aguy]

12 million dead men, women and children, murdered by socialists like you joe, would disagree about gun ownership and the government.........

One more time. There were a shitload of guns in Nazi Germany... just no one wanted to put his life on the line to save a Jew.

Trust me,when the ATF comes for you... your neighbors won't be rushing out to save you, either. They'll probably be glad you are being taken away because you were frightening them.

And one more time....asshat...

In the 1920s they registered guns in German.

In the 1930s the national socialists used the registration lists to take guns away from their enemies.

In the 1930s, those who stood in the way of the national socialists were beaten and had their businesses destroyed by antifa......I mean, socialist thugs...because the people who would stop them, the police, had guns, but were told to stand down.....and everyone else was disarmed....making it cost free to beat innocent people. That can't happen here.....you'll eventually get shot.

At the end of the 1930s, the people who were disarmed were sent to death camps...

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Joe, do you know why gun owners are up in arms (pun intended) over all this? They’re not worried about being “emasculated” by having their guns being taken away by the government, they’re simply worried that the government will take their guns, a Constitutionally protected right.
They’re worried about government overreach, excessive bureaucracy, excessive government power and precedents.

Gun owners and gun control advocates both know that if ARs are banned, it won’t stop there. Gun control advocates won’t admit it of course but deep down where the worms are squirming through the muck, they know it to be true and in fact, desire it.

I'm amused you guys really think this is about what a bunch of slave rapists wanted... or that anyone would buy that

What amuses you is irrelevant. This is the reason gun owners are against gun control.

Also, those same “bunch of slave rapists” also wanted free speech, freedom of religion and due process, among other things; all of which I’m sure you agree with. Tell me I’m wrong.

Realistically, I'd be fine if all privately owned guns are banned because there is NO GOOD REASON for you to own a gun if you aren't a cop or a soldier.

First, what you’re fine with is irrelevant. Second, a good reason is not required.

Realistically, I'd be fine with just keeping military grade weapons out of the hands of the Adam Lanzas and Nicholas Cruzes of the world.

Don’t insult my intelligence. You just said you’d be fine with no one having firearms.

As I've pointed out, for the small fraction of you that are gun nuts, the REST of us have to live with active shooter drills, metal detectors, and a prison industrial complex.

For your information dumbass, ALL of us have to live with these things.

I don’t like this shit any more than you. I just don’t delude myself into thinking that it’s all the fault of legal and law abiding gun owners just because I hate them. I’m also intelligent enough to see the bigger picture and know that the problem is cultural and that merely depriving law abiding gun owners of their firearms won’t solve the problem.

 

[JoeB131]

And one more time....asshat...

In the 1920s they registered guns in German.

In the 1930s the national socialists used the registration lists to take guns away from their enemies.

Big deal. Most Germans were not their "Enemies". Most Germans were perfectly fine with them getting rid of the Jews. Most Germans had guns, but they weren't going to stick their necks for Communists or Jews or whatever.

This is why your argument fails. What did the US government do when the cultists at Waco shot back? They came in with tanks and bigger guns. What would the government do if the folks in Pilsen shot at ICE agents? They'd come back with more agents.

This is why when I hear one of you gun nuts scream, "I needs me my Guns to fights me the Gummit" I just have to laugh. The government will always have more guns, bigger guns, and if they are coming for you, no one is getting in their way.

 

[JoeB131]

What amuses you is irrelevant. This is the reason gun owners are against gun control.

Also, those same “bunch of slave rapists” also wanted free speech, freedom of religion and due process, among other things; all of which I’m sure you agree with. Tell me I’m wrong.

I'd rather have freedom of religion and a responsible press that doesn't destroy people's lives. Given you are perfectly fine with Smirky Sandmann Suing the WaPo for merely showing his slappable face, I don't think you are that committed to free speech or the free press.

Don’t insult my intelligence. You just said you’d be fine with no one having firearms.

You've told me that you can't keep them out of their hands without infringing on everyone's right. Fine. You tell me how you are going to keep guns out of the hands of the next mass shooter, I'll be happy to listen.

For your information dumbass, ALL of us have to live with these things.

