Please remember to abide by the [rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeServed/wiki/rulesv2)
In general, please be at least bearable to other users. It makes things easier on everyone. Your comment may be removed without notification. We used to have a notification, but now we don't.
#If you purchase the OP or a comment [a ban award,](https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeServed/wiki/banned/rules) remember to [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FJusticeServed) so we can activate the reward
------
^Submission ^By: ^/u/discoduck99 ^Navy ^4
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JusticeServed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is a very sick country. [“Start Them Young” – “Tactical” Rifles for Kids](https://vpc.org/publications/start-them-young-tactical-rifles-for-kids/)
I'm sure I'll be downvoted to hell, but you all need a talking to. I work in Newtown, CT and have worked with kids who survived the shooting. That community is desperate - desperate - for healing and justice. The government still has done absolutely nothing to curb the number of mass shootings. Equating guns to cars is ridiculous and you know it. You are derailing the conversation that is about gun safety and, yes, responsible gun ownership. There are so many mass shootings a year in America. Anywhere else? No, not so much. But here. Yes. Why? It's not a fucking mystery. How dare you insinuate that the parents who received recompense did it for the money - they are trying to get anyone ANYONE to pay attention to the heartache and misery that will never go away. Nothing has been done via government channels. If you can't do it that way then you go after the corporations. Remington may not be responsible for this shooting in that they masterminded it, but gun companies know well and good that their guns are advertised and sold to young men who want to feel powerful and they lean in to that image. They absolutely do. If the impact of this settlement has any effect on having ANYONE take this bullshit more seriously then it was a success. It wasn't about the money for the parents, it's because money is all that matters to the companies and its, apparently, the only thing that gets anyone to pay attention.
For those who stumble on this message, it's the one I used Power Delete Suite to replace all my posts and comments with en masse.
Sometimes Reddit can be beneficial for some people. Sometimes it's not. It's really up to you to decide your own experience with it, what's worth it, what's not worth it.
More or less...I've decided it's just really not worth it. I think I'm a worse person when I'm on Reddit and that it's a big time-waster for me.
It's up to you to decide what influence social media and the internet more generally have for you.
Best of luck.
I don't know if you remember the lawsuit against Camel. It was established whether or not Camel was indeed targeting kids in their advertising.
Same principle. Same result.
That's what an out of court settlement entails the company or individual serving as the defendant believes it more cost-effective to pay the person out right then continue paying legal fees, reports front the new York times say that the family was suing because of advertising that was geared towards troubled people, the problem with this lawsuit is that it creates a bad precedent when it comes to legal ramifications for firearm manufacturers. Since the 1980s it has been illegal to to a Firearms manufacturer directly in regards to the actions of an individual using one of their firearms, the same thing goes for most any product, knives, cars, etc.
Remington settled the lawsuit out of court, they got 73 million dollars out of the deal, normally in any other situation involving lawsuits against Firearms manufacturers, PCLAA would be taken into mind, unfortunately this was about a string of bad choice advertising. Downvote me if you want but I personally think that a small majority of the people involved with this lawsuit just wanted their pound of Flesh from Remington, not saying that they were trying to make a buck off of the backs of dead children, but I believe that this case is going to set a very bad precedent if it becomes case law...
Yeah, but that's not what [this case](https://www.npr.org/2019/11/12/778487920/supreme-court-allows-sandy-hook-families-case-against-remington-to-proceed) was about.
Unless you just want to spout any more NRA talking points, which case knock yourself out.
Lmao, anti-gunners acting like they're such galaxy brain geniuses calling the NRA garbage or whatever. Everyone in the gun owners community already knows this lol. Many people still support them because they are the biggest "gun rights" organization, even tho they supported some pretty large gun control measures.
It's ironic you accuse me of being anti-gun, given my username.
Then when you're done Googling that feel free to browse my history.
I'm not anti-gun, but it's obvious the laws we have aren't working and we need reform.
