Help
FORUMS › General Discussions › Politics › Guns Guns and More Guns
TOPIC: Guns_Guns_and_More_Guns
« Prev  1 ...  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  ... 712  Next »
131 to 140 of 7117
User Details are only visible to members.
I understand, but...

To be clear to others who may read this, semi automatic firearms are not the only type of firearms that use detachable magazines.

Are you suggesting that the manufacturer could be including magazines that don't function properly in the firearm they sell them with?

I would agree that it is desireable to have more than one magazine for a number of reasons. IMO, unless you are in a competition that requires multiple magazines to get through a competitive event, or your life depended on the magazine feeding properly, multiple magazines for the average civilian shooter is more a "want" than a "need".

IMO a rifle like an AR15 is not well suited for concealed carry as a self defense weapon- especially with the bulk of a 30 round magazine. The need for 6 @ 30 round magazines for self defense inside the home or business is questionable.

The conclusion many people would make about a firearm sold from the factory with a 180 round "capacity" before reloading the magazines is not very favorable in today's anti-gun climate.

Brooklyn Park MN
Username hidden
(5409 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Any semi-auto weapon needs to be accompanied by more than one mag. If a mag malfunctions and it is the only one you have.........you now have a very SLOW single shot weapon.

Christoval TX
Username hidden
(1384 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Andrew, I agree with your position on firearm manufacturer's liability.

But, manufacturers' don't help the public's, or more specifically, the anti-gun lobby's perception of them.

As an example, I notice that a specific manufacturer of an AR15 style rifle now sells them (here anyway) with 6 @ 30 round magazines. I believe the manufacturer of an AK47 style also does the same thing, but because I was looking at the AR style, I can't say definitively that the AK style came with that many magazines.

Anyway...

The antis would claim that the only person who would want that many high capacity magazines at the time of purchase must have socially unacceptable intentions for the weapon, and the manufacturer's are enabling that.

Yeah, you *could* read "mass murder in mind" in lieu of "socially unacceptable intentions".

Brooklyn Park MN
Username hidden
(5409 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Thank you for your concern, been spending time on more productive things, and in more productive forums, where the individuals actually care about their countrymen, and not what benefits themselves.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(8416 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Robert!

What the heck? We haven't heard from you for awhile. Did your internet/data connection thaw out? Pay the bill and get reconnected?

Whatever it is, I'm glad to see you're still alive.

Brooklyn Park MN
Username hidden
(5409 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Sexy:

"All that would do is encourage the assholes to steal the guns from the rich."

Good, population control. Reduce the surplus rich, or at the least, make them the targets of the poor, and motivate the wealthy to reduce the number of poor. Thus spreading the number of wealthy gun owners who will be targeted, reducing the chance that any specific wealthy individual is targeted. This being the basic idea behind prey herding. The firing wealthy would be the targets, while the core wealthy remain unaffected. Thus a movement of middle class effort to end poverty which compels the poor to seek out weapons by theft.

That, or you'll make a market for 3D printed guns, and improve the economic status of 3D printers working out of their basement.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(8416 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Andrew, It's LIBERAL aka SOCIALIST OWEBAMA DIARRHEA BLOW OUT. THEY CAN'T STOP UNTIL THEY DROWN

Thornton CO
Username hidden
(3398 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Here we go. My explanation for how stupid they think all of us are.

They want to kill gun manufacturers with liability lawsuits, which are STUPID, by design.

They compare it to big pharma selling a bad drug, or big auto selling a car with a bad airbag. This is bullshit.

If the airbag, OR WHATEVER, in your car, is defective in some way, and it causes injury by failing to function properly, then they are, and should be, liable for the defect in the product.

If a drug company sells a drug that kills or harms people in an unintended way, then they are, and should be, liable for that defective product.

Merck is not responsible, and should not be liable, if someone takes an overdose of one of their drugs with the intent of killing themselves, and they shouldn't be held accountable even if the family of the suicide idiot sues them for it.