I don’t like this shit any more than you. I just don’t delude myself into thinking that it’s all the fault of legal and law abiding gun owners just because I hate them. I’m also intelligent enough to see the bigger picture and know that the problem is cultural and that merely depriving law abiding gun owners of their firearms won’t solve the problem.

No, we don't have to live with those things.

Countries with common sense gun laws DON'T have those things.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

What amuses you is irrelevant. This is the reason gun owners are against gun control.

Also, those same “bunch of slave rapists” also wanted free speech, freedom of religion and due process, among other things; all of which I’m sure you agree with. Tell me I’m wrong.

I'd rather have freedom of religion and a responsible press that doesn't destroy people's lives.

Right. Given to you by a group of people who, when they also give you the right to bear arms, are suddenly a bunch of “slave rapists”. You’re full of shit.

Given you are perfectly fine with Smirky Sandmann Suing the WaPo for merely showing his slappable face, I don't think you are that committed to free speech or the free press.

I’ve never said anything one way or the other about Sandmann’s lawsuit and I don’t give a shit about it.

While I think the media is guilty of conflating and sensationalizing the story and that the way they went about it helped stoke animosity and hatred against Sandmann, they were careful to word their stories and headlines to where I don’t think Sandmann will win his case.

In reality, they wouldn’t have needed to sensationalize anyway because everyone had a liberal aneurism and threw objectivity right out the window the moment they saw the MAGA hat.

Don’t insult my intelligence. You just said you’d be fine with no one having firearms.

You've told me that you can't keep them out of their hands without infringing on everyone's right. Fine. You tell me how you are going to keep guns out of the hands of the next mass shooter, I'll be happy to listen.

I don’t know what the solution is but I know what it is not. Banning firearms is not and will not be the end-all/be-all solution for avoiding mass shootings.

The problem of mass killings has been simmering for some time and there are multiple factors involved, the least of which is the firearm itself.

Guns are merely a tool and are incapable of killing unless someone picks it up and uses it for that purpose.
So the question is, why are we seeing an upsurge in mass shootings now, in the last twenty years or so, when the semiautomatic rifle has been around and available to consumers for eighty to a hundred years?

For your information dumbass, ALL of us have to live with these things.

I don’t like this shit any more than you. I just don’t delude myself into thinking that it’s all the fault of legal and law abiding gun owners just because I hate them. I’m also intelligent enough to see the bigger picture and know that the problem is cultural and that merely depriving law abiding gun owners of their firearms won’t solve the problem.

No, we don't have to live with those things.

Didn’t say we did.

Countries with common sense gun laws DON'T have those things.

Norway, 2011 - 77 people killed; remains the worst mass shooting/killing in history.

France, 2015 Charlie Hebdo shooting - 12 people killed.

France, 1978 Marseille bar massacre; 10 people killed.

Belgium, 2011 Liege attack - 6 people killed.

Russia, 2010 Chechen Parliament attack - 6 killed.

Spain, 1990 Puerto Hurraco shooting - 9 killed.

Need I go on? There are many more examples but I think you get the point.

 

[2aguy]

What amuses you is irrelevant. This is the reason gun owners are against gun control.

Also, those same “bunch of slave rapists” also wanted free speech, freedom of religion and due process, among other things; all of which I’m sure you agree with. Tell me I’m wrong.

I'd rather have freedom of religion and a responsible press that doesn't destroy people's lives.

Right. Given to you by a group of people who, when they also give you the right to bear arms, are suddenly a bunch of “slave rapists”. You’re full of shit.

Given you are perfectly fine with Smirky Sandmann Suing the WaPo for merely showing his slappable face, I don't think you are that committed to free speech or the free press.

I’ve never said anything one way or the other about Sandmann’s lawsuit and I don’t give a shit about it.

While I think the media is guilty of conflating and sensationalizing the story and that the way they went about it helped stoke animosity and hatred against Sandmann, they were careful to word their stories and headlines to where I don’t think Sandmann will win his case.

In reality, they wouldn’t have needed to sensationalize anyway because everyone had a liberal aneurism and threw objectivity right out the window the moment they saw the MAGA hat.

