I've been working for years to design a weapon that deer and bears can use to even the playing field.Would that give the family of the deer I tagged this year, grounds for a civil suit?
Or conspiracy to?
All very tricky elements.
I've been working for years to design a weapon that deer and bears can use to even the playing field.Would that give the family of the deer I tagged this year, grounds for a civil suit?
Or conspiracy to?
All very tricky elements.
I love it when you take on the persona of your avatar.
Does your policy encompass knife and sporting equipment manufacturers as well?
[/FONT]
Wouldn't that make you an arms dealer, supplying both sides of the conflict?I've been working for years to design a weapon that deer and bears can use to even the playing field.
So were bows, crossbows, knives and bats.Just guns because they were designed to immobilize or kill and there are laws in the legal system on killing humans.
As does Horton, Excalibur, Ten Point and Barnet. As well as arrow/bolt/broadhead manufacturers, Carbon Express, Eaton and Muzzy.The gun maker advertises their product as an efficient killing machine so therefore the gun maker must go to jail when a person using their product that kills a human.
Yes. I said that. So would you please amend your claim that "guns were meant to kill" to "SOME guns were meant to kill".Target guns were designed to poke through targets
No, the gun manufacturer doesn't. According the the law that EXISTS, it is the shooter that goes to jail if the courts can prove it.and as long as it is not a human then the gun makers don’t have to worry but when a target gun pokes a hole through a human then the gun maker has to go to jail.
I see your point CDNBear but the problem today is guns and the sooner we go after the gun makers who make killing machines and making them legally responsible where they go to jail the better off we will be.
lol.I love it when you take on the persona of your avatar.
[/FONT]
Maybe not.Liberalman is not a liberal.
Actually I think liberals do that to themselves, too, so it's hard to say whether he is an alien or really is a liberal.He is an alien plant put in to discredit the Liberals.
Pretty much. lolWouldn't that make you an arms dealer, supplying both sides of the conflict?
Yup.So were bows, crossbows, knives and bats.
As does Horton, Excalibur, Ten Point and Barnet. As well as arrow/bolt/broadhead manufacturers, Carbon Express, Eaton and Muzzy.
And Tactical/combat knife manufacturers, Gerber, Buck, Kabar, Remmington.
Why not go after the head dood? The one that's responsible for everything bad?I see your point CDNBear but the problem today is guns and the sooner we go after the gun makers who make killing machines and making them legally responsible where they go to jail the better off we will be.
Leave Jerry Lewis out of this!Why not go after the head dood? The one that's responsible for everything bad?
I see your point CDNBear but the problem today is guns and the sooner we go after the gun makers who make killing machines and making them legally responsible where they go to jail the better off we will be.
[/FONT][/COLOR]
Nah, there's two problems, criminals and people using guns who don't know how to handle them? If your 5 year old kids gets in your car, starts it up and wipe out some real estate, do you ban cars?
A car wasn't designed to kill people but a gun was so the gun makers must go to jail when one of their products kills a human
[/FONT][/COLOR]
No, they mustn't.A car wasn't designed to kill people but a gun was so the gun makers must go to jail when one of their products kills a human
[/FONT][/COLOR]
[/FONT][/COLOR]
Nah, there's two problems, criminals and people using guns who don't know how to handle them? If your 5 year old kids gets in your car, starts it up and wipe out some real estate, do you ban cars?
Nope but child welfare, the property owner etc. go after the parents or guardians of said child. Thing is even pub/tavern owners are liable if they serve too much of the product they sell. Not just the imbibers who injure or kill another person or causes damages are liable. Persons & companies are liable for producing products that cause injury or death even if they produce such benign items such as cribs, or blinds. So why not those making products who's sole purpose is to kill??
1, Gun manufacturers don't kill people.
2, In 2004 (Only because it was the quickest stat I could find.) 42,800 Americans were killed in car accidents.
While 29,500 were killed by guns.
You should be going after car manufacturers, driver instructors, licensing officials, legislators.
Where does it stop?
[/FONT][/COLOR]
Well.....Ths is for all you anti gun folks...The long gun registry is on it's way out...you can cry and tap your little foot....:smile:
All I can say is........I'm sorry for you loss
![]()
Yes, BitWhys, and if you are trying to piss me off you (and Mr. Day) are succeeding ROYALLY!
