Can Sandy Hook Families Hold the Gun Industry Accountable?

[moon]

They just won't accept the fact that a gun is designed to propel a projectile out of the front of its barrel and that a gun can't kill anything.
It would make as much sense as blaming the bow, because someone was shot with an arrow.

Try getting on the subway with a loaded bow.

 

[Legion Troll]

Try getting on the subway with a loaded bow.

He's probably never been on a subway.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

He's probably never been on a subway.

What makes you think that?

 

[moon]

What makes you think that?

He talks like a hillbilly parrot.

 

[Konono]

Try getting on the subway with a loaded bow.

Red herring. Your stance is indefensible so you are now desperately throwing around logical fallacies.

 

[Konono]

If guns are designed solely to kill, what does Moony think of non lethal bullets?

 

[Konono]

Cite.

How dumb can you get? I already posted it. At least you admit to not reading the law.

 

[Legion Troll]

How dumb can you get? I already posted it. At least you admit to not reading the law.

All manufacturers enjoy that protection.

They do?

 

[Konono]

They do?

Yes. Name one manufacturer that is or has been held liable for the unforeseen criminal acts of someone using their product illegally. Had you bothered to do any research into this topic, you would know that.

 

[moon]

If guns are designed solely to kill, what does Moony think of non lethal bullets?

Geez. How do they get to operate computers ?

A gun designed specifically to kill people will not kill people if it has no ammunition.
By the same token, a gun specifically designed to kill people will not kill people without lethal ammunition.

Any ammunition designed to render a lethal weapon non-lethal is to be welcomed. Pray publicise such ammunition, do.

 

[Konono]

Geez. How do they get to operate computers ?

A gun designed specifically to kill people will not kill people if it has no ammunition.
By the same token, a gun specifically designed to kill people will not kill people without lethal ammunition.

Any ammunition designed to render a lethal weapon non-lethal is to be welcomed. Pray publicise such ammunition, do.

So you admit that it is actually the ammunition that kills, not the gun. I asked you about that earlier and you stuck with your 'guns only kill' mantra. Now you admit that guns do not always kill and can have a purpose other than killing.

You have just destroyed your entire argument.

 

[Leonthecat]

So you admit that it is actually the ammunition that kills, not the gun. I asked you about that earlier and you stuck with your 'guns only kill' mantra. Now you admit that guns do not always kill and can have a purpose other than killing.

You have just destroyed your entire argument.

I saw Matt Dillon on Gunsmoke once use his gun like a hammer to drive a nail to hang up a wanted poster, so yeah guns can have uses other than killing.

 

[moon]

So you admit that it is actually the ammunition that kills, not the gun. I asked you about that earlier and you stuck with your 'guns only kill' mantra. Now you admit that guns do not always kill and can have a purpose other than killing.

You have just destroyed your entire argument.

You've deluded yourself. Let's examine how you've come to delude yourself. Show ANY post wherein I have even SUGGESTED that unloaded guns are lethal. You won't be able to , of course, but you'll find the fruitless search educational.

 

[moon]

I saw Matt Dillon on Gunsmoke once use his gun like a hammer to drive a nail to hang up a wanted poster, so yeah guns can have uses other than killing.

Everybody knows that Matt used chawin' tabacca to stick wanted posters. You must be thinking of the episode with the locust plague.

 

[Konono]

You've deluded yourself. Let's examine how you've come to delude yourself. Show ANY post wherein I have even SUGGESTED that unloaded guns are lethal. You won't be able to , of course, but you'll find the fruitless search educational.

You said guns are designed solely to kill. You now admit that is not true as they can use non lethal bullets. Though you continue to ignore that they can simply stop someone and not kill them.

You're a dummy.

 

[Konono]

Okay Moony, answer me this:

Can a terrorist or lawfully shot by police, sue the manufacturer for being injured by their gun?

 

[moon]

You said guns are designed solely to kill.

No, I didn't. Your grammar comprehension is poor. I'm not taking you to task for that- I'm just blunting the thrust of your attack.

You now admit that is not true as they can use non lethal bullets.

No, your attacking your own error.

Though you continue to ignore that they can simply stop someone and not kill them.

That's good, I'm pleased to hear that guns designed specifically to kill people don't have to be loaded. Let's hope that it catches on.

You're a dummy.

OK, suit yourself- you're a moronic ass with a C-grade in plain English.

 

[The Dude]

NRA terrorist kill thousands every year

 

[moon]

Okay Moony, answer me this:

Can a terrorist or lawfully shot by police, sue the manufacturer for being injured by their gun?

How many times do people have to say that the 2005 Act currently protects manufacturers from being held liable ?

 

[Konono]

How many times do people have to say that the 2005 Act currently protects manufacturers from being held liable ?

I should have said "should" they be able to sue.

And, does the law say they are not liable for everything?