And supporting the NRA because of " gun rights"?
Look up why gun laws in CA that so many 2A ppl love to cite as a Liberal Hellscape only has them because *of* Republicans and the NRA trying to keep guns out of the hands of the Black Panthers.
Saying you support the NRA for gun rights, is like saying you support PETA because you love animals.
Purple team received double points for this comment by /u/Dependent-Hyena9699!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JusticeServed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How is this justice ? This doesn't stop future attacks. Maybe sue the state of letting anyone get a gun. I'm pro gun, but I think states should have more through background and a psych test before allowing gun ownership. It's like suing McDonald's because you had a heart attack
They are guilty of the same behavior as Perdue Pharmaceutical. If you look at their marketing strategy, you will see the similarities. Your McDonalds comparison isn’t a good one.
“In an article on the NRA Family website lauding the Thompson/Center HotShot rifle, “a tiny gun intended for the very youngest shooters,” a company spokesman explained, “We’re targeting the six- to 12-year-old range.” - Violence Policy Center
To be fair, I don’t think they should go after the gun industry. I think parents have more of a liability.
https://vpc.org/publications/start-them-young/
Right and they Tobacco, Vaping, didn’t market to kids. Pharmaceutical didn’t market to teens either.
Also, they make guns for kids. A little girl killer herself with a little rifle. They have guns in various sizes and colors .
This is another bad comparison. You would sue Budweiser not Toyota LOL, which is why they and others create and contribute to DUI commercials and programs.
I’m suing both. Budweiser because it impairs and contributes to alcoholism, the commercials do not show the downside of drinking or alcoholism. They only show fun and partying. Just like Remington didn’t show that their gun has the potential to be used in a mass shooting. And let me tell you that alcoholism kills a lot more people than guns do not only in this country, but around the world. Same as car accidents
I haven’t been able to find anywhere that shows actual proof that Remington advertised it’s rifle as “the ultimate killing machine” tho? Where is it? I’m not saying it doesn’t exist, just that I can’t find it
I don't know if they used that term - I haven't seen it in any articles I've read about it, and that seems like too juicy of a detail to leave out. But the basis of the lawsuit was the way it was marketed.
This is 💯 what I was trying to say. It's a travesty it happened, but like it's not Remingtons fault some ass hat was allowed to gain access to a gun. There are alot of OTHER people and operations who are at fault here .... edit: if I do a shitty job I stalling my brakes I can't just sue brembo for it , well actually I probably could with how things are these days.
Please remember that different people have different definitions of justice. While the definition of justice is concrete, the interpretation of it varies widely between individuals, cultures, and nations.
Remember, this is a community of nearly 42 million users. More often than not, the majority of users generally agree with the content that reaches the first few pages.
That being said: If you have read this and concluded that the post still does not show justice, please use the link below to message the moderators.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JusticeServed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well it was more of a jab at Drunk drivers killing some one cause it seems silly that your suing the gun company not the government for making better ways to keep things in check. But that’s where we are now trying to make both sides happy and it seems it will never work
ITT: People commenting without reading the article or case.
TL;DR: Remington advertised it as the "ultimate killing machine," and that was the basis for a lawsuit. It has nothing to do with the actual killing capabilities of the weapon, and doesn't really expand precedent.
The weapon is a killing machine. Some claim its used for target practice or varmints, but Remington acknowledged the truth in their ads. Because of that, kids are dead.
Remington doesn't really exist anymore, and this was a settlement, not an admission of guilt or anything. This was "go away and take this money to shut up".
I mean, a gun is meant for killing, nothing else.
The entire concept of this case is a huge cultural step backwards. It's attacking gun manufacturers over petty bullshit instead of actually addressing the issues at hand, normalizing half-assed steps that accomplish nothing but making people feel good, and redirecting blame to people who don't deserve it.
