Why Sandy Hook parents are suing a gunmaker

[AURaptor 1,137]

Shotgun statement without merit? Bring it up with Joe Biden then. Ha ha ha.

Okay then. Well you're just as wrong as he is. Joke is still on you.

No , simpleton. You are the one who is wrong. Doesn't take a freaking military man to understand that a shotgun will cause more damage in a crowded area than a assault rifle.

[aujeff11 6,243]

Shotgun statement without merit? Bring it up with Joe Biden then. Ha ha ha.

Okay then. Well you're just as wrong as he is. Joke is still on you.

No , simpleton. You are the one who is wrong. Doesn't take a freaking military man to understand that a shotgun will cause more damage in a crowded area than a assault rifle.

How much do you think the pellets spread? I'd rather have a 30 round magazine with a much longer effective range of fire and a much better rate of fire.

AUUSN feel free to chime in if I'm wrong.

[AUDub 11,784]

Shotgun statement without merit? Bring it up with Joe Biden then. Ha ha ha.

Okay then. Well you're just as wrong as he is. Joke is still on you.

No , simpleton. You are the one who is wrong. Doesn't take a freaking military man to understand that a shotgun will cause more damage in a crowded area than a assault rifle.

How much do you think the pellets spread? I'd rather have a 30 round magazine with a much longer effective range of fire. AUUSN feel free to chime in if I'm wrong.

You're not. I have several shotguns and shoot clays. Could cover your spread with you palm at 20 ft.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Well I guess it depends on the skill of the gun user as well as the gun. As well as the situation. I hate to even bring this up , but in a school where lots of people are grouped together , in small rooms.… Yeah I'm just going to end it right there.

[MDM4AU 337]

To the OP...I think holding a manufacturer responsible for what some nut-job does with their product is wrong and would set a very bad precedent.

[aujeff11 6,243]

Shotgun statement without merit? Bring it up with Joe Biden then. Ha ha ha.

Okay then. Well you're just as wrong as he is. Joke is still on you.

No , simpleton. You are the one who is wrong. Doesn't take a freaking military man to understand that a shotgun will cause more damage in a crowded area than a assault rifle.

How much do you think the pellets spread? I'd rather have a 30 round magazine with a much longer effective range of fire. AUUSN feel free to chime in if I'm wrong.

You're not. I have several shotguns and shoot clays. Could cover your spread with you palm at 20 ft.

Exactly. It's not like the pellets can spread a massive distance, and if it could, the penetration and damage of a singular pellet would be minimal.

[aujeff11 6,243]

Well I guess it depends on the skill of the gun user as well as the gun. As well as the situation. I hate to even bring this up , but in a school where lots of people are grouped together , in small rooms.… Yeah I'm just going to end it right there.

Now that you changed the fact pattern to a close group in a small room, I'd choose a shotgun. It still wouldn't cause more damage though. And no, the skill of the shotgun user doesn't dictate how much the pellets spread. Only such things like distance, ammo, weapon.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Well I guess it depends on the skill of the gun user as well as the gun. As well as the situation. I hate to even bring this up , but in a school where lots of people are grouped together , in small rooms.… Yeah I'm just going to end it right there.

Now that you changed the fact pattern to a close group in a small room, I'd choose a shotgun. It still wouldn't cause more damage though. And no, the skill of the shotgun user doesn't dictate how much the pellets spread. Only such things like distance, ammo, weapon.

Well since the thread was about Sandyhook, I was going on the original premise that we were talking about that situation. So I didn't change anything.

Also,I will never claim to be a weapons expert. But I know you can use different chokes on a shotgun to widen and tighten the pellet spread as well as use different type of pellets.

I don't know how experienced the shooter was at Sandyhook, but as we saw in the recent attempted cop killing , where the guy was right up in the cop's face, he still didn't kill him. Though the cop was shot several times, and wounded badly, out of 11 shots fired I believe only half of those landed.

[AUUSN 823]

Shotgun statement without merit? Bring it up with Joe Biden then. Ha ha ha.

Okay then. Well you're just as wrong as he is. Joke is still on you.

No , simpleton. You are the one who is wrong. Doesn't take a freaking military man to understand that a shotgun will cause more damage in a crowded area than a assault rifle.

How much do you think the pellets spread? I'd rather have a 30 round magazine with a much longer effective range of fire and a much better rate of fire.

AUUSN feel free to chime in if I'm wrong.

Bingo. If you want to mow down a group of people at a stand off distance, the assault weapon is your choice. A shotgun requires you to get close.

I beginning to think Raptor has never fired a weapon.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Have fired a weapon ( several ) and have even passed a NRA basics course. But as I said, I will never be confused with a expert.

And being inside a classroom would be considered close range. IMO .

[Mikey 16,781]

The car company selling a car really isn't analogous to a gun dealer selling weapons of war to the public

Maybe if the car company was selling tanks lol.

