Exactly what guns does Hillary Clinton not want banned to the public

mogur said:
Okay, I'll bite.

How about guns that are commonly used to hunt?
How about guns that allow a homeowner to defend his life and property against intruders?
How about guns that allow store keepers to defend against robbery?
How about guns that can protect couriers from attack?
How about guns that gun enthusiasts can compete with?

Does anyone really need a semi? A well-regulated militia used to use single load, single shot rifles. To say that, in this modern world, a single load gun is no longer sufficient to defend us from foreign assault is also to say that tanks, bazookas, rpgs, grenades, ICBMs, nuclear bombs, and fully automatic weapons are now required to defend our country by ordinary citizens. This country was adamantly opposed to a standing army in those days. That is why the Constitution wanted the populous to be armed, and ready to defend the country. But, we now have an armed, standing military force, the likes of which this world has never seen before. If you want to defend the rights of ordinary people to extraordinary modern weaponry, then you must be in favor of replacing our military with a nuclear equipped 'Billy Bob'.
Click to expand...

Semi autos are commonly used to hunt.

We can stop there so try again
 
Ziggy said:
If people could recoup their damages from lung cancer and related diseases there would be no tobacco companies.

R U really that dumb?
Click to expand...

Really?
Anyone who has suffered an injury from tobacco can sue a tobacco company you retard.
Ask your mommy.
 
cawacko said:
Sigh. Gun manufacturers can be already be sued for a malfunctioning product, just like ladders can. But you already know that.

What Hillary wants is if you hit me with a ladder I can sue the ladder company.
Click to expand...

If you could prove that a ladder manufacturer made a ladder that was particularly lethal and easy to be used to hit someone with, you could maintain a suit. But I suspect you already knew that. Look up manufacturing defect v. design defect.
 
Jarod said:
If you could prove that a hammer manufacturer made a hammer that was particularly lethal and easy to be used to hit someone with, you could maintain a suit. But I suspect you already knew that. Look up manufacturing defect v. design defect.
Click to expand...

do you now see how stupid that shit looks?
 
Jarod said:
If you could prove that a ladder manufacturer made a ladder that was particularly lethal and easy to be used to hit someone with, you could maintain a suit. But I suspect you already knew that. Look up manufacturing defect v. design defect.
Click to expand...

You're full of shit; because most ladders can be easily used to lethally hit someone.
I'm beginning to pity any one you've ever represented in a Court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top