General Motors is not responsible, and should not be liable, if someone drives one of their vehicles up onto a sidewalk, mowing down pedestrians. Like that crazy bitch did in Las Vegas recently.

If Remington sells a rifle with a defective chamber, and it blows up in someones face when they fire it, then they are liable for the defective product. They should not be liable if someone takes a Remington rifle and uses it to kill someone in any act of illegal homicide.

Hilliard OH
Username hidden
(1871 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
The new gun control effort, which is being debated by the democrats. The way they're discussing it is a clear sign of just how stupid they think all of us are.

New bill would let gun violence victims sue firearm manufacturers

Democrats are trying to pass a bill that would hold gun makers liable for crimes committed with the weapons that they produced or sold. Passing the legislation will be an uphill battle in a Republican-controlled Congress.

The law would reverse protections by the gun industry granted by the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005, which shields it from litigation over gun crimes.

“If you’re a carmaker and your airbags kill someone, you’re potentially liable,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California) told The Hill in an interview. “If you’re a pharmaceutical company and sell faulty drugs, you can be held liable. If you’re a liquor store and sell alcohol to minors, you can be held liable."

“Why should it be any different for gun manufacturers?” Schiff, one of the lawmakers behind the bill, asked.

Opponents of the Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act argue that car manufacturers are only held liable when vehicles malfunction, not people are killed by drivers. They and say that the new law will leave gun manufacturers open to frivolous lawsuits, an outcome that the original law was designed to stop.

Co-sponsors Schiff and Rep. Adam Blumenthal (D-Connecticut), concede that the proposal will be very difficult to pass in a Republican-controlled Congress.

“It’s much the same as any gun violence prevention bill,” Blumenthal told The New York Times. “But it’s profoundly important.”

But while the bill may not be passed into law, it’s serving as an important locus of debate in the Democratic presidential primary. Hillary Clinton has long tried to claim that Bernie Sanders, who is now neck-and-neck with her in polls, is weak on gun control. Before the Sunday democratic debate, the Clinton campaign used the fact that he voted for the liability-shielding law that Democrats are trying to repeal to attack the Vermont senator.

"The Clinton campaign welcomes Senator Sanders' debate-eve conversion, reversing his vote to immunize gun manufacturers," Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta said in a tweet Saturday, implying that Sanders had flip-flopped on the issue, since he has come out in support of the new legislation.

Sanders, however, refuted the claim that he had been inconsistent on the issue, saying that he supports the new legislation, but only if it includes provisions to avoid “unintended consequences” that he originally supported the original liability-limiting measure to prevent.

“As I have said, I do want to make sure that this legislation does not negatively impact small gun stores in rural America that serve the hunting community,” he said. “So I’m pleased to support the legislation and should it come up for consideration I would work to make sure it includes a provision that allows us to monitor its impact so that we may determine if it is having any unintended consequences.”

rt. com/usa/329337-gun-manufacturer-liability-bill/

Hilliard OH
Username hidden
(1871 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I don't believe anyone claimed that an executive order reclassifying who is a firearms dealer is going to solve all of the issues regarding firearms sales.

While I do not have an issue with the content of the order discussed here, what I see as an issue is the president being able to make a "law" without having it go through Congress. Executive orders are nothing new, with one exception, every president has issued Executive Orders. The number varies from 1 to 3,522. The one exception was Harrison who died after being in office for about 1 month.

Brooklyn Park MN
Username hidden
(5409 posts)
« Prev  1 ...  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  ... 712  Next »
131 to 140 of 7117
TOPIC: Guns Guns and More Guns
This site does not contain sexually explicit images as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2256.
Accordingly, neither this site nor the contents contained herein are covered by the record-keeping provisions of 18 USC 2257(a)-(c).
Disclaimer: This website contains adult material. You must be over 18 to enter or 21 where applicable by law.
All Members are over 18 years of age.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
 
Copyright © 1998-2016 DashBoardHosting, LLC. All Rights Reserved.