[OFF TOPIC] Politics Thread

[Dunadan 1,103]

Just now, Shravan Kumar said:

Any info about what marketing violation they have made?

 

No idea. But anyway in many countries you can sue anyone, and if you are wrong you'll have to pay or you can get sued back. Gunmakers having a special law that protect them from being sued tells a lot.

[Olympian1010 8,230]

7 hours ago, heywoodu said:

I'm guessing this now also means the family of everyone who was (on purpose, specifically) killed by someone running over them in a car can now sue the car manufacturer? And the family of people who have been stabbed to death can now sue whichever company made the knife that's used?

 

2 hours ago, Monzanator said:

 

 

Americans are that stupid to follow this insane logic. Paul Walker's family sued Porsche over his death despite the driver of the car was proven to be speeding twice over the limit which led to the crash. Of course they will blame the gun producers for any shootings because they can't just blame the people who actually committed all the murders. It's simply insane.

Guns were invented to kill, that’s their sole purpose. Companies should be doing more to keep them out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them. None of this would’ve been necessary if people would just pass common sense gun reform.

[Olympian1010 8,230]

1 hour ago, Dunadan said:

Gunmakers having a special law that protect them from being sued tells a lot.

Speaks volumes.

[heywoodu 16,004]

10 minutes ago, Olympian1010 said:

 

Guns were invented to kill, that’s their sole purpose. Companies should be doing more to keep them out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them. None of this would’ve been necessary if people would just pass common sense gun reform.

That's more a job of laws though. Great that they can sue Remington, but - much as I am in favour of much stricter gun laws - I hope Remington doesn't need to pay. 

[Monzanator 4,769]

8 minutes ago, Olympian1010 said:

 

Guns were invented to kill, that’s their sole purpose. Companies should be doing more to keep them out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them. None of this would’ve been necessary if people would just pass common sense gun reform.

 

Step one: Remove the Second Amendment which protects the right to bear arms. I'm sorry but if the politicians are unwilling to act when it comes to a political document then they have no moral right to call out gun producers over these shootings, period.

[Olympian1010 8,230]

1 minute ago, heywoodu said:

That's more a job of laws though. Great that they can sue Remington, but - much as I am in favour of much stricter gun laws - I hope Remington doesn't need to pay. 

 

Just now, Monzanator said:

 

Step one: Remove the Second Amendment which protects the right to bear arms. I'm sorry but if the politicians are unwilling to act when it comes to a political document then they have no moral right to call out gun producers over these shootings, period.

Both of you are absolutely correct. This is more a symbolic lawsuit more than anything. Finding legal loopholes that allow you to put pressure on the government and gun companies is a way of the people letting the government know were fed up. Honestly I don’t even think we need to get rid of the second amendment. I think you could challenge the right of civilians to own guns, and win the Supreme Court because of language used in the constitution.

[Monzanator 4,769]

13 minutes ago, Olympian1010 said:

 

Both of you are absolutely correct. This is more a symbolic lawsuit more than anything. Finding legal loopholes that allow you to put pressure on the government and gun companies is a way of the people letting the government know were fed up. Honestly I don’t even think we need to get rid of the second amendment. I think you could challenge the right of civilians to own guns, and win the Supreme Court because of language used in the constitution.

 

So, is the constitution of any use anymore or just a convenient punchbag? Everyone knows how the politics work, half of the Congress doesn't give a damn about it and the other half also doesn't but pretends they are. If the Second Amendment remains in place then every gun producer can call upon it to provide the guns for the citizens to uphold their constitutional right. If the Amendment is gone then these gun maniacs can't sue anyone over violating their constitutional rights bc the damn document no longer guarantees that. Is that common sense enough? Supreme Court is the easy way out, it's always easier to convince five people to something than hundreds of Congress members or even thousands or millions when it comes to a public referendum. And now you just put new laws on top of other laws when the Second Amendment has the top priority over any of that in first place.

[Vojthas 949]

In this thread I feel now like I'm watching one of my favorite films (starring also "The Favorite"s actress) - "Runaway Jury".

[heywoodu 16,004]

Someone call 911 because we've got an epic burn right here.

 

 

Edited November 14, 2019 by heywoodu

[George_D 1,473]

Trump is the best president in US history