A car company producing and selling a car is 100% analogous to a firearms manufacturer selling a firearm. There's no way to dodge that fact, like it or not. The firearm used at Sandy Hook was produced and sold for civilian use, just as a Ford truck that might mow down 10 kids after school is produced and sold for civilian use.

The lawsuit is silly on the face of it and unfounded. A suit against the retailer might have some merit if the gun was sold illegally, but suing the manufacturer, after the gun has gone through several hands in the distribution chain? That nuts!

They are filing against Remington because the local gun store, even if the suit is won, does not have the millions of $ the greedy lawyers want. They'd rather hope for a big out of court settlement and are doing nothing except using the grieving parents as pawns in their money making scam.

[aujeff11 6,243]

Have fired a weapon ( several ) and have even passed a NRA basics course. But as I said, I will never be confused with a expert.

And being inside a classroom would be considered close range. IMO .

In the Sandy Hook classroom, an AR 15 took out twenty children. 26 people total in probably just a few minutes. A shotgun cannot do that.

[aujeff11 6,243]

The car company selling a car really isn't analogous to a gun dealer selling weapons of war to the public

Maybe if the car company was selling tanks lol.

A car company producing and selling a car is 100% analogous to a firearms manufacturer selling a firearm. There's no way to dodge that fact, like it or not. The firearm used at Sandy Hook was produced and sold for civilian use, just as a Ford truck that might mow down 10 kids after school is produced and sold for civilian use.

The lawsuit is silly on the face of it and unfounded. A suit against the retailer might have some merit if the gun was sold illegally, but suing the manufacturer, after the gun has gone through several hands in the distribution chain? That nuts!

They are filing against Remington because the local gun store, even if the suit is won, does not have the millions of $ the greedy lawyers want. They'd rather hope for a big out of court settlement and are doing nothing except using the grieving parents as pawns in their money making scam.

The lawsuit is making a distinction between firearms and "weapons of war."

A parent said, "There were a lot of guns the shooter could have chosen from his arsenal and he chose the AR-15," Hockley said, according to the Hartford Courant, "because he knew it would kill as many people as possible as fast as possible."

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/02/22/467688334/ar-15-gun-maker-seeks-to-dismiss-lawsuit-filed-by-sandy-hook-parents

[JayH4AU 1]

Shotgun statement without merit? Bring it up with Joe Biden then. Ha ha ha.

Raptor you are the only one that seems to make sense on these Political forums. It seems it's me and you against a bunch of Liberals. But about the OP, how in the world should any gun company be hold responsible for what a owner does with their weapon? If you wreck and kill someone with a Chevy Tahoe should Chevy be responsible? This world's logic is really starting to be complete nonsense.

[JayH4AU 1]

The car company selling a car really isn't analogous to a gun dealer selling weapons of war to the public

Maybe if the car company was selling tanks lol.

A car company producing and selling a car is 100% analogous to a firearms manufacturer selling a firearm. There's no way to dodge that fact, like it or not. The firearm used at Sandy Hook was produced and sold for civilian use, just as a Ford truck that might mow down 10 kids after school is produced and sold for civilian use.

The lawsuit is silly on the face of it and unfounded. A suit against the retailer might have some merit if the gun was sold illegally, but suing the manufacturer, after the gun has gone through several hands in the distribution chain? That nuts!

They are filing against Remington because the local gun store, even if the suit is won, does not have the millions of $ the greedy lawyers want. They'd rather hope for a big out of court settlement and are doing nothing except using the grieving parents as pawns in their money making scam.

Couldn't have said it better.

[aujeff11 6,243]

Shotgun statement without merit? Bring it up with Joe Biden then. Ha ha ha.

Raptor you are the only one that seems to make sense on these Political forums. It seems it's me and you against a bunch of Liberals. But about the OP, how in the world should any gun company be hold responsible for what a owner does with their weapon? If you wreck and kill someone with a Chevy Tahoe should Chevy be responsible? This world's logic is really starting to be complete nonsense.

I read the first sentence and thought you must be telling a funny. I then stopped reading the rest.

[homersapien 12,172]

Shotgun statement without merit? Bring it up with Joe Biden then. Ha ha ha.

Okay then. Well you're just as wrong as he is. Joke is still on you.

No , simpleton. You are the one who is wrong. Doesn't take a freaking military man to understand that a shotgun will cause more damage in a crowded area than a assault rifle.

How much do you think the pellets spread? I'd rather have a 30 round magazine with a much longer effective range of fire and a much better rate of fire.

AUUSN feel free to chime in if I'm wrong.

Not to mention the bullets will penetrate furniture, walls and more than one person. And shotguns take a lot longer to reload.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Then a pair of handguns would work almost as well, at close range. I'm just sayin', the choice of weapons shouldn't be the issue. One can't make a coherent, sane, or honest argument that an AR 15 is bad, yet others are ' civilian friendly ' and just fine.