Don’t insult my intelligence. You just said you’d be fine with no one having firearms.

You've told me that you can't keep them out of their hands without infringing on everyone's right. Fine. You tell me how you are going to keep guns out of the hands of the next mass shooter, I'll be happy to listen.

I don’t know what the solution is but I know what it is not. Banning firearms is not and will not be the end-all/be-all solution for avoiding mass shootings.

The problem of mass killings has been simmering for some time and there are multiple factors involved, the least of which is the firearm itself.

Guns are merely a tool and are incapable of killing unless someone picks it up and uses it for that purpose.
So the question is, why are we seeing an upsurge in mass shootings now, in the last twenty years or so, when the semiautomatic rifle has been around and available to consumers for eighty to a hundred years?

For your information dumbass, ALL of us have to live with these things.

I don’t like this shit any more than you. I just don’t delude myself into thinking that it’s all the fault of legal and law abiding gun owners just because I hate them. I’m also intelligent enough to see the bigger picture and know that the problem is cultural and that merely depriving law abiding gun owners of their firearms won’t solve the problem.

No, we don't have to live with those things.

Didn’t say we did.

Countries with common sense gun laws DON'T have those things.

Norway, 2011 - 77 people killed; remains the worst mass shooting/killing in history.

France, 2015 Charlie Hebdo shooting - 12 people killed.

France, 1978 Marseille bar massacre; 10 people killed.

Belgium, 2011 Liege attack - 6 people killed.

Russia, 2010 Chechen Parliament attack - 6 killed.

Spain, 1990 Puerto Hurraco shooting - 9 killed.

Need I go on? There are many more examples but I think you get the point.

I think the reason we are seeing more? The breakdown of the family, and more fatherless homes......most of the shooters....almost all, lacked fathers in the home, then add to that 24/7 media coverage, and social media which gives shooters a fame they didn't have before......

You forgot the French rock concert attack....130 killed by terrorists with fully automatic military rifles, pistols and grenades, terrorists who were already on French government, terrorist watch lists.....

Also, just recently, the Russian Polytechnic shooting, 20 killed, 40 injured with a pump action, 5 shot, shotgun....

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

What amuses you is irrelevant. This is the reason gun owners are against gun control.

Also, those same “bunch of slave rapists” also wanted free speech, freedom of religion and due process, among other things; all of which I’m sure you agree with. Tell me I’m wrong.

I'd rather have freedom of religion and a responsible press that doesn't destroy people's lives.

Right. Given to you by a group of people who, when they also give you the right to bear arms, are suddenly a bunch of “slave rapists”. You’re full of shit.

Given you are perfectly fine with Smirky Sandmann Suing the WaPo for merely showing his slappable face, I don't think you are that committed to free speech or the free press.

I’ve never said anything one way or the other about Sandmann’s lawsuit and I don’t give a shit about it.

While I think the media is guilty of conflating and sensationalizing the story and that the way they went about it helped stoke animosity and hatred against Sandmann, they were careful to word their stories and headlines to where I don’t think Sandmann will win his case.

In reality, they wouldn’t have needed to sensationalize anyway because everyone had a liberal aneurism and threw objectivity right out the window the moment they saw the MAGA hat.

Don’t insult my intelligence. You just said you’d be fine with no one having firearms.

You've told me that you can't keep them out of their hands without infringing on everyone's right. Fine. You tell me how you are going to keep guns out of the hands of the next mass shooter, I'll be happy to listen.

I don’t know what the solution is but I know what it is not. Banning firearms is not and will not be the end-all/be-all solution for avoiding mass shootings.

The problem of mass killings has been simmering for some time and there are multiple factors involved, the least of which is the firearm itself.

Guns are merely a tool and are incapable of killing unless someone picks it up and uses it for that purpose.
So the question is, why are we seeing an upsurge in mass shootings now, in the last twenty years or so, when the semiautomatic rifle has been around and available to consumers for eighty to a hundred years?

For your information dumbass, ALL of us have to live with these things.

I don’t like this shit any more than you. I just don’t delude myself into thinking that it’s all the fault of legal and law abiding gun owners just because I hate them. I’m also intelligent enough to see the bigger picture and know that the problem is cultural and that merely depriving law abiding gun owners of their firearms won’t solve the problem.

No, we don't have to live with those things.

Didn’t say we did.

Countries with common sense gun laws DON'T have those things.

Norway, 2011 - 77 people killed; remains the worst mass shooting/killing in history.

France, 2015 Charlie Hebdo shooting - 12 people killed.

France, 1978 Marseille bar massacre; 10 people killed.

Belgium, 2011 Liege attack - 6 people killed.

Russia, 2010 Chechen Parliament attack - 6 killed.

Spain, 1990 Puerto Hurraco shooting - 9 killed.

Need I go on? There are many more examples but I think you get the point.

I think the reason we are seeing more? The breakdown of the family, and more fatherless homes......most of the shooters....almost all, lacked fathers in the home, then add to that 24/7 media coverage, and social media which gives shooters a fame they didn't have before......

You forgot the French rock concert attack....130 killed by terrorists with fully automatic military rifles, pistols and grenades, terrorists who were already on French government, terrorist watch lists.....

Also, just recently, the Russian Polytechnic shooting, 20 killed, 40 injured with a pump action, 5 shot, shotgun....

The attacks in Europe and elsewhere are almost always driven by political or religious ideals whereas in the U.S., a common thread seems to be depression and other mental problems.

Depression and other mental problems have always had a stigma attached to them. The unspoken consensus was that it was some sort of character weakness or failure. As a result, family members with these issues were kept out of view of others and the families otherwise didn’t know how to deal with it. Besides all that, we didn’t have the medicines and treatments we have today.

I think what happens a lot of times is that they see others as the cause of their problems and lash out.

But that’s just me. I’m no expert so maybe I’m wrong.

 

[JoeB131]

Right. Given to you by a group of people who, when they also give you the right to bear arms, are suddenly a bunch of “slave rapists”. You’re full of shit.

The Second Amendment was about Militias, not gun ownership. Since we've replaced militias with a Standing Army and Police forces, it's no longer operative.

Oh, yeah, and these were the same guys who said, "All Men are Created Equal" and then went home and lived large off the labor of their slaves. Thomas Jefferson raped the shit out of Sally Hemmings because she had the bad luck to be his dead wife's half sister and kind of looked like her

In reality, they wouldn’t have needed to sensationalize anyway because everyone had a liberal aneurism and threw objectivity right out the window the moment they saw the MAGA hat.

Naw, we drew a conclusion when we saw a smirking little punk taunting an Native American veteran... the problem was, instead of slapping the kid silly and making him apologize, they got him lawyers and PR people to rehabilitate him.

Guns are merely a tool and are incapable of killing unless someone picks it up and uses it for that purpose.
So the question is, why are we seeing an upsurge in mass shootings now, in the last twenty years or so, when the semiautomatic rifle has been around and available to consumers for eighty to a hundred years?

Because the gun industry if flooding the market with them, and pitching them to the most unstable people.

In 1950, there were only 40 million guns in private hands, most of them bolt action and revolvers...Then this funny thing happened. Hunting fell out of favor because, hey, Animal Cruelty is so uncool. The Gun Industry had a problem. Sales were declining. Gun ownership was declining. What ever shall we do?

I know, they said. Let's market to the crazies. You see, in the 1960's, the NRA supported tough gun laws. When the Black Panthers started walking around openly brandishing guns, the NRA helped government pass sensible gun control laws. Then in the 1970's, Wayne LaPeirre and the other nuts took over the NRA, and the Gun Industry decided that they really needed to sell AR-15 to Nancy Lanza and her sort.

Need I go on? There are many more examples but I think you get the point.

.
Yes, when you have sensible gun control, these incidents are rare and only pulled off by organized terrorist groups.

We have them happen a bunch of times a year, usually any nut who forgot to take his meds can become a menace.

 

[JoeB131]

The attacks in Europe and elsewhere are almost always driven by political or religious ideals whereas in the U.S., a common thread seems to be depression and other mental problems.

No, the common thread in the US is that they can walk down to a store and the nice man behind the counter will sell them enough guns to fight off the Zombie Apocalypse...