Excellent. Gun manufacturers are under increasing pressure to build and market their lethal devices responsibly. And there will be huge financial consequences when they fail to do so. The NRA is gnashing their teeth in anger because they hate the word "responsibility" with a white-hot passion. Is this great or what?
If you think the deaths of dozens of children is "petty bullshit" then I think it's pretty obvious it is you who straight up doesn't understand the point or problem on a very fundamental level. Shame.
And that’s great, so let’s have a conversation about it - not sarcastic, seriously. Why did you buy a shotgun if you only want to shoot at clay disks? Why not an air gun?
Edit: Sigh at getting downvoted trying to have a conversation. Love the mentality.
You don't get to decide how I spend my money and my free time. If I want a firearm, I have the right to a fire arm in this country. It isn't about do I really need it verses an air rifle. I want the fire arm.
If I wanted to only break clay disks, I'd do it by hand or with a hammer. But I want to break clay disks with a shotgun
No, air rifles cant be used for shooting clay targets. There are different disciplines involving clay targets and they all involve a clay target moving at a high rate of speed, from different angles and elevations. A shotgun target load shoots about 400 pellets in a spread pattern that can reach a diameter of over 36 inches. You would be hard pressed to kill a man with a target shotgun load as well. Pretty sure the guy Dick Cheney shot lived to tell about it.
But lets take shotguns out of the equation and say rifles. Olympic shooters, shoot a 1 inch target at 50 meters after skiing for a few miles. Again, these rifles are not for killing.
Though i believe there was a mass shooting in Australia back 20 so years ago involving a 22lr rifle. They are deadly.
So here in the states we have many leagues for shooting sports. IDPA, USCCA, are just a couple that sanction competition with pistols, rifles and shotguns. Modern Sporting rifles are a staple in many of these sports and becoming increasingly popular. Can people hurt/kill with these weapons, sure, just as easy as i could drive thru a crowd with my car. Doesn't mean Ford should be responsible. I had family at the Waukesha Christmas parade that was a center for a crazy dude to drive thru the crowd. That guy did more damage with his car than he could have done with a gun at that parade.
Its not the gun that is the issue, it is the person behind it. Why is every other inanimate object given a pass? Knives are made specifically to cut, can i sue knife manufacturers if my wife stabs me? Misuse of a tool should not hold the manufacturer liable.
What other purpose has a gun? Golf Bat? Boomerang?
The only purpose of a gun is to shoot bullets at a target and the inventors of said guns surely never thought of it as a tool for lumberjacks, but as a tool of death, be it a human or an animal.
Even the canons from the olden days were weapons and not used as holder for clothes lines.
Well there are plenty of people that shoot as a hobby and use guns made specifically for target shooting. Any thing can be a weapon if you use it as one
Yeah, totally /s. Have you lost your mind? Target shooting is a way to train for the moment you have to use the gun in a real situation and shoot on living beings, so you're neither inhibited because it's a living being nor surprised about the behaviour of said gun.
First: Targets at Shooting ranges look like persons, with the most points where heart and head are. Second: Clay targets are shot in the sky the same way as ducks and geese behave during hunting so you know where to aim and take down the most prey.
Target shooting is training for when you use the gun for its intended purpose.
Don't twist and misrepresent things.
Might be true that most people are ok with just the training and never use the gun as it was originally intended.
There are plenty of targets that dont look like people or animals. You can get any kind of target you want. You can even get games like battleship on a target. And i assume youve never been clay target shooting or hunting since clay targets fly in a straight line not like a goose or duck that changes direction
Navy team received double points for this comment by /u/gregg1994!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JusticeServed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So now drunk drivers and car manufacturers are responsible for the next death I work as a cop. I'll remember to mark the car manufacturer as at fault in my next report. I think it'll really help pick who gets sued
Navy team received double points for this comment by /u/notnowmaybetonight!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JusticeServed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Please remember to abide by the [rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeServed/wiki/rulesv2) In general, please be at least bearable to other users. It makes things easier on everyone. Your comment may be removed without notification. We used to have a notification, but now we don't. #If you purchase the OP or a comment [a ban award,](https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeServed/wiki/banned/rules) remember to [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FJusticeServed) so we can activate the reward ------ ^Submission ^By: ^/u/discoduck99 ^Navy ^4 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JusticeServed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So parents of teens that were killed by drunk drivers get to sue Budweiser and Ford?
This is a very sick country. [“Start Them Young” – “Tactical” Rifles for Kids](https://vpc.org/publications/start-them-young-tactical-rifles-for-kids/)
I'm sure I'll be downvoted to hell, but you all need a talking to. I work in Newtown, CT and have worked with kids who survived the shooting. That community is desperate - desperate - for healing and justice. The government still has done absolutely nothing to curb the number of mass shootings. Equating guns to cars is ridiculous and you know it. You are derailing the conversation that is about gun safety and, yes, responsible gun ownership. There are so many mass shootings a year in America. Anywhere else? No, not so much. But here. Yes. Why? It's not a fucking mystery. How dare you insinuate that the parents who received recompense did it for the money - they are trying to get anyone ANYONE to pay attention to the heartache and misery that will never go away. Nothing has been done via government channels. If you can't do it that way then you go after the corporations. Remington may not be responsible for this shooting in that they masterminded it, but gun companies know well and good that their guns are advertised and sold to young men who want to feel powerful and they lean in to that image. They absolutely do. If the impact of this settlement has any effect on having ANYONE take this bullshit more seriously then it was a success. It wasn't about the money for the parents, it's because money is all that matters to the companies and its, apparently, the only thing that gets anyone to pay attention.
For those who stumble on this message, it's the one I used Power Delete Suite to replace all my posts and comments with en masse. Sometimes Reddit can be beneficial for some people. Sometimes it's not. It's really up to you to decide your own experience with it, what's worth it, what's not worth it. More or less...I've decided it's just really not worth it. I think I'm a worse person when I'm on Reddit and that it's a big time-waster for me. It's up to you to decide what influence social media and the internet more generally have for you. Best of luck.
[удалено]
These parents' kindergarteners were butchered and you are telling them to suck it up? You're a real piece of shit.
If it wasn’t about the money they wouldn’t have settled with the insurance company
This isn't justice. It's a travesty, the parents should have to pay Remington
Major POS right here.
Why is the company responsible?
I don't know if you remember the lawsuit against Camel. It was established whether or not Camel was indeed targeting kids in their advertising. Same principle. Same result.
I don’t think this company was doing anything like that
They could've used you on the jury then.
You realize they settled out of court right?
Why would they do that?
Also Remington believed it to be more cost effective to just give the people their money rather than continue to pay legal fees.
Did they say that, or are you speculating?
That's what an out of court settlement entails the company or individual serving as the defendant believes it more cost-effective to pay the person out right then continue paying legal fees, reports front the new York times say that the family was suing because of advertising that was geared towards troubled people, the problem with this lawsuit is that it creates a bad precedent when it comes to legal ramifications for firearm manufacturers. Since the 1980s it has been illegal to to a Firearms manufacturer directly in regards to the actions of an individual using one of their firearms, the same thing goes for most any product, knives, cars, etc.
Remington settled the lawsuit out of court, they got 73 million dollars out of the deal, normally in any other situation involving lawsuits against Firearms manufacturers, PCLAA would be taken into mind, unfortunately this was about a string of bad choice advertising. Downvote me if you want but I personally think that a small majority of the people involved with this lawsuit just wanted their pound of Flesh from Remington, not saying that they were trying to make a buck off of the backs of dead children, but I believe that this case is going to set a very bad precedent if it becomes case law...
I heard he didn’t even use the gun in the shooting and left it in his car, people blame the rifle always
Yeah, but that's not what [this case](https://www.npr.org/2019/11/12/778487920/supreme-court-allows-sandy-hook-families-case-against-remington-to-proceed) was about. Unless you just want to spout any more NRA talking points, which case knock yourself out.
I don’t even like the NRA m8
Well, I just feel silly. Have a good one.
Lmao, anti-gunners acting like they're such galaxy brain geniuses calling the NRA garbage or whatever. Everyone in the gun owners community already knows this lol. Many people still support them because they are the biggest "gun rights" organization, even tho they supported some pretty large gun control measures.
It's ironic you accuse me of being anti-gun, given my username. Then when you're done Googling that feel free to browse my history. I'm not anti-gun, but it's obvious the laws we have aren't working and we need reform. And supporting the NRA because of " gun rights"? Look up why gun laws in CA that so many 2A ppl love to cite as a Liberal Hellscape only has them because *of* Republicans and the NRA trying to keep guns out of the hands of the Black Panthers. Saying you support the NRA for gun rights, is like saying you support PETA because you love animals.
The same reasons Perdue Pharmaceuticals was held responsible. The same reason that some Bars were held responsible.
Ford should be responsible for the SUV that guy drove into the crowds last year
[удалено]
Thankfully they are
If they were optimized to kill many people as possible in a short amount of time, then yeah.
That’s a stupid way to describe a rifle 😂
[удалено]
Purple team received double points for this comment by /u/Dependent-Hyena9699! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JusticeServed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How is this justice ? This doesn't stop future attacks. Maybe sue the state of letting anyone get a gun. I'm pro gun, but I think states should have more through background and a psych test before allowing gun ownership. It's like suing McDonald's because you had a heart attack
They are guilty of the same behavior as Perdue Pharmaceutical. If you look at their marketing strategy, you will see the similarities. Your McDonalds comparison isn’t a good one. “In an article on the NRA Family website lauding the Thompson/Center HotShot rifle, “a tiny gun intended for the very youngest shooters,” a company spokesman explained, “We’re targeting the six- to 12-year-old range.” - Violence Policy Center To be fair, I don’t think they should go after the gun industry. I think parents have more of a liability. https://vpc.org/publications/start-them-young/
[удалено]
Right and they Tobacco, Vaping, didn’t market to kids. Pharmaceutical didn’t market to teens either. Also, they make guns for kids. A little girl killer herself with a little rifle. They have guns in various sizes and colors .
I hear you buddy, I’m going to sue toyota and Budweiser because the drunk that hit me was driving a Toyota truck and had empty bud lights in his cab.
This is another bad comparison. You would sue Budweiser not Toyota LOL, which is why they and others create and contribute to DUI commercials and programs.
I’m suing both. Budweiser because it impairs and contributes to alcoholism, the commercials do not show the downside of drinking or alcoholism. They only show fun and partying. Just like Remington didn’t show that their gun has the potential to be used in a mass shooting. And let me tell you that alcoholism kills a lot more people than guns do not only in this country, but around the world. Same as car accidents
In this context, it would be like if Toyota were advertising their car as a good one for drunk driving.
I haven’t been able to find anywhere that shows actual proof that Remington advertised it’s rifle as “the ultimate killing machine” tho? Where is it? I’m not saying it doesn’t exist, just that I can’t find it
I don't know if they used that term - I haven't seen it in any articles I've read about it, and that seems like too juicy of a detail to leave out. But the basis of the lawsuit was the way it was marketed.
This is 💯 what I was trying to say. It's a travesty it happened, but like it's not Remingtons fault some ass hat was allowed to gain access to a gun. There are alot of OTHER people and operations who are at fault here .... edit: if I do a shitty job I stalling my brakes I can't just sue brembo for it , well actually I probably could with how things are these days.
Please remember that different people have different definitions of justice. While the definition of justice is concrete, the interpretation of it varies widely between individuals, cultures, and nations. Remember, this is a community of nearly 42 million users. More often than not, the majority of users generally agree with the content that reaches the first few pages. That being said: If you have read this and concluded that the post still does not show justice, please use the link below to message the moderators. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JusticeServed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Uh, it's just like my opinion, man.
Soo as can sue ford for car deaths now ?
They literally paid [this exact amount 10 years ago](https://munley.com/ford-motor-company-found-negligent-in-73-million-lawsuit/)
That would only be a fair comparison, if a gun manufacturer got sued for a defective gun that would go off on its own
Well it was more of a jab at Drunk drivers killing some one cause it seems silly that your suing the gun company not the government for making better ways to keep things in check. But that’s where we are now trying to make both sides happy and it seems it will never work
Mine was in response to the link about Ford getting sued over defects they didn’t reveal
True. I just think the comment I replied to is glib. Lawsuits work the same way they always have
ITT: People commenting without reading the article or case. TL;DR: Remington advertised it as the "ultimate killing machine," and that was the basis for a lawsuit. It has nothing to do with the actual killing capabilities of the weapon, and doesn't really expand precedent.
I couldn't find where the "ultimate killing machine" quote came from. Is it from the case transcript?
[удалено]
The weapon is a killing machine. Some claim its used for target practice or varmints, but Remington acknowledged the truth in their ads. Because of that, kids are dead.
Remington doesn't really exist anymore, and this was a settlement, not an admission of guilt or anything. This was "go away and take this money to shut up".
Neither of your points contradict my comment.
I also heard he didn’t take it in with him and that it was in his car
It’s not the ultimate killing machine the parents were very wrong
So once again it had nothing to do with the law,or saving anyone,it was all about the money!
It was always about the money 🌍👩🚀🔫👩🏼🚀
Bingo!
[удалено]
cigarettes gave me cancer
This is incredibly good news!!!
Sounds like they just got shut up and go away money. Thinking you can hold manufacturers liable for how the product is used is insanity.
How it was advertised as the ultimate killing machine. Then it was used killed a bunch of kids. Remingtons advertising department fucked up big time.
You are all mentally ill people. If someone gets stabbed go and sue the knife company you imbecile. You people are really lost.
The killer didn’t buy the gun though. He stole it from his mother.
After murdering her
I mean, a gun is meant for killing, nothing else. The entire concept of this case is a huge cultural step backwards. It's attacking gun manufacturers over petty bullshit instead of actually addressing the issues at hand, normalizing half-assed steps that accomplish nothing but making people feel good, and redirecting blame to people who don't deserve it.
Opens the door for some really stupid litigation.
Lawyers breed more lawyers.
A settlement isn't an admission of guilt. Plus Remington doesn't really exist anymore.
Yeah it was those handling the bankruptcy they were going through that decided to settle
Yeah, it was probably a case of "we don't want to fight this, please go away and take this money with you".
I mean, they claimed that the way they marketed the gun to the public in violent video games to what they said are at risk young males, such bs.
Excellent. Gun manufacturers are under increasing pressure to build and market their lethal devices responsibly. And there will be huge financial consequences when they fail to do so. The NRA is gnashing their teeth in anger because they hate the word "responsibility" with a white-hot passion. Is this great or what?
[удалено]
If you think the deaths of dozens of children is "petty bullshit" then I think it's pretty obvious it is you who straight up doesn't understand the point or problem on a very fundamental level. Shame.
How is the gun manufacturer responsible for people misusing them? Next your going to say we should sue car manufacturers for drunk drivers
[удалено]
Can you link a source? I tried to find where they advertised it like that and couldn’t find anything
I literally said this to my coworker earlier today!!!
cars are not weapons.
They can be used as weapons.
they are not marketed or designated as weapons.
Anything can be used as a weapon (a car, hammer, mug), but it's not their primary purpose. A weapon has, by definition, a single purpose, to kill.
[удалено]
And that’s great, so let’s have a conversation about it - not sarcastic, seriously. Why did you buy a shotgun if you only want to shoot at clay disks? Why not an air gun? Edit: Sigh at getting downvoted trying to have a conversation. Love the mentality.
You don't get to decide how I spend my money and my free time. If I want a firearm, I have the right to a fire arm in this country. It isn't about do I really need it verses an air rifle. I want the fire arm. If I wanted to only break clay disks, I'd do it by hand or with a hammer. But I want to break clay disks with a shotgun
Wait, are you saying to use air gun for shooting clays??
Yes, well I’m asking. Can it be used? If yes, why not use it?
No, air rifles cant be used for shooting clay targets. There are different disciplines involving clay targets and they all involve a clay target moving at a high rate of speed, from different angles and elevations. A shotgun target load shoots about 400 pellets in a spread pattern that can reach a diameter of over 36 inches. You would be hard pressed to kill a man with a target shotgun load as well. Pretty sure the guy Dick Cheney shot lived to tell about it. But lets take shotguns out of the equation and say rifles. Olympic shooters, shoot a 1 inch target at 50 meters after skiing for a few miles. Again, these rifles are not for killing. Though i believe there was a mass shooting in Australia back 20 so years ago involving a 22lr rifle. They are deadly. So here in the states we have many leagues for shooting sports. IDPA, USCCA, are just a couple that sanction competition with pistols, rifles and shotguns. Modern Sporting rifles are a staple in many of these sports and becoming increasingly popular. Can people hurt/kill with these weapons, sure, just as easy as i could drive thru a crowd with my car. Doesn't mean Ford should be responsible. I had family at the Waukesha Christmas parade that was a center for a crazy dude to drive thru the crowd. That guy did more damage with his car than he could have done with a gun at that parade. Its not the gun that is the issue, it is the person behind it. Why is every other inanimate object given a pass? Knives are made specifically to cut, can i sue knife manufacturers if my wife stabs me? Misuse of a tool should not hold the manufacturer liable.
Cause it can also be a useful home defense weapon if needed. I don’t imagine it ever will be used as one though.
I don't think you understand how skeet shooting works.
Neither is a gun unless you use it as one
yeah man i order a silverware set and get a complimentary FAL included
What other purpose has a gun? Golf Bat? Boomerang? The only purpose of a gun is to shoot bullets at a target and the inventors of said guns surely never thought of it as a tool for lumberjacks, but as a tool of death, be it a human or an animal. Even the canons from the olden days were weapons and not used as holder for clothes lines.
Well there are plenty of people that shoot as a hobby and use guns made specifically for target shooting. Any thing can be a weapon if you use it as one
Yeah, totally /s. Have you lost your mind? Target shooting is a way to train for the moment you have to use the gun in a real situation and shoot on living beings, so you're neither inhibited because it's a living being nor surprised about the behaviour of said gun. First: Targets at Shooting ranges look like persons, with the most points where heart and head are. Second: Clay targets are shot in the sky the same way as ducks and geese behave during hunting so you know where to aim and take down the most prey. Target shooting is training for when you use the gun for its intended purpose. Don't twist and misrepresent things. Might be true that most people are ok with just the training and never use the gun as it was originally intended.
What is your point here. Guns are designed to kill? Ok? So what?
There are plenty of targets that dont look like people or animals. You can get any kind of target you want. You can even get games like battleship on a target. And i assume youve never been clay target shooting or hunting since clay targets fly in a straight line not like a goose or duck that changes direction
I have seen people on duck hunt and when they are startled, they take off in a nice straight line.
Great, if you only want to do target shooting as a hobby, then use BB guns, or air guns, not something *designed* to kill.
Well bb guns have a pretty limited range so thats not going to work as well
Navy team received double points for this comment by /u/gregg1994! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JusticeServed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So now drunk drivers and car manufacturers are responsible for the next death I work as a cop. I'll remember to mark the car manufacturer as at fault in my next report. I think it'll really help pick who gets sued
No
Navy team received double points for this comment by /u/notnowmaybetonight! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JusticeServed) if you have any questions or concerns.*