[homersapien 12,172]

Then a pair of handguns would work almost as well, at close range. I'm just sayin', the choice of weapons shouldn't be the issue. One can't make a coherent, sane, or honest argument that an AR 15 is bad, yet others are ' civilian friendly ' and just fine.

One can most certainly say an AR15 is more dangerous (capable) than a handgun. No sane person would say otherwise.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Then a pair of handguns would work almost as well, at close range. I'm just sayin', the choice of weapons shouldn't be the issue. One can't make a coherent, sane, or honest argument that an AR 15 is bad, yet others are ' civilian friendly ' and just fine.

One can most certainly say an AR15 is more dangerous (capable) than a handgun. No sane person would say otherwise.

It's a more powerful gun, but again, it depends on the situation, the skill of the shooter...

Point is, the OT, that there's any legit standing to blame the gun maker for making a legal product which works as its suppose to, and didn't by any fault of the maker or malfunction of the product cause the death of - ANYONE.

[aubearcat 2,153]

Shotgun statement without merit? Bring it up with Joe Biden then. Ha ha ha.

Okay then. Well you're just as wrong as he is. Joke is still on you.

No , simpleton. You are the one who is wrong. Doesn't take a freaking military man to understand that a shotgun will cause more damage in a crowded area than a assault rifle.

How much do you think the pellets spread? I'd rather have a 30 round magazine with a much longer effective range of fire and a much better rate of fire.

AUUSN feel free to chime in if I'm wrong.

Not to mention the bullets will penetrate furniture, walls and more than one person. And shotguns take a lot longer to reload.

The penetration is going to depend on the round. The rounds we carry in our patrol rifles are manufactured by hornady. They are specifically engineered to prevent "over penetration ".

[AUUSN 823]

Shotgun statement without merit? Bring it up with Joe Biden then. Ha ha ha.

Okay then. Well you're just as wrong as he is. Joke is still on you.

No , simpleton. You are the one who is wrong. Doesn't take a freaking military man to understand that a shotgun will cause more damage in a crowded area than a assault rifle.

How much do you think the pellets spread? I'd rather have a 30 round magazine with a much longer effective range of fire and a much better rate of fire.

AUUSN feel free to chime in if I'm wrong.

Not to mention the bullets will penetrate furniture, walls and more than one person. And shotguns take a lot longer to reload.

The penetration is going to depend on the round. The rounds we carry in our patrol rifles are manufactured by hornady. They are specifically engineered to prevent "over penetration ".

You should have access to an AR-15. The general public shouldnt.

For sale, specially designed to mow down large groups of kids...

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=543976182

[cole256 17,085]

Shotgun statement without merit? Bring it up with Joe Biden then. Ha ha ha.

Raptor you are the only one that seems to make sense on these Political forums. It seems it's me and you against a bunch of Liberals. But about the OP, how in the world should any gun company be hold responsible for what a owner does with their weapon? If you wreck and kill someone with a Chevy Tahoe should Chevy be responsible? This world's logic is really starting to be complete nonsense.

This was great

[aubearcat 2,153]

The car company selling a car really isn't analogous to a gun dealer selling weapons of war to the public

Maybe if the car company was selling tanks lol.

A car company producing and selling a car is 100% analogous to a firearms manufacturer selling a firearm. There's no way to dodge that fact, like it or not. The firearm used at Sandy Hook was produced and sold for civilian use, just as a Ford truck that might mow down 10 kids after school is produced and sold for civilian use.

The lawsuit is silly on the face of it and unfounded. A suit against the retailer might have some merit if the gun was sold illegally, but suing the manufacturer, after the gun has gone through several hands in the distribution chain? That nuts!

They are filing against Remington because the local gun store, even if the suit is won, does not have the millions of $ the greedy lawyers want. They'd rather hope for a big out of court settlement and are doing nothing except using the grieving parents as pawns in their money making scam.

The lawsuit is making a distinction between firearms and "weapons of war."

A parent said, "There were a lot of guns the shooter could have chosen from his arsenal and he chose the AR-15," Hockley said, according to the Hartford Courant, "because he knew it would kill as many people as possible as fast as possible."

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/02/22/467688334/ar-15-gun-maker-seeks-to-dismiss-lawsuit-filed-by-sandy-hook-parents

"Weapon of war " is really hyperbole. I have a friend who's 10yr old son shot his first dear with an AR-15 this past dear season. It was approximately a 50 yard shot because an AR won't take a dear down much further than about 100 yards. Common hunting rifles, 308, 30.06, 7mm...etc, are much more powerful than an AR. Those rifles can take a dear down from several hundred yards.

[AUUSN 823]

So then you have no problem with open carry hand grenades.

...which are a totally different subject, is part of your normal game. Now it's time for you to post an irrelevant cartoon. Go ahead, there is plenty of space below.

You got it skippy...