• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother[W:52]

Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

I called it, you didn't answer the question, AS ****ING USUAL.

:failpail:

What should be called on your silly call IS a big giant BS.

Did you not see the very large bolded and underlined word YES?

Ray Charles could have seen it and he has the disadvantage of being both dead and blind.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

You still evaded my original question.

So the giant word YES did not answer your question? Gimme a break already with this nonsense.

Tell you what - you don't like my answer and its not clear enough for you or anybody else - TOUGH.

Do you deny that gun manufacturers do not intend for their products to murder people?

or....

Do you believe that gun manufacturers intend their products to be used in the commission of a murder?

a big YES to both.
 
Last edited:
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

What should be called on your silly call IS a big giant BS.

Did you not see the very large bolded and underlined word YES?

Ray Charles could have seen it and he has the disadvantage of being both dead and blind.

And now Haymarket has sunk to using racist dead blind man jokes.

You must be proud of such a new low.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

And that bullet was then suppose to do what exactly?

Why would someone go through all that trouble just to fire a bullet out of a barrel?

The bullet is supposed to hit its target.

Why would someone go through all that trouble just to make an airplane fly?
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

And now Haymarket has sunk to using racist dead blind man jokes.

You must be proud of such a new low.

And you have resorted to pure hate in daring to characterize a post mentioning an African American as racist.

How dare you stoop to such a low level here. How dare you!!!! :roll::shock:
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

And you have resorted to pure hate in daring to characterize a post mentioning an African American as racist.

How dare you stoop to such a low level here. How dare you!!!! :roll::shock:

Nice try, but your dodging will not save you this time.

dodgeball.jpg
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

The bullet is supposed to hit its target.

Why would someone go through all that trouble just to make an airplane fly?

Of course. The very idea that a gun manufacturer is not somehow aware that the product he makes will be used to fire at other people and some of those people will die is so beyond the pale that it borders on a serious delusion or the worst case of denial ever on record. They accept that as part of the job they perform.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

You mean she allowed her son to stay in her home? OMFG, imagine what could happen next! :roll:

We don't need to imagine we already know .... sadly :(
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

So the giant word YES did not answer your question? Gimme a break already with this nonsense.

Tell you what - you don't like my answer and its not clear enough for you or anybody else - TOUGH.

aa big YES to both.

Wow. That was actually easier than I thought it would be. So you believe that gun manufacturers intend for their products to be used in murder. Thank you very much for showing your true colors Haymarket. This is undeniable proof that you are clearly anti-gun. No reasonable person or pro-second amendment person as you have claimed to be would admit that they believed that gun manufacturers intended their products to be used for murder. By stating such you believe them to be committing crimes (accessory to murder at the very least) simply for making guns. Which any sane person that is against people being an accessory to murder would want stopped.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

I have no idea what you are talking about unless you cannot read a simple three letter word - YES.

For your edification and enlightenment.

Dodge (verb):
to elude or evade by a sudden shift of position or by strategy

Dodge (noun):
to move aside or change position suddenly, as to avoid a blow or get behind something.
to use evasive methods; prevaricate:

Synonyms:
To avoid, equivocate, quibble.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

When there is no reasonable way of obtaining an actual answer then no, its not a reasonable question to ask.



You may not be saying that she shouldn't have had guns in the first place, but several other people have.

Bold: Basing what is considered "secured" upon individual circumstances is a good way to leave so much up for subjectivity that pretty much any amount of precautions or security taken beforehand could be deemed as "not secured" or "not secured properly". Doing so in a court of law or even in a legislated law would be one hell of a blow to 2nd Amendment Rights. Anti-gunners would have a field day with it and so would trigger happy DA's (no pun intended) looking to make a name for themselves. Not to mention all the ambulance chasing lawyers.

If it's the case that we can't find out whether she appropriately safeguarded her weapons then we need to give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she did. That's the ethical answer. The legal one of course brings up preponderance of evidence etc, etc but basically gives the same answer in the case where we can't find out whether or not she safeguarded her weapons. However I don't think we can, out of the box, say we can't know so let's not even bother inquiring.

I understand what you're saying about my individual circumstances argument but the reality is that it is dependent on individual circumstances. When my kids were little I secured my handguns in a different manner than I do now that they're adults and on their way out of the house to create their own lives. What was appropriate when they were kids, locked up a in safe, is not appropriate now that they're responsible adults and I want one firearm available in case someone breaks in. Imposing a one size fits all solution on everyone doesn't work. If you legislate that everyone has to lock up their guns you hamstring people's ability to defend themselves. If you say "there's no such thing as negligence when it comes to firearms safety" you sanction stupidity and let people who deserve to be sued or in jail off the hook. Neither seems right to me. Imperfect as it may be the best course in my opinion is to look at the individual circumstances.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

Of course. The very idea that a gun manufacturer is not somehow aware that the product he makes will be used to fire at other people and some of those people will die is so beyond the pale that it borders on a serious delusion or the worst case of denial ever on record. They accept that as part of the job they perform.

I'm sure that every gun manufacturer is aware they manufacture lethal weapons, but I fail to see your point. Crossbow manufacturers also know their product is a lethal weapon, and I still fail to see your point.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

So if you have a son that grows up and ends up murdering someone with your gun that was locked away in a gun safe and he happened to pickpocket your key from you would you accept responsibility for your son murdering innocents?

I wouldn't need to because I'd know better than to have guns in my house in the first place much less an AR 15. The human condition can be unpredictable and that unpredictability mixed with easy access to firearms often leads to Sandy Hook style tragedies in the US

I mean come on, you "obviously didn't do enough to secure your guns". And you obviously "should have known beforehand that your son was a murdering psychopath".

If the guns had not been in the house in the first place none of that would have mattered
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

Wow. That was actually easier than I thought it would be. So you believe that gun manufacturers intend for their products to be used in murder. Thank you very much for showing your true colors Haymarket. This is undeniable proof that you are clearly anti-gun. No reasonable person or pro-second amendment person as you have claimed to be would admit that they believed that gun manufacturers intended their products to be used for murder. By stating such you believe them to be committing crimes (accessory to murder at the very least) simply for making guns. Which any sane person that is against people being an accessory to murder would want stopped.

So, Haymarket's logic means the following:

If I think about buying a gun for any reason, I am guilty of premeditated murder.

If a friend and I go together to buy a gun for each of us, it is murder with racketeering, as we were in collusion.

If I tell my wife and kids that I am going to buy a new gun, at that moment they are guilty as accessories to murder.

OK, I got it now - thanks for educating me, Kal!!
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

I wouldn't need to because I'd know better than to have guns in my house in the first place much less an AR 15. The human condition can be unpredictable and that unpredictability mixed with easy access to firearms often leads to Sandy Hook style tragedies in the US

If the guns had not been in the house in the first place none of that would have mattered

We all already know that you wouldn't have a gun in your house. You're anti-gun. And you know that not having a gun in the house isn't reflective of what we are talking about. All that you did was try to evade answering a simple question honestly. Because of this there is only one possible conclusion.

You don't want to admit that you would not accept responsibility and that it would be wrong for someone to sue you for such.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

So, Haymarket's logic means the following:

If I think about buying a gun for any reason, I am guilty of premeditated murder.

If a friend and I go together to buy a gun for each of us, it is murder with racketeering, as we were in collusion.

If I tell my wife and kids that I am going to buy a new gun, at that moment they are guilty as accessories to murder.

OK, I got it now - thanks for educating me, Kal!!

I hope nobody posted in the Gun Section that they're buying (insert gun name). That's confessing to intending to kill someone. According to Haymarket anyway.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

So, Haymarket's logic means the following:

If I think about buying a gun for any reason, I am guilty of premeditated murder.

If a friend and I go together to buy a gun for each of us, it is murder with racketeering, as we were in collusion.

If I tell my wife and kids that I am going to buy a new gun, at that moment they are guilty as accessories to murder.

OK, I got it now - thanks for educating me, Kal!!

Well, he thinks that gun manufacturers intend for their products to be used in the commission of a crime. I see no reason that what you say here isn't true also. So yep you've got it right!. :)
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

Wow. That was actually easier than I thought it would be. So you believe that gun manufacturers intend for their products to be used in murder. Thank you very much for showing your true colors Haymarket. This is undeniable proof that you are clearly anti-gun. No reasonable person or pro-second amendment person as you have claimed to be would admit that they believed that gun manufacturers intended their products to be used for murder. By stating such you believe them to be committing crimes (accessory to murder at the very least) simply for making guns. Which any sane person that is against people being an accessory to murder would want stopped.

No. It does not show that I am anti-gun. It shows that I am so hopelessly pro-gun that I am willing to place everything I know about the history of fireamrs and crime in the trash can and pretend that sort of record does not exist.

Gun manufacturers are no fools. Gun manufacturers are not idiots. Gun manufacturers do not have their head crammed up their own head corridor pretending that there are no obvious consequences that come with their own product that has a long and storied history that cannot be denied.

I have no doubt that not a single one would admit that they know their product will be used for murder and crime. They may be merchants of death but they are not stupid.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

So, Haymarket's logic means the following:

If I think about buying a gun for any reason, I am guilty of premeditated murder.

If a friend and I go together to buy a gun for each of us, it is murder with racketeering, as we were in collusion.

If I tell my wife and kids that I am going to buy a new gun, at that moment they are guilty as accessories to murder.

OK, I got it now - thanks for educating me, Kal!!

I never said that and you damn well know it because you FAILED to print any quotes from me saying it. It is simply more blatant dishonesty and fraud.

It speaks volumes about your argument that you have to resort to such tactics.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

We don't need to imagine we already know .... sadly :(

When you obtain the ability to accurately predict the future, get back to me.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

No. It does not show that I am anti-gun. It shows that I am so hopelessly pro-gun that I am willing to place everything I know about the history of fireamrs and crime in the trash can and pretend that sort of record does not exist.

:blink: :giggle1: :lamo :lamo :lamo
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

I'm sure that every gun manufacturer is aware they manufacture lethal weapons, but I fail to see your point. Crossbow manufacturers also know their product is a lethal weapon, and I still fail to see your point.

You didn't fail anything, because there is no point to see.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

:blink: :giggle1: :lamo :lamo :lamo

If we ran a poll to see who believes haymarket is pro-gun, I couldn't imagine getting more than one yes vote.
 
Re: Sandy Hook families sue estate of shooter's mother

Read some of my earlier discussions in this thread.

It should be easy for you to name the member that said that.
 
Back
Top Bottom