That the Liberals have the ARROGANCE to whip their members over this damned thing that has cost TWO THOUSAND times what they promised, and has been used to feed money to their gangster buddies in Quebec is bad enough...........that the NDP and Bloc, being socialist idiots, will do the same is to be expected.
The registry is USELESS.
It does NOTHING but cost BILLIONS to harass honest citizens.....THAT'S IT!!!!!!
Look at the (somewhat fixed) post above..........the comparison amazed me, and it has confirmed every belief I have in the responsibility of the average citizen, and confirmed the uselessness of practically ALL gun control. A waste of time and money.
Notice if you will, as our gun laws took effect, murder rates here went UP, and while the Americans loosened their laws, murder rates went DOWN, until we kill MUCH more than they do.......
Support this crap if you will, but understand it is money that could be spent putting cops on the street, or improving health care.
As for us shooters, we'll keeping ignoring what laws we can, and obeying those we absolutely must to carry on our sport.
I'm not sure how many problems that sort of buck passing has solved! Next thing they will be putting a limit on how many kitchen knives a manufacturer can produce. How is a bartender supposed to know a person's mode of transportation? Besides I think it may just come under the heading of "minding ones own business". If you're over the age of 19 and you do the killing, you're the culprit, not John Labatt or Joe Bartender! :lol:[/QUOTE)
.........................................
The bartender doesn't need to know a person's mode of transportation. He is responsible for noticing those who are inebrated to the point of becoming a danger to himself & to others . He must not serve those who have obviously had too much to drink. A drunk person is not just a danger in a car. He or she can fall down & injure or kill himself. He .may cause accidents by staggering into traffic. The bartender is also hit with a hefty fine and jail time for serving a minor. if caught not checking ID's.
Since liquor , blinds, cribs etc, are manufactured for entirely benign purposes, what excuse is there for not holding gun manufacturers and sellers to the same standards, considering benign is not exactly their products intent.
What I find incredible is the persons most in favour of making it easier to own guns, are generally the same ones who are the most vocal about calling abortion MURDER!! Talk about double standards.
Children Killed by Guns: In 1999, there were 3,385 firearms-related deaths for children ages 0–19 years. They break down as follows: 214 unintentional, 1,078 suicides, 1,990 homicides, 83 for which the intent could not be determined, and 20 due to legal intervention. Source: 2002 edition of Injury Facts.
Read more: Children Killed by Guns — Infoplease.com Children Killed by Guns — Infoplease.com.
I'm not sure how many problems that sort of buck passing has solved! Next thing they will be putting a limit on how many kitchen knives a manufacturer can produce. How is a bartender supposed to know a person's mode of transportation? Besides I think it may just come under the heading of "minding ones own business". If you're over the age of 19 and you do the killing, you're the culprit, not John Labatt or Joe Bartender! :lol:[/QUOTE)
.........................................
The bartender doesn't need to know a person's mode of transportation. He is responsible for noticing those who are inebrated to the point of becoming a danger to himself & to others . He must not serve those who have obviously had too much to drink. A drunk person is not just a danger in a car. He or she can fall down & injure or kill himself. He .may cause accidents by staggering into traffic. The bartender is also hit with a hefty fine and jail time for serving a minor. if caught not checking ID's.
Since liquor , blinds, cribs etc, are manufactured for entirely benign purposes, what excuse is there for not holding gun manufacturers and sellers to the same standards, considering benign is not exactly their products intent.
What I find incredible is the persons most in favour of making it easier to own guns, are generally the same ones who are the most vocal about calling abortion MURDER!! Talk about double standards.
Children Killed by Guns: In 1999, there were 3,385 firearms-related deaths for children ages 0–19 years. They break down as follows: 214 unintentional, 1,078 suicides, 1,990 homicides, 83 for which the intent could not be determined, and 20 due to legal intervention. Source: 2002 edition of Injury Facts.
Read more: Children Killed by Guns — Infoplease.com Children Killed by Guns — Infoplease.com.
I'm more in favour of making the INDIVIDUAL responsible for his/her own actions. The more people we have "looking after" us the less able we are to look after ourselves. As cruel as it sounds perhaps unfortunate deaths through stupidity, greed, gluttony will just ensure the continuation of "survival of the fittest". The only problem I see is the innocent unfortunate victims, but there will always be those no matter what we do. :smile: